Replies

I said American icon. Just like Ronald Reagan was before he became a Republican hero.
And in #67 you said, "Keep it in context. I said they are both American icons and Republican heroes."
Which is it?

It's both. Ronald Reagan was an American icon even back when he was still a Democrat. He certainly was no Republican hero then. And after become a hero to Republicans, he didn't cease being an icon. Unlike Reagan, Arnold has never been a Democrat. Being an American icon is cultural, being a hero to a party is political. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Oh - it's about "asses in seats"! Why didn't you say so? Hell, let's forget about politics then - why don't we have Jessica Simpson as the keynote speaker? She'll draw teenagers interest.

If Jessica Simpson was the Republican Governor of California then I'm sure she would be a keynote speaker at the convention. As it is now, she is not a current or former politician, or even a political entity. By the way, didn't Ronald Reagan speak at the Goldwater convention, before he was even in politics? Couldn't that be because he was an actor with a lot of draw? You seem to keep ignoring the fact that Arnold is the elected governor. Are you in denial over this?

The reality is, it's about reaching a happy medium by presenting charismatic people that will articulate the party's platform. Arnold, by his own admission, disagrees with the platform on many points.

You'll be hard pressed to find very many people who are lockstep with every point of the party platform. about half of all Republicans are pro-choice, just as about half of all Democrats are pro-life. Politics is not black and white, and no party is or should be monolithic. "Republican" is a party, an political support organization, not any specific ideology. We're talking about the Republican Convention, not the Conservative Jamboree.

Counterpunch-to-English Tranlation: I don't believe conservative values have any appeal, because they don't appeal to me.

It depends on what you consider "conservative values". There are a lot of positions that the religious fringe would consider to be "conservative values" that I don't appeal to me. Just as there are a lot of things that liberal Democrats try to claim are "conservative values" that don't appeal to me. I'm not a purist, and I have no interest in competing with you or anybody else for the gold medal on that. In a nation based on plurality and governmet for, by, and of the People, I see no nobility in extremist rule over the people from any side. I have a lot of personal views that I hold as my own which I would never try to impose on everyone else through government.

You have no idea of what California is like, living out there in Virginia. You may think you know, but its just a hollow stereotype. Everytime people like you try to send up some purist conservative, they lose here. I also don't think you know very much about Governor Schwarzenegger as a politician. I doubt very much that you watched him debate, or that you watched him speak, or saw a rally. I suspect all you know about him is the bile the McClintockista here spewed.

Californians don't care so much about advancing a conservative agenda at this point in time. We're more interested in stopping the bleeding and repairing some of the damage from the liberal agenda that was in full advance over the past several years instead.

It is clear to me that you are not interested in a serious discussion. Your intent primarily seems to be to troll and play a sophmoric, losing game of semantics.

It's both.

So you've now contradicted yourself for a second time on the same thread. Flip. Flop. Flip...care to go for a third time?

By the way, didn't Ronald Reagan speak at the Goldwater convention, before he was even in politics? Couldn't that be because he was an actor with a lot of draw?

Could be, but isn't. Reagan was there because he was a conservative who supported the GOP platform.

You seem to keep ignoring the fact that Arnold is the elected governor. Are you in denial over this?

I'm not ignoring it at all. Indeed I've addressed it a number of times on this very thread; perhaps you should go back and read more carefully. But just because Californians like yourself appreciate Arnold's social liberalism, don't try to foist it on the rest of the GOP.

You'll be hard pressed to find very many people who are lockstep with every point of the party platform. about half of all Republicans are pro-choice, just as about half of all Democrats are pro-life. Politics is not black and white, and no party is or should be monolithic.

Feel free to provide a cite. Here's one I found with a quick google search, and it certainly doesn't agree with your assertion that as many Republicans as Democrats are pro-life.

"Republican" is a party, an political support organization, not any specific ideology.

Nice rhetoric, but actions speak louder than words. Particularly your actions back in Post # 26, where you said, "For all of you knuckle-dragging paleocons who are unhappy with our party's stars - Bush, Schwarzenegger, and Guiliani - I understand Pat Buchanan is looking for new members for the Reform party." You can try to trot out the Big Tent philosophy, but it'd be far more convincing if you actually lived by it yourself.

It is clear to me that you are not interested in a serious discussion. Your intent primarily seems to be to troll and play a sophmoric, losing game of semantics.

Counterpunch-to-English Translation II: I'm getting waxed, maybe if I resort to cheap insults he'll reply in kind and stop concentrating on those stubborn facts.