Skip to comments.GOP Needs More Sarahs And Fewer Arnolds
Posted on 11/19/2008 8:01:38 AM PST by mnehring
At the recent Republican Governors Conference in Florida, one superstar (Sarah Palin of Alaska) was center stage, while another (Arnold Schwarzenkennedy of Caleefornia) was conspicuous by his absence.
Fresh off her rollercoaster ride as the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee, Governor Palin gave a speech that was simultaneously humorous and serious, confident yet self-deprecating. Unshackled from the nitwits who ran the disorganized John McCain for President Campaign, she was relaxed and back in her element. She spoke of the states as a proving ground for the future leadership of the nation, and of the governors as the alternative to Washington's visionless business-as-usual. She is truly a political rising star in the midst of several political rising stars.
Conspicuous by his absence was the governator, celebrity potentate of an increasingly ungovernable state that comprises most of the Left Coast. Apparently, he was too busy begging the federal government for a bailout of his state to bother attending the RGC. Either that or he was pouting because he is no longer the biggest fish in the shrinking pond of GOP governors.
Emboldened by the largesse of the feds in recent corporate bailouts, Arnold now says his state needs a five billion dollar infusion of cash in order to maintain that infamous profligate California lifestyle -- at least for a while. Like the "Big Three" automakers, Schwarzenegger is in the process of trying to convince the nation that his state is "too big to fail." He no doubt believes that after nearly a trillion dollars of handouts to corporate America, the country is ready to start bailing out the states -- especially if it means avoiding increased taxes at the state level.
Ironically, Arnold seems to see no conflict in the fact that a few years ago (on his watch) California committed that exact same sum to the highly questionable field of embryonic stem cell research. Always compelled to live on the cutting edge of everything, the state committed to this funding to show how much more progressive it was than the federal government. (Kind of like legalizing "medical marijuana.")
God forbid that the citizens of California should actually see their government exercise some fiscal restraint and cut spending. (Where is it written that governments always have to grow?)
Consider just a few of the other expenses incurred by the Golden State in the last few years, expenses that Schwarzenegger seems to have no stomach for cutting. California leads the nation in sanctuary cities, whereby the mayor and city council of a city give their official blessing to harboring criminal aliens. The poster boy for this nonsense is Mayor Gavin Newsom of San Francisco, whose city has become a "progressive" magnet for every deviant in the Western Hemisphere.
One of the dirty little secrets hidden in the nation's mortgage crisis is the fact that five million of those bad loans were given to illegal aliens! How many of those loans were in California?
In many ways, it is unfair to compare the task of governing California and Alaska. While they are two of the largest states physically, the former is the most populous state, while the latter is the most sparsely populated. But the principles of responsible governance remain the same. For example, Sarah Palin has utilized the natural resources of Alaska for the benefit of the people of Alaska. Arnold Schwarzenegger has shackled the taxpayers of his state by embracing much of the silliness of the environmental movement: opposing offshore drilling; supporting the continuation of numerous designer grades of gasoline to conform to "clean air" standards, etc.
One other important difference between these two governors: Sarah Palin believes in the principles laid out in the Republican Party platform, including those that revere the sanctity of human life and traditional marriage. Arnold Schwarzenegger does not.
She, not he, is the future of the GOP.
unfortunately, the arnolds win on popularity and no substance.
Same formula as the marxist messiah
American Idol Election
I know media praises him but what does Arnold stand for?
Arnold’s philosophy is, when the State gives you lemons, you crush it and make a protein smoothie.
other than that.. nothing really.
we need more Alaksa’s and fewer California’s too.
More Sarah’s and NO Arnold’s. None at all.
We need Arnold for some things, specifically, acting.. that’s about it.
Media’s ideal republican, similar to the McCain they say they used to know, maybe he’s back.
Exactly! Spot on!
We have been sheltering “lite-like” politicos like Bush 1 & 2, Gingrich (immoral), McCain (immoral), Dole (clueless) and Rove and Atwater like characters who hijacked the party and drove it to the end of the ditch.
If we dont go back to the party of the 1970, 1980, we are going to be doomed.
We should realize that we tried all manner of Rove and Atwater tricks this year and it did not work.
What we need are solid people like Ms. Palin and the like.
Not this Atwater, Rovian nonsense of “conspiracies”.
its more like 8 years man.
at the rate we are off-message and over reaching against the dems-rats, we wont know how much we create negatives against us.
we are our own worst enemies.
Left-Coast latte drinking prius driving same-sex marriage legalizing freak-show. RINO RINO RINO. Remember that one Republican governor from California we used to have? Yeah, I liked him too.
The GOP doesn’t need any Arnolds, or Shays or McCains, if it wants to win and govern responsibly in the future. Because of RINOs, we have Obama.
Guess he won that one.
You certainly are talkative for someone who just signed on today.
A blog is where you air your feelings. Am I not right?
So what is talkative about freely sharing one’s thoughts!!
This is Free Republic where one gets to air their views.
Or did you want them censored? Or uniform to yours?
YOU ARE NOT THE STANDARD BEARER FOR WHAT IS CONSERVATIVE AND WHAT IS NOT!
You need to review....
FR is not a blog. It is a Conservative, as opposed to RINO, forum.
Statement by the founder of FR
” As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty.
Free Republic is private property. It is not a government project, nor is it funded by government or taxpayer money.”
Do you own FR?
Do you know the defination of what a FORUM is? or a BLOG?
Conservative does not equal GoP. And hate is not conservatism.
Thank you for the links. Not that I didn’t know.
But you should not assume everybody is as idiotic as you.
I don't, but I volunteer for the guy who does. One minute you're decrying RINOs, and the next you are supporting Ah-hold and Eric Holder. All the while telling long-timers how FR should be run while spewing insults. Maybe next you're going to tell us that the First Amendment means you can post whatever you want here in screaming uppercase.
The issue is simple really.
This country belongs to all of us.
Like many citizens, I evaluate a person’s qualifications based on their CV’s and NOT their POLITICAL PARTY.
So if Eric Holder has the qualifications, then he is ok.
If Arnold has the qualifications, then he is ok.
If Ms. Palin has the qualifications, then she is super ok.
Time is gone when we do a political ideoloy litmus test.
Those times are gone. We are in new territory now.
SOLUTIONS matter to people more than POLITICAL PARTY tests.
And then you turn around and decry RINO candidates. Do us all a favor and make up your mind.
Conservatism is beyond party lines. Its a real philosophy and principled movement.
Conservatism also respects institutions and rules and respects diversity of people, ages and religions.
So if a person in power chooses someone who is not a conservative to hold an important office, so be it.
Conservatism does not demand that we force politicians to only appoint conservatives.
So far, nobody has told me convincingly why Eric Holder lacks the qualifications to be AG.
The AM was talking about Free Republic, which is private property and DOES NOT have any free speech.
Like many citizens, I evaluate a persons qualifications based on their CVs and NOT their POLITICAL PARTY.
Interesting, I thought you were a CONSERVATIVE.
Members of the Senate (in theory) vote for political appointees based on their qualifications. However, as citizens we should vote for a politicians based on their qualificatons AND their political beliefs.
For someone who just signed up today, your posts rather bold, but also amusing and conflicting. My guess is that you are cutting and pasting them from someplace.
“Time is gone when we do a political ideoloy litmus test.”
LOL! What’s your “ideoloy”? Trollism?
“Conservatism is beyond party lines.”
It’s not in the democrap party of Eric “pardon Marc Rich” Holder. And by the way it’s an “ideoloy”.
Good post! Would you happen to know if Sarah Palin’s FULL SPEECH to the governor’s association is posted anywhere on Free Republic? I’ve done some rudimentary searching (on FR and in Google) and haven’t seen anything (yet). FReegards, FRiend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.