Republicans First or Conservatives First?

Media Research Center ^ | August 19, 2003 | Brent Bozell

[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.

[A CA Guy]

There is one Democrat that will get most of the vote and an electable Republican saddled with two fractured 4% candidates that could sabotage the election and gift the Governor's seat to the Democrats.

[TheAngryClam]

That poll's sample was 25% non-registered voters, and another 25% "not likely voters."

Hardly representative of true standing, and highly likely to overstate Arnold (the stupid, huh huh, Terminator for governor is cool vote) and Cruz (the illegals).

Try again.

[Roscoe]

Just a week ago, Arnold Schwarzenegger was the political sensation of California -- and of the national media, with his face on the cover of both Time and Newsweek. Polls showed him leading everyone in the horde of candidates for governor by a wide margin.

Now Schwarzenegger is trailing an undistinguished political hack named Cruz Bustamante in the polls.

http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Aug/08222003/commenta/85971.asp

[South40]

That poll's sample was 25% non-registered voters, and another 25% "not likely voters." Hardly representative of true standing, and highly likely to overstate Arnold (the stupid, huh huh, Terminator for governor is cool vote) and Cruz (the illegals). Try again.

No, you try again. Show me a poll ANY POLL that shows he even has a slim chance.

[TheAngryClam]

But... but... ARNOLD CAN WIN! STUPID CONSERVATIVES, VOTE FOR THE RINO OR YOU GET CRUZ!

Hint, RINOs: When the only way you can promote your candidate is by calling everyone who doesn't vote for him stupid, you're not going to make many converts.

Then again, when your candidate has absolutely zero platform other than wasteful social spending (Prop. 49) and tax hike trial balloons (Buffet and Sean Walsh), that's probably the best you can do.

[LibertyAndJusticeForAll]

This week he said that he does not intend to raise taxes, unless there is a natural disaster or terrorism. In a recent interview he said he was against gun control. His emphasis on his own experience becoming a legal immigrant was very well done. He spoke about being fiscally responsible, not spending more than you have.
I find it really note worthy that the Hollywood left is coming out very strong against him.
I did not say he is the perfect candidate, but he can win. In 2004, a Republican governor will help re-elect Bush.
Now, tell me what Cruz Bustamante will give us.

[Protagoras]

So do you favor gun registration?

[Protagoras]

I have just two words: hell no.

Who are you answering for?

[NathanR]

"Conservative First or Conservative First?"

BZZT! WRONG! Thanks for playing.

American first and Californian second. Cruz Bustamonte is neither, despite being born in California's Central Valley. He is a Mexican Nationalist.

In his world there are the "Good Mexicans", "Coconuts" (Coladas?), and the "Gringos". He is a "good Mexican". Arnold is a 'gringo'. Cruz probably has more in common with Arnold's father, the Nazi, than Arnold himself.

But then you knew that. You just don't care.

[A CA Guy]

So that would be your well thought out reasoning for getting another Democrat elected instead through stubborn voting?
You are just too brilliant for words.

[TheAngryClam]

Field Poll, which leans left, and was taken in the initial flurry of attention on Arnold, before he starting showing how much he lacked anything resembling a platform, had the combined Conservative (Simon/McClintock) vote only a few percentage points behind Arnold and Cruz.

Subtract the conservatives who are willing to sell out their principles for party from the Arnold column, add it to Mcc, and you have a winner.

Simple.

[Roscoe]

ARNOLD CAN WIN!

Well, maybe it's a master strategy. If his poll numbers plummet fast enough, he'll hit bottom so hard that he'll bounce back up to the top on election day. Or something like that.

[TheAngryClam]

Myself. I thought I'd invite myself into the discussion.

[South40]

Are you really that uninformed? Or just that desperate?

The poll you posted was based on erroneous reports that Arnold would follow Buffet's advice and repeal Prop 13. He has since said he would not and his numbers went back up putting him ahead of Cruz.

Try again.

[Roscoe]

So do you favor gun registration?

Read it again. Those were quotes from Arnold.

[TheAngryClam]

Does not intend is a lot different than "will not."

That Clintonesque word worming, coupled with the repeated tax hike trial balloons floating from his campaign (and not only Buffet) and his hiring of tax-hiking Pete Wilson's aides, make it almost a certainty that Arnold is lying.

[Roscoe]

The poll you posted

I didn't post a poll.

[South40]

Simple.

Yes..you're thinking is simple.

Glad you pointed that out.

[Mad Dawgg]

"Republicans First or Conservatives First?"

Neither, America first!

[floriduh voter]

Take care.