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

Skip to comments.

Schwarzenegger supported '94 ballot measure to deny social services to illegal immigrants
sfgate ^ | Sunday, August 10, 2003 | SANDRA MARQUEZ

Posted on 08/10/2003 5:46:35 PM PDT by demlosers

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:43:14 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Actor Arnold Schwarzenegger voted for a 1994 ballot measure to deny social services to illegal immigrants, his campaign said Sunday -- offering the first glimpse of the actor's stand on a major policy issue.

The Republican has promoted himself as the candidate in California's gubernatorial recall who can best appeal to the state's politically and ethnically diverse electorate.


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


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: allornothinglosers; arnoldwillwin; goarnoldgo; illegalimmigration; keysters; losers4mcclintock; mcclintockistas; mcclinton; mcloser; mcmarginalized; schwarzenegger; socialservices; tomwho; vote4arnold; winners4arnold
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-148 next last
To: Lantern1776
Funny, Republicans criticize the democrats for not allowing pro-life people to even speak at their events, and we do the same in the other direction. I am pro-life myself, but that is not my only issue. It seems self-defeating for conservatives to hold up one issue (whatever it may be) and announce they won't support a candidate based upon that one opinion.
41 posted on 08/10/2003 6:42:25 PM PDT by Libertina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: South40
"How can this be?"

When you're riding the Titanic, you'll use anything for a liferaft.
42 posted on 08/10/2003 6:43:38 PM PDT by Those_Crazy_Liberals (Ronaldus Magnus he's our man . . . If he can't do it, no one can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Libertina
I don't know how anyone can put another issue in front of abortion when there are HUMAN LIVES on the line.
43 posted on 08/10/2003 6:46:01 PM PDT by Lantern1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
There won't be any debates. Too many candidates. Everybody's got to be invited.

Your first sentence may turn out to be accurate, but your last one is not.

I was thinking of a privately funded debate between just those 2 guys to set them apart as the only legitimate Republican candidates. Charge the public a buck or 2 to get in a big arena or convention center and get somebody like Mel Gibson to film it.

Make the tape available to the media and they will show clips and play sound bites. Either candidate could use portions of the tape in their media ads.

Arnold would never agree to this though, unless McClintock gains a lot of ground fast.

44 posted on 08/10/2003 6:47:48 PM PDT by StopGlobalWhining (Con Cruz, Venceramos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Not sure there are not more than one! What better place to create disharmony than here on FR.

Personally I think Simon and McClintock should get a clue and back Arnold who can win. Neither of those two stand a chance to get elected! Without Arnold, neither of them would win either. Wish for once, Republicans would put the good of the State and Republican Party ahead of their own selfish interest in order to win in October.

Came to the conclusion over the last several days that the purist conservatives are just downright selfish -- only explanation. Their "so-called" stand on principles cost us elections and we get DemocRATs who are worse than the Republican candidate they tanked! What good is their "so-called" stand on principles if the outcome is worse?

Have also decided over the last few days that the word RINO is being used on the wrong group of people. To me the Republican in Name Only are the arch right conservatives who threaten not to vote if they don't like what the Republican candidate is all about. Never hear Arnold, Olympia Snow, Susan Collins and others say they are not voting for Republicans if they don't agree 100% for a Republican candidate!

Think about it -- only one group threatens to sit home and not vote and actually did in 2000 which almost cost Bush the election -- the ultra right which includes the Keyes faction of the Republican Party! Seems to me they are the Republican in Name Only part of Republicans since they didn't vote for President Bush or stayed home. As Keyes said in 2000, he was going to sit back and say He Told Us So when President Bush lost in November. I don't call that a "real" Republican!

These non-voters/non-supporters yet want to tell the rest of us that we are RINO's, but yet we vote in every election and probably 99% of us vote straight Republican. Something is wrong with this picture!
45 posted on 08/10/2003 6:56:22 PM PDT by PhiKapMom (Bush Cheney '04 - VICTORY IN '04 -- $4 for '04 - www.GeorgeWBush.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
good for him.
46 posted on 08/10/2003 6:56:37 PM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (I'm so glad to no longer be associated with the Party of Dependence on Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Simon and McClintock should get a clue and back Arnold who can win

Worth repeatimg...Democrates were able to get behind Bustimani (SP?). Republicans circled the wagons, turned inward, and started shooting.

47 posted on 08/10/2003 6:59:38 PM PDT by Drango (A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
Person who does touch it will be rewarded with huge landslide wins.

Really? How can you say that when the last person to touch it (Wilson) was run out of town with his political career in shambles?

48 posted on 08/10/2003 6:59:41 PM PDT by South40 (Get Right Or Get Left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: woodyinscc
All the next Gov. has to do is appeal it to the SCOTUS.

And in light of the overwhelming backlask suffered by former California Governor Pete Wilson, who, in their right mind would?

Even prominent Republicans such as Jack Kemp opposed 187...not because it was a bad idea...it was great!, and it passed easily. But because of the political ramifications.

49 posted on 08/10/2003 7:06:15 PM PDT by South40 (Get Right Or Get Left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: GatekeeperBookman
Thanks for posting this! It fleshes out more details from an intriguing candidate. I particularly like the idea that he was so enthused with Friedman's economics that he gave everyone in his family "Free to Choose". Maybe those who don't think he's a fiscal conservative should re-read their Friedman, and Sowell.
50 posted on 08/10/2003 7:07:39 PM PDT by alwaysconservative (I like everyone else's tag better than mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Have also decided over the last few days that the word RINO is being used on the wrong group of people. To me the Republican in Name Only are the arch right conservatives who threaten not to vote if they don't like what the Republican candidate is all about.

Excellent idea!

Never hear Arnold, Olympia Snow, Susan Collins and others say they are not voting for Republicans if they don't agree 100% for a Republican candidate!

Well, John Warner threatened to NOT escort Ollie North into the Senate chamber when it looked like Ollie would win a Senate seat a few years back. In fact, JW campaigned against Ollie.

51 posted on 08/10/2003 7:08:23 PM PDT by onyx (Name an honest democrat? I can't either!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: South40
All the next Gov. has to do is appeal it to the SCOTUS.

And in light of the overwhelming backlask suffered by former California Governor Pete Wilson, who, in their right mind would?

Only someone who isn't a career politician.

52 posted on 08/10/2003 7:10:19 PM PDT by byteback
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
So much for the RINO label sticking. I hope he wins because he loves his country, and that is a big selling point for me.

We probably do disagree on a few social issues, but good people can disagree so if I were a Californian (and I'm glad I'm not) I'd be volunteering and getting ready to pull that lever for the big Austrian who loves his adopted country like I do. To expect to agree with a candidate on all the issues is an adolescent (sp?) delusion.

53 posted on 08/10/2003 7:14:03 PM PDT by AlbionGirl (A kite flies highest against the wind, not with it. - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
But he won't get any "undocumented immigrant" votes. What a shame

Hey! Can they vote in Kalifornia? (just a question from an ignorant conservative in the Republik of Iowa - home of governor Vilsack and Senator Dung-Heap Harkin)

54 posted on 08/10/2003 7:14:08 PM PDT by PLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: alwaysconservative
You must not have read the entire article-he is a moral idiot. He has no morals. check it out. He is toxic. It will not be refuted.
55 posted on 08/10/2003 7:18:41 PM PDT by GatekeeperBookman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
These non-voters/non-supporters yet want to tell the rest of us that we are RINO's, but yet we vote in every election and probably 99% of us vote straight Republican. Something is wrong with this picture!

You're absolutely right! I have been voting straight Republican since I cast my first vote for Gerald Ford in 1976, and have voted in EVERY single election since that time. (I even voted early in 2002 just in case something happened that I couldn't get to the polls on election day!) I have never sat one out in a fit of pique, as these threaten to do so constantly. And I'm getting pretty tired of being called a RINO or a "neo-con" or any of those other code words for not being as pure as they are.

56 posted on 08/10/2003 7:21:08 PM PDT by alwaysconservative (I like everyone else's tag better than mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
The GOP-backed Proposition 187 to deny health care and public education to illegal immigrants was passed by a wide margin, although it was eventually ruled unconstitutional.

Exactly how is this unconstitutional ?

57 posted on 08/10/2003 7:24:30 PM PDT by Centurion2000 (We are crushing our enemies, seeing him driven before us and hearing the lamentations of the liberal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlbionGirl
Please see #39

A few highlights: Louis Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, said the actor "would be a darker villain than any he has faced in his movies. . . . It's hard to imagine a worse governor than Gray Davis, but Mr. Schwarzenegger would be it."
'Homosexual' -- that only means to me that he enjoys sex with a man and I enjoy sex with a woman. It's all legitimate to me."
For voters seeking to understand how Schwarzenegger would govern California,

political analysts say the best example may be former Gov. Pete Wilson, who is supporting the actor, and even Gov. Gray Davis during his first term, when he tried to skip across the political spectrum and angered many liberal Democrats.

"It's like going through a buffet line where you find all sorts of things, on the left and the right, that you can chose from," said Bill Whalen, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, who advised Schwarzenegger in 2001 and analyzed his public positions.

"Reporters are going to try very hard to put him in a box, but I don't think there is a box that would fit Arnold," said Whalen. "He said something very interesting to me once: 'You have to understand I am internally conflicted. I have an Austrian upbringing, but an adult life in California.' "
But policy details can matter. In his first public comments as a candidate Wednesday night, Schwarzenegger said "the junk bond ratings that we're getting,

it is disastrous." In fact, although California's bond ratings have been downgraded by Wall Street, the state's credit rating is not at junk-bond status.

58 posted on 08/10/2003 7:27:27 PM PDT by GatekeeperBookman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: AlbionGirl
He has no morals. check it out. He is toxic. It will not be refuted.
59 posted on 08/10/2003 7:28:18 PM PDT by GatekeeperBookman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: byteback
Only someone who isn't a career politician.

No...only someone without a career or someone wishing to end theirs.

60 posted on 08/10/2003 7:28:19 PM PDT by South40 (Get Right Or Get Left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-148 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