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

Skip to comments.

GOP has star-power dilemma: How will party use Schwarzenegger? [Kerry vs. Arnold?]
San Francisco Chronicle ^ | June 19, 2004 | Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer

Posted on 06/18/2004 3:59:50 PM PDT by RonDog

.

SF Gate        www.sfgate.com        Return to regular view
GOP has star-power dilemma
How will party use Schwarzenegger?

- Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer
Friday, June 18, 2004
With less than three months to go before the Republican National Convention in New York City, a prime-time cliffhanger is in the works over whether the Bush camp will use it or lose it -- the megawatt influence and star power of California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Among the most sensitive issues is whether Schwarzenegger, a GOP marquee name, will be given a prized prime-time speaking spot at the party's presidential convention August 30-Sept. 2 at Madison Square Garden.

On the pro side: As the party's star actor, Schwarzenegger would get worldwide attention, and -- to the delight of networks -- draw millions of potential viewers to the now scripted-for-television political convention.

On the con side: The White House worries about lavishing too much attention on one Republican elected official who has shown an uncanny ability to upstage the party's star, Bush himself. A prominent role for Schwarzenegger also could anger the Republican right wing, which opposes his social views on such issues as abortion and same-sex marriage.

Ken Mehlman, campaign manager for Bush-Cheney '04, in an interview with The Chronicle, made no commitment on the specific role the Bush team expects the California governor to play, saying only that Schwarzenegger "is one of the great leaders of our party.''

Asked about talk that the White House is worried Schwarzenegger might outshine Bush at the convention, Mehlman downplayed the matter, suggesting that Schwarzenegger is one of many stars in the GOP...

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Announcements; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: arnoldbashers; gwb2004; hughhewitt; rncconvention; schwarzenegger
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400 ... 521-537 next last
To: NittanyLion

He's a wonderful asset to our party, and especially to Bush.


361 posted on 06/22/2004 10:01:34 AM PDT by b9 ("Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm" Emerson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion; Poohbah
So, because he disagrees with you, you want him to shut up and not speak. Ideological purity uber alles won't win elections.
362 posted on 06/22/2004 10:09:18 AM PDT by hchutch ("Go ahead. Leave early and beat the traffic. The Milwaukee Brewers dare you." - MLB.com 5/11/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion

Well, I think he should speak. You don't. In the case where the party has conflicting opinions, I believe that the President and the Chairmamn make the final decision, after talking to those who sit on the national committee.


363 posted on 06/22/2004 10:09:45 AM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion; doodlelady; Miss Marple

As governor of CA, when Arnold speaks
he dazzles. Citizen Arnold has always
worked tirelessly for GOP and he is a
HUGE asset for GOP.

He's not your brand of Republican, but
then again damn few of your desires hold elected office.




364 posted on 06/22/2004 10:26:11 AM PDT by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies]

To: onyx
As governor of CA, when Arnold speaks
he dazzles. Citizen Arnold has always
worked tirelessly for GOP and he is a
HUGE asset for GOP

Interesting that the "other side" sees Arnold as a threat.
In the real world, the "other side" supports Kerry!

365 posted on 06/22/2004 10:36:05 AM PDT by b9 ("Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm" Emerson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies]

To: doodlelady

Exactly right.
We;ve been there, done that with same folks here.
I am SO GLAD they do NOT hold sway in GOP.
If they did, we would not be the majority party.


366 posted on 06/22/2004 10:44:49 AM PDT by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 365 | View Replies]

To: onyx; RonDog
Do you think the strident ones here on FR are really so myopic they don't see the bigger picture, or has living in CA made us more aware of how the left operates day-to-day?

As RonDog says, LA is a "target rich" environment!

367 posted on 06/22/2004 10:57:47 AM PDT by b9 ("Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm" Emerson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Well, I think he should speak. You don't. In the case where the party has conflicting opinions, I believe that the President and the Chairmamn make the final decision, after talking to those who sit on the national committee.

I think that's accurate. As I stated at the outset, those decisions will provide wonderful insight into their vision of where the GOP is going.

368 posted on 06/22/2004 11:01:07 AM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion
You are now attempting to substitute reality with idealistic rhetoric.

...and you claim you're a libertarian? I've known libertarians, and they sure as heck don't talk like that.

When did I ever proclaim myself to be a Libertarian?

I only stated a fact that much of modern Libertarianism is based on neo-liberal(classical liberal) philosophy. I also stated that neo-conservative philosophy is based on neo-liberalism. You should know that Libertarians certainly disagree with much of the neocon agenda. anti-Reagan Man is the one who called me a "libertarian". "Libertarian heathen" I believe was his exact words. But then again he also called me a "liberal" and a "leftist".

Do you also make the unsupported jump in logic that I support open borders, and oppose NAFTA and all foreign entanglements?

Unlike you, I am not defined by others, and I have never claimed to be a purist of any ideology.

So is this your best argument? Setting up a strawman and attacking that, rather than the factual points of my statements?
You cannot argue with the facts I present, so instead you attack ideologically.

Rights either exist or they don't; government cannot remove a legitimate right no matter whether the Supreme Court, President, Congress...whoever...says so.

The Supreme Court disagrees with you. They are the ultimate arbiters on what rights are legitimate, and how they are defined. They also reserve the right to change their minds at any point.
You don't have a legal leg to stand on here, so instead you exclaim some feel-good ideology.

With regard to the Second Amendment, it either guarantees citizens the right to bear arms or not

The Supreme Court has routinely found that there are limits to constitutional rights. You wanna argue that, take it up with them.
The second amendment is extremely vague, and is quite an open question, legally speaking. Does the right to bear arms apply only to a well regulated militia? Does it only apply only to types of arms available at the time of its adoption? Does a limit on certain arms infringe upon the general right to bear arms? Does "the right to keep and bear arms" include nuclear arms?

You'll need to aswer these questions first and cite established case law to back it up.

- but that basic right doesn't change based on the whim of the majority.

It most certainly does change based on the whim of the majority in the Supreme Court.
369 posted on 06/22/2004 11:04:48 AM PDT by counterpunch (The CouNTeRPuNcH Collection - www.freepgs.com/counterpunch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies]

To: doodlelady

Do you think the strident ones here on FR are really so myopic they don't see the bigger picture,...




YES!


370 posted on 06/22/2004 11:04:55 AM PDT by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 367 | View Replies]

To: doodlelady
He's a wonderful asset to our party, and especially to Bush.

Ah, but that's not the question before us. The question is, would it be appropriate for him to speak in a primetime slot at the National Convention? Can he adequately convey the message the GOP wants sent, or is he too liberal to represent mainstream GOP thinking?

371 posted on 06/22/2004 11:08:11 AM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 361 | View Replies]

To: hchutch
So, because he disagrees with you, you want him to shut up and not speak. Ideological purity uber alles won't win elections.

Not at all. I simply don't want him to speak at the convention. This is because I can think of other conservatives who will better express the values embraced by mainstream GOP members.

372 posted on 06/22/2004 11:09:17 AM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies]

To: onyx
As governor of CA, when Arnold speaks he dazzles. Citizen Arnold has always worked tirelessly for GOP and he is a HUGE asset for GOP.

To the CA GOP perhaps. He's too liberal to deliver a primetime address on behalf of the national GOP, though.

373 posted on 06/22/2004 11:10:31 AM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
It most certainly does change based on the whim of the majority in the Supreme Court.

Rights don't change based on time or circumstance. Even if governments forbid the exercise of a right, that doesn't mean it isn't a right even so.

Your argument would have us believe the invasion of Iraq was not a humanitarian gesture, because the government had decided for its people what rights they had (virtually none). Therefore, they were not entitled to any other rights.

It's absurd, but sadly very representative of your confused thinking.

374 posted on 06/22/2004 11:13:59 AM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 369 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion

He's too liberal to deliver a primetime address on behalf of the national GOP, though.




In YOUR opinion, but likely not in GWB's opinion.
Arnold won in CA! THAT is miraculous!

Arnold is a star, not only in films,
but in the GOP as well.

He draws folks into GOP!

Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesh.
Why can't you see that?


375 posted on 06/22/2004 11:14:10 AM PDT by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion
I've concluded that the perspective we have, living in CA, is unique.

Arnold's entire career has been immersed in leftist Hollywood,
and he knows them through and through. His ability to be
making inroads as governor is extraordinary.

I do not fault you for not seeing his virtues.
You might have to live here to appreciate the good he is doing.

376 posted on 06/22/2004 11:16:34 AM PDT by b9 ("Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm" Emerson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies]

To: onyx
In YOUR opinion, but likely not in GWB's opinion.

That remains to be seen. I guess we'll find out soon enough.

Arnold won in CA! THAT is miraculous!

Given the confluence of events, anyone who opposed Davis would have won. The people wanted him out, period.

Arnold is a star, not only in films, but in the GOP as well.

Yes, the CA GOP. He's too liberal to represent the GOP at a national level, though. He doesn't represent mainstream GOP thinking.

He draws folks into GOP! Sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesh. Why can't you see that?

Conjecture. The CA GOP is not representative of the national GOP. His brand of social liberalism is likely to alienate as many current GOP members as it draws in.

377 posted on 06/22/2004 11:20:32 AM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies]

To: doodlelady
I do not fault you for not seeing his virtues. You might have to live here to appreciate the good he is doing.

I'm sure after Davis he's looking real good. But does that translate into a primetime slot at the national convention? Are there other conservatives out there who've done a great deal of good over a very long time period, AND who represent mainstream GOP thinking?

I submit there are, and they should be featured.

378 posted on 06/22/2004 11:22:43 AM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion
Arnold is probably the best "draw" with regard to prospective
voters, and that is most important to me at this time.
379 posted on 06/22/2004 11:25:35 AM PDT by b9 ("Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm" Emerson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 378 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion
A libertarian relying on governmental decisions to justify right v. wrong? How entertaining.

Once again, a strawman argument completely lacking in substance.

Whether one believes the Creator endowed us with unalienable rights or whether one subscribes to Ayn Rand's philosophy, the right to life is clearly present. Only a disingenuous moron and you would suggest it doesn't exist. But I repeat myself.

If that right to life really existed, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. You wouldn't have a political cause/religious crusade, and there would be no need for a "Right to Life" amendment to the Constitution.

My, but you're a dumb one! Capital punishment is meted out in response to an overt action on the part of the murderer (traitor, etc.). By committing the action and infringing on the rights of another person, the felon has forfeited their own rights.

You must first be awarded your rights before they can be forfeited.
For example, you cannot lose the right to vote if you have not yet reached the legal voting age of 18. Just as you cannot lose your right to life if you have not yet been born.
This is the current standing of the law.

If life is an inalienable right, then the death penalty would be found unconstitutional. Period. This happened once, and it was overturned.
380 posted on 06/22/2004 11:25:49 AM PDT by counterpunch (The CouNTeRPuNcH Collection - www.freepgs.com/counterpunch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400 ... 521-537 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.

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