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

Following the typical unelectable statements on Friday’s show is now an old argument. The argument that Hugh “the voice of reason” was that if Arnold gets elected, Bush will be elected, and therefore Bush will get his conservative judges and some may be pro-life.

To repeat an obvious defense, Hugh by fiat has assumed an enormous number of facts not in evidence. As silly as it sounds, Bush was elected previously without Arnold and without a California Republican Governor. It fact Bush did not need California to get elected. Bush has been blocked on his judicial nominees so far, and unless we pick up a lot of seats in the Senate, that will not change. So his rambling argument falls short of any kind of true discourse, it aims to confuse the issue.

Now Hugh is pointing to those of us “Tombots” and claiming it will be our fault if Arnold does not win. Gone is any reasoning here, gone is any rational discourse, Hugh says it, therefore it must be so.

Many of us on the right are not so quick to give up our ideals as Hugh sadly has. He points to a Cruz versus Arnold race, yet ignores McClintock steady rise in the polls. Note that if one-half of the Arnold supporters joined McClintock, McClintock is ahead of Cruz. And why exactly are the Arnold supporters staying put (not gaining, not losing), I believe that it is largely due to talk radio, and shows like Hugh’s and John & Ken, etc., repeating the mantra that Arnold can win and Tom cannot.

So the truth here is that McClintock can win, but alas Hugh will do his best to make sure it is not so. Gone will be another good conservative, gone will be the best candidate, and we must welcome another “pale pastel”.

A Gauntlet thrown down by this Tombot to Hugh Hewitt “At what percentage will you finally say McClintock can win?” This will give us yet another goal to reach on our way to the governor’s chair.

DD

1 posted on 09/12/2003 6:40:41 PM PDT by DiamondDon1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last
To: South40; DoctorZIn; RonDog
Hugh Hewitt Ping!
2 posted on 09/12/2003 6:44:56 PM PDT by annyokie (One good thing about being wrong is the joy it brings to others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1

"Tom McClintock can't win!"

3 posted on 09/12/2003 6:45:06 PM PDT by ambrose (Member of the McClintock Militia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
Keep dreaming. Practice saying "Governor Bustamonte", my friend.
4 posted on 09/12/2003 6:46:43 PM PDT by annyokie (One good thing about being wrong is the joy it brings to others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
Ageed. And if the vote totals on October 8 are Cruz 30%, Arnold 35% and Tom 32%, that it is Hugh's fault (and all the other inexplicable RINO-supporters who otherwise decry the overpopulation of RINO's) that the new governor gives more to the Left than Trent Lott's leadership did, and only marginally less than Cruz would have.
5 posted on 09/12/2003 6:46:50 PM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: kellynla; NormsRevenge; Rabid Republican; ambrose; RonDog; PeoplesRep_of_LA; BlackElk; ...
The gauntlet has been laid down...

DD

6 posted on 09/12/2003 6:47:16 PM PDT by DiamondDon1 (Official Tombot, Member VRWC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
Hugh can say all he wants. I am one listener that has stop listening to his program and will not return.

He lost all creditability with me when he immediately endorsed Arnold without even hearing what the man stood for. Arnold has shown me all I need to know about his character. Anyone who was ashamed to be a Republican during the impeachment of a man who prejured himself in a court of law is not someone I wish to vote for. No one is above the law, including people from Austria or Arkansas.

7 posted on 09/12/2003 6:48:25 PM PDT by Two-Bits (God Bless our Country, Our Military and their families, and President Bush!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
Just out of curiosity's sake - is there such a thing as the RNC anymore? or has the republican party leadership simply disappeared in the sludge pits?
What does the leadership say out there?

Here in Arkansas, we don't have the luxury of a republican party at all. just a few party-goers that sit around LittleRock with their thumbs up their a$$e$ refusing to talk to anyone or answer any requests.

That's why this year Arkansas freely passed a law that legalized:
"Any organization which advocates or teaches the overthrow by force or violence or other unconstitutional means of the governments of the United States or the State of Arkansas."

Did our so-called "republican leadership" say anything? hah! Cowards All!

http://www.gohotsprings.com/focus/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=316
9 posted on 09/12/2003 6:50:57 PM PDT by steplock (www.FOCUS.GOHOTSPRINGS.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
The fact is now Tom is at 18 in the latest Time poll
which if anything is biased with too many liberals
and too few conservatives so if anything Tom McClintock
is higher than 18% and this poll was more recent
that the field poll. Expect the field poll to have
much higher number McClintock next week.

All polls agree McClintock is the only candidate going up.

And further the reality is if the conservatives who
currently support Arnold would switch to McClintock
McClintock would be first leading everyone.

10 posted on 09/12/2003 6:51:12 PM PDT by Princeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
Where does Hugh Hewitt get off proposing this kind of crap?

What bullcrap! That is all it is!

Are the ratings tanking?

What country club does he belong to, I wonder?

This used to be a FRee country with FRee elections.

The inanity of it all.

For the ArnoldBots..

in·an·i·ty   Audio pronunciation of "inanity" ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (-nn-t)
n. pl. in·an·i·ties
  1. The condition or quality of being inane.
  2. Something empty of meaning or sense.

13 posted on 09/12/2003 6:53:35 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
In all seriousness, Hugh Hewit has always been the most obnoxious (R)nold Groupie and is losing his mind. I'm totally serious, he knows he is selling out, that many like me in SoCal think he has 0 credability and will not only never take him seriously again no matter the outcome, but are already letting his advertisers know, and he is getting more "shrill" every day to make his "point" about us "TomBots" as he likes to marginalize us. (Funny, I always thought we were Conservative.)

As silly as it sounds, Bush was elected previously without Arnold and without a California Republican Governor.

I heard this for a bit on the ride home, he thinks this is his "ace in the hole" Its silly DD, because he's drowning, and he might even know it by now. (R)nold's stuck, Tom is slowly moving, and he is the Poster Child for Triangulation that is exploding like a cigar in his mouth.


19 posted on 09/12/2003 6:58:34 PM PDT by PeoplesRep_of_LA ((R)nold called me a "Right wing crazy" because I have a problem with his position on Prop 54)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
Tombots

Let me, for myself alone as an Ahnold supporter, apologize for this term
being thrown around...especially from a fellow who is a law school professor in
Constitutional Law and a out-in-the-open evangelical.

I'll still listen to Hewitt's show for Frank Gaffney and David Alan White...but I'll
still be peeved that someone with Hewitt's brains could do this sort of thing.

But I'll say one thing for Salem Broadcasting (KRLA and KKLA 99.5 FM)...while Hewitt
has pushed Ahnold, Duffy and Company on KKLA has been McClintock all the way.

And Democrats say that Republicans/Conservatives/Religionals don't value diversity!
25 posted on 09/12/2003 7:02:24 PM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
I really don't understand what Hugh is trying to do. Weintraub had some good advice for him today that he should quit obsessing over the 'Tombots'. He isn't helping Schwarzenegger out by implying that if you support McClintock, you must be an idjit.

Rule number one when you are trying to persuade someone that your position is correct -- don't call that person names or imply that the person is stupid if he or she ends up disagreeing with you.

35 posted on 09/12/2003 7:10:59 PM PDT by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
I really dislike all of this Bot stuff, totally unnecessary, meanspirited, and I wonder how a republican can ever get elected with this kind of petty crap in the party. Once again:

THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE ENEMY!

36 posted on 09/12/2003 7:12:02 PM PDT by ladyinred (The left have blood on their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
It has been my observations that wiser politicians and commentators don't make statements starting with "If...".

Whenever I see and "if" statement which is speculative in nature about the political future, red flags go up immediately.

Sheesh, Arnold! is not signing a no-tax pledge because he doesn't know what the future may bring in terms of revenue shortfall. And Arnold! supporters don't seem to think that's important.

OK, then, but to be fair, one should cut the other side some slack, too.

If not, how's this:

"If Arnold! is elected and subsequently raises taxes, or flips to becoming a (D), then it is the fault of Arnold!'s supporters and advocates in the media, including Hugh Hewitt."

This election is so nuts that some talk show hosts would seem to want to cut off their noses to spite their own faces.

49 posted on 09/12/2003 7:18:50 PM PDT by SteveH (I presume it's too late to DRAFT TED NUGENT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
And another thing, the Republican state hierarchy expressly took a stance of neutrality, thus avoiding an informal primary and avoiding the possibility of setting up a mandatory debate limited to major Republican candidates.

This resolution seems to be an egregious violation of that pre-arranged climate of neutrality.

So I for one have no idea what game Mr. Hewitt is playing. Perhaps there is an angle here that I've missed; an angle that would somehow redeem this proposition. What is it???

Also, as so kindly pointed out by an Arnold supporter, the use of the term "Tombot" does not exactly inspire loyalty to the party or leading candidate. Does Mr. Hewitt use that term, or is it just a term of convenience, with context limited to this base post? A less important issue, but still of some interest, in order to help understand where Mr. Hewitt is coming from...

59 posted on 09/12/2003 7:28:11 PM PDT by SteveH (I presume it's too late to DRAFT TED NUGENT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
I'd suggest that the Republicans would be better served to wait until the wild card (9th Circuit) is laid down early next week.

Davis is waiting with $15M in his pocket.

The dynamics of the game change appreciably if the election is set back 5 months.

66 posted on 09/12/2003 7:35:08 PM PDT by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pubbie
You may be interested...
74 posted on 09/12/2003 7:44:35 PM PDT by DiamondDon1 (Official Tombot, Member VRWC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
OK, I went to the website and answered my own question as to the use of the pejorative "Tombot":

"Odds are that the Tombots would deny they are pulling a Thelma and Lousie, even under those circumstances" (sic)

OK, not only does the guy use insulting pejoratives against those he is ostensibly trying to influence, but he can't even spell.

This guy isn't even professional, not to mention worthy of a response.

Did anyone catch what, if anything, Herschensohn said?

84 posted on 09/12/2003 8:04:43 PM PDT by SteveH (I presume it's too late to DRAFT TED NUGENT?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
Arnold's supporters are not going to vote McC. in bulk. They will stay home if the Terminator is not on the ballot.

Y'all keep thinking this is about public policy. It is not. California is driven by celebrity.

I wish it were different, and a conservative could win. But you have to back the most conservative candidate who has a chance of winning.

In 2000, I supported Alan Keyes until it was clear he couldn't win. Then, I became a Bush supporter. You gotta bite the bullet sometime, and back THE MOST CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE WHO CAN WIN!
87 posted on 09/12/2003 8:07:46 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (How did we ever lose all those farming jobs? We'll starve!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DiamondDon1
Who knows, the rise of McClintock in the polls may push more moderates into his camp as someone, who is THE expert on the California budget or Dem's and moderates may switch from Bustamonte to Arnold to keep McClintock out. Life is complicated.
90 posted on 09/12/2003 8:22:49 PM PDT by Jabba the Nutt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

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