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

Skip to comments.

Arnold Is No "Liberal" (Truth is Out!)
MensNewsDaily ^ | 26AUG2003 | Bob Chandra

Posted on 08/26/2003 1:14:51 PM PDT by familyop


Arnold Is No "Liberal"

August 26, 2003


by Bob Chandra

MensNewsDaily.com
California Republicans have a historical opportunity to remove from office the state's corrupt and inept governor, Gray Davis, who has bankrupted California and buried it in debt. Recent polls indicate that the effort to recall Gray Davis would succeed. However, the nightmare scenario would be that Davis ally - Democrat Cruz Bustamante - would gain the most votes as a result of Republicans dividing their votes amongst several candidates. Recent polls by Time/CNN, NBC, and the Public Policy Institute of California all suggest the same thing - Schwarzenegger is ahead of Bustamante, while the results show that Bustamante would beat both Tom McClintock and Peter Ueberroth easily. But the question arises- is Arnold a "liberal"?

In order to make this determination, one has to plumb Schwarzenegger's background, actions, and past statements for indications of his politics. The evidence strongly suggests Arnold is not, in fact, a liberal. From the Wall Street Journal: "Bill Saracino, a former head of Gun Owners of California, believes that when it comes to conservatives evaluating Mr. Schwarzenegger, 'the glass is half full or way more.' He notes that Mr. Schwarzenegger has opposed strict gun controls." In a magazine interview, Arnold said, "Outlawing guns is not the right method of eliminating the problem. If you outlaw guns, people will still have them illegally." According to NewsMax: "Arnold has given private assurances to congressmen and Republican Party leaders that he will come out against partial-birth abortion, pederasts in the Boy Scouts, and welfare for illegal aliens. Couple that with a knowledgeable defense of free market economics gained through study of Milton Friedman and years of attending Reason Foundation seminars, and Arnold takes the wind out of his Republican opponents Bill Simon and Tom McClintock."

Arnold supported Proposition 187 to deny taxpayer-funded services for illegal immigrants. When criticized for it by the media, he did not backpedal and instead conveyed the importance of rule-of-law. On family values, Arnold understands the importance of two parent households. In Salon.com, he called the phenomenon of broken homes one of the most pressing problems in society today. These are some of the reasons that Hugh Hewitt came out in support of Arnold in his column on WorldNetDaily ("This conservative is voting for Arnold"). Hewitt summarizes his thinking this way, "I support the most conservative candidate who has the most realistic chance of winning. A vote for Tom McClintock, Bill Simon or Peter Ueberroth is a vote for Cruz Bustamante. It really is that simple."

Regarding his fiscal inclinations, Arnold's successful rise from rags to riches suggests that he respects the role of entrepreneurs in creating jobs and building the economy. According to the Wall Street Journal: "Mr. Schwarzenegger's biography exemplifies the American dream...At age 21, he came to America in 1968 with little money and even less command of English. A natural capitalist, he bought up office buildings and apartment complexes before he ever made a film. His business empire now includes shopping malls, a Boeing 747 he leases to an airline, and a large chunk of Santa Monica real estate. He took evening courses in business at UCLA, and earned a bachelor's degree in business by mail from the University of Wisconsin at Superior." Arnold's business background suggests he will be responsible with taxpayer money and knowledgeable on financial matters.

A recent Contra Costa article ("Arnold's finances reveal a shrewd tale") reveals how Schwarzenegger built his personal fortune through successful entrepreneurship and perceptive business moves. Arnold told the Financial Times, "I am more comfortable with an Adam Smith philosophy than with Keynesian theory." He has also said, "I still believe in lower taxes -- and the power of the free market. I still believe in controlling government spending. If it's a bad program, let's get rid of it." According to a San Jose Mercury News report, Schwarzenegger is a "fan of the University of Chicago Economics Department, which had provided President Reagan's economic advisers".

There are some who call Arnold a "compromise candidate". But given his past actions and statements, it's clear that a strong streak of conservatism runs through him. At very least, he is no "liberal".

Bob Chandra


Bob Chandra is a Bay Area Republican activist. He was involved as a strategist for Linda Rae Hermann's campaign against Mike Honda for California's 15th congressional district, and he currently serves as a commissioner for the Saratoga library. His email address is bobchandra(at)comcast.net.






MensNewsDaily.com


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: california; governor; republican; rinopolishing; rinos; schwartzenegger
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

1 posted on 08/26/2003 1:14:52 PM PDT by familyop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: familyop
Talk like this around here will get you labeled as a heretic.

Good post.
2 posted on 08/26/2003 1:17:29 PM PDT by socal_parrot (I'm here all week, tell your friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop
HERETIC!





;-)
3 posted on 08/26/2003 1:18:28 PM PDT by Registered (Gray Davis won't be baaaaahhck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Registered
Grrrr. You beat me to it, and made me laugh.
4 posted on 08/26/2003 1:22:41 PM PDT by unsycophant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Registered
Thank you thank you. I wondered when the rest of the
cat would be out of the bag on Arnie's true leanings.
Here it is. I guess it's time.

And any of you who want to argue about this, that's fine.
Just make sure you read it first, please, this time.

All my best to you all in California. The rest of us in
the northwest just hope you win!

Go, go!

5 posted on 08/26/2003 1:23:45 PM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: familyop
This is somewhat encouraging news.

Makes you wonder if Arnold was masking his views for the sake of his career.

But the best indicator will be to see who Arnie surrounds himself with as his advisors. That's always the tipoff.
6 posted on 08/26/2003 1:24:14 PM PDT by GulliverSwift
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Baloney! Schwarzenegger is a liberal, pure and simple...

Arnold Schwarzenegger's views in his own words:

I put Arnold Schwarzenegger's views up front because they speak for themselves. Many people want to say that Arnold hasn't articulated his views, but he has, and they're profoundly different from traditional Republican ideals. As conservative goddess Ann Coulter says, "Schwarzenegger claims to be a fiscal conservative and a liberal on social issues. Historically, that means: "liberal.""

Many Republicans think this is just peachy - that we need someone who isn't really a conservative and isn't really a Republican to win in California. I'm not sure what the point is in running such an animal, but these timid Republicans are legion.

Rush Limbaugh spanks all of these timid Republicans who cringe at the idea of pushing a conservative candidate right now when, actually, the time is ripe to elect a REAL conservative.

California Needs Conservatism

California is a liberal proving-ground run amok. Its crushing debt - resulting from years of pandering to unions, bureaucrats, illegal immigrants, environmentalists and trial lawyers - has led to huge tax increases, major cuts in basic services, a reduction in the state's credit rating, brown-outs, water shortages and a large exodus of citizens from the state.

None of this decay is surprising. The left's promises of Nirvana never measure up. But what does surprise me are the reactions of some conservatives who see California's problems as so severe that they can't be solved by the application of conservative principles. Their thinking has led them to support Arnold Schwarzenegger, who, to my knowledge, has yet to embrace any conservative positions, though he has embraced Warrent Buffett. Hasta la vista, whatever.

There's no better time to advance conservative principles than when they're most needed. And California needs a large dose of conservatism. Recent history should be our guide.
.
.
Conservatives need to learn from Ronald Reagan. They need to stop being timid, pessimistic, and insecure. California needs solutions. There is no better time and place to establish and illustrate the primacy of conservatism. True, not all of California's problems mirror those of the late '70s and '80s, but many do, particularly those that forced this recall. Now, if one man with a vision completely changed the course of a nation, why can't it happen in a single state?
-Rush Limbaugh, Wall Street Journal, 20 August 2003

Obviously, Rush is saying that we need a true conservative and one with vision. And he makes it clear that it isn't Arnold who, he says, "has yet to embrace any conservative positions."

Rush doesn't rehabilitate Arnold much at all in the whole 'Arnold Got His (Conservative) Groove Back' thing. Far from it. Rush's support of Arnold's alleged conservative credentials it as tepid as Coulter's. So Arnold brought in Schultz? And?! That certainly doesn't immediately make him a conservative. Other people he's brought into his campaign detract from the conservative illusion. For example, he's brought in A. Jerrold Perenchio, the leftist CEO of the Univision and a long-time Davis supporter as well as leftist reconquista Carlos Olamendi, Vice President of the open borders National Coalition of Professional Mexicans Abroad.

In 1966, When Reagan ran for Governor of California, he was considered too extreme to be elected governor. The leadership of the Republican Party in California preferred a moderate who was "electable". Reagan was not only considered "too right-wing" for California, he was also considered to be tainted. He was portrayed by the media as an extremist because some of his supporters were members of the John Birch Society. He was tainted by his close association with the widely disparaged Goldwater campaign of 1964, which was hysterically denounced by the political establishment of California as too extreme. Considering that the more moderate Richard Nixon had failed to win the Governorship in 1962, nobody gave the Gipper any chance. A vote for Ronald Reagan in 1966 was considered by many Republican naysayers to be a vote for liberal Democrat Pat Brown. California was just too liberal to elect a conservative.

Either conservative principles are right and worth promoting or they're not. Either conservative policies are the best thing to save California or they are not. Either the Republican Party is the vehicle for electing representatives who will promote conservative principles - or it isn't.

Right now, with the Democrats in disarray and failed liberal policies obviously destroying the state of California, is the best time - an extremely rare alignment of the planets - for electing a true conservative. Yet so many Republicans are getting distracted by Arnold's star power and forgetting why we're Republicans in the first place. They are about to waste the perfect tactical opportunity to elect a real conservative because it is far easier to just go with Arnold and not do the work to get McClintock elected.

This could be conservatism's finest hour - the opportunity to prove that liberal policies are destructive and that conservative policies can succeed, save a nearly bankrupt state, and prove to the rest of the nation that we need conservative policies everywhere. We might be able to save California through true conservative ideas and capitalize on that victory to advance the conservative message nationwide. Or you can elect an inexperienced RINO and cross your fingers and hope. If, somehow, purely by luck alone, the RINO appears to save California all we have is a victory for RINO, non-conservative principles. A "new direction" for the Republican Party - away from conservative ideals- will be celebrated. Thereby, the cause of conservatism would suffer a serious, possibly deadly blow.

As Ronald Reagan said, "We’ve come to a moment in our history when party labels are unimportant. Philosophy is all important." Schwarzenegger has made his philosophy apparent through the comments he's made and that philosophy is far from conservative and far from traditional Republican principles despite the party label that he has adopted. The party label means nothing if you don't truly represent the ideals of the party. You know this is true. You know that conservatism is the answer. You know who the conservative Republican candidate is in this race for Governor and it isn't Arnold. Vote accordingly.



7 posted on 08/26/2003 1:24:25 PM PDT by Spiff (Have you committed one random act of thoughtcrime today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Arnold's own words prove he's no conservative.

He refuses to fire Buffet or the spokesperson who repeatedly says he won't rule out raising taxes. He has refused to sign the no-new-taxes pledge.

He says that "children will have first claim on the treasury." He supports more spending on state-funded baby-sitting. He refuses to specify any spending cuts he will try to make.

He's for gay marriage. That is a part of the social agenda that a governor can affect, and Schwarzenegger is on the wrong side.

He's married to a Kennedy.

If he isn't a liberal, he's doing a pretty good imitation.
8 posted on 08/26/2003 1:25:01 PM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: familyop
He's no liberal. He's no conservative either.

He's a populist movie star, with a mish-mash, unfocused, conflicting agenda that has no solid ideological underpinings.

He's a perfect fit for California.

10 posted on 08/26/2003 1:27:01 PM PDT by dead (Perdicaris alive or Raisuli dead!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Just make sure you read it first, please, this time.

I can see that rule has been broken already. The McClintock-Bots are in a hurry. No need to let facts get in the way.

11 posted on 08/26/2003 1:31:04 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (Why is the Left afraid of Arnold?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Oh, and I forgot to mention, all, that the opposition knows it's late and wants you to vote for rear-runners very much! They are filled with anxiety, knowing that Bustamante could possibly win if you are split! ...especially those in the opposition who hate family.

As a dear California friend told me a few weeks ago, you don't want Hillary's offal in California again, in any way!

And BTW, those who argued with the article above did not read it! This, even though I asked politely that they do so for once.

12 posted on 08/26/2003 1:31:11 PM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dead
He's a perfect fit for California.

As long as he's fiscally conservative that will do just fine for now.

13 posted on 08/26/2003 1:32:29 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (Why is the Left afraid of Arnold?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: familyop
"I support the most conservative candidate who has the most realistic chance of winning. A vote for Tom McClintock, Bill Simon or Peter Ueberroth is a vote for Cruz Bustamante. It really is that simple."

Well said.

As far as I'm concerned, it's settled. Arnold ain't perfect, but he's our man.

On to the wreck of the Cruz Bustamante!

14 posted on 08/26/2003 1:33:33 PM PDT by Luke Skyfreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Please do read the article above, and remember that the opposition uses rhetoric without facts in attempts to fool you.
15 posted on 08/26/2003 1:33:56 PM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dead
Arnold is Republican-lite
16 posted on 08/26/2003 1:37:41 PM PDT by Kibbylou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: familyop
I guess if you ignore Arnies actually stands on issues and ignore him being

Pro Abortion

Anti Gun and self protection (except for the elites like himself)

Being pro Immigration (illegal and otherwise) and or
fearfull to speak out on really pressing conservative matters

Promises to attract business (in order to tax them for social programs)

Said he was "Ashamed to be a Republican" due to the impeachment of Clinton
and called the impeachment "The darkest days for the Republican Party"

AND If you ingnore most of the pressing issues weighing on California and reduce the race to
Bustamante or Arnie..

If a real conservative cannot possibly win...then there is no choice but Arnie - no matter what he really is...Call him a conservative if that helps...

Its La Raza or The Terminator nothing else really matters anymore
17 posted on 08/26/2003 1:42:20 PM PDT by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Luke Skyfreeper
In Salon.com, he called the phenomenon of broken homes one of the most pressing problems in society today.

It took guts to tell a pinko liberal publication like Salon Magazine that kids need two parents. That, not to mention the other most conservative points he's in favor of (article above), puts all on notice, including the liberals, now!

And BTW, he's been coached by good Republicans all along.

It's go time! Go! Go, Cali!

18 posted on 08/26/2003 1:43:27 PM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TBP
He has refused to sign the no-new-taxes pledge.

After his speech of last week, he said he wouldn't rule out new taxes in case California had some catastrophic event, i.e. earthquake. No catastrophy, no taxes.

He says that "children will have first claim on the treasury.

This state is in the strong grip of the "mommy party". This is only an issue for the conservative puristas in Calif.

He's for gay marriage. That is a part of the social agenda that a governor can affect, and Schwarzenegger is on the wrong side.

Where is the quote "I'm for Gay marrige and, if elected, I will sign a bill that makes it the law of California." Bustamonte wouldn't think twice.

He's married to a Kennedy

Haven't you seen all the jokes about Arnold scr#ing a liberal?

19 posted on 08/26/2003 1:46:51 PM PDT by muleskinner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jfritsch
Do you have a list of Bustamante's postitions? Seems he should be the one that needs to be defeated for sure.....

But then who knows.
20 posted on 08/26/2003 1:50:13 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Most of your (often-posted) post with the Arnold quotes is entirely fair, but not the characterization of Perenchio as "left-wing." He and his business(es) donate a ton of political money and, although a lot of it goes to people on the left of the nation's political center, most of it by far goes to conservatives ... and a quick eyeballing of the available data strongly suggests Perenchio is turning away from his past liberal notions ... and that he "plays the field" quite a bit.

Click here for contributions for election cycles ending in 2004, 2002 and 2000. True, I see Ted Kennedy and John Conyers on the list for $1k each, but not since 1999. More recently, I see SIX-FIGURE donations to the RNC and NRSC ... I see some "bad" donations, like those to Loretta Sanchez, the DNC ($25k, which is bad, but it's still tons less than he gives to the GOP), Harry Reid and Little Dick Gephardt ... but I see a LOT MORE recently to W. ... even James Rogan when he was under (ultimately successful) attack for his role in impeaching Clinton.

Perenchio just likes to have someone he can call in DC: "access." The evidence doesn't support a "left-wing" bent on his part. His support of more GOP/conservative efforts in recent years than Dem/liberal ones suggests that he may be turning rightward. If so, let's not discourage him; let's co-opt him.
21 posted on 08/26/2003 1:54:38 PM PDT by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
MAN! You sure can type fast!

Or is that what they call 'spamming from another thread'?
22 posted on 08/26/2003 1:56:30 PM PDT by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: pogo101
First, the characterization of Perenchio as a leftist came from another source. And I've already looked up his political donations. He gives more money to Democrat candidates than Republican candidates, but he gives more money directly to the RNC and other committees within the RNC than to committees in the DNC.
23 posted on 08/26/2003 1:57:33 PM PDT by Spiff (Have you committed one random act of thoughtcrime today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: familyop
I am reserving my decision until the election.
24 posted on 08/26/2003 1:59:20 PM PDT by Feiny (Courtesy is not a sign of weakness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spiff

25 posted on 08/26/2003 1:59:51 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: deport
Here's one of Bush's positions...

Quotes from another thread:

Bustamante as governor would not be good news for Bush. As a Democrat in the governor’s chair, he would inherit Davis’s fiscal problems but not his personal baggage. Accordingly, the election of a Republican Oct. 7 suddenly becomes a Bush priority. Nobody gives 2002 nominee Bill Simon a prayer, and state Sen. Tom McClintock is a very dark horse. That is why, on the day after Schwarzenegger nudged aside Riordan to become a candidate, the President declared of the five-time Mr. Universe: “I think he’d make a good governor.”

LINK

I think McClintock is the better candidate.  If he can't win I will vote for someone else rather than see Davis or worse yet Bustamante hold the office.

26 posted on 08/26/2003 2:01:36 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
the characterization of Perenchio as a leftist came from another source

OK. This is a tiny nit to pick: your post presents it as your own view, or so I believe most readers would construe it. To present it as someone other source's view and not as yours, most writers would use a turn of phrase like, "Perenchio, whom one source has termed 'left-wing' and who has long supported Grayout Davis ... ."
27 posted on 08/26/2003 2:02:11 PM PDT by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: pogo101
Nice post. There's too much slanted (or half) truth being flung around on this forum concerning Schwarzenegger.
28 posted on 08/26/2003 2:04:32 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Kibbylou
Better than RAT-heavy!
29 posted on 08/26/2003 2:08:00 PM PDT by Redleg Duke (Stir the pot...don't let anything settle to the bottom where the lawyers can feed off of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Thanks, but bear in mind I like both guys for gov., and have to concede that the chart I was referring to has a lot of fair comparisons.

Wish I could elect both guys and pick the best bits. *L*
30 posted on 08/26/2003 2:08:42 PM PDT by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
"Here's one of Bush's positions..."

LOL! That's the best endorsement anyone could give!
31 posted on 08/26/2003 2:09:57 PM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
ROFL! Good one!
32 posted on 08/26/2003 2:11:35 PM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne; jfritsch
Here's one of Bush's positions...


Thanks but I was asking the poster if he has a similar list of "Bustamante's" Positions similar to the Schwarzenegger statements he detailed in his post....

My point is that I believe Bustamante needs to be exposed for what he believes and how he would govern. I think the Republican candidates/supporters need to push their positives and leave the tearing down of each other out of it. Positives reflect upon the candidates and their supports in a good way while negatives become hard to overcome when it becomes time to try and unite behind a candidate to defeat the democrat. But then maybe electing a democrat is the objective. There will be plenty of Republican bashing by the Democrats as the race nears election day.



33 posted on 08/26/2003 2:12:44 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
And how long do you suppose he will stay fiscally conservative? That's one thing I haven't heard any answer upon. Honestly, we all know that power corrupts and without something to hold force in check, the more corrupt people become. What's to stop a moderate from becoming liberal when surrounded by power? I simply have no faith in moderatism, because it is nothing.

It is madness to say that "fiscal conservativism is the only thing that matters" when the governor can wreak all kinds of havok on other fronts. It is irresponsible if nothing else...
34 posted on 08/26/2003 2:12:51 PM PDT by =Intervention= (Moderatism is the most lackluster battle-cry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
If it's southeast Arizona, ain't that sorta like word
from Las Vegas? LOL!
35 posted on 08/26/2003 2:13:04 PM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: pogo101
I like them both also, and actually prefer McClintock.
36 posted on 08/26/2003 2:13:17 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: familyop
In all fairness, I canibalized this graphic from the one against Schwarzenegger on the forum. I morphed it to what you see here.
37 posted on 08/26/2003 2:14:58 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: deport
And I think that was an excellent point. Don't hold your breath while that list is developed. I doubt it's going to show up.
38 posted on 08/26/2003 2:16:22 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Arnold has given private assurances to congressmen and Republican Party leaders that he will come out against partial-birth abortion, pederasts in the Boy Scouts, and welfare for illegal aliens.

When will this happen?

39 posted on 08/26/2003 2:22:43 PM PDT by SunStar (Democrats piss me off!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Personally, I am a member of the "Let the People's Republik of Kalifornia crash and burn with a Democrat so that the it makes a good example for the rest of the country" caucus.

That said, for all his RINO status, Ahhhnold is still to the right of Bustamonte (and most of the PRK legislature), has the poll numbers, the money, and the name recognition. If'n you want a Republican running the PRK, you need to support Arnold Schwartzenegger. He is also probably the best chance ya'll will ever have of pryin' the PRK's electoral votes out the fingers of the Democrats.
40 posted on 08/26/2003 2:26:58 PM PDT by Little Ray (If it is not cruel and unusual, it is not punishment!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: familyop
That's nice.
But, let's hear it from Arnold, directly, DURING the campaign. Not through quotes and outtakes from his days as an bodybuilder and actor. Let's hear what the aspiring governor has to say.
41 posted on 08/26/2003 2:29:39 PM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray
That said, for all his RINO status, Ahhhnold is still to the right of Bustamonte (and most of the PRK legislature), has the poll numbers, the money, and the name recognition. If'n you want a Republican running the PRK, you need to support Arnold Schwartzenegger. He is also probably the best chance ya'll will ever have of pryin' the PRK's electoral votes out the fingers of the Democrats.

Yes, Arnold is more conservative than Bustamante. Obviously. However, you're all missing my point and the point that Rush Limbaugh made. You must not be reading the entire post. Right now - this moment - is the perfect time to elect a real conservative. If you don't try now, when will it be a better time? The Democrats are in disarray, the state is on the skids, liberal policies have all but destroyed the state. A new message, a new direction - that is what is needed. Not warmed over slightly-less-than-liberal policies. Conservatism is the answer! What a bunch of wimps.

42 posted on 08/26/2003 2:39:33 PM PDT by Spiff (Have you committed one random act of thoughtcrime today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
I don't have a dog in this fight. I just know a guy who does. He's a "Libertarian of the Right" and he thinks that Arnie is the best chance, and I'll take his word for it. Like you I would rather have a real conservative, like McClintock (though I have my doubts about any Republican's ability to govern with the PRK legislature overwhelmingly commie-pinko-socialist Democrat).
43 posted on 08/26/2003 3:39:03 PM PDT by Little Ray (When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Ah. For a minute there, I thought you'd lost your mind. :)
44 posted on 08/26/2003 3:52:34 PM PDT by Tony in Hawaii (Actually Tarzana CA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Arnold said, "Outlawing guns is not the right method of eliminating the problem. If you outlaw guns, people will still have them illegally."
Can we find an anti-gun control quote from Arnold that's a little less lukewarm? I'm asking in all seriousness.
45 posted on 08/26/2003 3:55:08 PM PDT by Tony in Hawaii (Actually Tarzana CA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop
The evidence strongly suggests Arnold is not, in fact, a liberal.

Oh you betcha.

Arnie's only official dabbling in California politics thus far has been to champion a childrens afterschool program which now costs the taxpayers millions and is part of the cradle to grave system.

If Arnie is a fiscal conservative the first thing he'll do as governor is to ax his own program.

Oh you betcha.

46 posted on 08/26/2003 5:00:16 PM PDT by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Great post, thanks :-)

And any of you who want to argue about this, that's fine. Just make sure you read it first, please, this time.

I don't know why they would, many of us have made all these exact points repeatedly on the Arnold threads... they ignored the facts then, and will continue to ignore them.

As a matter of fact, the manner in which Mr. Chandra has posed some of the points sound very familiar... I wouldn't be surprised to find he is a Freeper or lurker here ;-)

47 posted on 08/27/2003 12:20:01 AM PDT by Tamzee (Incrementalism will seize the day, and the next., and the next... exactly how the left did it....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag
Arnie's only official dabbling in California politics thus far has been to champion a childrens afterschool program which now costs the taxpayers millions and is part of the cradle to grave system.

Sigh... same garbage, as always.

I believe you are discussing Prop 49? The one that was endorsed by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and the California Taxpayers Union, and Rep. Christopher Cox.... anti-tax folks all the way who approved it because it does NOT "now costs the taxpayers millions"?

Going by many of his supporters, McClintock's case for election is SO WEAK that they must resort to posting outright lies and stunning exaggerations to smear Arnold.

48 posted on 08/27/2003 12:45:30 AM PDT by Tamzee (Incrementalism will seize the day, and the next., and the next... exactly how the left did it....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: muleskinner
After his speech of last week, he said he wouldn't rule out new taxes in case California had some catastrophic event, i.e. earthquake. No catastrophy, no taxes.

They will find a catastrophe. We were in a state of national emergency from the Depression through the Nixon Administration. Why? To end the emergency would eliminate certain emergency powers.

When someone talks about "only in a catastrophe" you can bet the house that he will find one.

Where is the quote "I'm for Gay marrige and, if elected, I will sign a bill that makes it the law of California."

He's made the statement that "I have no absolute sexual standards in my head that say this is right and this is wrong." He has come out for homosexual adoption. You can induce his position on this.

49 posted on 08/27/2003 10:20:34 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Arnold is a liberal.
50 posted on 08/27/2003 10:21:02 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 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