Notes From D.R. | Random Thoughts on the Passing Scene

How aggressively will the left attack Clarence Thomas’ new book? More from the AP, New York Times, Rich Lowry, Rebecca Hagelin and the Washington Post.

Sometimes I wonder if socially conservative Republicans actually want to lose the 2008 election… More from Power Line.

UPDATE: Fred Barnes on ‘08.

Bill Kristol on last night’s Democrat Presidential debate.

Will Newt Gingrich make up his mind about running for President already? More from National Review Online.

Another "progressive" federal judge declares portions of the Patriot Act unconstitutional. More from the New York Times.

While I’ve disagreed with Bill O’Reilly at times, I have to say: having heard the full context of O’Reilly’s recent remarks about race relations in America, shame on the extremists who are trying to make him out to be a racist bigot. More from Newsbusters, Brian Maloney, Earl Ofari Hutchinson and Ericka Andersen.

UPDATE: More from Brian Maloney.

SECOND UPDATE: Jesse Jackson speaks to Bill O’Reilly.

As if Boston talk-radio icon Howie Carr doesn’t have enough problems…

UPDATE: The man himself speaks.

A mini-controversy involving President Bush and National Public Radio.

President Bush and President Ahmadinejad address the UN. More from Human Events, the Washington Times and Mark Noonan.

Even the left has issues with Republican-loathing New York Times columnist Bob Herbert.

Shelby Steele on the fiftieth anniversary of the school-integration crisis in Little Rock, Arkansas.

UPDATE: More from the New York Times.

Sean Trende on Jim Ogonowski’s chance to become Massachusetts’ first Republican Congressman in a decade.

Thomas Sowell on the "Jena 6" controversy.

In a bold move, GOP Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee calls on Hillary Clinton to disavow controversial progressive activist George Soros. Will Huckabee’s fellow Republican Presidential hopefuls do the same?

Can the Republican Party three-peat in 2008?

It’s undeniable that the most powerful American political force of the past thirty years is the unified GOP base. When fiscal, social and defense conservatives are all on the same team, victory is all but assured. With five impressive Presidential victories (1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, 2004), an argument can be made that the GOP is the political equivalent of the 1990s Chicago Bulls.

However, the Republican franchise has certainly seen better days; it’s hard to believe that the GOP has lost so much momentum since the party’s last championship win. The GOP’s popularity has declined due to the unpopularity of the Iraq War and the party’s apparent refusal to listen to the base’s concerns about immigration. The Larry Craig and Mark Foley scandals certainly haven’t helped matters. In addition, it seems as though fewer and fewer Americans are rejecting the notion that President Bush isn’t the brightest bulb in the lamp.

Yet the GOP is a party of possibility—and it’s certainly possible for the party to bring home a third White House championship.

If Hillary Clinton becomes the Democrat nominee, she will present a formidable challenge, but not an insurmountable one. An advantage for the Republicans is that Clinton is, at bottom, a retread candidate—the Walter Mondale of the 2000s. Hillary will give the GOP a tough fight—but let’s not forget that Michael Dukakis and John Kerry gave the GOP fits in 1988 and 2004, respectively. Let’s also not forget that neither Dukakis nor Kerry ultimately became President.

Yes, there is a significant amount of Clinton nostalgia out there—mostly harbored by those who regard Bush as the worst President of all-time (what about LBJ and Carter?). However, there’s also a significant amount of anti-Clinton nostalgia—from conservatives who remember Filegate and Travelgate, from independents who remember the campaign contribution scandals and the Rose Law Firm billing records, from moderates who weren’t particularly fond of the forced “birds and bees” lesson they had to give to their kids in 1998. There are a lot of Americans who don’t have warm memories of the first Clinton Administration. If the Republicans nominate a solid ticket, these voters will have extra motivation to say no to a Clinton sequel.

Another advantage for the GOP is the Democrats’ tone-deafness when it comes to symbolism. Just as John Kerry’s ill-fated remark about applying a “global test” to American military action reinforced a stereotype of the Democrat Party as excessively concerned about world opinion, so too does the horrid “General Betray Us” ad from the left-wing outfit MoveOn.org reinforce a stereotype of the Democrats as anti-military. Americans are instinctively angered by perceived attacks on military personnel; it’s one reason why so many Americans rejected the Party of Jane Fonda in the 1972 Presidential election despite misgivings about Nixon’s handling of the Vietnam War. Despite her recent mild criticisms of the Move0n.org ad, Clinton is unlikely, in only fourteen months, to reverse the perception of her party as scornful of the military. MoveOn.org is Clinton’s cross to bear—and once she’s nailed to that cross, a political resurrection is unrealistic.

The “silent majority” factor also cannot be ignored. The 2004 election (and, to a certain extent, the 2000 contest) showed that there are many Americans who don’t necessarily sign on to every last aspect of the GOP’s agenda, but who regard the Democrats as leading the charge to destroy “the America we grew up in.” There are still many voters—not all of them old—who hold grudges against the Democrats, because they hold the progressive philosophy of that party responsible for prayer being taken out of the public schools, abortion being legalized, the television “family hour” being unofficially abolished, popular music and film becoming more profane and less appropriate for pre-adolescents, etc. Democrats may not like being blamed for “coarsening the culture,” but so long as that perception is out there, and so long as the party does next to nothing to dispel that perception, a large number of Americans won’t even think about voting for a Democrat as President.

Sure, the GOP could drop the ball. They could nominate a candidate who repels the base with his social views. They could ignore the serious concerns many voters have about the way we are conducting the war. They could get arrogant and assume that they don’t need to work extra hard to ensure pro-Republican turnout on Election Day.

Yet, the GOP could also hold on to the ball long enough to make the game-winning shot in the closing seconds. They could effectively remind voters that, seven years after 9/11, the war against terrorism is still in its embryonic stage—and that the Democrats are still poorly suited to protect the country.  They could convince the electorate that Clinton’s health care proposals will severely damage the national economy and subject millions of citizens to third-rate care. They could remind political consumers of the flawed software that was Clinton 1.0, and warn them about the bugs and viruses that will infect Washington and the country as a whole if they decide to purchase the new version.

If the Republicans three-peat next year, their win will be remembered as one of the greatest come-from-behind victories of all-time. If the GOP base is unified and motivated, the party could pull off a shocker. Although skeptics currently insist that the party will suffer a blowout loss, I wouldn’t bet against Team GOP to once again beat the buzzer, and walk off the court with a third trophy in hand.