Schwarzenegger Would "Do Damage" to Republican Party Suggests Political Analyst

LifeSite.net ^ | August 28, 2003

[Hildy]

LOL! This is the funniest thing I've read in a long time!

[Defiant]

Good point. Giuliani sure did damage to the GOP in NY, right? Arnold is very similar to Giuliani in his views.

Another person trying to give us Governor Bustamonte.

[Walkin Man]

As I understand it, Arnold wants to pay for programs by lowering taxes to grow the economy, much as Ronald Reagan did.

Like they say, "The Devil is in the details." I don't believe Arnie has spelled out in detail what he plans to do about anything. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm sure his demoRat advisor, Warren Buffet will have some major imput in Arnie's plan.

[LibertyAndJusticeForAll]

How is Arnold any different than Pete Wilson? Wilson was/is pro-choice.

[Ron H.]

Back your favorite up to a point and then count heads. Get behind the guy who has the best chance of winning. Hold your nose if you must. Improve once you've WON!!

The only problem with your (kind of) philosophy here is that it further weakens the core of the G.O.P. in the long run as it has done so many times in the recent past. All one has to do is look at what depths the Republican Party has already sunk to by adopting a "win at any cost", "winning is everything" or "the end justify the means" mentality. IMO Arnold is far far left of center and will govern even farther left, so far left that he would eventually damage the Republican Party.

I suspect Republicans would be better off to let the Dems keep this office for now and allow California to sink even further into the red than it is now and hit the Dems in the next normal election cycle and vett a real Republican, at least more than Arnold and his liberal entourage, at least one that is to the center or slightly right of center. Arnold is just so far left that real Republicans (conservatives) should shun him like the plague.

I also do not believe that having Arnold(Rep) as Gov. would be that much help to Bush either in '04. This is just so much hype.

[Kevin Curry]

Arnold is very similar to Giuliani in his views

Horse manure. Giuliani was a law and order mayor who cracked down hard on the "anything goes" social liberal mentality that was destroying NYC. Porn freaks, pimps, youth gangs, drug abusers and other fave social liberal victim groups got tough love with a size 12 right upside their permissive posteriors.

Arnie is more akin to the feckless, mewling Bloomberg, who is busy undermining and destroying Giuliani's legacy with gay high schools and other social liberal rot.

Giuliani wasn't perfect, but despite his rhetoric he often did the right thing.

[tpaine]

Advocating separate federal and state powers; and advocating that powers not be used to promote social [ist] liberalism are not inconsistant stands.

True enough as amended. However our RepubloCratic statists on this board advocate that state powers can be used to 'regulate/control' [read prohibit] our liberties.

Sometimes the federal government oversteps, sometimes the state oversteps (referring to the use of tax money for the promotion of social liberalism). THe fact that the federal bill of rights was designed to limit federal powers only does not create hypocracy.

Our rights in the bill of rights are not just 'federal'. They are inalienabe human rights.
IE -- The state of CA contents that they have the power to prohibit weapons. Your friends here agree. Do You?

[Scott from the Left Coast]

Well, of course it would damage the Republican Party. We certainly can't have the Republican Party actually win any races out here on the coast now. That would ruin everything we've worked so hard to establish -- you know, that absolutely perfect doctrine that we can roll out every couple of years.

[Rome2000]

Oh, ok, Steve Jalsevac says so, it must be true.

[Cultural Jihad]

Yeah, there was the Warren Buffet incident which earned him a glare and a public censure, but Arnold also has George Schultz as an economic advisor, too, which carries a lot of conservative weight. His first statements after announcing his candidacy were that he wants to grow the economy, which can only happen when the business climate improves by removing governmental taxes, restrictions, and over-regulations.

[Maelstrom]

What Republican party in NY?

Bloomberg took over from Rudy.

Bloomberg Republicans can only help Democrats

[Carry_Okie]

Too bad your premise is false.

[Maelstrom]

Well, if you *do* have a Republican Party win races...make sure it does it with a candidate who's views are those of a traditional Democrat.

I'm not sure how you can claim that as a Republican win.

[teletech]

All this bickering among Republican candidates will do is get a RAT elected. IF Arnold gets elected, and its a BIG if, he might just surprise ALL his conservative critics.

[Scott from the Left Coast]

Maybe you don't think there are any differences between Arnold's position and that of traditional Democrats-- but why don't stop talking to people who only think like you do and ask a Democrat if there are any differences (there are plenty around)?

And you'll get an earfull of differences: Starting with property taxes, car license taxes, environmental policy (no they aren't at all impressed with his statement about oil-drilling off California -- that doesn't go anywhere NEAR far enough for them), benefits for illegals, hell -- they don't even like his statements on gays and abortion -- because he doesn't go anywhere near FAR ENOUGH for them. Ask them, they'll tell you.

Arnold may be well left of you...but he's light-years to the right of Bustamante and Davis and their consticuencies. The problem with doctrinaire conservatism is that it thinks the political scale only goes off to the left about 5 inches from where they are. The Greens will certainly show you the error of your ways. And if your next Governor is not Arnold, it's going to be someone working day and night to make the Greens [not to mention the illegals] happy.

[Cboldt]

Not trying to pick a fight, or resolve the human dilemma of when an individual or group should "Declare Independence." I was calling you on your statement that a certain pair of expressions was evidence of hypocracy.

A quick lesson in the meaning of "inalienable." It means "can't be sold or given away." You can't give your life to a dead person, you can't give your liberty to an incarcerated person, and you can't take your happiness and force an unhappy person to be happy. The fact that some things are inalienable is just a fact, no matter how eloquently expressed.

Of course humans can (and do) defend themselves, sometimes using weapons. There is no way to keep a person from doing so, period. So, the "right" to self defense is inalienable. It's going to happen, no matter how much talk to the contrary.

I personally think that many states have, and certainly the federal government has, miscontrued the 2nd amendment. But "power" is a funny thing. One can't know which side has more, until the battle is over.

[GatekeeperBookman]

The title is correct. I would add that the voters who are with out logic, principles or any understanding of our needs as a nation, are doing more damage. This sad Arnold sham is reason enough to reverse the universal franchise-I recall the author of the novel, On the Beach, pen name, Nevill Shute ( http://www.nevilshute.org/ ), had a wonderful formula for voting. One's vote was weighted by accomplishment-real accomplishment.

We used to discourage fools from voting-requirements like literacy & comprehension of historical documents. Now we pay fools ( 'street money' in the NorthEast )& bus them to the polls. No wonder we see such awful results.

This also means that Hitlary may by entirely viable-we may see our end sooner than we think. You see, I would love to love The Arnold-but he is hollow & has a very dark past-it is also the behavior of the masses which frighten me.

With apologies to any who disagree-I see nothing good in The Arnold. What was his story in the 'men's magazine'-sex is fun, any sex with anyone? Was that the jist of his interview?