Rnold and other Rats.
Posted on 09/02/2006 11:51:19 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
by Mark Finkelstein
September 2, 2006 - 14:36
Republican? Want to make a "remarkable political comeback"? Become the functional equivalent of a Democrat. At least that would seem to be Good Morning America's advice. A segment of the ABC show focused this morning on the transmogrification of Arnold Schwarzenegger from a Republican who muscularly confronted the Democrats in Sacramento to one working hand-in-glove with them.
The spark for the segment was the deal Arnold has worked out with the Dem-dominated legislature to cut carbon emissions 25% over the next 15 years. Co-host Kate Snow hailed it as "a bold move made despite resistance from the Bush administration." She then turned things over to senior national correspondent Claire Shipman, who had earlier scored an interview with the governor.
Shipman wasted little time in suggesting that maverick is the way to go for Republicans: "The Schwarzenegger administration has decided to break with the Bush administration on fairly critical issues. Is that good politics these days?"
Arnold actually claimed "I don't think one should look at greenhouse gas emissions or global warming as a political issue." Is there something wrong with politics, Arnold? It's how democracy works. How would you want these matters of huge importance resolved - by implementing the recommendations of a panel appointed by Al Gore? Come to think of it, don't answer that.
Shipman tried to drive the wedge deeper: "President Bush is not a popular politician in California right now. If the White House called you tomorrow and Karl Rove got on the phone and said President Bush wants to campaign with you. What would you say?"
Arnold made it clear the welcome mat wouldn't be out: "I would say this is something I can handle myself. I think that it is something that is between me and the people of California."
It was then noted that "The 59-year-old Governor Schwarzenegger has made a remarkable political comeback in the past year, his approval rating jumping from 36% to 49%. How? After taking a beating for governing as an anti-union, Republican, he's moved to the center, cutting deals with the Democratic legislature on minimum wage, prescription drugs and now global warming."
Shipan: "Have you solved your political crisis by essentially turning into a Democrat?"
Schwarzenegger: "First of all, there was really no political crisis. . . I said, okay . . . I'm going to work with the legislators, meaning the Republicans and the Democrats."
There was this telling little exchange after the interview between Shipman and Snow:
Snow: "A marked change from when he used the term 'economic girly men.'"
Shipman: "Yes. It's a interesting political shift for him. I know most of the folks I talked with said they really welcome what he's doing. He's playing to the populace there."
And then, in a sign of just how the mighty have fallen, Snow suggested: "Make room, Al Gore, on that fight."
ABC's message seemed clear enough to Republicans who want to 'pump up' puny approval ratings: go left, young man!
GMA/NewsBusters pump-you-up ping to Today show list.
California Conservatives, Don't Worry!
You still have a choice in the Governor's race. Don't waste your vote on a Republican that might as well be a Democrat. Instead of voting for a pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality, anti-moral, anti-second ammendment, pro-big government, pro-tax increase candidate, who happens to have an "R" beside his name, vote for the true conservative in the race.
Vote for Ed Noonan, the American Independent Party candidate. For more information, go to www.ednoonan4gov.org
ping
Ahnold the terminated (Republican that is)
(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )
One would think that the Pope had converted to Islam.
(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )
A vote for Arnold is a vote for Hillary. :-)
Got into office and proved himself to be California's Conan the Boobarian.
His shrill shills were so vocal once.
Arnold isn't pro tax increase... anything but.
There is one silver lining in this unfolding tragedy. There is quiet in the land.
It's rumored that both FO and the Minister of Information have taken up residence in a supply room at 1903 W. Magnolia Blvd. in Burbank after the Friday Night Masaccare of Republican values and the POTUS hit the airways. Steve Schmidt has repeatedly asked them to come out but both steadfastly refuse to reemerge until after the election.
Just updating you on your hero. I don't think the mods will take offense to my pinging you but if you feel you must then turn me in.
The big one downstairs or the small one upstairs?
I'm glad that they are "hailing his leftward tilt." The problem with electing liberal Republicans is that it's confusing to the voter. When they screw things up, the voters blame the conservatives.
You are joking aren't you?
Don't know what you're smoking over there. He just increased the sales tax. He has consistently supported bigger government. Awaiting your next excuse.
Shipan: "Have you solved your political crisis by essentially turning into a Democrat?"
Schwarzenegger: "First of all, there was really no political crisis. . . I said, okay . . . I'm going to work with the legislators, meaning the Republicans and the Democrats."
--
Odd statement,he has worked very little with the Rs of late, in fact, they have not been supportive of much of anything he has been supporting or signing legislation-wise.
I don't consider making a stand for conservatism a joke. Do you?
Arnold sure was a mistake!He is an embarassment to the republican party.
Does the man shape the job, or does the job shape the man?
At this time, in California, a conservative Republican without the pecular combination of tough skin and genial good humor, would be taken apart by the wolverines and Tasmanian devils of the left that populate the landscape there. So Arnold tried to use these coping mechanisms, and was relatively successful, but the relentless attacks have made their mark. Arnold has caved on a couple of important issues, and sensing total victory, the leftoids have pressed their advantage. Complicating this situation is the upcoming election, and a state whose economy is in a state of flux, which to the opposition, means they have an unparalleled opportunity to sweep any challenges from the right aside forever, or at least until they manage to pull down the roof upon themselves once again.
In 2004 the Austrian actively promoted almost $30B, with a B, in tax increases and this year he's been forced to settle for $30B, with a B, after proposing $100B.
Yup, I'd say the Austrian was pro tax increases. In fact Schwarzenegger is probably going to go on to the be the King of California Tax Increases at his present 2006 pace and he hasn't stopped signing legislation.
Rnold and other Rats.
"He just increased the sales tax."
He can't. The state legislature can propose it and he can sign it.
What bill are you talking about?
(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )
The state can't end in a deficit by law. I do remember they had to find a way to end in the black. Is that what you are referring to?
(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )
Characterizing Arnold as a "demagogue" seems a bridge too far for me. Insufficiently informed, lack of attention to details, careless staff, and into political survival, and some pandering to accomplish that, is perhaps more of a fair and balanced assessment.
(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )
No
"All of his borrowing is a disguised tax increase."
And how was he going to solve the deficit issue all by himself? Isn't wasn't like the Dem controlled legislature would have had any qualms about breaking state law and ending a fiscal year in the red.
"Then there's the minimum wage hike."
Even the feds are considering passing minimum wage laws and even so how is this a "tax increase"?
"And now there's his costly new enviro wacko mandates with the fees."
Its called revenue.
I think you are mixing up bond issuances with tax increases.
(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )
Then what are you referring to?
Ever hear of a veto?
When he signed the state budget on June 30, 2006, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger failed to veto $6 million, inserted by legislative Democrats, for a Labor Institute at the University of California. The UC Labor Institute, dubbed the "union think tank," now enjoys a fresh $6 million in taxpayer dollars to harass California businesses, concoct bogus studies, conduct union activism, and engage in partisan politics.
You have millions of cows. They make real California cheese. Only five moo in English. Most are illegals. Arnold likes the ones with the big udders.
It is tough to effect budget cuts, when you have millions and millions in "need" of government subsidies of one sort or the other, to keep their heads above water, and unions who have an iron grip on the legislature. The dirty little secret, is that given the facts on the ground, there is not much running room, when it comes to fiscal issues. In fact the only real fiscal constraint, is that while California, given its unique geography and climate, can "afford" to tax somewhat more than its peer states, it cannot get too far out of line, without producers and those with wealth, exiting the high tax zone, at the margin in sufficient numbers to make the tax increases produce little or no or less revenue. Few sell their stock in businesses they privately own, which are worth a substantial amount, without moving to Las Vegas first, as an example.
6 million is about an hour's income stream as it were. One should focus on numbers that represent real money. Real money requires a "b" or a "t" appended to it, as to the amount, to represent real money.
He has a line item veto.
And if he had vetoed the budget on June 30 that would have meant there was no budget.
He has a line item veto.
Translated into German, this comes out "Ya."
Maybe he wanted that funded. Six mil is nothing.
He's worse. He's an actor.
Schwarzenegger knew the details, his staff was professional and he certainly raised pandering to high art but he did not prevail on the emotions and prejudices of his audience.
Schwarzenegger has been candid about his aims since he announced his attentions for public office. The demagoguery has been the province of partisans in the CAGOP.
Is Schwarzenegger guilty of a capital political sin? Should his person be trashed because of his political behavior? The answer to both is NO.
Schwarzenegger is a liberal. While he's consistently attempted to portray certain of his actions as conservative and has brandished his party registration when it suited his purposes but has neither outright lied. He has left that to others. Only occasionally has he tentatively ventured into fear mongering or inflamed long held prejudices but quickly, redefined his remarks and backtracked when confronted
He's simply Arnold. The cinematic action hero turned folk hero. Too bad he's a European liberal. Were it not for that fatal flaw, he might have made a great Republican leader, a great American. Unfortunately that flaw has reduced him to just another, opportunistic, pandering, liberal politician. They are a dime a dozen in California.
Arnold arguably allowed 6 million bucks to be spent imprudently. If that was the only knock against him, life would be grand.
I'm sure he did.
The UC Labor Institute, dubbed the "union think tank," now enjoys a fresh $6 million in taxpayer dollars to harass California businesses, concoct bogus studies, conduct union activism, and engage in partisan politics.
Are you suggesting it is?
I invite you to revisit his bond initiative affair - the bollixed pension reform initiative (that involved big bucks) that "had" to be withdrawn, because it would strip pension for police and firefighter widows, or some such, and his ineffectual "don't bother with the details, because I don't know them just trust me campaign" for them. And do you think Arnold has a clue about the scientific merits and demerits of global warming, and a clear understanding of the longer term economic impact on the state, and who the winners and losers will be of the proposal he endorsed and will sign? Just asking.
No.
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.