Posted on 11/24/2006 8:10:17 PM PST by FairOpinion
Quietly encouraged by the Schwarzenegger administration, a lot of pundits nevertheless have been pushing this idea of an Arnold Way for the Beltway. But conservatives - the ones who would actually have to change their course under the Arnold Way — aren't buying it.
CNN's Bill Schneider "informed the GOP that the way to recover from midterm losses is to imitate Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and embrace liberal policies," the liberal-media hating News Busters concluded. My favorite response to the Whalen piece came from Weekly Standard reader Calcowgirl, who simply pointed to Schwarzenegger's deeds as proof he wasn't one of them. She (I assumed Calcowgirl is a female) keeps a list of the governor's offenses from 2006:
.........
-- Signed AB 1207, Code of Fair Campaign Practices (homosexual agenda)
Absentee ballots are part of the homosexual agenda? Anyway, the real question is: How many of these would President George W. Bush support?
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
Excellent point.
Excellent point.
And yes, I agree, many people don't debate.
But I think you get my point in the previous post. One of the most socially conservative (who is also fiscally conservative) posters on this board, voted straight Republican in this past November election, as did I, while others with similar opinions, stayed home and refused to vote.
On second review, that sentence was correct as it was the first time, though it's a lousy sentence and somehwat confusing.
thanks, no problem,
my tendency is to not trust a moderate any further than I can throw them, and I'm a big fellar. most of those I run into here only re-inforce I am acting appropriately. ;-)
for some of them here, debate isn't a lost art, it was never on their list of skills to begin with.
Norm, you still did not address my point in the last sentence in reply #83.
re: your point,, I can't speak for others and the choices they make or choose not to make re: voting, any number of factors came into play, unfortunately.
I absentee balloted for the first time due to a trip ,, No on all the bonds and new taxes and almost a straight Republican ticket , not that anything less is to be taken as a failure of an acid test, imo
too bad about Santorum,, and Toomey before that...
Yes, too bad about Toomey and Santorum. Now instead of having two conservative senators, we've got two Liberals, not to mention our Governor. I do believe if Santorum had, at the very least, stayed out of the Spector-Toomey race, both Toomey and Santorum would have won. Such a pity.
Nonsense! Good, honest conservatives will continue to fight the good fight and have the highest respect here at FR. Rino hunting, fifth columnist ilk are having a hard time though.
Debate with fifth columnist ilk is a waste of time. The only thing ilk deserve is to be exposed.
And they say the same thing about you. In truth, both groups are conservatives who differ about strategy.
Now I voted for Santorum but supported McClintock and probably would have voted for him, so where do I stand?
The beginning of my sentence is necessary for the accurate context...
"The same "all-or-nothing" faction types in PA sabotaged solidly conservative Santorum, too, which shows you how absolutely unappeasable they really are... or what utterly fake conservatives many of them are in truth."
If you voted for Santorum, you aren't part of the "all-or-nothing" faction I was referring to. I would have voted for McClintock, too, I had high hopes for his becoming Governor after Schwarzenegger left office :-( The posters I was referring to above are the ones who feel it would be better if Schwarzenegger lost even if someone like Bustamante or Angelides won instead.
TAdams, you hit the nail on the head in another post when you said that most of us are solid conservatives who agree on issues but differ on strategy. What you didn't see years ago (this is an old debate with many of the same Freepers on either side) was that many of us here explained that over and over again only to be personally attacked and repeatedly trashed as "liberals" and "progressives".... and this was for trying desperately to keep hard-left people out of the governor's office, go figure ;-)
same old boring routine, snip from a poster's comment and try to impugn them as a result .. real mastery there, grunt.. Of what, I'm not sure.. smacks of a Progressive to me.. TWirPing away.
You keep ilking and I will keep exposing you. How about that for a deal!
For quite some time, this was my working theory in explaining the difference. I have discarded the theory since early this past year, in light of facts and evidence. The "conservative" movement has been factionalized via the "single-issue" voter, and ego or economic self-interest, all the while in light of the fact that we are in a war for our nation's very survival. Those who couldn't or wouldn't see the forest for the trees acted and pretended as tho this war didn't "really" exist or that having been fought, their own single-issue be given second priority, as they demand. -- Much like liberals do.
On one hand, this is very bad, as evidenced this past election and in regards the WOT.
OTOH, it is very good, in that the extremists in both liberal and conservative groups are now at parity. The playing field has been "leveled" in this regard. There exists more purple than a clear "divide" between red and blue.
This is exactly what President Bush proposed in his "unity" speech years ago. And, it appears the legislative bodies reflect this very result.
The President made clear that the safety and security of this nation was PRIORITY #1. And factions within the conservative ranks ensured it was backpedaled, given lip-service, but only as long as their single-issue was given a higher priority.
Moonbats Meet Faux Conservatives, is how I refer to these next few years (aka: The Great Threshing of the American populace).
Good for you. Congratulations! I love to see someone tell it like it is.
OTOH, it is very good, in that the extremists in both liberal and conservative groups are now at parity.
The leftie extremists have unified strongly with the Democrat coalition on the left (see Moveon.org's financial backing of "moderates" like Casey in PA)... the right extremists think themselves too pure to form a coalition with anyone that doesn't believe 100% the same as they. Hence, the left will keep winning again until we go so far left we turn into the United States of Cuba.
In Europe they form coalitions of interests to form governments after the voting takes place, in America we form coalitions of interests prior to the elections... it's pretty simple, but the conservative "purists" think it is unprincipled to work with a right-side coalition and the fake conservative saboteurs here glory in driving that wedge deeper on the right.
Scary situation...
The leftie extremists have unified strongly with the Democrat coalition on the left (see Moveon.org's financial backing of "moderates" like Casey in PA)...
They've been tied at the hips and wallet long before Soros became a known name in the cybersphere. They were always connected.
...the right extremists think themselves too pure to form a coalition with anyone that doesn't believe 100% the same as they;
But they do make "bedfellows" with other "purists", usually piggybacking all issues "conservative".
Hence, the left will keep winning again until we go so far left we turn into the United States of Cuba.
The awareness of this direction will appear just as the Producers in America begin laying off workers; a dollar doesn't go so far; exports stink, and one is punished for being a small "upstart" business entrepreneur. The Clintons did enact much of the above, and while some parts of the economy continued to float, the gradual decline appeared in projections, and Clinton won 2nd election by a hair. Meantime, conservatives began screaming bloody murder and demanding a counter revolution. Groups began forming, all coalescing around a core called "Constitution" and/or "Conservatism".
In Europe they form coalitions of interests to form governments after the voting takes place, in America we form coalitions of interests prior to the elections... it's pretty simple, but the conservative "purists" think it is unprincipled to work with a right-side coalition and the fake conservative saboteurs here glory in driving that wedge deeper on the right.
Well put, Tamzee. However, one cannot awaken folks who refuse or choose to not be awakened.
Constitution Party went a long ways in promoting themselves to have negated GOP elections this past November. And what have I been hearing from all kinds of lips, known and not known to me? "Constitution Party".
I've seen this all before. Constitution Party will be in play, next election, but not in the way that some are thinking, IMO.
it's pretty simple, but the conservative "purists" think it is unprincipled to work with a right-side coalition and the fake conservative saboteurs here glory in driving that wedge deeper on the right.
The purists understand "principle" in only the most esoteric, etheric of terms. It's an abstract reality if there's nothing solid or real behind it. These are great principles and ideas, but if there's no cost justification or benefit/cost ratio for them, they don't win: Sandcastles in the sky.
But then again, some folks really get "off" on losing but while claiming the high moral ground over everyone else. Oh Lordy - I've just described the Dem's Libbies and the Repub's Purists.
The purists understand "principle" in only the most esoteric, etheric of terms....
Agreed. Otherwise they would have already been coalescing around a core called "National Security", as America is in enormous peril from both internal and external threats, vividly demonstrated by 9/11 and the attempted attacks since.
I'll try to take heart in your optimism... and the fact that the hard left is repugnant to middle-America and they will be further exposed to the voters now that they have won Congress.
Thanks, tt. Love your tagline! lol.
I'll try to take heart in your optimism... and the fact that the hard left is repugnant to middle-America and they will be further exposed to the voters now that they have won Congress.
I find numerous issues regarding this past election worth note and studying -- issues which were downplayed, or not played/addressed if at all. When the Clintons came into power in early 90s, the country wasn't much awake. There was Rush on talk radio. Internet consisted predominantly of Compuserve and Socnet/Usenet. The MSM ruled the roost, and they hid most of the Dem's onerous taxations and clearly obfuscatory constitutional rights of JoeJane Citizen.
And since having left CA two years back for NC, I've observed how many think my move from San Francisco was, like, "so a mistake - San Francisco is where it is all happening" asserted by many I've spoken with.
Unto them is ushered the bowl of misery, a taste. And the faux-conservatives will be roiled and spun, tossed upon wave after wave. I do believe in a place called Purgatory.
And we've another election in two years.
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.