Skip to comments.
The Real Reason Conservatives are So Vehemently Opposed to the Candidacy of Arnold Schwarzenegger
www.allsouthwest.com ^
| Eric Dondero
Posted on 09/13/2003 2:46:24 PM PDT by Tony in Hawaii
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-118 next last
To: Kevin Curry
Bush cannot win without the votes of the social conservatives that Arnold and the Log Cabin Republicans despise.I don't know any of them that "Despise" socal conservatives. Social conservatives only use that word again, and again, and again, and again, because it's obviously the way they feel about them. They can't understand what it's like to NOT feel that way.
To: Tony in Hawaii
"libertarian David Stockman " ?????? Didn't Stockman get canned for advocating higher taxes?
To: Nowhere Man
Yes same guy and he was even pro-life too so
not the same as Arnold at all!
To: churchillbuff
Yes and Stockman later attacked conservatives for
being too eager to cut the size of Government!
Comment #45 Removed by Moderator
To: TonyRo76
Plus, everytime one of these social liberal
economic conservative types gets elected they
ALWAYS raise taxes and increase talke Wilson,
Taft, Weld etc..
To: Tony in Hawaii
twit
47
posted on
09/13/2003 5:58:07 PM PDT
by
pointsal
To: BlackElk
#30. Excellent post!
To: tkathy
Jesse Ventura was a fiscal conservative and social moderate. (Healthy dose of personal responsibility.) Big difference between social liberal (victimhood) and social moderate (personal responsibility). You are being extremely kind to Jesse. Jesse was all over the place. But as Joe "mayor of garage logic" said Jesse was for Jesse. He was only conservative things that would personally benefit him. (Like a flat fee for vehicle registration, because Jesse felt that it was unfair that he have to pay a much higher fee just because he drove an expensive sports car.) But he was liberal on the social issues, and for a lot of big spending programs, like light rail.
To: Tony in Hawaii
Article written by a very confused individual....
about a very confused guy....
50
posted on
09/13/2003 6:32:46 PM PDT
by
hosepipe
To: Tony in Hawaii
The author is right. I've said the same many times. A Schw governorship is a threat to social conservatives, constitutaional conservatives, Second Amendment advocates, religious conservatives, anti-Green pro-business conservatives.
To: George W. Bush
But other than that, he'd make a helluva photo op Gub. ;-)
I wonder if he would just work out of his home in SoCal or..
52
posted on
09/13/2003 7:48:17 PM PDT
by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi .. "Logic ", of late, flies in the face of conventions AND principles in California.)
To: Tony in Hawaii
Liberal writing a liberal article.
53
posted on
09/13/2003 7:53:15 PM PDT
by
bluelowrider57
(More of da thugz crawlin)
To: Princeliberty
And they wish to push real conservatives
down to the bottom of the party and just tell
them they should behave like blacks do toward
Democrats and just go along with this garbage
no matter how badly they get done.
I think you are correct.
54
posted on
09/13/2003 8:07:21 PM PDT
by
wgeorge2001
("The truth will set you free.")
To: InterceptPoint
Social liberalism is destructive of the family. It creates the gangs of fatherless young men and single mothers in inner cities with their attendant high social welfare costs. Social liberalism teaches that drug use is no one's business and drug addiction is no one's fault. The horrific attendant external costs in crime and health care are shoved onto the taxpayer.
Social liberalism preaches that everyone is "entitled" to government largesse from education, to housing, to prescription drugs including costly AIDS cocktails that allows gays to engage in promiscuous high-risk sodomy secure in the thought that the taxpayer will pay to find a cure. Social liberalism makes no distinction between citizens and illegal aliens, insisting that all are "entitled" to government handouts.
Social liberalism is the ideology of the nanny state. Schwarzennger captures its essence thusly: "We want to make sure the mothers have affordable day care. We want to make sure the older folks have their care that they need. That everything has to be provided for the people.
Open your eyes and count the costs. Social liberalism teaches that you can be as nasty, lazy, self-indulgent, or irresponsible as you wanna be, because government will be there to bail you out and clean up after you.
To: Tony in Hawaii
To: Incorrigible
To: Dog Gone
>>"It may be dividing Republicans in California, but there's no spillover anywhere else."<<
Would you clarify this statement. Do you mean there's no spillover of division in the Republican party due to the Kalifornicate circus/recall? My belief is that the rift is growing among Republicans due to RINOism, altho no where near the KA degree yet.
There is certainly a huge spillover of the toxic ideology coming out of socialist, immoral KA.
To: Kevin Curry
>>"Open your eyes and count the costs. Social liberalism teaches that you can be as nasty, lazy, self-indulgent, or irresponsible as you wanna be, because government will be there to bail you out and clean up after you."<<
Social liberalism is a disease!
59
posted on
09/13/2003 8:43:03 PM PDT
by
viaveritasvita
(AHNOLD SLEEPS WITH A LEFTIE. I DON'T TRUST HIM.)
To: Kevin Curry
Kevin: There is very little point in arguing with you since I agree with almost everything you say. Given that, I am still going to vote for Arnie as the lesser of two evils.
In fact, you really can't be socially liberal in the way you define it and fiscally conservative. It just doesn't work. There isn't enough money in the world to satify the liberals thirst for "doing good". So for me a Social Liberal is just a big spender. If Arnie turns out to be that kind of Liberal then God help us. Time to move to Nevada.
Also note that the point of the article is that Arnie is a closet Libertarian (not a Liberal or Social Liberal). Now Libertarians are not Liberals even though they do agree on some points relative to individual freedom. I think the Libertarian beliefs are based on the principle of maximizing individual freedom and Liberals are just practicing their idea of good politics (e.g. don't legislate gay behaviour and you will secure their vote). The difference between them in a nutshell: Liberals want big Government and Libertarians want a very small, just defend the country, Government.
I could live with a lot of what the Libertarians preach. I suspect you couldn't.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-118 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson