By Christopher G. Adamo

If Republican “moderates” should have learned anything from the furor over President Bush’s nomination of Harriet Miers to replace retiring Justice Sandra O’Connor, it is that conservatives do not pursue personalities. They follow principle.

Unfortunately, the Republican National Committee has been too busy “carrying the water” for the president to reflect on the discontent being expressed by even the most stalwart members of the Republican base. Apparently, party politics trumps regard for the “grassroots.”

Yet if Miers is indeed confirmed, and if once on the court, she proves not to be a pro-Constitution originalist, conservative backlash will vastly exceed all of the uproar voiced since her nomination. Unfortunately, key players in Republican circles have not seemed to hear this message. But they remain indifferent at their own peril.

During this past week, a couple of events have foreshadowed a possible “crack-up” within Republican ranks that could potentially undo every conservative gain of the past twenty years, and may ultimately re-establish the liberal/Democrat stranglehold on Washington that was decisively broken in 1994.

In his new book, political strategist Dick Morris asserts that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is the rightful Republican candidate to run against Hillary in the ‘08 Presidential elections. Morris claims that only a woman can credibly run against Hillary. Furthermore, he contends that Rice’s ethnicity gives her a significant advantage in the affirmative action/quota department.

One has to wonder if Morris, once a high-ranking operative for the Clintons before mysteriously becoming estranged from them, is not deliberately stumping for Hillary’s most vulnerable opponent.

Condoleezza Rice may well be a capable Secretary of State, but that does not qualify her to properly assess and conduct matters on the domestic front. Her positions on key social and moral issues are decidedly liberal, and her campaign would be hard pressed to convince the public otherwise.

Nor would the major media allow such matters to go unnoticed. And if the Republican National Committee were to jump headlong into the inevitable fray that would ensue, it would only succeed at completely destroying its own credibility among the “grassroots.”

This would be quite the tragedy, especially since a recent Gallup poll plainly showed that Hillary is vulnerable on several fronts. When matched against several Republican opponents, Hillary loses. Of particular significance is that those opponents are not presently known on the basis of policy. Rather, they represent the fact that the public would indeed choose an alternative to the former First Lady, if a decisive contrast exists.

Meanwhile, “Republican” Senator John McCain of Arizona is once again alluding to the possibility that, at some appointed time in the near future, he will announce his own intentions to run for the nation’s high office. But while McCain, like Rice, receives enthusiastic support from certain limited sectors of American society, his chances of winning are just as remote as are hers.

In short, only a candidate who appears as a strong conservative can inspire and motivate the conservative base. Yet Republican insiders are reluctant to concede this fact.

John McCain will never be able to convey sufficient allegiance to the conservative movement to offset his frequent venomous tirades against it, and his occasional open betrayal of it, the filibuster debacle being only the latest example. Nevertheless, he still lives under the delusion that his mix of belligerence and populism can garner him sufficient “crossover” votes to balance out those conservatives whom he has alienated.

He believes he possesses evidence, in the form of state primary victories during the 2000 Presidential campaign, to support such a contention. Yet he does not understand that the “crossover” votes he received were overwhelmingly the work of Democrats who hoped to help him through the Republican primaries as the weaker candidate.

Had he garnered the nomination, his media support would have instantly evaporated. The liberal/Democrat media machine is simply unwilling to risk a possible Republican administration if it could guarantee a Democrat in his place (Although to be fair, they would not find a McCain Administration all that objectionable).

George Bush’s low approval ratings hardly suggest a growing disfavor with conservatism. Rather, they reflect a major frustration among conservatives who are fed up with the inconsistencies of the Bush Administration, particularly in the areas of spending and immigration control.

As with every presidential race since the 1960’s, a truly conservative candidate is the only winning possibility for the Republicans in 2008. But such a candidate has yet to appear.