Posted on 08/26/2003 2:23:28 PM PDT by churchillbuff
According to Lifesite, a Nov. 18, 2002 Associated Press article reported that Schwarzenegger describes himself as "very liberal" on social issues and that "He favors legalized abortion…and gay adoption". England's May 30 Guardian newspaper also quotes commentator Bill Bradley stating, "He's pro-choice, pro-gay rights… "
IS THIS REALLY AN ISSUE THAT FREEPERS CAN SWEEP UNDER THE RUG? SHOULDN'T WE DEBATE IT - UNLIKE ABOTION IT'S SOMETHING THAT STATE POLITICIANS CAN REALLY HAVE AN EFFECT OVER. SHOULD GAYS BE ALLOWED TO ADOPT YOUNG BOYS? IF YOU SAY NO, CAN YOU STILL SUPPORT ARNOLD?
No, they had his CHIEF ECONOMIC ADVISOR dissing Prop. 13. And that was true -- Buffett DID come out against Prop. 13. And Arnold didn't can him.
So you don't think adoption should involve any kind of intrusion into people's private lives?
Of course it should! My point is simply that the intolerant folks who pridefully call themselves 'social conservatives' are those who appear to want intrusion into private lives, and their intrusiveness, intolerance, vindictiveness and petty meaness cause people to see them as scary, to say the least. The appear the antithesis of free, desiring to control all aspects of life, even thought. They spawn the hate and disgust that fuels the fire of division.
This issue, in regard to the upcoming recall election, is a strawman, a red herring, nor does it address the issue that McC is incapable of getting the turnout needed to win. I'm laughing at the social conservatives outright panic now, but I'm sure gonna be crying when bustamante wins.
Why was Buffett his first appointee? And then ex-Gov. Wilson who raised California taxes an unprecedented level? These two guys are still with him. I can't believe California conservatives can let themselves get suckered into electing a tax-increaser, just because he's a Republican and starred in some sci-fi movies.
1. Not if McClintock locks up the conservative vote - - which ought to be a third of the electorate and could be enought to win in a fragmented election. 2. WHo's the most "pro-homosexual" candidate? Is it Arnold, Cruz or Arianna or Peter U? I don't know where these four differ on "homosexual issues" Please enlighten me.
Nothing is ever liberal enough for some of the leftist legislators. I assure you, the next governor will have more legislation sent to him to make gay access to adoption or other entres to young kids, even easier. Would you rather have that legislation reach the desk of McClintock or of Arnold?
No, I believe McClintock can win this one. It would be foolish for him to pull out so early in the campaign, before the Dems have dumped whatever they've got against Arnold --- because if they're able to take down Arnold, there has to be a Republican to pick up the pieces.
Is that because you're conservative on theological issues - or an atheist?
Can you give me an example of a social liberal who really is or was a fiscal conservative -- ie, held firm against tax increases and went to the wall to cut the size of government?
Didn't ex-governor Wilson (one of Arnold's top aides) claim to be a fiscal conservative (while a social liberal) - and didn't he raise taxes a huge amount?
Even though your statement is riddled with falsehood and expired material, what would have changed in Sacramento if McClintock had ben engaged in the same type behavior? Nothing! He's made no difference in the 20+ years he's been in and around the State government. He's not a leader, he chooses his battles poorly and he exaggerates his abilities.
Has Uberoth made a pledge to stick it out to the end? I'm not aware of any such pledge. Considering how he agreed with McClintock on many issues during the debate, I would guess that a lot of his 7% would go to McClintock if Uberoth pulled out. Also, I haven't seen a poll since Simon dropped out. I would expect nearly all of his support to flock to McClintock (I did). I would guess that McClintock is running neck-and-neck or better than Arnold if Uberoth drops out.
Why haven't there been any poll results since the debate? Allow me to speculate:
1) Arnold is a republican that the media can love. Just like John McCain. He's liberal, he loves the camera, he's colorful and he's a Kennedy. And when he screws up the state, the media will have a great opportunity to rip the CA GOP a new one. Most of the media would love it if Arnold won.
2) If the media can maintain the cover that Arnold is the only republican who can win, those who would rather vote for McClintock (like many Freepers) will cast a ballot for Arnold, as an anti-Cruz vote.
3) How long does the media have to hold their cover? About a week. Absentee ballots will be coming in shortly. They are overwhelmingly republican. And they tend to come in as early as possible.
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.