By: Christopher G. Adamo

Political operatives on both sides of the aisle are discussing the 2008
election as if it is only days away. But hardly a dismissal of the important
issues facing President Bush in his second term, this talk of the next
presidential race is representative of the pivotal changes in the political
landscape that occurred last November.

Unfortunately, the forces of “moderation” are still at work within the GOP,
threatening to undermine the tremendous gains made by conservatives in the
elections. Arnold Schwarzenegger contends that the Republican Party should
move “to the center” (which means to the left) on social issues.

Voices from within the RNC contemplate running a social “moderate” as the
best means of countering a potential Hillary candidacy. And political
strategist Dick Morris warned against GOP senators playing hardball in
response to Democrat filibusters of judicial nominees.

But although the Republican Party cannot afford to become arrogant and heavy
handed in the wake of its recent victories, neither should it be fixated on
gaining the approval of its political rivals, or the avoidance of
controversy.

Americans voted as they did in hopes of fending off the catastrophe of a
Kerry Presidency, but also because they desire the restoration of
conservative and traditionally pro-American/pro-Constitutional government in
Washington. So far, signs have been mixed.

President Bush remains devoted to an immigration policy that, aside from
minor window dressing, amounts to “open borders.” In the best of times, a
plan of this nature can be detrimental to national cohesiveness. But, with
America facing the ongoing threat of terrorist incursions, such an approach
verges on the suicidal.

Fortunately the Congress, operating on a level that is much closer to the
“grassroots,” is asserting itself against the President’s effort to further
weaken barriers to illegal immigration. Though internal conflict isn’t good
for the overall unity of the party, if Congressional Republicans remain
steadfast, they will avert a situation that many conservatives would regard
as nothing less than betrayal.

Second only to the War on Terror in the minds of conservatives is the
looming menace of judicial activism. And on this front, the President
appears to be rising to the fight. Having perhaps recognized the need to
abandon his “new tone” of compromise and conciliation, he announced his
intention to re-nominate twenty of his previous candidates for federal
judgeships. This move constitutes a direct confrontation with filibustering
Democrats.

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democrats’ new Minority Leader, claimed to
be “extremely disappointed,” and described the nominees as “extremist.”
Other prominent Democrats have similarly excoriated the President.
Nevertheless, if Senate Republicans remain true to principle and play their
strategy correctly, the situation could prove to be a huge “win/win” for
them.

A continuation of the Democrat filibusters, formerly spearheaded by then
Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota, may well place Reid, a “red
state Democrat” on the same track that led to Daschle’s early retirement
from public office.

Furthermore the so-called “nuclear option,” being pondered by the
Republicans as a counter to the power of the filibuster, would gradually
lower the number of votes required to end debate and allow an “up or down”
decision on nominees. This process could place an unwelcome spotlight on
those Democrats who still choose to obstruct a simple majority vote as
stipulated by the Constitution.

Democrats’ dismay, resulting from the country’s “red shift” during recent
elections, has been made evident by some other phenomenal events of the post
election period. According to a December 24 Los Angeles Times article, the
Democrat Party is actually rethinking its historically radical pro-abortion
philosophy.

Meanwhile Hillary, in an attempt to distance herself from the “Haight
Ashbury” liberalism that was her trademark throughout her eight years as
“co-president,” now sounds positively hawkish and on occasion, even
“religious.”

Republicans ought to realize that phony posturing towards the center by
Democrats only serves to blur the lines and make it easier for those on the
left to masquerade as conservatives. Consequently, Republicans should
respond with a bold, unabashedly conservative agenda. Aside from simply
being the right thing to do, this tactic will make nearly impossible for
Hillary, or any liberal Democrat, to deceive the electorate with a
fraudulent conservative facade.

This is no time for Republicans to become detached from their conservative
base. Any future political fortunes are critically dependant on their
ability to recognize and take advantage of this chance for leadership that
will otherwise remain only fleetingly in their grasp.