Why I Am Now Behind Arnold

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?

You are foolish and uniformed.

------

For Immediate Release Contact: Ruth Gardner 661-859-2600

June 12, 2003

905 Fraudulent Votes Found in 30th Assembly District by Dean Gardner Volunteers. Investigation Centered on Kern County Portion of 30th Assembly Dist.

Today, Dean Gardner, made the following statement at a news conference in Bakersfield, Ca.

“For the last 30 years, I have heard about voter fraud in California, but it did not affect me directly and like you, I didn’t pay much attention. I didn’t realize how much voter fraud impacts all of us until recently.

In the seven months since the election, we have looked in detail at 2,460 of the 14,000 recently registered Democrat voters in Kern County that are registered to vote in the 30th Assembly District. I was shocked and dismayed by what we found.

I cannot give you any names or addresses because of the ongoing investigations.

In order to cast a legal vote in California, the voter must be at least 18 years old, must be alive, must be a Citizen of the United States, must not be a felon on parole, must be registered to vote and live in that district and that voter can vote only one time in that election.

Of the 2,460 voters that were examined 905 of these people in this sample cast fraudulent ballots.

For example, we found:

69 people actually admitted voting at least twice. These are just the ones who admitted it.

93 people admitted that they voted but are not citizens of the United States. They were told that if they registered and voted, it would help them get their citizenship.

272 people actually admitted that they do not live in the 30th Assembly District but that they voted in the 30th Assembly District

We found people that changed the spelling of their name slightly so that they could register and vote a second time. Someone named William also registered as Bill. We found people with the same name registered at the same address whose birthdays were exactly one year or one day apart. By changing their birth date, one person became two people with two votes.

The biggest problem that we found was the number of people who showed up at the polls and voted using someone else’s name. We have testimony from people who report that they went to vote and found that their name had already been used. People impersonated the legitimate voter. How did they do that? A lot of people are registered but don’t vote. Hanging on the wall in every polling place in the State of California is a list of the people that are eligible to vote at that polling place. By state law, every two hours, an election worker up dates the list with the names of the people who have voted. The cheaters send in someone with a cell phone to call back to the headquarters with the names of the people who have not voted. People claiming to be those people miraculously show up and vote.

We found 905 fraudulent ballots out of 2,460 voters. You do the math. Divide 905 by 2,460 you will get 37%. We estimate that 37% of the newly registered Democrat voters who voted in the Kern County portion of the 30th Assembly District cast fraudulent votes.

What we found in Kern County was seen all over California. Some places worse than others. There is a well oiled and well funded fraud machine run by liberal special interest groups that may be electing people to the legislature who should not be there and they are destroying our freedoms in California.

Let me give you some examples of the fraud. We have people who registered in October at a house that burned down two years ago. We have people registered to addresses that don’t exist. We have people who voted last November at the polls who actually moved to the Philippines two years ago.

I personally spoke to one man who admitted voting four times. I asked him why and he said that he cared more than most. I went with a volunteer to one house at random where seven votes originated and asked the woman how many people lived there. She said three. When asked about the other four voters, she said that her two daughters and their husbands always use her address to vote. They do not live in the 30th Assembly District. They just vote here.

The information that we have discovered was turned over to the Kern County District Attorney’s Office and to the Secretary of State’s fraud unit six months ago.

We have just handed the same information to the US Attorney’s Office.

Voter fraud is an attack on our basic freedoms and I cannot and will not sit back and watch it continue.

Last November, California voters turned down ‘same day voter registration’. Well, the liberal special interest groups in Sacramento did not get the message, because the Assembly just passed a bill allowing for same day registration in Alameda County. They call it a pilot program. We can not rely on the special interest liberals in Sacramento to stop the voter fraud. As you know, under current law identification is not required either to register or to vote, in fact, if you, as a poll worker or election official, ask a person to prove their identity, you have broken the law.

Therefore, I am announcing that immediately after the Gray Davis Recall is completed, I will sponsor a statewide initiative that will help clean up the voter fraud problem. It will require proof of eligibility and proof of identity when a person registers to vote and proof of identity when a person does vote.

If you buy something and write a check or use a credit card, you must have identification. If you want to get on an airplane in you must show photo id. It seems logical to me to require people to produce identification when they vote. It seems ridiculous to me that we allow people to walk into the polls, point at a name and say, “That’s me” and vote without any verification as to their identity.

One man told me “If we didn’t cheat, we couldn’t win”.

We have a group of people with no integrity attacking our basic freedoms. As you know, I served in the military and I swore to protect the Constitution of the United States. This is one way I can help do that. It is time to put California back in the hands of the people.”

This is wrong on so many counts that I'm not going to bother with it. In the Emerson case, the Appellate Court (I believe that it was the 5th Circuit) found that the Second Amendment was an individual right. You are mixing up the Emerson case with the recent Ninth Circuit ruling. Hate to tell you, but the case continued on to one more trial that you must not have been aware of.
A District court found that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right. It is most noteworthy that this was the first time a court had ever mading such a ruling.
The 5th Circuit upheld the ruling, but reversed the dismissal of the case and remanded it back to the District Court, which held a second trial and found him guilty.
Being that the 2nd Amendment defense ultimately did not protect Emerson upon retrial, the unprecidented original ruling was effectively nullified. Furthermore, the Supreme Court rejected hearing the case, so any percieved advancement by this singular exception to established case law is in no way solidified.

So how is Ahnold saving us from anything? If McClintock would have won by a plurality without him, as you asserted, how is he saving us from anything by splitting the vote?
How many times must I explain this?
Arnold is saving the conservatives from themselves because a small McClintock victory by simple plurality now will translate into a huge GOP defeat in 2004. It is called "backlash".

Best to tell your handlers that you are out of your depth here.
I don't have any, but I would like to know where I can get some.

Some Republican Bible thumpers are defining the cutting edge of environmental policy, like me.
I won't argue with that, but the negative stereotypes put forth by the media still stand firm in California.

I never said the left-wing propaganda was true, only that it is effective.

Hate to tell you, but the case continued on to one more trial that you must not have been aware of.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court rejected hearing the case, so any percieved advancement by this singular exception to established case law is in no way solidified.

No, the DOJ decided to drop the case.

Arnold is saving the conservatives from themselves because a small McClintock victory by simple plurality now will translate into a huge GOP defeat in 2004. It is called "backlash".

BS. Getting the Slave Party out of power is essential to generating ANY Republican contributions. Without leverage you can't generate campaign funds, PERIOD. Further, if Ahnold gave a hoot about Bush he wouldn't have tapped Buffet as a campaign advisor. There is little correlation with which party holds the governorship and how a particular state votes in presidential elections. Finally, if supporting the President is the only reason to vote for Ahnold, you don't give a hang about California which has to live with the results.

I never said the left-wing propaganda was true, only that it is effective.

If left wing propaganda was so effective, we wouldn't be having this discussion because there wouldn't be a recall.

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.