Replies

What kind of choice is that?

A choice you may face.

Schwarzenegger came to the race with a built in 10% disadvantage. His handlers knew he would never appeal to the far right in California. A volcal group that represents about 10% of the votes cast in statewide elections.

Schwarzenegger's challenge was to carve enough from the center to overcome this disadvantage. He may well do that but thus far he hasn't.

Further aggravating his problems are the moderate Republicans who are attempting to sway that 10% with pragmatic logic and humilitation. It won't work. That 10% fled their Republican Party loyalty because they are ideologues and ideologues respond neither to pragmatic logic nor intimidation. The harder they are pushed, the more their resolve in their core beliefs is strengthened.

I find it amusing that Republican moderates are now flocking to this forum and are surprised that their viewpoint, now matter how logical or pragmatic from their perspective, is not warmly received.

I'm tired of that 10%.

You know why? Because they can get 50-90% of what they want--but they turn it down, because it involves a little log-rolling, and then claim that it's all the fault of the RINOs.

Because they often have opportunities to get 100% of what they want, spoil it with their own damn bickering among themselves as to who gets the credit--and then blame the "RINOs" for their own internal feuds.

Because they will go out and deliberately work to split the vote, and then be stupid enough to brag about it--and then blame the "RINOs" for the inevitable GOP retaliation (cutting off walking-around money, et cetera), even when the hammer's being wielded by a rock-solid conservative like Dana Rohrbacher.

Because they will refuse to do the inter-election heavy work--things like organizing (hell, even PARTICIPATING in) letter-writing campaigns to stiffen GOP spines, scream bloody murder when the GOP officeholders cave because they mail is running 20:1 against their position--and then demand that they be the ones to write every bit of the platform in an election year, that they be the ones to call all of the shots in an election year, that they be given control of the money in an election year (so they can dole it out to their drinking buddies), and say that the majority of the party should tote that barge, lift that bale, and do all the heavy lifting, all while being insulted and spat on for being "traitors" and "RINOs."

As far as I'm concerned, they can grow up, or they can shut up. I don't give a damn which one they do, as long as they do it quickly.

I find it amusing that Republican moderates are now flocking to this forum and are surprised that their viewpoint, now matter how logical or pragmatic from their perspective, is not warmly received.

It's silly to describe all of Ah-nold's supporters as "moderate." Plenty of conservatives such as my self will pull lever (or punch the chad if you will) for Ah-nold without giving it a second thought.

Most of as you call them "moderates" have been on this forum for a long time and we are not "moderates" BTW! As much as all of your would like to portray us a "moderates" facts fly in the face of all of your allegations.

Been on this forum since January 1999 and find it strange that people with sign up dates that go back a few years have screen names that I have never come across before. And I have posted a lot on this forum. Just asked someone who has been here longer than I have and he hasn't seen your screen names either.

Would you care to explain why that is? What gives, don't want the rest of us to know who you really are? Would like to know who is calling us "moderates" since that couldn't be farther from the truth!