Why I Am Now Behind Arnold

me

[DrMartinVonNostrand]

I have slowly come to the conclusion that California needs Arnold. Republicans need Arnold, and above all, California Republicans need Arnold.

I had been leaning towards McClintock, and I must admit, I made that decision before Arnold threw his hat into the ring. I welcomed the move when he did, but I still had reservations. I had gotten pretty excited over McClintock's vision, particularly his desire to void the Davis energy contracts and his general desire to stick it to the Democrats. I was also justifiably concerned at first about Arnold's talk of handing the treasury over to "the children".

But one has to be able to discern politics from policy. Everyone who wants to win elective office has to pay lipservice to "the children". It is the national passtime of politicians. I think when Arnold says "the children should have the first call of state Treasury" it is followed by an unspoken qualifier of "before illegal immigrants, welfare recipients, and special interests." He is simply putting forth his priorities, and they lay in stark contrast to Gray Davis and Cruz Bustamante's. He is quite savvy, so he isn't going to come out and say it in those words. He knows highlighting what is his priorities gets much better press than highlighting what isn't. He wants to reassure the soccer moms who have been frightened by Davis' threats of cutting funding to schools that he will be looking elsewhere to cut.

Arnold is very mindful of the hurdles he faces by running as a Republican in such a liberal state, so he will take extra measures to make traditional Democratic voters feel comfortable voting for him. It is what he has to do right now if he wants to win, and it seems to be working brilliantly.

Some conservatives will argue against Schwarzenegger because he opposed the impeachment of Bill Clinton. But Arnold understood the articles of impeachment that were brought were a pretty weak justification. Right or wrong, they were too easily construed as a right-wing lynching. He recognized it as too divisive and knew it could only further poison the political atmosphere and ultimately damage the Republican party.

Perhaps if Ken Starr had the convictions to pursue the serious matters of Whitewater, Chinagate, Filegate, or the murder of Vincent Foster, then Arnold would have seen it differently, just as the rest of America would have. But clearly Starr had no will to do so. It's hard to understand why, but perhaps he didn't want to expose that level of corruption in the highest office out of the long-term best interest of the American political system. Exposing Clinton's ties to the Dixieland mafia and Red China could have brought the entire government to its knees. It would have been a short-term victory for Republicans, but just as Nixon understood when he covered for Kennedy and Johnson over the Pentagon Papers, the long-term damage to the nation as a whole would have been far too great. Anyways, had Clinton actually been removed from office as a lame duck on those flimsy charges, we would have a President Gore in office right now. Arnold knew, just as everyone else did, that this was not going to happen considering it required a two-thirds majority in the Senate. Surely he understood that impeachment was a lose-lose proposition for Republicans so it was a mistake to go down that road. It was important for him to remain above it all for the sake of his own political future.

Some will argue that what we need right now is someone sort of financial wizard to fix the budget, and Arnold just doesn't qualify. But the truth is we really only need someone who can admit that Gray Davis has made some huge mistakes. Anyone but Gray Davis will do.

I hate to admit it, but the whole budget crisis is being about as overplayed for political reasons as the federal deficit in the '90s was (and is again). When it comes down to brass tacks, I think even the Democrats will bite the bullet and fix it. Yes, I know you're cringing, I am too, but it's the truth. The issue here isn't that the Democrats are incapable or even unwilling to fixing the budget. It's merely about how they want to fix it: the usual liberal approach of skyrocketing taxes. Either way, California isn't going to drop into the ocean or become a third world nation.

As far as Arnold not being a "social conservative", neither am I, and neither is California. A social conservative is not going to win a statewide election here for a long time to come. I fit in more along the lines of a fiscal conservative, just as Arnold is, and a "Constitutional conservative" with libertarian tendencies. Piety is not a prerequisite for my support, and too much of it may even lose it. I don't begrudge anyone their religious beliefs, but I do belive strongly in Jefferson's "wall of seperation between church and state". I also believe in strict interpritation of the First Ammendment, and that freedom of religion also entails freedom from religion. I realize those of you in the religious-right do not agree because this doesn't reinforce your personal religious beliefs, but not everything should be about our own personal whims and narrow agendas. Defending our own freedom as individuals must always be a higher objective. Otherwise it may be you they come for next. The Constitution protects everyone, or it protects no one. I think there are a lot of people on both extremes who forget that sometimes.

Even though some will say for these various reasons that Schwarzenegger is not the ideal conservative candidate, it is important for everyone to be pragmatic and pick their battles wisely. Right now we should be looking at long-term goals. An expedient victory in the recall of a conservative candidate by a 20 percent plurality is going to be counterproductive in the long-term. What are you going to do when Bill Simon is elected and the drive to recall him begins October 8th and qualifies three weeks later?

Electing Arnold, who can come to office with a true mandate and bring California together, will pay off big in the perception wars. Conservatives will never get their agenda anywhere in California as long as it is taboo to even vote for Republicans here. The longer Democrats have a complete lock on the state, the further left we will drift. Even if Arnold can't change the course right away, he can at least slow the momentum.

Personally, my goal is the destruction of the Democratic party and the liberal agenda far more than it is advancing any conservative single-issue. I have far more hate for left-wing Democrats than I have love for right-wing Republicans. I would be happy simply with a return to sanity at this point.

You can't walk a mile until you take the first step. For right now we all need to be concentrating on the jouney one step at a time or we will never reach the final destination. You have to at least open the door, which is now closed and locked here. It seems like a lot of right-wingers around here would rather rant and rave and pound on the door in futility than grab it by the handle.

I think I've finally figured that one out. For the death-before-electibility crowd, it's not about advancing their cause on earth, it's about earning a place in heaven.

As for the rest of us, we have to make a decision: do we want a small victory, or a huge defeat?

[rolling_stone]

one view from the opposition:

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/08/08/MN19612.DTL

[Tamzee]

Good to hear because the GOP platform supports background checks, which consequently leads to waiting periods. The platform also doesn't specifically define "arms" as include or exclude all types of guns. I'm just tired of folks slamming other Freepers as RINO's when they disagree with other people's values.

And yes, I believe strongly in that "big tent" even if fellow occupants want to tuck an Uzi with their Zoloft next to their sleeping bags :-)

[RS]

"- Think Clinton impeachment backlash. "

Baaad Statement -
..." oh I can't put Bill Clinton in jail because other countries will laugh at us"
..." oh I can't put Hillery in jail for all the illegal stuff she pulled in the White House because all the Dems will be mad at us "

Folks, we don't have to do ANYTHING to make them hate us and want to keep us out of power...

... If we don't get Davis out now, by electing anyone else... even Bustamonte, we will just have to fight him again later - stronger - and more secure -

The Goal now is Davis's career finished, if we get a Rep that can actually accomplish something, more to the good.

[DrMartinVonNostrand]

I've stated repeatedly that I support McClintock, but he just can't win.

So? It isn't true.

It isn't?
And how is McClintock going to overcome Bustamante's 12 point lead, let alone Arnold's 51% coalition of Republicans, Democrats, independents, and non-politicals?

Upon what basis do you lump Tom McClintock with Bill Simon, other than that they diverge from Ahnold?

Don't get me wrong, I think there is a world of difference between McClintock and Simon. Simon is a world-class loser and a bumbling idiot. Simon would bring ultimate death to the Republicans if he was elected. McClintock would not be nearly as bad of a reaction, but it would still create a backlash. Arnold is different because he is beloved by the people. He can't be painted as a partisan hack. If he won it would bring California together and Republicans would be off the hook for the recall. Anything else will surely bring voter anger and retribution.

Abortion (the ultimate red herring in a State election)?

Hey, at least we agree on something...

[Carry_Okie]

I'd have popped in sooner, but was on the road and am still digging out. We drove from Seattle down to the Bay Area yesterday after a series of speaking engagements. It's getting better. One or two more of these and I'll have the core delivery of both the short and long programs worked out with the permutations to come.

[rolling_stone]

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/07/11/MN293799.DTL

A latina Republican to challenge "dumber than a box of rocks" Boxer...

could be some coattails to ride on for change in California....

[William Tell]

DrMartinVonNostrand said: "To read into it a free pass on any weapon is a grevious misinterpritation. "

I am not aware of any arms at the time the Constitution was written that were not protected by the Second Amendment. Our Founders did not foresee the invention of nuclear weapons but they did foresee the need to amend the Constitution. It has not been amended with regard to this matter.

The idea that our Founders would have tolerated a ban on a rifle because it has a bayonet lug is ludicrous.

[RS]

Yep- Worse case, state goes bankrupt and all the bad deals and union contracts Davis signed get legally tossed

... or is that the Best case ?

[Carry_Okie]

McClintock would not be nearly as bad of a reaction, but it would still create a backlash.

Any cut in spending will create a backlash. Ahnold is too malleable to have the nards. Look how Maria and clan have changed his politics.

Arnold is different because he is beloved by the people. He can't be painted as a partisan hack.

Where do you guys get this stuff? It's easy to paint him as an inexperienced tool of wealthy Republican insiders and that's just what they'll do. Class envy works.

If he won it would bring California together and Republicans would be off the hook for the recall. Anything else will surely bring voter anger and retribution.

How do you get an eight inch brush to work on a keyboard? That kind of baseless claptrap will get you NOTHING among the professional class in Silicon Valley, Orange County, San Diego, or on the Peninsula (all high-turnout voters).

[RS]

"Legally there is nothing that stops the Government from regulating which arms are and aren't legal. The right to bear arms is quite narrow. "

Just when did the Government get the right to redefine the language ?

If this passed when I wasn't looking I guess they could do just about anything.

Depends what the meaning of IS is....

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

"I don't know much about him, but I'll probably vote for him," said Rafael Cortez of Oakland. "He seems like a good person, and the politics of this thing are really ugly. It would be great to have a Latino governor."

Frightening, and confirms my belief that many voters swim in the shallow end of the voter pool.

Latinos, about a third of the state's population, are on their way to becoming the majority in California, according to the U.S. Census. But very few Latinos vote. About 44 percent are immigrants, including many who never obtained citizenship, and millions of other Latinos are too young to vote.

AAARRGGGHHH!! Nor SHOULD they vote!

But I would rather have Cruz Bustamante than Gray Davis," said Sandoval, an Oakland resident who immigrated from Mexico in 1949. "And that movie star has a nice smile, but I wouldn't trust him further than I could throw him."

Smart man.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Marin may be a good candidate. I need to learn a bit more about her. For some reason, I'm a little more tolerant of moderates/liberals for the Senate. I'm not crazy about her pro choice stance but if she is good on immigration **crossing my fingers** I'll take what I can get. Illegal immigration is the most immediate problem facing our state and nation IMO.

[Carry_Okie]

Legally there is nothing that stops the Government from regulating which arms are and aren't legal.

I have a request:

Please keep saying things like that on FreeRepublic while you tout Arnold Schwartznegger. There's a reason Simon came up on Riordan fourteen points in a month and with more such penetrating analysis you'll help Tom McClintock do even better!

Got any more like that?

[Sabertooth]

For the record, I'm more convinced than I was back at #13 on this thread that you're a shill and a fraud.

You posted this thread under the pretense that you've "slowly come to the conclusion" that you are "now behind Arnold." That's a steaming pile of crap.

Your registered all of two days ago, and your first post ever was this thread was over here, Force Simon Out! Your first post was a thread? The day you registered?

Then you claim to have some dark night of the soul in less than 48 hours, on the same subject of the recall election, and you post your second thread? And you spend the entire day here preaching it like a new convert? Baloney.

You ain't no newbie, you've been here before, and you're playing dishonest games right now on Free Republic. You came here to post exactly this thread all along. Whether you're a professional (if so, you're overpaid) or an amateur, you're an operative with an agenda, and while you might fool some who want to believe that pap you're putting out, not everyone is so easily manipulated.

I might actually vote for Arnold Schwarzeneggar on October 7th, but it won't happen because of any of the gamesmanship and dissembling that you've ever done.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Good catch on the "Force Simon Out" thread. Very interesting.

Then you claim to have some dark night of the soul in less than 48 hours

LOL

Good to end the night with a laugh:-)

[DrMartinVonNostrand]

If my analysis is incorrect then explain why the courts routinely rule in accordance.

Simon came up on Riordan because Gray Davis spent millions in advertising to influence conservatives in the Republican primary.

The recall election is not a Republican primary.
Moderates cannot survive the primary and conservatives cannot survive the general election.

That's why there are not Republicans in statewide office right now.
I think you need to poke your head out of the bubble you're living in.

[DrMartinVonNostrand]

You are correct, I am not a newbie to political thought.

And I very much have an agenda: to elect some Republicans in California for a change.

[nunya bidness]

One or two more of these and I'll have the core delivery of both the short and long programs worked out with the permutations to come.

As long as it doesn't keep you from your "yardwork" and all is well.

[Sabertooth]

Simon came up on Riordan because Gray Davis spent millions in advertising to influence conservatives in the Republican primary.

Pop quiz for shills:

Why was Richard Riordan annointed by President Bush and Karl Rove, and whatever happened to Bill Jones, anyway?

[DrMartinVonNostrand]

I don't need a forum to develop political thought. I'm not the sort to join a forum if I don't have something to say first.

It's laughable that you should think I a person needs to lurk on a forum before formulating their own opinion.