Posted on 08/23/2003 9:02:36 AM PDT by nwrep
Per FOX NEWS
Have a nice day, vote for (R)nold.
Color me suspicious of you not voting for (R)nold given you attributing spending decreases to the guy out of love. If you do wait, then we are in total agreement, although I would wait until at least Oct 1 to make that decision, given the history of Bob Mulholund and the history of late voter interest in actual substance.
Sorry I was so hard on you, I didn't think you were this open minded.
I do not have a problem paying taxes, I do have a problem with it being pis..ed away. I as you work very hard to earn money and do not mind helping someone in need to get back on their feet but not to the point of their lifetime, their offsprings and their offsprings. I personally do not owe anyone a living nor does anyone owe me. This is turning into a Nation of hand-outs and where is mine mentality.
I remember when this Country was built on a foundation of hard work, spirituality, and freedom. (Yes, I am that old). We were a melting pot of many nationalities which thru hard work, getting an eduction and sacrifice, you too, could have the American Dream which has never been duplicated anywhere on this planet. The American Dream is still alive but asleep and as soon as people realize that not thru goverment handouts, poor me mentality, blaming everyone for their failures & their lot in life, being hyphened Americans and laziness, will the dream be awaken.
I am tired of the rich elite living high on the hog telling me how I should think, raise my children, and live my life. It is the same rich elites who look down on me for wanting to keep more of my hard earned money while they pay little to nothing on their own. That is the ugly little secret that Democrats do not want you to know. Their Tax the Rich is Tax the Middle Class who are working stiffs trying hard to give their families the American Dream. Tax them so they can't achieve anymore or want too. Yup can't have them make it to the top. Oh no, can't have them in our Special Club. Oh yea, Outsiders not welcomed. How in the hell can any rich elite try to tell any of us that only they can feel and understand the pain of the downtrodden while they live in their mansions with their staff of many catering to their every need. When are people going to understand that talk is cheap and action speaks louder than words.
I am tired of the same bs regarding republicans and how we can not win on a platform outlining our beliefs but need to compromise. You know that was the same dog and pony show rallied around with Clinton. Yes he has no character, yes he is a low life, but we must compromise and stand behind him because God Forbid if a Republican got in power. Well doesn't that sound familiar? We must vote for Arnold, put your principles on hold, have to compromise because we don't want a Democrat in power. I've seem that fork in the road too many times and know where it leads. No Thank you!! Sorry to rant but when are people going to start listening and seeing what is before them?
The missing factor in all the forgoing analyses is the effect of the media.
The media is mainly comprised of liberals.
Their idea of a Republican is a RINO.
Their idea of a real Republican is equivalent to a Nazi.
They have no real concept of third parties, other than Greens (I am thinking in particular of Libertarians.)
The media are clueless as to reality, in or out of California. They will screw up, omit, or misquote a true conservative or libertarian candidate.
RINOs they can handle.
From the media perspective, Davis is toast. The threshhold was several weeks ago.
Notice what the media did: they immediately focused, not on the Republican candidates, but on Feinstein! Feinstein was the only credible Democratic candidate on the horizon at the time.
But something very bad (from the liberal media perspective) happened: Feinstein did not take the hint of the adoring media that she should run. Instead, she ducked.
This caused a lot of media pressure for Bustamante (as the second bench alternative Democrat candidate), and he finally buckled and ran, if for no other reason than to give the media a candidate that they can gloss over and endorse without any particular concern (N-word and MeCHA to the contrary).
But then what happened? Schwarzenegger jumped into the race, and stole the headlines from the liberal media wet dream candidate Bustamante. Another media panic ensued!
The media went into shock and then almost immediately into "divide and conquer" mode as a strategy for containment. Anyway a typical J-school graduate doesn't have enough gray matter upstairs to comprehend a 3 way race, not to mention an n-way race. In a race with more than two candidates, you gotta have your white hat hero and your black hat villain. The remainder of the candidates clutter the political landscape and prevent journalism from doing its job, namely, providing biased news.
The Democrats have only one serious candidate, and he wears the media white hat, so he is beyond reproach. The media's task is therefore to whittle down the Republican slate. So we start hearing about Schwarzenegger... and the others... and in particular, why the others should drop out (in so many words). That's why we hear about some second- or third-tier county organization suddenly becoming "influential" when they decide to back Schwarzenegger in contrast to some other Republican candidate (conservative or otherwise).
It is selective reporting and it is selective for a singleminded purpose: to narrow the field to a single big-ticket Republican (preferably a RINO, and preferably someone the journalists don't need to describe to the readership, because then they'd actually have to sit down and do some serious studying).
As a result, Republicans are being herded around into thinking that only one Republican (Arnold) has a chance, and that all the others need to drop out, and the sooner, the better.
But this does not make any real sense from a logical perspective, since Arnold has yet even to define his platform fully, while other Republican candidates have some very well defined specifics already. Why the rush?
I'll answer that question: because once the other major Republicans drop out of the race,
(1) the pressure for Schwarzenegger to adopt conservative or libertarian principles will be removed. This plays to the advantage of liberals.
(2) the press can then declare "open season" on Schwarzenegger, and really start to dig into his past. So the media along with Democrat operatives are lying low in the tall grass, waiting until Arnold is out in the open and standing alone against Bustamante. Then, the truckloads of dirt (true or otherwise) will start to be delivered to his feet, courtesy of the media, and contrasts will be drawn with the liberal wet dream alternative, Bustamante, who will be given a free pass on dirt by the liberal media. Advantage: liberals (again). But then, the difference will be that the other major Republicans will have already been pushed aside by the media and it will be too late for any of them to attempt to come in and take the baton.
If events unfold according to the media plan, the Republican ticket will be whittled down to Arnold, who will then take a politically fatal hit (courtesy of the media-- if they can't find one, they'll manufacture one) in the closing days prior to the election, and leave the field clear for the white-hat liberal candidate (Bustamante) to ride in and save the day for all Californians (or at least the liberals). Then the business of state tax-and-spend government can get back to "normal", or at least what passes for normal in California these days. With the help of the media enablers...
A brief word concerning Arnold: he is an opportunist and a political dilletante. He acts as if it is entertainment to him to run. Very well, it may be entertaining to him but to everyone else in California, it is a very serious choice to be made. I suggest Arnold supporters take a close look at Arnold before pushing the panic button onto every non-Arnold conservative voter. Charisma, yes. Specifics? not very many, and potential reservations such as gun control? plenty.
So I would say to those who feel compelled to argue that no one but Arnold has a chance:
You are being manipulated, big time, by the media. This is an unprecedented election, and literally anything can happen between now and October 7. It really does not make sense for conservatives and libertarians to coalesce behind a single candidate at this time. Maybe at the beginning of October, but not now. The only folks coalescing helps in the short term are the Democrats and their media enablers. I suggest would-be Arnold supporters resist the media pressure to commit at this early time. Just relax and let events unfold. Even more than last time, this election is the conservatives' to lose. Don't forget that, and if the media start warping your thinking, be aware and don't play into their hands.
Just some IMHO thoughts...
I've had enough people call me a Bustamante supporter to be, how shall I say....suspicious of tepid endorsements for my standpoint.
Keep your options open, and your ears. Things may not be as easy as who appears most "electable" for us loyal 'R's in August 23.
Take care.
Here are some of the candidates web pages extracted from the candidates actual filing statements:
http://www.badiforgovernor.org/
http://anderson4governor.org/
http://www.oceanchinampa.com/
http://www.johnbeard4gov.com/
http://cherylblychester.com/
http://www.bettercalifornia.com/
http://www.wsws.org/
http://www.votecamejo.org/
http://www.billchambersforgovernor.com/
http://www.clementsforgov.com/
http://www.bobcan.com/
http://www.davisforgovernor.org/
http://www.bobedwards.com/
http://www.johnestrada.com/
http://www.warrenfarrell.com/
http://www.feinstein4gov.com/
http://www.attorneybusters.com/
http://www.comparadox.com/
http://www.richgosse.com/
http://www.grishamforgovernor.com/
http://www.gruenerforgovernor.com/
http://www.ivanhall.com/
http://www.governorken.org
http://www.govhickey.com/
http://www.hollandforgovernor.com/
http://www.votearianna.com
http://www.trekkelly.com/
http://www.kennedygov.com/
http://www.hyperlogik.com/jerry_gov/
http://www.calvinlouieforgovernor.com/
http://www.macforgov.com/
http://www.mannheim4cagov.com/
http://www.mikeforgov.com/
http://www.bobmcclain.com/
http://www.mehrforgovernor.com/
http://www.millerforcalifornia.com/
http://www.voteformobley.org/
http://www.geocities.com/stirlingforgov/
http://www.newman4governor.org/
http://www.peters4gov.com/
http://www.pinedaforgovernor.com/
http://www.priceforgov.com/
http://www.jeff4gov.com/
http://www.whowantstobeagovernor.com/
http://www.smokersparty.com/
http://www.rushfordfiles.com/
http://www.georgyforgov.com/
http://www.davidsams.com/
http://www.save-california.us/
http://www.governorgeorge.com/
http://www.simmonsforgovernor.com/
http://www.sprague4gov.com/
http://www.bestcounsel.com/
http://www.timforgovernor.org/
http://www.dianetemplin.com/
http://www.billthillforgov.com/
http://www.briantracy.com/
http://www.peterforgovernor.com/
http://www.paulvannforgovernor.com/
http://www.vaughnengineering.com
http://www.chuckwalkerforgov.com/
http://www.wattsforgovernor.com/
http://www.rstengineering.com/governor
http://www.vote4woz.com/
http://www.zellhoefer.com/
The platforms range from sensible to off the wall!
It's sad to see so many conservative repub's getting suckered by not only the lib RINO's in their own party but also by the press, who are their allies in this scam.
Intriguing theory. The Dems and liberal media may already have a ton of dirt on him, but are holding it in reserve until he becomes the Republican candidate. Larry Flynt probably has full-color videos.
McClintock, on the other hand, probably has nothing salacious or terribly controversial in his background. If he did, his opponents likely would have found and used it a long time ago.
>>>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.
I think it had something to do with me stating, Arnold "needs to come clean and stop all the hollow rhetoric and shallow policy positions". You making excuses for Arnold serves no good purpose. Arnold has political associates in the state legislature and there are enough economists around to advise him on economic policy, state finances and the fiscal responsibility associated with tax cuts and spending cuts. Like JimRob said recently, this isn't rocket science. Arnold should have secured the required information and formulated a plan that was as detailed and specific as possible. As time passed, Arnold could have made corrections to his economic recovery plan. Instead, between now and recall election day, Arnold will be offering NO details and NO specifics on how he intents to get California out of the mess its in. He has not taken the "no tax pledge" either. That doesn't sound like a fiscal conservative. That doesn't sound like someone conservatives should trust.
>>>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.
Arnold has specifically said, he wants to get California out of the red, so its social welfare programs will run more efficiently. That's called highminded liberalism. Arnold has also said, he wants to bring businesses back to California, so tax revenues will increase and the states social welfare programs will then have the proper funding levels, to operate better. More highminded liberalsim.
Tom McClintock came out with his own economic recovery plan a while back. It was somewhat detailed and specific. Arnold could learn a lot from Mcclintock's economic recovery plan.
McClintock wants to cut state spending by 9.5% over 18 months. He says that will balance the budget, without increasing taxes. At the same time, McClintock would demand a "comprehensive review of every state agency and program now on the books". McClintock also wants to restore Constitutional spending limits, "restraining the growth of state expenditures to the combined growth of population and inflation".
That's a sound economic plan. Both conservative and fiscally responsible. McClintok also has a plan to address the regressive car tax, the mess surrounding California's energy contracts and the issue of California's out of control workers compensation program.
*McClintock has said:
"I'll spend the rest of my first day as Governor to personally de-fund every state agency that duplicates local or federal jurisdictions, or overlaps other state agencies or that is performing functions that the private sector could and should do anyway."
*McClintock also said:
"I believe that the only just tax is a uniform flat rate tax. Variable rates and progressive tax schedules allow one group of citizens to tax another group for their own benefit. We have watched for years as businesses have shifted the tax burden from business profits to sales and personal income taxes. Debates over progressive schedules invariably set rich against poor. With a flat and uniform rate, every single citizen is in exactly the same boat - in exact proportion to their income. Raise the uniform rate on personal income, the rate increases proportionally on businesses too."
*And finally, one more statement from conservative Tom McClintock:
""I have always thought that one of the phoniest claims in California politics is that 'I'm a fiscal conservative but a social liberal,' which always invites the question: 'How do you plan to pay for your socially liberal programs with your fiscally conservative policies?'"
Who do you think McClintock was talking about in that last statement? I'll give you one guess.
>>>I might also add that this comment was made in his Wednesday press conference. You didn't see that?
I saw the Schwarzenegger press conference. I wasn't impressed. Obviously, you were.
>>>Schwarzenegger needed to address the issues. He has.
No he hasn't. Not even close.
>>>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.
Breakup of this nation! WTF are you talking about?! You're now entering that stage of convoluted rhetoric and asinine outbursts, somewhere between the outer limits and the twilight zone.
>>>As for this being the worst judgement by any conservative in your entire life... groan. R.M., you're self-destructing bud.
There you go again. I didn't say, it was "the worst judgement by any conservative in [my] entire life". You did. I did say, "[t]his is some of the worst judgement I've ever seen from any conservative in my entire life". Big difference.
The fact is, I'm not the one saying I'm gonna vote for a liberal RINO. You are bucko! LOL You're the one whose self-destructing and right here in plain sight on FreeRepublic, to boot.
>>>I've never professed to be a supporter of George Bush.... I am not going to start now.
Thank God you cleared that one up for us.
I should have repeated that I was not necessarily including you but rather the collective buzzing of the swarm of Bush Bots that infest this forum.
IMO, PresBush is a conservative and voting for him doesn't intrude on my basic conservative principles.
You think Bush is conservative uh? Well, how would you describe a president that has not ONCE after nearly 3 years in office vetoed even one bill from Congress? Or thinks it's a great idea to spend 15 billion dollars for Aids treatments in Africa while our Veterans Healthcare funding gets the knife. Or that Ted Kennedy's NEA approved voucherless doubling of the education budget is what it takes to turn the public school system around. Or that the freedom of speech squelching McCain/Feingold CFR bill is noble bill after all. Or that it is better to turn America into a police state under the "Patriot Acts" than control our out of control immigration and halt all immigration from terrorist harboring middle east nations. Or that our borders should remain wide open to the Invasion from Mexico and anyone that wants come here and squat or do harm to this country--even after 9/11. Or that it's wise to form a one-way trading relationship with a belligerent communist country where freedom and liberty are non-existent and slave labor is a way of life. Or that what America really needs in the midst of a recession is YET more One Way Trade deals like NAFTA. Or that despite our HUGE budget deficit it is necessary to one up LBJ's Great Society and Socialize prescription drugs to an elderly class that has more wealth than any other age group in the country. Or that Mexico’s Illegal Aliens should be included in OUR (soon to be bankrupt) Social Security System.
Ya know with Bush I could go on all night but the better question is:
IF GEORGE BUSH IS A CONSERVATIVE THEN WHAT THE HELL IS A LIBERAL? Some Stalinist that goes house to house and evicts people from their homes at gunpoint? Maybe that's the extreme debasement of political labels we have reached today.
Although I can't agree with his record spending levels in his first term. He does have a full plate right now.
You bet he does. And he keeps on stacking that plate fuller all the time.
OTOH, Arnold isn't even a moderate conservative or a fiscal conservative. He's a liberal RINO! Period.
Arnold is the only republican that has a chance of winning. Given the alternative he most certainly deserves a crack at the bat. If he turns out to be a RINO Sellout like Bush then he doesn't deserve to be re-elected. It's really that simple. Like many conservatives I voted for Bush and gave his campaign a lot of my time and money. Since he has demonstrated that he does not have a conservative bone in his body and wants to continue on with his Dad’s and Clinton's plan of turning America into some industry barren 3rd World ZOO I will most certainly not vote for Bush. Nor will I contribute to the republican party insanity of attempting to out Dim the Dims that defines Bush’s stewardship of this once respectable party.
Over and Out.
Thank God!
I am inclined to believe that they probably have something (even if it is mostly hyperbole), and all the main players (I include the media) know it. What we just might have for the moment is a Mexican standoff on a gigantic scale.
Remember a couple of days before the 2000 presidential election? GWB's 30 year old DUI arrest record (or whatever it was) came out a couple of days before Nov. 7, not enough time for him to marshall a press counterattack. Well, dirt is Davis' strong suit, so I would not be surprised if some kind of hit pieces are already written and waiting by the fax blaster machines, all set to go at the push of a button...
McClintock, on the other hand, probably has nothing salacious or terribly controversial in his background. If he did, his opponents likely would have found and used it a long time ago.
And that's one of the reasons he and his positions rarely get much press coverage. If Arnold drops out, the press will no doubt do a zigzag and start giving Huffington major face time, because they'll do anything to squirm out of their ostensible responsibility to present a fair and balanced view of the major candidates-- in particular, the positions of a true conservative candidate. I get a sense that the media's "Nightmare on Elm Street" is to be forced to cover a true conservative such as McClintock with no dirt on hand to throw at him...
A kick-@ss counterstrategy would be for Arnold and McClintock to carry the contest forward until the last few days, and then make a major splash by arranging for one candidate (which one, I would not dare predict at this time) to back off and endorse the other... kind of the political equivalent of a football hail-mary pass into the endzone. This would serve to help offset the almost-certain last minute media dirt bomb that the Davis/Bustamante crowd are fashioning even as we type. (It also spreads the Democrats thinner in terms of coming up with last minute dirt bombs: it would multiply their research and strategy costs by order N for N (R) candidates, if the (R)s play it close to their chest.) Something like this is what a well-oiled party might do almost as a matter of course at the state level. But this being California, and the Republicans at the state level used to having their quadrennial circular firing squad ritual, IMHO all bets are off. I just hope McClintock and Arnold are burning the telephone wires at this very moment, trying to work out what's best for all Californians, instead of what will best feed their own individual egos.
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.