Posted on 01/13/2006 4:35:43 PM PST by FairOpinion
Every time Schwarzenegger joins with the Democrats in the Legislature his actions convince the electorate that there is little difference between Republicans and Democrats beyond party registration. Schwarzenegger's vindication of Democrat policies, by adopting them, simply convinces the electorate that the system they have grown accustomed to is the best they're going to get.
It paints Republicans into a corner, and ultimately, poisons the playing field before conservative solutions are even attempted.
Yes, it is. Especially to see some on a conservative website ignoring all of the signs that the CA Republican Party has totally abandoned conservatives (and Republicans, for that matter). Borrowing, spending, new fees, more environmental wackoism, more gun control, sham bonds for stem cell research, etc. etc. etc. When one looks at the record of just 3 short years, it is stunning how far we have digressed from any form of fiscal responsibility. The new budget projects operating deficits for years to come while the administration acknowledges that those deficits could have been eliminated if new spending was not implemented. It boggles the mind!
The people (R) with busy lives who find solace in having an (R) in office, but pay little attention to details, need to be made aware of what is happening. I haven't given up hope, but I fear Republicans will be paying for the damage done by these imposters(R) for many years to come.
There are times it's best to stand for principle and support conservatives (most of the time), and there are times to cut your losses and choose half of something over a lot of nothing.
This race falls under the second catagory.
I read something that implied that the effect of taxes on higher gasoline prices was mostly offset by reduced consumption. I don't know if it's true, and I don't remember the source (although I think it was semi-official).
I wouldn't encourage it. If McClintock challenges Schwarzenegger, the CAGOP will move heaven and earth to sabotage his campaign and work tirelessly to defeat him in his net try for office. They would be vicious.
It's one thing to face an honest opponent and yet another to campaign while covering your 6 against attack from partisan extremists from within your own party.
Got news for you. We already are a third world country and dropping. What is next? No status at all.
The only hope I would see of McClintock switching races is if Arnold dropped out and the CA GOP agreed to support him (instead of stabbing him in the back, as usual). I don't put high odds on either happening.
If one is going to write, I think it should be to the CA GOP and to Arnold.
At this point, we have no assurances that the party establishment will not sandbag McClintock in his run for Lieutenant-Governor (and looking at the Politics1 website, it looks like they may get behind Carly Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard CEO).
Also, too, what are our chances for holding the Secretary of State's office with the incumbent-appointee RINO McPherson ? I'd at least concede having McPherson presiding over the elections agency is better than the corrupt Kevin Shelley.
Finally, someone arrived.
The reply demands an honest question. Beyond the banality offered, is there an apperciation of the circumstanes in California, especially the governance philosophy of Schwarzenegger and his official actions to date?
The question is posed because of the reference to half of something, implying that Schwarzenegger actions, in the capacity of his elected ofice, had some aspects which were conservative. Actions taken, in the name of conservatism, that were bound to result in net, personal harm.
From a related thread as McClintock came out of the shadows to take a shot at the Austrian:
This public opposition to Schwarzenneger's shennigans is very curious.
McClintock needs the CAGOP to run an effective campaign this year. His silence and/or tacit support of measures on the November ballot were easily explained by pressure/threats brought to bear by the CAGOP if he didn't cooperate. The spin from the party that he actually believed in some of the dirty tricks the party was fronting for Wilson/Schwarzenegger fell on my deaf ears. A brief review of his outspoken objections to such shenanigans just weeks earlier, made the spin just that: spin.
So why has McClintock now become vocal, turned "traitor" or jumped ship? Ostensibly he still needs the CAGOP's blessing and support to win in November.
The possibilities are endless but these three are at the top of my list:
1) McCLintock is well aware that the CAGOP will eventually turn on him, after his usefulness is gone (selling the "reforms" to conservatives), as they have done to many conservatives and he pragmatically realizes the no amount of booth licking will change the course of events.
2) McClintock is becoming increasingly aware that Schwarzenegger will not survive, either within the CAGOP or with the electorate in November, and McClintock is just trying to salvage someting conservative out of the Schwarzenegger debacle, using his typically undiplomatic style.
3) McClintock calculates that he might be better off to "go it alone" this summer in view of the considerable damage the CAGOP has done to their reputation supporting Schwarzenegger's failed agendas. Just as Schwarzenegger has distanced himself from the CAGOP, so will McClintock. He'll run as a "reformer", not a partisan.
Have you taken a look at the candidates who have won California since after 1970 ? Aside from Reagan, you have had a parade of bores from both parties elected. Grey Davis won twice, and he could quite possibly have been the most boring and blah candidate for the top job we've seen in the last 50 years. McClintock may be "blah" in your estimation, but then, that leaves him in good company.
"And to the guy who keeps repeating that Tom McClintock won the highest number of votes by a Repub... that's a nice little piece of trivia. The fact is he lost. There ain't no prize for second place."
It's not trivia, it's fact. And he lost by 16,000 votes when every other GOP candidate lost by hundreds of thousands of votes or more. You know what you call the candidate for a statewide office who is the highest vote-getter who comes that close to winning despite being drastically outspent ? The guy you nominate for the TOP job the next time it comes open.
"What's that leave us? I dunno. I think a conservative can win in California, but it's gotta be somebody who carries a lot of "oomph" with him -- clear, bold visions, passionate words, and probably somebody who hasn't been stained by California politics."
Bill Simon, Jr. looked pretty good... until he choked up for the general campaign. The thing I like about McClintock is that he has yet to do so, despite all of the attacks on him. He stands his ground.
"Otherwise, we're left with two choices -- moderate to liberal RINOs, or the moderate to conservative Democrats. The two are the same in my book. But I think I sleep a little better with somebody with the Republican moniker."
You're forgetting, this is California. There are no moderate/conservative Democrats in California. You have your Marxists and you have your Stalinists. Then you have your RINO establishment types that pull out the kneepads to appease the Marxists and the Stalinists. Then you have Tom McClintock who has no interest in feeding any of these monsters. I know who I'd be voting for.
Very interesting read, thank you.
Tom McClintock may very well be the best candidate for anything in Californa, but I don't think he can win. And it's not because he's too conservative. It's cause he's blah. Let's remember what we're talking about -- we're talking about California, where everything needs to have a nice glossy coat on it. Everything needs to be bigger, better, bolder.
Bigger, bolder, better--glossy? Like George Deukmejian, Pete Wilson, and Gray Davis? Talk about a 'blah' bunch of guys! Take a closer look at history, would ya? I would suggest that after electing this celebrity, we will see folks welcome the wonks with open arms. After Jesse Ventura, did they recruit in Hollywood?
And to the guy who keeps repeating that Tom McClintock won the highest number of votes by a Repub... that's a nice little piece of trivia. The fact is he lost.
Do you think there might have been a different answer if the GOP had supported him? You think maybe the spending had something to do with it? He was outspent five-fold and still finished within 16,000 votes (out of almost 8 Million!).
Candidate Vote Pct. Spent ($MM) Steve Westly Moderate Democrat 45.4% $10.6 Tom McClintock Conservative Republican 45.1% $ 2.0
I think a conservative can win in California, but it's gotta be somebody who carries a lot of "oomph" with him -- clear, bold visions, passionate words...
It is just that passion, and clear message, that got McClintock support and respect from across the political spectrum. Only when Arnold started to mimick McClintock's fiscally conservative message did Arnold take over the race permanently. Unfortunately, there was no passion behind Arnold's words as he has failed to embrace the platform upon which he won.
"Steve Westly Moderate Democrat" <---- You misspelled Marxist. :-P
LOL. Well, relatively speaking, he is moderate. In California, that may not say much.
I actually copied that from a lengthier post that Carry_Okie put together:
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1438808/posts?page=33#33
I live in a red county or I would not have a CCW, I see the welfare mentality oozing over the state like the blob in the old 1950s movie and I feel we are sinking further into the depths in this state. Hopefully we can pull it out but I am begining to doubt it.
I'm sorry, Amerigomag.
We'll never agree about this.
I could never, ever, under any circumstances vote for a dem.
And I'm so sorry to see that proposed here.
Hey, I didn't call him a Stalinist. The Marxists are the moderates. :-D
"Otherwise, we're left with two choices -- moderate to liberal RINOs, or the moderate to conservative Democrats. "
===
Most of what you said was almost sensible for someone not living in CA, but you are out of touch with reality, when you think that is the alternative. The alternative in CA is a moderate Republican, if we are so lucky, or an ultraliberal, socialist, communist Democrat who wants to give drivers licenses to illegals, raise taxes, have socialized medicine, raise taxes, regulate business out of existence until they all leave CA.
THAT is the choice.
As for Arnold, he put his career on line to reform California, by introducing CONSERVATIVE propositions, which would have severely decreased the power of the unions, would have gotten rid of the impacts of the horrible Prop. 98, mandating a huge portion of the budget has to be spent on schools, and would have put a control on spending.
He was doing what the conservatives said they wanted, then they stayed home, just to spite Arnold, even if it will sink California and us with it.
It's as if the conservatives said to Arnold, bet you can't swim the English Channel, Arnold said, yes, I can. Then the conservatives handcuff his hands and feet, put great big lead balls on it, then throw him in the ocean, then they are crowing that "see, I told you he won't be able to swim the Channel". This is exactly what was done to Arnold.
Arnold can only get reelected, if he gets the moderate votes. If he doesn't get reelected, mark my words and save this post.
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.