Posted on 08/08/2003 8:36:39 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan
Here me now and believe me later, my friends: all these conservative orgasms over Arnold Schwarzenegger are - like the "Gorbasms" liberals experienced over Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev - fake. I know that (R) next to Schwarzenegger's name excites the White House, but his own words prove he's not a conservative. I call this "The Hollywood Syndrome," and it happens every time some actor-type says anything even remotely conservative. I'm not trying to cold shower anybody here, but don't look to anyone in Hollywood to validate your political ideas.
The American Prowler's George Neumayr detailed Arnold's politics in his article "Here's Arnold!" Quote: "[H]e spoke in generalities and banalities about his plans for the state. To the extent that he said anything, he sounded not like a fiscal conservative but a moderate Democrat. He said that he wanted businesses to come back to California so that the state government could collect enough tax revenues to provide social programs. This is the sort of obtuse comment middle-of-the-road Democrats always make, forgetting that businesses are leaving the state because they are tired of paying high taxes for those big government social programs."
More: "He has told the press he is 'very liberal' about social programs, supports abortion and homosexual adoption, and advocates 'sensible gun controls.' His entree into politics last year was a proposition Democrats endorsed because it raised state spending for what amounted to state babysitting - before-school and after-school programs that cost the state up to $455 million a year. He has complained openly about the party's conservatism.... Talk magazine described him as 'impatient' with the religious right.... [H]e expressed disgust with the Republicans who impeached Clinton. 'That was another thing I will never forgive the Republican Party for,' he said. 'We spent one year wasting time because there was a human failure. I was ashamed to call myself a Republican during that period.'"
Does this sound like "the Next Reagan," as some people are calling Arnold? Hardly. This guy may be the next actor elected governor of California, but that's where the similarity between him and Ronaldus Magnus end.
Also, what Limbaugh is doing is a very public warning to Arnold-------we are watching now, so support the base or you will lose. Limbaugh is no fool. Hell, he has watch election cycles as closely as anyone here, and has Glad Handed more GOP pols than most on this forum.
Let Arnold have his time giving the Dirtycrats fits. That alone is worth the price of admission.
The key here is to let Arnold know that once given our support, he has certain responsibilities to keep some of it. BUT--we do not make slaves like the Dims to. Our God (at least mine is) not the GOP--but Him. Arnold serves a great purpose. You all make your own choice.
After the election, we now want pwoof you voted for A.S
(I hope that "pwoof" comment was making fun of Arrianna's accent.)
So, who said now I will vote for him because you proved anything whatsoever????
The one book and/or video tape he sent to all his family and friends for Christmas for several years was 'FREE TO CHOOSE'
These arguements are getting so desperate and flimsy. You have to make the arguement to ME, because we are talking about MY VOTE, thank you very much, and I'm not voting for Arnuld based on rumor of principles, when the only issues I have heard him take are ones that at BEST show a lack of conviction, and at worse underlie a lack of committment to standing up to Big Government powers.
Last time I checked Carl Riener made wealth from nothing, so is Ted Danson, Barbara Steisand, and Martin Sheen. By your litmus they are "fiscal" conservatives-never mind what they say about social issues. This is ludacris!
I want a serious stance taken on policy issues, not platitudes, and certainly not excuses from a starry-eyed Amen Choir.
I, unlike so many including Arnuld, know my limitations.
Besides, I would already be referring to this guy for the budget info anyways, might be more efficient to just vote for him! http://www.tommcclintock.com
Bait and switch isn't so much a theory... ;)
This will be a good chance to watch him closely with all the exposure he'll garner.
We can only pray that he does get exposure. That is the only whole in his game, but right now its a big one...May work precisely to his advantage for once, all the sliming will be Arnuld, and people will get turned off on him in the coming months. Tom will slip by Bob Mulholund.
I believe that Arnold said that the reason that the companies were leaving the state was the high tax rates.
You put up a Classic Conservative candidate and it's hardly a challenge to the dimwits. Why? Because it's easy to scare the minorities with labels-that-stick like Heartless, Rich, Pro-Big Business, Anti-Labor, Extremist Fundamentalist etc. etc. You want someone that can WIN, you've got to get a person who can make the opposition's causes his/her own - that's what GWB is so good at.
Hear, hear! Arnie is a great breath of fresh air. I hope he wins only because I like the idea of representatives working for the people, not treating it like a great entitlement program.
Not sure what Rush's beef is about Arnie, but it sounds awfully hypocritical to me. Afterall, it wasn't that long ago in 2002, when callers were worried about some pro-abortion (R) candidates, and Rush urged them to hold their nose and vote the party way.
Guess he can't take his own advice.
There is no such thing as a fiscally conservative social liberal. That term is an oxymoron.
I presume you're including the shrub in your mix of fans.
Darn! I was just about to post the EXACT statement.
Things just do't go that way. New York would have elected a REAL Repubican instead of Bloomberg, bt there wasn't one running. Pity.
Arnld can get people to work TOGETHER. Period.....who else could?
No matter what any candidtae says they will do, the legislatre still has to VOTE FOR IT! A right winger will get Nothing done.
Why place 4 (four) question marks after your question when only one is needed????
I offered you evidence of Arnold's economic beliefs...the antithesis of liberal/democrat policy.
I'm not voting for Arnuld based on rumor of principles
Not rumor, fact.
Last time I checked Carl Riener made wealth from nothing, so is Ted Danson, Barbara Steisand, and Martin Sheen. By your litmus they are "fiscal" conservatives-never mind what they say about social issues. This is ludacris
This means what???? Do they all go around extolling the virtues of Milton Friedman? You must have inside info.
I want a serious stance taken on policy issues, not platitudes, and certainly not excuses from a starry-eyed Amen Choir.
The only starry-eyed choir I see are those who think Mcwho has a chance. Maybe next time, but not in 59 days.
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.