Replies

You've failed to prove a contradiction. Just saying it doesn't make it so. Try moving away from semantics and back up your next statement with facts.

#42: Giuliani's position is secured because he is an American icon, and a Republican hero, just as Arnold is.
#67: I said they are both American icons and Republican heroes. Would you argue that Arnold is an American icon? He was one far before Rudi ever became one. What about Republican hero? I'd say he is, as the man who single-handedly saved the California Republican party. Both men fit these descriptions, but for very different reasons.
#83: I said American icon [in the context of your reply, not a hero]. Just like Ronald Reagan was before he became a Republican hero.
#186: It's both.

I doubt even John Kerry could change his position as rapidly as you have, but I suppose that's what happens when one lacks an ideological base.

Opinion dynamics polling agrees with me. Nice that you found a blog to back you up, though.

I'm open to persuasion. Show me a cite and I'll take a look at it, but intuitively it's hard to believe as many Republicans as Democrats are pro-life.

As for the rest of your post, I generally don't respond to mindless drivel and personal attacks.

I can't believe I'm arguing semantics with you. It's very simple.
i·con
n.

3. One who is the object of great attention and devotion; an idol: “He is... a pop icon designed and manufactured for the video generation” (Harry F. Waters).

he·ro
n. pl. he·roes

3. A person noted for special achievement in a particular field: the heroes of medicine. See Synonyms at celebrity.

They are American icons for their achievements outside of, and beyond the political arena. They are Republican heroes - that is, heroes to the Republican party - because of their work within the political arena combined with the prestige their iconic status brings to the party specifically. All three of them are both. I never said that one was one but not the other. Perhaps your poor comprehension skills has lead you to percieve some contradiction. Don't blame me for that.

There are some people who are American (read: cultural) icons who are not heroes to any political party. You mentioned Jessica Simpson. She may fit that description, that is if you consider her to be a cultural icon. Britany Spears certainly fits it.
Then you have people who are heroes to a political party, but not American icons. Bill Owens and Rick Santorum were mentioned. They both would fit that description, if you were to consider them to be Republican heroes - that is, heroes to Republicans. they are not, however American icons who would draw a large interested television audience.
It has a lot to do with reach and influence. There are very few people who fit in both catagories. Schwarzenegger, Giuliani, and Reagan are some of the few. In fact, they're the only 3 I can think of. Perhaps Abraham Lincoln, but I'm not sure about how much celebrity he has in America in general.

I'm open to persuasion. Show me a cite and I'll take a look at it, but intuitively it's hard to believe as many Republicans as Democrats are pro-life.

I never said "as many". There are more Democrats than Republicans. Right there, you aren't going to have "as many" even if they're both split down the middle 50/50. There is a slight bias towards pro-life among Republicans, and a slight bias towards pro-choice for Democrats. But it is not all that great.

The main difference seems to be Republicans tend towards wanting stricter limits on abortion while keeping it legal. Democrats tend towards abortion on demand. the differences are nuance, and not at all the monolithic split that you and others may believe.