Posted on 02/12/2005 3:54:58 PM PST by FairOpinion
So then it is your contention that the state of California is dominated by scumbags, parasites, goofballs, and losers? If that's the case, why would anybody who is decent and normal and works for a living want to stay there?
You won't find me commenting much on this stuff, because I am not involved in party politics. IMO, the gamesmanship has become so extreme, that there is no longer any truth in either side of the political spectrum. Tactics and strategery have overtaken principle. Without principle, no politician will truly represent me, nor can they be trusted to do what they promise.
Instead of campaign tactics, my posts will mostly deal with specifics, usually legislation, and the pros and cons. What amazes me is the lack of truth in campaigns. There is a wave toward political speech being accepted as free speech, with little need for it to be accurate, and no accountablity when it is not. The two party system is what usually kept that in check, but 'big tent' attitudes make it hard to discern what people stand for.
For example, when Gray Davis proposed selling $8 Billion in bonds (to be paid back over a 5 year period) to solve the deficit problem in 2003, the Republicans screamed, filed lawsuits, wrote articles, etc. condemning the action. (The final deficit as of July 2003 was less than $8 billion.) When Arnold came in November 2003, he proposed selling $15 Billion in bonds (to be paid over approximately a 15 year period) for the same purpose. Did the GOP scream? No, they either went silent, or lined up behind him.
I don't care whose position it was, if (D)Borrowing is bad, then (R)Borrowing should be bad also. (I personally think borrowing is destroying the state and is leading us into a death spiral). The Dems will not attack Arnold for this, as it supplements continued high spending. If members of the GOP (or fiscal conservatives) don't speak out, who will?
I am equally amazed at the GOP now lining up behind what is being called a "Spending Reform." Buried in that initiative is an additional $10 Billion (roughly) of borrowing. This is money that probably should not have been promised (these were the behind-the-scene education deals), but was to be repaid out of revenues within 3 years. The idea was, that increased reveunues would cover it. Well, there have been increased revenues, but the current budget proposal continues to spend those on other programs and shifts this $10 Billion worth of promised spending increases (debt) into the next 15 years, with interest. What happened to cutting up the credit cards?
There are also tenuous problems with the "Pension reform." It will cost more in the short term and savings, if any, will not come about for 1-2 decades. It does however shift the power to Wall St. There are some big power plays happening that are not necessarily in the best interest of California, IMO.
Last year, we saw Arnold promote the Sierra Nevada Conservancy, something that JF Kennedy, Jr. put into AS's "environmental platform." This was an outrageous assault on property rights, one of the fundamental rights of United States citizens and a passionate issue among conservatives who value liberty. Those kind of actions cannot be easily undone, if at all.
The issues I have are ones that extend way beyond Arnold. It isn't him, or wanting him not to succeed. It is all about holding him accountable to his promises and avoiding long-term missteps that we will have to live with for years after his name is in the history book.
I hope someone else can answer your question more directly. But hopefully you understand my motivations more than before.
"Arnold almost lost, and Bustamante almost won, BECAUSE Tom was in the race"
I don't know where the hell you were in 2003 but RIONld didn't even enter the race until AFTER the recall was a reality! We had a legitimate GOP conservative candidate to run against the Dimwit Davis and your boy decided that he would jump in the race at the last minute...showing up for only ONE FRIGGIN' DEBATE!
Now you can try to rewrite history all you like but we were there and we were responsible for getting the signatures for the recall and that RINOld line "McClintock couldn't win" is factually inaccurate! PERIOD!
USA TODAY/CNN/GALLUP POLL 9/28/2003
6. If the choice were between Cruz Bustamante, the Democrat and Tom McClintock, the Republican, who would you be more likely to vote for: Cruz Bustamante or Tom McClintock?
Registered Voters
2003 Sep 25-27 42% Bustamante 49% McClintock
Probable Voters
2003 Sep 25-27 37% Bustamante 56% McClintock
Point, Game, Set, Match!
I assume that this query was sarcasm. Just in case someone, a new lurker, not so sophisticated, read this; here's the answer.
While the Republican Party did not exactly "sell out" it did in fact, under the guidance of Carl Rove, embark upon a course to eliminate the Democrat Party. This tact has the Republican Party headed left of center in an effort to collapse the allegiance of at least two key constituents of the Democrat Party; blacks and Hispanics.
This tact has drawn criticism from many conservatives and the division it has created is best manifest in two areas. Immigration "reform" and the size of government.
Ohhhhhh... LET ME DO IT!!! I wanna raise it!!! I'm obsessed with it cause it's soooooooo big!!! Oh Please Norm, lemme do it... Puuleeeeese!!! I'll follow him around from thread to thread with it. I'll do it in 8 different font sizes and as many colors... Pulleeeeease lemme do it!!!
You have no idea how thrilling it would be on a slow news Saturday nite to just go ape wild throwing that abomination on this nation in the faces of people that should have known what we were gonna get with Senor Sinister Schwarzenrenegger... Property rights, Hasta La Vista, Baby!!!
Come on, Norm, just turn me loose! I'm especially motivated tonight as I've learned that the CA Republican Party is once again being HIJACKED by Duff Sundheineous to SHUT-OUT ANY POSSIBLE CHALLENGER TO SCHWARZENEGGER WITH NO REAL PRIMARY CAMPAIGNS OR ELECTIONS!!!
Lemme at 'em Norm! I'm fired up!! I ain'ta gonna take it no mo!!! I'm fired up! Turn me loose!! They shoulda known better!!! (wiping foam from corners of mouth and grinning fiendishly)
Well stated, calcowgirl.
Those who seek to be at the vanguard of movements and pursue agendas open themselves up to scorn and ridicule whetherit is warranted or not. It goes with the territory as many will become very personally involved and become zealots for 'their' cause.
Those who are too trusting often times capitulate to just get along, go with the prevailing mood and do not question for themselves as to what else may be behind the suggested changes or reforms that are now so necessary, yet really do not know why, other than it seems like the right thing to do.
Add to the mix, forces such as media and institutions with vested interests, unions and other special interests and before you know it, everything becomes as clear as mud.
That's why there is never a shortage of mud to fling at each other while Rome burns... again.
No party is free of fault as no government is without fault or ulterior motive as they are made up of individuals , and we all know individuals can be bought and influences swayed by means , sometimes nefarious and obvious, and other times, by means not so easily identified.
Me thinks your indignation is a little too righteous.
You've been here long enough to know that the Austrian Pretender can't survive the Republican primary without the support of conservatives. You knew this was coming. The only possibility of surprise was that it would become so public so soon before the primary campaign.
yes I agree and it wasn't total sarcasm but someone eluded to the weak Calif Repub party and not supporting conservatives but then we turn around and spotlight moderates......maybe Calif should be above all this but if Bush and Rove and Mehlman consider this politics to win and we of coure endorse them, then why does anyone think Calif can do any better????????
LOLOL Alright already..
sic 'em.
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels."The establishment of an American Soviet government will involve the confiscation of large landed estates
repr. In Karl Marx: Selected Works, vol. 1 (1942).
The Communist Manifesto, sct. 2 (1848).
William Z. Foster, National Chairman of the Communist Party,
restating point one of the Communist Manifesto in 1932,
“The abolition of private property.”
Did you ever stop to consider that this assumption (we are all Republicans) may be the reason behind your difficulties following the logic of many on this forum.
A reminder. We are not necessarily Republicans. We are conservatives.
LOL. Well, my expertise lies in different endeavors as well. But based on prior campaigns, I have learned I can't trust the politicians and the news media, so I actually read the legislation, something everyone should do if they want the truth.
I honestly don't have the energy to discuss Bush. I will say that I think all laws should be enforced; if they are bad laws, then change them, but never ignore them. Immigration laws should be enforced. If we need more workers, then increase the quotas for legal immigration. With the social programs in place, the country can't afford the continuing influx of illegal aliens into the country.
Hey, I'm always willing to put an extra plate on the table for someone who is hungry or in need. But what about when the government tells me to do it? What if I then have so many other mouths to feed that I can't feed my own family? What about when someone chooses to not have children because they can't afford to raise them? Where does it ever end?
IMO, there is no excuse for the feds not paying for the cost of illegal aliens (health care, prisons, etc), if those same feds fail to enforce the law. No brainer. But that still means the taxpayer is bearing the cost.
What the state can do is to avoid offering any incentives that bring more illegals into the state/country. That includes certain educational benefits, drivers licenses, etc. I was utterly dismayed at the lack of general support at FR for the Save-Our-License campaign just completed. It was a first step in solving the problem. I hope they got enough signatures.
LOL. How long you gonna make us wait? ;-)
D1... That was an outstanding reply/statement!!! Excellent!!!
yes I misspoke.....that is what I meant....I know there Libertarian's here as well as others......and I don't have a problem following the logic as much as I'm now asking questions........OK?
Well... Lemme tell ya. That Norm, back on reply #69, got me all werked up and then I started readin all the excellent back an forth replies on this superb thread and startin ta think maybe I hadn't needed to git so excited and so now I finally gits here and sure enough... It's all anticlimactic!!!
All you wonderful people are finally gettin past all the hard feelings and posting such superb replies that the reasons for misunderstanding and disagreement are starting to melt away! It's a beautiful thing!! And it's through arguing it out... not some stupid concensus thingy! WOW!!! I'm lovin it!!!
Thanks NR. Great post. :-)
Worse, why did Carl Rove arrange for the appointment of the current CAGOP leadership, especially Gerry Parsky, who has refused to support ANY conservative Republican nominee?
That's just what happens when we elect GOP moderates. Think Pete Wilson, or Nixon.
?I know you said the Calif Repub party sold out, but didn't the national party sell out as well.
It did indeed, but you have to understand the hierarchy.
However inept Bill Simon's campaign may have seemed, the worst of it was done by his own Party. Had the CAGOP supported their candidate wholeheartedly, Simon would be governor now, despite that ineptitude (which one has to question considering the way he crushed Dick Riordan). As it was, Gerry Parsky and the GOP leadership refused to raise the money promised when they took the job, withheld funds raised by President Bush until Simon's campaign manager (Sal Russo) signed the Log Cabin letter, Parsky refused to fund GOTV or registration efforts, and stipulated Simon hire Wilson/Jones (remember "Fire Gray Davis"?) and Ed Rollins (the famous fundraising photo) as campaign consultants. As a result, Simon lost by 350,000 votes when 1.6 MILLION registered Republicans didn't vote.
That Simon came as close as he did with those kinds of handicaps is PROOF that a competent conservative CAN win. That's the dirty little secret of the California Republican Party, and the one thing they don't want is for those who would otherwise support Tom McClintock, but don't believe he can win, to realize it.
Consider Bill Jones recent campaign. ALL of the funds raised and ALL of the organizational effort in California last year went to the Bush campaign. After Jones beat conservative Howard Kaloogian in the primary, he took the expected dive in the general election getting zero support from the CAGOP.
The behavior of GOP "moderates" during the Simon campaign is the principal reason I have so little patience for Arnold supporters when they demand I support him. They put up Riordan, lost, screwed a conservative in Bill Simon, lost, resisted the recall petition drive, lost, and then inserted their "centrist" excuse for a Republican telling us to support him while accusing conservatives of splitting the vote! They were perfectly happy to keep Gray Davis until conservatives succeeded in the petition drive despite them and then get crappy when we don't fall in line behind them.
So, let's say conservatives supported Arnold, will the GOP leadership EVER support another conservative candidate? The record says, no way. They'll expect us to keep giving them money, keep doing the legwork, and keep accepting the consequences for their "social liberalism," which ends up costing the State a fortune and manufactures ever more Democrat dependents... for what?
Yeah, it's laughable for Tom McClintock to accept money from bigtime Bustamante supporters.
I didn't drag in the tribes; Tom McClintock did.
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.