Posted on 08/23/2003 9:02:36 AM PDT by nwrep
They've got the smell.
I can't say you are entirely wrong in that assessment of Arnold however it is quite CLEAR that of all the republicans running only Arnold has a realistic shot at being governor.
Which brings me to my next point. I find it rather amusing that some of you (not necessarily you) Bush Apologists who like lecturing other conservatives about how we all must support Bush in the next election because he is, well, the lesser of 2 evils. Then turn around, get suddenly purist and say republicans should rally around McClintock--good conservative guy that he is who, unfortunately, doesn't have a hell's chance of winning.
Do you Remember what's at stake here?
Anyway, I'm planning on taking your purist advice and vote for the most conservative candidate for president in 2004 and I guarantee you that it won't be Bush. I don't like PROVEN Socialists...especially of the One World Kind.
>>>This is so dishonest R.M. Schwarzenegger spent a whole week consulting with academics, business leaders, economists, politicans and consultants, but none of them could agree on what the exact amount of our deficit spending is at the present time.
I'm being very honest. NO details. NO specifics. How is a rational conservative voter suppose to reach an intelligent conclusion about any candidate who won't tell the people, what his economic agenda is. Come on D1. If you call yourself a fiscal conservative and have a legislative and/or governing history which backs up your political rhetoric, then you at least have a record to point at. Arnold has no record of being a fiscal conservative and we know he's a social liberal. He needs to come clean and stop all the hollow rhetoric and shallow policy positions.
>>>Schwarzenegger also stated that taking away guns wasn't the answer. I read that to say "not an option".
I've heard Arnold say, he favors stricter gun control efforts in California. California already has excessively strict gun control laws on the books that infringe on the Second Amendment rights of American's. They don't need any more.
Even though the next governor will have no control over abortion rights, when you look at Arnold's pro-abortion position in the context of his entire agenda, its very troubling, disturbing and definitely goes against all the tenets of conservatism.
Sorry. You're cutting Arnold way too much slack. He needs to address the financial-budgetary problems with some specifics. I read somewhere, that Arnold was asked about the people wanting to know the details of his economic plan. He said, paraphrasing, 'the people don't care about details, they care about leadership'. LOL This guy can't be for real. No way!
The twin pillars of fiscal conservatism, are cutting taxes and cutting spending. So far, Arnold hasn't shown he's serious about doing either one.
>>>This is just flat not true. He stated that the citizens of California were paying too much as it is and said cutting spending was the way to go, not raising taxes. He was very emphatic about that. When asked to guarantee he wouldn't raise taxes, he said he couldn't because an earthquake (national disaster) or a severe act of terrorism might require it.
In all honesty, if taxes needed to be raised in California to combat terrorism or a state wide disaster, the people would probably go along with it. Arnold needs to take a tax pledge that says, he won't raise taxes because of any type of financial budgetary shortfall.
I find your future support for Arnold to be a sell out of those conservative principles I believed you held so close to your heart and soul.
>>> Once again, this is about as dishonest as it get R.M. I declared that I would continue to support McClintock until the middle of September, when the lead candidate deserves to be able to pull all Republicans behind him to shore up before election day. If it turns out Schwarzenegger is behind and he has to drop out, so be it. If McClintock has to drop out, so be it. This is hardly my selling out on principle.
Once again, I'm being totally honest. If you read all my posts since Arnold declared his candidacy on Leno's show, you will see that 95% of the time, I don't mention Bustamonte or McClintock. I firmly believe this is an issue unto itself. Its all about Arnold masquerading as a moderate Republican and a fiscal conservative. That's 100% bulls**T and you know it. I understand what Bustamonte is and why you're so determined to defeat him. But at the same time, Arnold the liberal, is in many ways, no better then Cruz the liberal.
>>> If you truly understood what Bustamante was, you would have stoped this paragraph right there. If McClintock is at 15% on September 15th, Schwarzenegger is at 25% and Bustamate is at 30%, no reasoned conservative would have any choice but to consolidate behind the Schwarzenegger. To ponder anything else just isn't reasonable.
This is one of the biggest lines of nonsense you've ever written on FR. Face it, you're not always right. If Arnold turns out to be the leader on recall election day and you vote for him, you will have surrendered your conservative principles to elect a liberal RINO. Very sad indeed.
>>>Allowing Bustamante to attain the office of Governor of California would be the lower uncommon act of a person claiming to be a conservative.
You can use all the sophistry you want. But you're still dead wrong on this issue and one day you may realize the error of your ways. This is some of the worst judgement I've ever seen from any conservative in my entire life.
>>> ... Schwarzenegger ... will help to re-elect George Bush.
You've got to be kidding me. Come on man. You DON'T support PresBush`s re-election bid in 2004 and never will. I suppose you're about to tell us all, you've had a change of heart about our remarkable President and courageous Commander In Chief.
Gun controls should be stiffer, parents should start working harder with their kids, have more control over them and spend more time with them rather than going out to work or being on a golf course five hours a day..
Sounds like he wants parents to have more control over their kids (Columbine?) which would necessarily include controlling what they might be getting into (guns).
Oh my Gott! What a liberal!
I never gave any purist advice.
IMO, PresBush is a conservative and voting for him doesn't intrude on my basic conservative principles. Although I can't agree with his record spending levels in his first term. He does have a full plate right now.
OTOH, Arnold isn't even a moderate conservative or a fiscal conservative. He's a liberal RINO! Period.
If not, then I understand you trashing Schwarzenegger, because there's no chance you would ever vote for the man. And if that's your decision come hell or high water, I think it's fair for me to simply air out the fact that you have come to that conclusion, and that you think Bustamante would make a better governor than Schwarzenegger, and that you and DU are in full agreement on that.
So its back to me being a liberal kook because I don't agree YOUR candidate? You are a very bad listener. I pity you for thinking so small mindedly.
Yes, me an DU think the same, because I am a ZOT, way to go finding me out, keep it a secret while I rally all the people away with my Pied Piper music of conservatism.
Killing Schwarzenegger by character assasination isn't going to be easy. With your help it's going to be a lot easier.
ITs character assisination in your small mind to call a non conservative a non conservative on a Conservative posting board? You people are a joke. I hadn't even ruled out voting for the guy depending on the lay of the land in Oct, but you just can't make a logical arguement. You people have no issues. Its just insult insult insult, well you are the straw that broke the camels back. I'm sick and tired of you know it all RINOs preaching to me about rallying in August, like I can't make up my own damn mind myself.
I will do my best to hurt you fraud's feeling on FR.
And Arnold will be in!
McClintock's the only thing that's going to get me anywhere near a polling place in October.
I wouldn't vote for Schwarzenegger if you paid me.
He is pushing the after school program so children have a place to go and not be on the streets. How wonderful....
Well if Mom and Dad could make a comfortable living on one income than Jr could be supervised by his stay at home Mom so the need for an after school program would not be so critical. Thus giving back to the Tax Payer the monies he has worked so hard for in which such monies could be utilized toward keeping Mom home to raise and nuture the kids. Now who would have thunk it?
NO conservative should support a candidate who won't outline the details and specifics of his economic plan, especially with California in such awful financial condition.
This is so dishonest R.M. Schwarzenegger spent a whole week consulting with academics, business leaders, economists, politicans and consultants,
but none of them could agree on what the exact amount of our deficit spending is at the present time.
I'm being very honest. NO details. NO specifics. How is a rational conservative voter suppose to reach an intelligent conclusion about any candidate who won't tell the people, what his economic agenda is. Come on D1. If you call yourself a fiscal conservative and have a legislative and/or governing history which backs up your political rhetoric, then you at least have a record to point at. Arnold has no record of being a fiscal conservative and we know he's a social liberal. He needs to come clean and stop all the hollow rhetoric and shallow policy positions.
Why do I say that your comments on this topic are hollow and untruthful? I say so because Schwarzenegger doesn't have access to all the information that he will have to base his decisions on. He has explained what his philosophy is and explained to the public in detail how he plans to conduct his decision making process. Futher he has stated that his plan is to cut and cap spending, and not use taxes as a portion of the fix. He also talked about restructuring debt.
His comments regarding the state budget were extensive. He explained how he had been consulting every day the week prior to his Wednesday press conference with the groups I mentioned earlier. He stated that none of them could give him accurate figures about what the budgetary deficits for this year are. In light of that, how can you expect him to specificaly state exactly where and how much he will cut? He hasn't even seen the state budget yet. Those he talked to couldn't reveal it to him. Yet you want us to agree it's reasonable for him give exact specifics right now for what and how much he will cut.
Once again that is unreasonable and a straw arguement. It's not possible for him to be more specific right now, than he has been.
Schwarzenegger also stated that taking away guns wasn't the answer. I read that to say "not an option".
I've heard Arnold say, he favors stricter gun control efforts in California. California already has excessively strict gun control laws on the books that infringe on the Second Amendment rights of American's. They don't need any more.
Well I haven't. That doesn't mean he hasn't said it, but I'm not sure exactly what his overall outlook on gun control is. I suspect I may have problems with it. I for sure have problems with Bustamante's.
Even though the next governor will have no control over abortion rights, when you look at Arnold's pro-abortion position in the context of his entire agenda, its very troubling, disturbing and definitely goes against all the tenets of conservatism.
Antoherwords, even thought Arnold can never attain a higher position than this one, and can't affect abortion policy at all, I'm supposed to turn the state over to a racist separatist. Nice logic there.
Sorry. You're cutting Arnold way too much slack. He needs to address the financial-budgetary problems with some specifics. I read somewhere, that Arnold was asked about the people wanting to know the details of his economic plan. He said, paraphrasing, 'the people don't care about details, they care about leadership'. LOL This guy can't be for real. No way!
We've already covered the "specifics issue". I thought that was a poor comment, but if that's the worst flub you can find in his entire presentation, then you're grasping at straws. I might also add that this comment was made in his Wednesday press conference. You didn't see that?
If you didn't see that, then how can you come here and damn Schwarzenegger for not being more specific. You didn't even hear what he said.
The twin pillars of fiscal conservatism, are cutting taxes and cutting spending. So far, Arnold hasn't shown he's serious about doing either one.
This is just flat not true. He stated that the citizens of California were paying too much as it is and said cutting spending was the way to go, not
raising taxes. He was very emphatic about that. When asked to guarantee he wouldn't raise taxes, he said he couldn't because an earthquake (national
disaster) or a severe act of terrorism might require it.
In all honesty, if taxes needed to be raised in California to combat terrorism or a state wide disaster, the people would probably go along with it. Arnold needs to take a tax pledge that says, he won't raise taxes because of any type of financial budgetary shortfall.
Schwarzenegger needed to address the issues. He has. You didn't see the presentation, but you're trying to tell me that his presentation wasn't good enough. Well it was. It was very impressive. I could read you the words to the Pledge of Allegiance, but hearing Red Skelton read it would give you a whole new outlook on it. I cannot and wouldn't attempt to convey Schwarzenegger's presentation the other day, other than to say that it was impressive live, but might not impress you on paper.
I find your future support for Arnold to be a sell out of those conservative principles I believed you held so close to your heart and soul.
Once again, this is about as dishonest as it get R.M. I declared that I would continue to support McClintock until the middle of September, when the
lead candidate deserves to be able to pull all Republicans behind him to shore up before election day. If it turns out Schwarzenegger is behind and he has
to drop out, so be it. If McClintock has to drop out, so be it. This is hardly my selling out on principle.
Once again, I'm being totally honest. If you read all my posts since Arnold declared his candidacy on Leno's show, you will see that 95% of the time, I don't mention Bustamonte or McClintock. I firmly believe this is an issue unto itself. Its all about Arnold masquerading as a moderate Republican and a fiscal conservative. That's 100% bulls**T and you know it. I understand what Bustamonte is and why you're so determined to defeat him. But at the same time, Arnold the liberal, is in many ways, no better then Cruz the liberal.
You've stated this several time several ways. It just serves to prove how out of touch with reality you are. In one small sentence you dismiss Bustamante's world view with "but". What I am amazed at, is your willingness to sell out even the breakup of this nation to sooth your thought that the best man who can't win won't get my vote. If this isn't a lame-arse arguement, I have never seen a lame-arse argument.
If you truly understood what Bustamante was, you would have stoped this paragraph right there. If McClintock is at 15% on September 15th,
Schwarzenegger is at 25% and Bustamate is at 30%, no reasoned conservative would have any choice but to consolidate behind the Schwarzenegger. To
ponder anything else just isn't reasonable.
This is one of the biggest lines of nonsense you've ever written on FR. Face it, you're not always right. If Arnold turns out to be the leader on recall election day and you vote for him, you will have surrendered your conservative principles to elect a liberal RINO. Very sad indeed.
And your alternative, voting for a man that can't win over a racist separatist isn't a big line of nonsense? LOL, it tops by ten times anything I've said today.
Allowing Bustamante to attain the office of Governor of California would be the lowest uncommon act of a person claiming to be a conservative.
You can use all the sophistry you want. But you're still dead wrong on this issue and one day you may realize the error of your ways. This is some of the worst judgement I've ever seen from any conservative in my entire life.
Well if you want to call it sophistry to vote for a man that can defeat Bustamonte vs one that can't, I guess we can judge that on it's own merits. As for this being the worst judgement by any conservative in your entire life... groan. R.M., you're self-destructing bud.
Schwarzenegger ... will help to re-elect George Bush.
You've got to be kidding me. Come on man. You DON'T support PresBush`s re-election bid in 2004 and never will. I suppose you're about to tell us all, you've had a change of heart about our remarkable President and courageous Commander In Chief.
I've never professed to be a supporter of George Bush, other than to help coordinate large protests in his favor after the 2000 elections. I am not going to start now. I have always defended George Bush against what "I thought" were unfair attacks by editorialists, democrats and news articles. I have none the less continued to speak out on policy issues where I have disagreed with the man. I have also championed his decisions that I agreed with.
I am not about to characterize President George Bush here. It isn't germane.
My comments about Schwarzenegger's Governorship being a plus for the President's re-election chances stand on their own. I stand by them.
748 posted on 08/23/2003 5:30 PM PDT by Reagan Man
However, I think Arnold has a thing for helping children, whatever their fate in life's lottery, and this makes him a weak conservative when preserving the tradtitional family would reduce the risk of idle children drifitng toward delinquency.
This is not to suggest that he'd not favor stronger families but that the situation may be so dire that tossing public money at it is warranted in his mind. I myself would exercise more caution when making available a new 'teat' on the Public Sow but then I haven't spent much time in the hood lately.
You obviously really don't have any respect for the common person to figure things out on their own.
I respect a lot of opinions of people I seldom come in contact with. So much for that bone-headed pap.
They don't need the media to treat someone fairly if that person has Core.
Oh really. So you think Clinton had more core than say Dole or the first President Bush. Now there's an interesting theory.
They treated no one less fairly that Ronald Reagan, and as I tried to explain to you, even without Talk Radio, he won in one of the biggest landslides in US history, against a guy with no skeletons in his closet, and an even bigger likeable minority than Mexicans-a woman vice Pres. This is conviently forgotten by the cynics, the pessimists, and the "how can we fool em today" Republican moderates, but principles matter.
Taking nothing away from Reagan, this was his mid-term election. His popularity was giant at that point. Mondale/Ferraro was a throw away team and you know it. There's simply no way to compare that to Schwarzenegger's first run. Geez guy. Come on.
Find him charming or no, the only hard principles you can honestly say about (R)nold is that he "is for the children" that's not Core, that's pandering, and people not into politics are sick of that BS.
Let me see. Arnold has no core principles. Let's just pile it all in here. He's no better than Bustamante and he's another Tom Daschle. Let's just pile it all in, granting you didn't say it all. But let's address it all once and for all okay? I'm getting really tired of defending a man who isn't my first choice, but that's okay. That's lost on you blithering... well nevermind.
Arnold Schwarzenegger came here around 35 years ago. He parlayed himself into a body-builder then actor. He made investments even before he became an actor. Today he is a self-made man, worth tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars. Schwarzenegger circumvented some pretty serious hurdles to overcome the obsticles a person with a heavy german accent would have getting into films. He IS a can do guy. He has a positive public image. He has an entrapraneurial spirit and knows what taxation is all about. He disagrees with what our state officals are doing and wants to change that. He doesn't want to raise taxes but does think cutting state spending is the way to go. When faced with the daunting task of getting the state budget under control, he contacted people from academia, the economic community, the business community and the political community. He counceled with a new set each day for a week. He met with one set of economic advisors the morning of his press converence this last Wednesday. He proposed forming a commission and calling in an outside auditing firm that isn't associated with either party, to do an audit on the state books. Then after the auditing was done, the commission made recommendations and he had time to review this, he would make his final decisons public.
Cruz Bustamante is a member of Mecha. He will not renounce that membership. He will not renounce what they stand for. He is a racist with a number of insightful comments, most recently the utterance of the word ni--er numerous times during a presentation to among other groups, blacks. They all walked out. He is notorious for making insensitive comments concerning the relations between hispanics and whites. This man is your typical tax and spend liberal. He stands for 110% of the things you don't. He hates this nation. Can't wait to break away from it and thinks whites should just leave the state. That is what Mecha believes and pushes. It's essentially the hispanic KKK.
Tom Dashle stands diametricly opposed to everything Bush stands for. He fought us tooth and nail regarding entering Iraq. He wasn't happy about the war on terror. Each and every day this man makes public statements that trash this nation and what it stands for.
Conversely, compared to these two men, Arnold Schwarzenegger loves this nation. He can't say enough good about it, and our state. He loves it and what it stands for. He worked hard to become what he is today and has nothing but praise for a system that afforded him to become what he is. The first two men dispise this nation. Arnold loves it. He can't praise it enough. Bustamante loves big government ever higher taxation. He loves more controls over business. Arnold hates that stuff. He want's lowered state spending and much lower taxes. He wants to luer more businesses to California. He wants tort and state disibility reform.
Now, what were you saying about the children?
If not, then I understand you trashing Schwarzenegger, because there's no chance you would ever vote for the man. And if that's your decision come hell
or high water, I think it's fair for me to simply air out the fact that you have come to that conclusion, and that you think Bustamante would make a better governor than Schwarzenegger, and that you and DU are in full agreement on that.
So its back to me being a liberal kook because I don't agree YOUR candidate? You are a very bad listener. I pity you for thinking so small mindedly.
If you walk talk and quack on this issue like a liberal duck, it's not my fault. I'm not the one who is promoting the idea of voting for someone who may not be able to win against the likes of Bustamante.
Yes, me an DU think the same, because I am a ZOT, way to go finding me out, keep it a secret while I rally all the people away with my Pied Piper music of conservatism.
Look no died in the wool conservative is boing to back Bustamante being the next governor. If you can't grasp that, then don't blame me for what you look like.
Killing Schwarzenegger by character assasination isn't going to be easy. With your help it's going to be a lot easier.
ITs character assisination in your small mind to call a non conservative a non conservative on a Conservative posting board?
I have called Schwarzenegger a non-conservative, so there goes another of your deep deep thoughts. The question is, are we going to have a racist separatist or Arnold Schwarzenegger for governor. You've made you views crystal clear on that. I don't have to live with them. You do.
You people are a joke.
Well, along with your other fine reasoned comments on this thread that made no sense whatsoever, I guess I'll just have to buck up under the weight of this insult.
I hadn't even ruled out voting for the guy depending on the lay of the land in Oct, but you just can't make a logical arguement.
Yes, I guess laying out why I won't vote for someone who can't win over Bustamante is illogical to some, and logical to others. We can tell which group you are in now. Okay. Great. Thank you.
You people have no issues.
You mean like damning Schwarzenegger for only talking about the children. Yep, Schwarzenegger has no issues but the children. We've covered your wondrously insightful comments regarding that issue.
Its just insult insult insult, well you are the straw that broke the camels back. I'm sick and tired of you know it all RINOs preaching to me about rallying in August, like I can't make up my own damn mind myself.
Well I'll just have to bear up under another well reasoned post from you that wasn't insulting in the least. This whole thread is full of posts from you that aren't the least insulting. Nice job.
I will do my best to hurt you fraud's feeling on FR.
I wouldn't expect someone with the name "PeoplesRep_of_LA to do otherwise. Have a good time.
752 posted on 08/23/2003 6:08 PM PDT by PeoplesRep_of_LA (Stop Dividing the Republican base; vote McClintock on October 7, 2003!)
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.