E-mail this story to a friend Have comments? Send them to the editor. Printer Friendly Version Subscribe for Free! Other Columns by Christopher G. Adamo Christopher G. Adamo Bio

In their typically duplicitous fashion, Republican "moderates" who orchestrated this latest electoral catastrophe are once again blaming the lingering vestige of conservatism in the McCain campaign as the factor that ultimately doomed its prospects. This forked-tongue political ploy is certainly nothing new, but instead represents the standard tactics of the Republican moderates whenever they assert their presence within the Party. Move to the left, attempt to be as much like the Democrats as possible (ostensibly at a lower cost), and then blame conservatism when voters reject the scam.

To nobody's surprise, liberal Democrats are always eager to assist in the disinformation campaign, especially since those perennially gullible "moderates" are far more willing to embrace the philosophies of the left than anything from the right. Following every election in which RINO thinking dominates, Republican "moderates" join with the Democrats in pointing out who among the party's "extreme right" bears responsibility for the loss.

For decades, this pattern has worked well for liberals, so they have no need to abandon it now. If Republican insiders can be repeatedly duped into fearing and denying their party's strengths while embracing its liabilities, the party can be kept off balance and in minority status, despite a firm resonance of the conservative message with the American people whenever it is offered.

Americans clearly expressed their reason for abandoning the senior George Bush in 1992. In reneging on his "Read my lips. No new taxes." pledge, he broke faith with the American people, sought instead to pursue "bipartisanship" with Democrats, and proved himself to not be a man of his word. According to the Democrats, the 1992 campaign was all about "the economy stupid." Yet in the immediate aftermath of Bill Clinton's victory (with a mere forty-three percent of the vote), America was informed in no uncertain terms that the entire election was a referendum on abortion, and a clear rejection of the pro-life message.

Similarly, the insipid campaign of Bob Dole started out on life support, as a result of his abominable capitulation to Clinton in the 1995 budget deal. Such Washington-Insider thinking from Dole resonated no better with Middle America than had Bush's waffling. Moreover, Dole's attempts to broaden the base by distancing himself from Christian conservatives only served to alienate them from banalities of the GOP establishment.

Running against an incumbent president, and carrying a banner of blandness that could make Al Gore look exciting, Dole's loss was easily predictable. Yet just as predictably, upon his defeat the Republican "moderates" who had defined the Dole campaign finally found a voice with which to castigate and criticize the perceived saboteurs, as typified by conservative stalwart Phyllis Schlafly.

History has properly characterized the 1960s as the era of traditional America's cultural downfall and concurrent ascendancy of the political left. Yet the modern political class is intent on ignoring the fact that from that time to the present day, glaringly obvious and absolutely consistent a pattern of success and failure has emerged.

>> Continued -- Page 1 2 3