Democratic Strategies Which Can Work

March 17, 2002

by Christopher G. Adamo

Conservative spokesmen have been railing in recent weeks over the abject partisanship being exhibited by Democrats, and in particular, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota. On one issue after another, Daschle embodies an unconscionable obsession towards the acquisition of political power for the Democrat Party and ultimately for himself, devoid of any concern for the harm he is doing to the country as a whole. Of course Daschle’s efforts are far from universally successful, much to the elation of his Republican opposition. But their celebrations may well be premature. For although every attempt by the Democrats to "go on offense" has backfired, forcing them to fall back and regroup, one undercurrent has remained consistent. Republicans ignore it to their own peril.

In December of last year, Karl Rove, chief political strategist for the White House, made a rather surprising announcement. Of the nineteen million Conservative Christian voters who had been expected to support George W. Bush in the 2000 election, four million had not done so. The ideology of those voters completely eliminates any possibility that they could have been won over to Gore’s camp. Instead, the situation resulted from massive disillusionment among the staunchly Conservative ranks of the so-called "Religious Right."

The significance of this migration, from what has traditionally been a steadfast segment of the Republican base, was certainly not lost on the Democrats. Imagine what the results might have been in that election, had the ranks of the disenfranchised increased to five or six million. In a like manner, it isn’t difficult to ponder what will happen this fall, despite the moral and ideological bankruptcy of Daschle and company, if that number again manifests itself in the November elections. Disillusionment is the most powerful weapon the Democrats presently have in their arsenal. Unfortunately, in almost every area of his governing policy outside of the War against Terror, the President’s behavior in recent months has done little other than contribute to it.

Consider ANWR, the education bill, airport security, and maybe even campaign finance "reform." Each time the president reverts back to his "new tone," thus allowing another initiative to receive the indelible stamp of the Democratic agenda, some segment of the Conservative base finds itself asking the question "Just why did we elect this guy?"

When the issue is the judiciary, the most outlandish contrast of all exists between the inexcusable actions of the Democrats and the pathetic capitulation of Republicans during the Clinton administration. Despite the fact that few, if any, of Clinton’s appointees were fit for office, and should have been readily disqualified, the typical reaction from Republicans (even a few renowned Conservatives) was to mumble some nonsense about how "the president ought to get his choice of judicial appointees." Thus, the Republicans proceeded to "rubber stamp" the bulk of Clinton nominees, essentially abdicating their truly constitutional role of oversight.

Now that the table is turned, and a Republican president is attempting to appoint Charles Pickering, a truly honorable man, to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Democrats have shown absolutely no inclination to respond with integrity, or even the slightest degree of civility. Herein lies a golden opportunity for the president to go on the attack, lauding Pickering’s sterling credentials, and boldly making the case that it is Pickering’s regard for the Constitution which is at odds with those on the left. In response to the fabricated charges hurled by Pickering’s opponents, President Bush ought to emphatically state that the purpose of the judiciary is to uphold the law and the integrity of the Constitution, not to be a bludgeoning tool in service to anyone’s political agenda - and certainly not that of partisan Democrats. Bush’s comparatively mild pronouncements on Pickering’s behalf are inexplicable, particularly since the composition of the judiciary was the single greatest reason offered for Conservatives to support him. To the degree that his response is perceived as insufficient, he neutralizes that argument.

Although despicable, the behavior of the Democrats is nonetheless to be expected. Of course they will run things if allowed to do so. But it is the willingness of Republicans to grant them the latitude for such behavior with total impunity which is particularly distressing, and fueling an almost subtle but widespread undercurrent of frustration. It was this same frustration which resulted in defeat for the senior George Bush in ’92, and which caused the Republicans to lose Congressional seats in the off-year elections of ’98. Simply maintaining the present strategy looks to be a safe bet for the Democrats. Every action on their part proves they are banking on this. Republican strategists in general, and the Bush Administration in particular, are gravely mistaken to believe that Democrats need to inspire and lead in order to acquire power. The situation is much more clearly defined in the minds of Democrats ... all they need to do is win elections.

_________________________________________

Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer who lives in southeastern Wyoming with his wife and sons. He has been involved in grassroots political activity for many years. Chris was the editor of the Wyoming Christian from 1994 to 1996, and his columns can also been seen at CheyenneNetwork.com.

Send the author an E mail at Adamo@ConservativeTruth.org.

For more of Christopher's articles, visit his archives.