PING! 
Your One Stop Resource For All The California Recall News!
Want on our daily or major news ping lists? Freepmail DoctorZin.
Posted on 08/22/2003 9:03:09 AM PDT by TBP
The Arnold Schwarzenegger candidacy may become a classic contest for activists to decide whether they are Republicans or conservatives first. Republicans are urging everyone to jump on the bandwagon, to "wake up and smell the Arnie," to take the pragmatic step that will guarantee the ouster of incompetent Gov. Gray Davis.
But what do conservatives gain for this leap of faith? This movie star’s campaign still is not presenting any concrete positions, conservative or liberal. He would like to be seen as a fiscal conservative, but Schwarzenegger has signed no anti-tax pledge nor offered any spending cuts or bureaucratic reforms. Instead, he has touted advisers like Warren Buffett, last hailed by Ted Koppel as "the sage of Omaha" for opposing the Bush tax cuts. Buffett’s also been a financial booster of Senators Chris Dodd, Russ Feingold, Tom Harkin, and Hillary Rodham Clinton.
On social issues, conservatives gain nothing by elevating a Gov. Schwarzenegger. He told Cosmopolitan magazine "I have no sexual standards in my head that say this is good or this is bad." It also doesn’t help that adviser Buffett has been a massive funder of Planned Parenthood, the Vatican-bashing front group calling itself "Catholics for a Free Choice," and a bevy of other radical abortion proponents.
Some suggest Schwarzenegger’s leftist social views are irrelevant because this race is based on economics. But does anyone doubt that the 2004 Republican convention in New York would be dominated by media heavies tripping over themselves to get the governor of the nation’s most populous state to denounce the GOP platform on social issues as "out of the mainstream"? He would probably become the keynote speaker, or be at least as prominent on the podium as Christopher Reeve was for the Democrats the last time around, dominating one of the convention nights.
Conservatives should already notice what is happening in California coverage. The press is using Arnold to marginalize the right. On CNN, reporter Dan Lothian observed that "while Schwarzenegger has been connected to some conservative themes, like eliminating the car tax and voting for the anti-illegal immigrant measure Prop 187, his support of gay rights, abortion rights, and some gun control, [is] turning off the far right."
Lothian kept pounding: "For now, many conservatives are embracing Bill Simon who had impressive numbers but lost to Gray Davis last year, and state Senator Tom McClintock....The big question: Does Schwarzenegger even need the far right to win?" Lothian turned to USC professor Martin Kaplan, who added: "To the degree that Arnold Schwarzenegger tries to appeal to that far right vote, he will alienate the very moderate Republicans, independents, and moderate Democrats that he needs to put together a coalition."
The brain trust at CNN would relgate the philosophy of Ronald Reagan, that same philosophy that triggered two landslide election victories, to the "far right."And they wonder why their network is tanking.
CNN doesn’t care that Lothian’s utterly conventional labeling is at odds with its own network polls, that shows that it is Schwarzenegger’s "if it feels good do it" liberal positions on abortion and homosexuality that are out of the majority, out of the mainstream, and therefore better defined as "far left" than conservatives are defined as "far right." Why do these liberal media outlets always locate "the center" of our political spectrum somewhere in Massachusetts?
Lothian even hinted at marginalizing that massive and very real majority of Californians, the 59 percent who voted for the "anti-illegal immigrant" Proposition 187 back in 1994. You will never see Democrats described on CNN as "pro-illegal immigrant." Other reporters have used the appellation "anti-immigration" for that vote. Too many reporters leave out the nuance that you can be for Prop. 187 and for legal immigration. You can love your immigrant neighbors, and still think it’s a bad idea to provide a five-star menu of taxpayer-funded social services to people who have no respect for our legal system.
If desiring a legal, measured system of immigration that doesn’t encourage law-breaking puts you on the "far right," then where on the ideological spectrum do we place the judges and radical advocates who got this majority vote crushed? Once again, the media have described a political battle as between the "far right" and the "public interest," as propagandistic as that sounds.
The politics of Schwarzenegger may remain a mystery, but the politics of the "objective" press never really change. Conservatives have much to lose from creating a Frankenstein monster they can’t control, not to mention how the definition of "Republican" or "conservative" might be warped beyond recognition. Californians should just say no to the Schwarzeneggernaut.
Schwarzenegger is a liberal and it's not as if there aren't good conservatives in the race, such as Simon, McClintock, and the woman from the AIP.
Principle over party.
If Larry Kuldow says he's Ok. And Arthur Laffer likes him, well, I am hardpresssed to disagree.
...In a dramatic news conference this week, actor-turned-gubernatorial-candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger made it clear that he will occupy right-of-center territory when it comes to fiscal matters in the forthcoming recall election to throw out California's incumbent Governor Gray Davis.
That only leaves the question of ... Are drowning California Conservatives SMART enough to grab the lifeline within their reach
Huh? Aren't Simon and McClintock GOP as well?
I'm just as conservative as you. You have two choices. Pick one.
Which is why he still won't rule out raising taxes, right?
You're dreaming. Support an unelectable proven conservative in the liberal state of California and you'll get another democrat (cruz) for governor.
The ballot says otherwise.
No one but an absolute MORON, will ever say Read my lips, No New taxes.....especially not someone with an R after their name.
The media only remembers campaign promises made by people running as republicans, and Arnold is smart enough to know that, even if others are not.
Of course they do, because Cruz and Arnold are of basically the same ideology. Simnon and McClintock (as well as the aforementioned woman from the AIP) aren't.
You build it at the local and state level. In this case, there are at least two other Republicans who are identifiably conservative. But if you are in California and want to build a thrid party, you might want to look at the AIP. Nationally, it's affiliated with the Constitution Party.
Logic sure doesn't.
But not electable obviously. One of them lost an election that my front door knob would have won.
You must think that the conservative candidates are morons, then, because Bill Simon is repeatedly reminding people that he has signed the no-new-taxes pledge. I believe McClintock has signed it too and says so. Are these people morons? Or do you dislike them because they're conservatives who are making things difficult for the Kennedy Republican?
Well they have 45 days to find one of the lower tier candidates [single digit] and boost the ratings by at least 1/2% per day to make it into the mid 20%range and maybe become competitive. Can that be done? Who knows but time is running out.....
The following is from the Public Policy Institute of CA poll released yesterday.... It will interesting to see polls in the next few days showing numbers taken after the Arnold news conference.....
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.