"The most important thing is that a Republican wins the White House this fall," GOP party flaks tell us at every available opportunity. And, naturally, as conservatives we're just supposed to swallow that without question. "Party loyalty," and that sort of thing.

They tell us this for a variety of reasons, but chief among those is that the Clinton administration is so full of criminals, low-life lawbreakers, rule-benders, and treasonous liars that there is just no way this country can afford another four years of Democratic rule. I would agree with that assessment of the current Democratic regime. I couldn't imagine another four to eight years of the socialism I've seen in the 1990s; this country would be a shell of itself by then if we were still around.

But to be honest here, I don't see much "reform" or even "opposition" coming from Republican ranks these days. The latest GOP cave-in absolving the Clinton administration and the Internal Revenue Service of any culpability in launching a series of politically motivated "assault" audits against conservative activist groups critical of Clinton's lawlessness is a perfect example.

If you didn't see the story last week, I'm speaking about the cop out of Rep. Bill Archer, R-Texas where, in the House Joint Committee on Taxation's oft delayed final report he claimed that there was "no credible evidence" that Clinton sicced the IRS on his political enemies, including this netpaper's founding organization, the Western Journalism Center.

I guess Archer and the Republicans don't call an admission of same from the auditing IRS agent (this came on orders from the White House) and documents proclaiming same as "credible evidence." Hoo, brother -- where have we heard that excuse before?

Led by Archer, (who lives in the same state as GOP presidential hopeful George W. Bush, by the way) this committee made its determination in spite of the facts. Despite solid, documentable and tangible evidence that the White House ordered a politically motivated IRS audit at least once (again, against WND's Western Journalism Center), committee Republicans still found "no credible evidence" that such audits really happened.

No, of course they didn't. And the Clintons had nothing to do with Filegate either; nobody really hired Craig Livingstone to help steal 900 Republican files. And Livingstone isn't really a well-documented buddy of the president and first lady, as former White House counsel Bernard Nussbaum admitted to the FBI back in '97. Heck, no.

Oh, and Republicans as well as Democratic lawmakers don't ever sic the IRS on their political enemies, either.

If you believe that rubbish, I have a number of well-stocked grocery stores in North Korea I'd like to sell you.

Meanwhile, Gov. George W. Bush blew a big fat chance to differentiate himself from this criminal socialist rabble. Last week, after NRA executive director Wayne LaPierre told the truth and said the Clinton administration had blood on its hands for the firearms violence committed in this country, Bush immediately rolled, whimpered, and gave it up to the liberals who would love nothing more than to take every damned gun in this country away from all of us -- unless we're soldiers or cops or federal agents who are veterans of Waco.

Instead of using his vast media reach -- something not usually available to conservatives and Republicans -- to inform Americans that LaPierre was right, Bush folded. He could have pointed to all the shameless hyping the Clinton spin machine uses to highlight every shooting in this country. Then Bush could have cited the 40-something percent decrease in federal gun law prosecutions over the past few years to ask why, if Clinton wasn't using those incidents to further his political agenda, weren't the existing laws being enforced? If Clinton's Justice Department was as serious as he says he is about stopping gun violence "for the children," then why isn't he asking Attorney General Janet Reno to get off her duff and step up enforcement of federal gun laws, Bush could have asked.

Instead, he said LaPierre's comments were just "too harsh" as he worked to "distance himself" from that troublesome NRA.

And here I was looking forward to the end of the Clinton era. Now I wonder why, with guys like this on the horizon.

If Republicans are not "clean" enough to hold blatant lawbreakers responsible for what they've done; if Republicans cannot find their "facts" with both hands; if Republicans will sell out the Second Amendment; if Republicans will behave like those they accuse of behaving badly; then where is the hope in electing more of them?

If the sole GOP presidential nominee cannot even find the political wherewithal to stand up for a guy who is telling the God's honest truth, then how is this candidate supposed to hold up under the scrutiny of his performance as president? How can a guy with no guts to tell it like it is tell it like it is after he gets into office -- where the pressure to "compromise" is much more harsh?

Maybe the core Republican Party platform is still a valid alternative to democratic socialism for conservatives in this country, but I'll tell you something -- the current crop of GOP lawmakers is not the answer to a free and prosperous America for the future.