Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Republicans First or Conservatives First?
Media Research Center ^ | August 19, 2003 | Brent Bozell

Posted on 08/22/2003 9:03:09 AM PDT by TBP

The Arnold Schwarzenegger candidacy may become a classic contest for activists to decide whether they are Republicans or conservatives first. Republicans are urging everyone to jump on the bandwagon, to "wake up and smell the Arnie," to take the pragmatic step that will guarantee the ouster of incompetent Gov. Gray Davis.

But what do conservatives gain for this leap of faith? This movie star’s campaign still is not presenting any concrete positions, conservative or liberal. He would like to be seen as a fiscal conservative, but Schwarzenegger has signed no anti-tax pledge nor offered any spending cuts or bureaucratic reforms. Instead, he has touted advisers like Warren Buffett, last hailed by Ted Koppel as "the sage of Omaha" for opposing the Bush tax cuts. Buffett’s also been a financial booster of Senators Chris Dodd, Russ Feingold, Tom Harkin, and Hillary Rodham Clinton.

On social issues, conservatives gain nothing by elevating a Gov. Schwarzenegger. He told Cosmopolitan magazine "I have no sexual standards in my head that say this is good or this is bad." It also doesn’t help that adviser Buffett has been a massive funder of Planned Parenthood, the Vatican-bashing front group calling itself "Catholics for a Free Choice," and a bevy of other radical abortion proponents.

Some suggest Schwarzenegger’s leftist social views are irrelevant because this race is based on economics. But does anyone doubt that the 2004 Republican convention in New York would be dominated by media heavies tripping over themselves to get the governor of the nation’s most populous state to denounce the GOP platform on social issues as "out of the mainstream"? He would probably become the keynote speaker, or be at least as prominent on the podium as Christopher Reeve was for the Democrats the last time around, dominating one of the convention nights.

Conservatives should already notice what is happening in California coverage. The press is using Arnold to marginalize the right. On CNN, reporter Dan Lothian observed that "while Schwarzenegger has been connected to some conservative themes, like eliminating the car tax and voting for the anti-illegal immigrant measure Prop 187, his support of gay rights, abortion rights, and some gun control, [is] turning off the far right."

Lothian kept pounding: "For now, many conservatives are embracing Bill Simon who had impressive numbers but lost to Gray Davis last year, and state Senator Tom McClintock....The big question: Does Schwarzenegger even need the far right to win?" Lothian turned to USC professor Martin Kaplan, who added: "To the degree that Arnold Schwarzenegger tries to appeal to that far right vote, he will alienate the very moderate Republicans, independents, and moderate Democrats that he needs to put together a coalition."

The brain trust at CNN would relgate the philosophy of Ronald Reagan, that same philosophy that triggered two landslide election victories, to the "far right."And they wonder why their network is tanking.

CNN doesn’t care that Lothian’s utterly conventional labeling is at odds with its own network polls, that shows that it is Schwarzenegger’s "if it feels good do it" liberal positions on abortion and homosexuality that are out of the majority, out of the mainstream, and therefore better defined as "far left" than conservatives are defined as "far right." Why do these liberal media outlets always locate "the center" of our political spectrum somewhere in Massachusetts?

Lothian even hinted at marginalizing that massive and very real majority of Californians, the 59 percent who voted for the "anti-illegal immigrant" Proposition 187 back in 1994. You will never see Democrats described on CNN as "pro-illegal immigrant." Other reporters have used the appellation "anti-immigration" for that vote. Too many reporters leave out the nuance that you can be for Prop. 187 and for legal immigration. You can love your immigrant neighbors, and still think it’s a bad idea to provide a five-star menu of taxpayer-funded social services to people who have no respect for our legal system.

If desiring a legal, measured system of immigration that doesn’t encourage law-breaking puts you on the "far right," then where on the ideological spectrum do we place the judges and radical advocates who got this majority vote crushed? Once again, the media have described a political battle as between the "far right" and the "public interest," as propagandistic as that sounds.

The politics of Schwarzenegger may remain a mystery, but the politics of the "objective" press never really change. Conservatives have much to lose from creating a Frankenstein monster they can’t control, not to mention how the definition of "Republican" or "conservative" might be warped beyond recognition. Californians should just say no to the Schwarzeneggernaut.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Extended News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: brentbozell; california; conservatism; conservatives; election; gop; jellyfish; liberalism; mcclintock; media; partyloyalty; personalities; principles; priorities; republicans; schwarzenegger; simon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-273 next last
Supporting liberal Kennedy Republicans only loses ground for our cause. It gains us nothing. Never support a policy or an individual just because there is an R appended to it.

Schwarzenegger is a liberal and it's not as if there aren't good conservatives in the race, such as Simon, McClintock, and the woman from the AIP.

Principle over party.

1 posted on 08/22/2003 9:03:09 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TBP
Enjoy Cruz.
2 posted on 08/22/2003 9:06:21 AM PDT by Texas_Dawg (I will not rest until every "little man" is destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
It's not that simple and you know it. Support a real, proven conservative and you'll get a conservative governor. Support Ah-nold and you'll get a liberal RINO.

We know where you come down: Republican first. Gop Uber Alles.
3 posted on 08/22/2003 9:08:30 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TBP
If they can't have Arnold, his supporters seem to want Cruz to be elected.
4 posted on 08/22/2003 9:08:39 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP
PING!

Your One Stop Resource For All The California Recall News!

Want on our daily or major news ping lists? Freepmail DoctorZin.

5 posted on 08/22/2003 9:10:40 AM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP
Enjoy your upcoming Cruz.

If Larry Kuldow says he's Ok. And Arthur Laffer likes him, well, I am hardpresssed to disagree.

...In a dramatic news conference this week, actor-turned-gubernatorial-candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger made it clear that he will occupy right-of-center territory when it comes to fiscal matters in the forthcoming recall election to throw out California's incumbent Governor Gray Davis.

That only leaves the question of ... Are drowning California Conservatives SMART enough to grab the lifeline within their reach

6 posted on 08/22/2003 9:12:15 AM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
"I'm for gun control. I'm a peace-loving guy." --Arnold Schwarzenegger
7 posted on 08/22/2003 9:13:40 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TBP
We know where you come down: Republican first. Gop Uber Alles.

Huh? Aren't Simon and McClintock GOP as well?

I'm just as conservative as you. You have two choices. Pick one.

8 posted on 08/22/2003 9:15:11 AM PDT by Texas_Dawg (I will not rest until every "little man" is destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
In a dramatic news conference this week, actor-turned-gubernatorial-candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger made it clear that he will occupy right-of-center territory when it comes to fiscal matters

Which is why he still won't rule out raising taxes, right?

9 posted on 08/22/2003 9:16:05 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Rome was not built in a day. When you are in hole the first thing to do is STOP DIGGING.



Schwarzenegger Today, McClintock Tomorrow.


10 posted on 08/22/2003 9:16:08 AM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TBP
Support a real, proven conservative and you'll get a conservative governor.

You're dreaming. Support an unelectable proven conservative in the liberal state of California and you'll get another democrat (cruz) for governor.

11 posted on 08/22/2003 9:16:16 AM PDT by South40 (Get Right Or Get Left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TBP
What is needed is a viable 3rd party that doesn't get hijacked by dingbats. I agree with you on principle and then see Cruz Bustamonte v. Arnold or Howard Dean v. Bush.

Perhaps the GOP does write off its conservative base the way the Democrats just assume they will dominate amongst minorities. However, until there is a tenable alternative, we're genuinely stuck.

In order to posit a choice between conservatism and Republicanism, there has to be a doctrine which can in turn support a platform that specifically elucidates what makes a conservative non-GOP.

Secondly, the 3rd Party candidate has to have the national organization to beat both the Dems and the GOP. If all that party garners is a 5% protest vote, they do nothing except Nader the GOP and cause national policy to drift further to the left as more Democrats win in congressional races down ticket.

So what needs to happen is the following:

a) A National grassroots organization needs to be established to field a wide array of down ticket candidates first. This insulates the party from being hijacked by well-funded political gadflys who want it's money to wage quixotic presidential races.

b) These candidates all have to run on a similar platform. Something similar to Newt Gingrich's Contract With America.

c) Money in large amounts needs to be raised and invested to maintain viability in off years. THis is the only way a 3rd party can legitimately hope to exist 3 years after it's first presidential candidate has been destroyed at the polls.
12 posted on 08/22/2003 9:18:04 AM PDT by .cnI redruM (The Problem With Socialism Is That You Eventually Run Out Of Other People's Money - Lady Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
You have two choices.

The ballot says otherwise.

13 posted on 08/22/2003 9:18:06 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TBP
You do remember the First Bush Presidency ?

No one but an absolute MORON, will ever say Read my lips, No New taxes.....especially not someone with an R after their name.

The media only remembers campaign promises made by people running as republicans, and Arnold is smart enough to know that, even if others are not.

14 posted on 08/22/2003 9:18:30 AM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
If they can't have Arnold, his supporters seem to want Cruz to be elected.

Of course they do, because Cruz and Arnold are of basically the same ideology. Simnon and McClintock (as well as the aforementioned woman from the AIP) aren't.

15 posted on 08/22/2003 9:19:04 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM
What is needed is a viable 3rd party that doesn't get hijacked by dingbats.

You build it at the local and state level. In this case, there are at least two other Republicans who are identifiably conservative. But if you are in California and want to build a thrid party, you might want to look at the AIP. Nationally, it's affiliated with the Constitution Party.

16 posted on 08/22/2003 9:22:19 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
The ballot says otherwise.

Logic sure doesn't.

17 posted on 08/22/2003 9:23:15 AM PDT by Texas_Dawg (I will not rest until every "little man" is destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TBP
In this case, there are at least two other Republicans who are identifiably conservative.

But not electable obviously. One of them lost an election that my front door knob would have won.

18 posted on 08/22/2003 9:24:32 AM PDT by Texas_Dawg (I will not rest until every "little man" is destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
No one but an absolute MORON, will ever say Read my lips, No New taxes

You must think that the conservative candidates are morons, then, because Bill Simon is repeatedly reminding people that he has signed the no-new-taxes pledge. I believe McClintock has signed it too and says so. Are these people morons? Or do you dislike them because they're conservatives who are making things difficult for the Kennedy Republican?

19 posted on 08/22/2003 9:24:59 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1

Well they have 45 days to find one of the lower tier candidates [single digit] and boost the ratings by at least 1/2% per day to make it into the mid 20%range and maybe become competitive. Can that be done? Who knows but time is running out.....

The following is from the Public Policy Institute of CA poll released yesterday.... It will interesting to see polls in the next few days showing numbers taken after the Arnold news conference.....


20 posted on 08/22/2003 9:25:00 AM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
Logic

Blind partisanship isn't logic.

21 posted on 08/22/2003 9:26:54 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: South40
Here's what I don't get. These people live in one of the two biggest liberal/marxist hell-holes in the country and they actually act stunned that a conservative can no longer be elected as governor. And like the election is going to decide anything. Since the 2000 Gore-fest, elections don't determine who wins, the courts do. This worked in the GOP's favor in 2000, but I don't think The Nine in DC are going to hear this one. It will probabaly end up at the state supreme court or at the most, the 9th Circus.
22 posted on 08/22/2003 9:27:42 AM PDT by Orangedog (Soccer-Moms are the biggest threat to your freedoms and the republic !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: South40
Declaring someone unelectable and refusing to support him for that reason is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If everyone who agreed with the conservative candidates voted for tehm instead of the "pragmatic" Kennedy Republican, they would have enough to build a plurality and win this race. But too many of you would rather waste your vote on a liberal because he is a movie star with an R after his name.

Pragmatism doesn't work.
23 posted on 08/22/2003 9:27:49 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg; All; 4integrity
Winning v. strict conservatism. That's what it's about imo. I think the DNC is so corrupt that beating them is very important to me. Who can beat the dems? That's what it comes down to.

I am neutral & in Florida, but Arnold supporters seem to be more prepared. Prove me wrong but please don't flame me. I present this for discussion purposes, not for personal attacks.

24 posted on 08/22/2003 9:29:57 AM PDT by floriduh voter (http://www.conservative-spirit.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TBP
No. Only Miss Cleo carries sight into the Future. One never knows what is around the corner.




No Taxes Pledges are a nice gimmick, but a gimmick nonetheless.
25 posted on 08/22/2003 9:30:02 AM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Blind partisanship isn't logic.

Blind partisanship? McClintock, Simon, and Schwarzenegger are all Republicans.

26 posted on 08/22/2003 9:30:08 AM PDT by Texas_Dawg (I will not rest until every "little man" is destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: TBP
And two of the Nations Foremost Economists (Laffer, Kudlow) advising him and in his corner.
27 posted on 08/22/2003 9:31:14 AM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: South40
How is McClintock unelectable?

He got 103,000 more votes than Bill Simon in 2002, despite being outspent 10-1 and in a downticket race.

He won a strong re-election in his state senate district in 2000, at the very same time it voted for Gore over Bush by 19%.

Yeah, sounds like he really could never win, huh?
28 posted on 08/22/2003 9:31:27 AM PDT by TheAngryClam (TOM McCLINTOCK is my choice for governor. He should be yours too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
I meant Foremost CONSERVATIVE Economists.
29 posted on 08/22/2003 9:31:36 AM PDT by hobbes1 ( Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: floriduh voter
I think the DNC is so corrupt that beating them is very important to me. Who can beat the dems? That's what it comes down to.

Not to mention that wherever there is a Democrat somewhere, it is in the best interests of conservatism that they be kept from political office. The successes (or total lack thereof) of the California conservatives and GOP over the last decade speak for themselves. They are as politically ineffective at advancing conservative causes.

30 posted on 08/22/2003 9:32:32 AM PDT by Texas_Dawg (I will not rest until every "little man" is destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
Main Entry: 1par·ti·san
Variant(s): also par·ti·zan /'pär-t&-z&n, -s&n, -"zan, chiefly British "pär-t&-'zan/
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French partisan, from Old Italian partigiano, from parte part, party, from Latin part-, pars part
Date: 1555
1 : a firm adherent to a party , faction, cause, or person; especially : one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance

Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary, 10th Edition
31 posted on 08/22/2003 9:32:43 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
Logic sure doesn't.

Hey, no fair dragging logic into politics!

32 posted on 08/22/2003 9:34:12 AM PDT by Orangedog (Soccer-Moms are the biggest threat to your freedoms and the republic !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
Not a gimmick. Principle. Something a lot of Republicans don't understand.

Simple: If they send me a tax increase, I will veto it. Period. Simon and McClintock can take that position on principle and there is every reason to believe that they will stand by it.

Arnold, OTOH, "won't rule it out" becuse "you never say never." Just like a liberal Republican.
33 posted on 08/22/2003 9:34:44 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: deport
Note that the poll sample is badly skewed.

almost 25% of the respondents aren't even registered voters.

Slightly over 25% are registered, but not likely voters. That leaves less than 50% likely voters in the poll.

The idiots and the apathetic are Arnold's main constituency.

The Field Poll, which leans leftward about 5-10% due to its sample selection methods, had Simon at 8% and McClintock at 9% in the first few days of the Schwarzenegger bandwagon.

They didn't lose nearly have of those conservative votes to Arnold as he was sending up trial balloon after trial balloon of raising taxes, first with Buffett, then with Sean Walsh just a day ago.
34 posted on 08/22/2003 9:35:40 AM PDT by TheAngryClam (TOM McCLINTOCK is my choice for governor. He should be yours too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Orangedog
Supreme Court of California is actually quite good, politically.
35 posted on 08/22/2003 9:36:23 AM PDT by TheAngryClam (TOM McCLINTOCK is my choice for governor. He should be yours too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: TheAngryClam
almost 25% of the respondents aren't even registered voters. Slightly over 25% are registered, but not likely voters. That leaves less than 50% likely voters in the poll.

Good points.

36 posted on 08/22/2003 9:36:57 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Are you not in support of a Republican candidate (or any candidate for that matter) in this race? Sounds like you are just as partisan, if so.
37 posted on 08/22/2003 9:37:35 AM PDT by Texas_Dawg (I will not rest until every "little man" is destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg; Jim Robinson; Bob J; diotima
There are some decent GOP members in congress but their numbers are limited.

Further, we have some great freepers in California. They all have my respect and admiration.

38 posted on 08/22/2003 9:38:40 AM PDT by floriduh voter (http://www.conservative-spirit.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
Are you not in support of a Republican candidate

There's more than one candidate with an "R" behind their name and some of them have more than just an "R".

39 posted on 08/22/2003 9:40:41 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: TBP
Arnold is not a liberal. In his press conference this week he spoke clearly in support of conservative causes like being over taxed, how he legally became an American citizen, how important it is to be fiscally responsible. He may not be as conservative as we would like, but the alternative is Bustamante.
Splitting the Republican vote is just going to elect Bustamante. McClintock and Simon do not have a chance in California. I voted for Simon the first time, but in this race he cannot win.
40 posted on 08/22/2003 9:41:19 AM PDT by LibertyAndJusticeForAll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertyAndJusticeForAll
Care to respond to post #28, then?
41 posted on 08/22/2003 9:42:03 AM PDT by TheAngryClam (TOM McCLINTOCK is my choice for governor. He should be yours too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
"I'm for gun control. I'm a peace-loving guy." --Arnold Schwarzenegger

So I guess he believes in gun registration. Do you?

42 posted on 08/22/2003 9:42:13 AM PDT by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TheAngryClam; All
The Field Poll is from left field. Check out http://www.ourcampaigns.com/ if you want national compiled data that is balanced. That's how I knew that Jeb Bush was going to be re-elected Florida's Goveror. (Plus, McBride was a really bad candidate, even with McAwful's & Algor's help).
43 posted on 08/22/2003 9:42:41 AM PDT by floriduh voter (http://www.conservative-spirit.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
I have just two words: hell no.
44 posted on 08/22/2003 9:43:03 AM PDT by TheAngryClam (TOM McCLINTOCK is my choice for governor. He should be yours too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: floriduh voter
Exactly my point- when even the field poll has the conservatives at double the junk PPIC poll that Arnold-loving RINOs are touting, there's a real problem.
45 posted on 08/22/2003 9:43:49 AM PDT by TheAngryClam (TOM McCLINTOCK is my choice for governor. He should be yours too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: TBP
I am a conservative and would be right of Reagan in my views.
I also was blessed with logic and good common sense.

You can't always get everything you want "To quote the Stones" so you have to achieve your goals in STEPS!

McC and Simon are unelectable in this race at this time, so logic tells me that even though Arnold isn't everything I've ever hoped and dreamed of, he is by for the best choice between Cruz Bustamonte and Arnold.

Some claim an issue with their high principles involving this race. This is a problem and not a virtue when it in effect gets Democrats/liberals elected.

There is no common sense or logic in empowering Democrats. By only backing the perfect philosophical candidate, conservatives are throwing away their vote to the benefit of Democrats.
In this case it is KNOWN that McC and Simon are unelectable unless there is a miracle and the rest of the field drops dead before election day.

Arnold might be conservative lite, but he is a member of the team and it is moronic to stay on a legless horse in a race and to also try and sabotage the only winnable horse on the same team.

Some applications of principles can be totally stupid!

STEPS, our goals in this state can ONLY be achieved in STEPS.
There is a voting advantage favoring the Democrats and they vote in numbers because many have their employment attached to some form of government. The only way to win California back is to gather a bunch of smaller victories into eventual bigger ones. Conservatives are not in a position to make large strides all at once here in CA.

This is heavily tilted enemy territory that has to be reclaimed back for conservatives little STEPS at a time.

Califonians need to quit shooting themselves in the foot over their valued principles. That is foolish and self defeating.
46 posted on 08/22/2003 9:47:20 AM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
At least the GOP in the legislature will resist Cruz's tax hike.
47 posted on 08/22/2003 9:47:20 AM PDT by The Old Hoosier (Right makes might.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
With the exception of Libertarianism, there are few agendas as ill-concieved as "gun control".

And for Republicans to the actor's right politically, the moderate Schwarzenegger could be a target for his social views. He has described himself as "very liberal" on social issues," noting that he favors legalized abortion, gay adoptions and "sensible gun controls," including a ban on assault weapons.

By ERICA WERNER
Associated Press Writer
August 7, 2003


48 posted on 08/22/2003 9:48:55 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: The Old Hoosier
Why empower Democrats? That is a foolish choice IMO!
49 posted on 08/22/2003 9:49:35 AM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: TheAngryClam
Ask Bob Dornan. Cruz wants to do want Loretta Sanchez did. You have no idea how often the hispanic community (legal and illegal) votes. The voter fraud in Dornan's district was terrible.
McClintock's senate district is not representatative of the entire state of California. I would vote for him if I thought he stood a chance. Sadly, he doesn't. Simon lost and cannot win either.
Arnold has a very good chance of winning and I'll take half a loaf over none. Cruz is worse than none.
50 posted on 08/22/2003 9:50:52 AM PDT by LibertyAndJusticeForAll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-273 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson