Posted on 09/17/2003 1:44:36 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
A picture hangs on my office wall that reminds of the glory years of the Reagan Revolution. It shows the White House team entry in the D.C. Nike Challenge from 1985. The six participants include Dick Hauser, then Deputy Counsel in the White House; John Roberts – newly confirmed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and then a young White House lawyer; and me, also a young White House lawyer. The captain of the "White House V-toes" was Pat Buchanan, at the time the Gipper's communications director.
Whenever a visitor's eye turns to the picture, I point to Pat and say, there's the man who put Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer on the U.S. Supreme Court. Only the politically inclined get it: Pat Buchanan's primary challenge to President George H.W. Bush in 1992 bled the incumbent and opened the door to Perot. Perot, of course, put Clinton in the White House, and Clinton put those justices on the highest court.
Buchanan fans sputter a lot when they hear this recounting of history, and many splendid arguments follow. They protest too much, the Pat people do, because of the impulse to disguise guilt with vigorous and emphatic denunciations. Facts, to quote Reagan quoting Lenin, however, are stubborn things. Buchanan wrought what he wrought, and honest accounting requires that the two Clinton appointees be put credited to Pat's legacy ledger. So much for the pro-life platform upon which Pat has long stood. There is no doubt that he sincerely believes in the platform – but there is overwhelming evidence that the unborn would have been far better off had Pat never launched a public career.
This history becomes relevant as the California recall vote draws near. Like Pat, Tom McClintock is a smart, talented and principled public man. Like Pat, Tom is supported by a legion of dedicated, energetic activists. Like the Buchanan campaign of 1992, the McClintock campaign of 2003 thinks it has momentum, a mirage created wholly by an elite media eager to wound a Republican front-runner. A decade ago, that front-runner was President Bush; these days it is Arnold.
And like the Buchanan campaign of 1992, the McClintock campaign of 2003 is playing the role of unwitting pawn of the Democrats to a perfection.
It will not be clear for some years what the real costs of the McClintock candidacy will be. The GOP is already damaged in California, but the real disaster will arrive only if Cruz Bustamante replaces Gray Davis, winning the second part of the California recall with a margin less than the total number of votes garnered by McClintock.
The die-hards ought to think about Breyer and Ginsburg as they launch rhetorical salvo after rhetorical salvo at Arnold. These attacks are very similar in tone and detail to those hurled by the Buchananites against the elder Bush in 1992. Whether they will result in the declaration as unconstitutional of such laws as a ban on partial-birth abortion remains to be seen, but Pat Buchanan clearly didn't set out to destroy such protections with his candidacy of 1992.
But he did. What will the McClintock ledger show a decade hence?
This, IMO is the worst problem confronting the state & is the worst thing any governor could do.
That one statement has settled this issue for me.
I am a diehard, and I do indeed think about Breyer and Ginsberg and I blame Clinton who appointed them. Had GWH bush won in 1992, he might very well have appointed Breyer and Ginsberg, himself.
Arnold the liberal should not be geting support from any Republicans. Setting aside ones principles and voting for someone so far left of center, isn't my idea of winning anything. California continues its leftward slide into a financial and moral cesspool and electing Arnold will only accelerate that slide.
If Ronald Reagan could speak out he would be appalled at the direction his home state has taken and he would be ashamed at the behavior and actions of the California GOP.
please put me on the Hewitt ping list. ThanksYou are now ON my "Hugh Hewitt" PING list.
To see the threads to which I (and others) have posted a reply "To: Hugh Hewitt" - click here:Hugh is not actually registered to post here (at least not under THAT screen name) - but his name is registered in John Robinson's official Free Republic "bump list" register - so that it appears with an asterisk when you post to him, as I did in THIS reply.
You can therefore easily find all of the threads that have marked for Hugh's attention - by clicking here.
Arnold the liberal should not be geting support from any Republicans. Setting aside ones principles and voting for someone so far left of center, isn't my idea of winning anything. California continues its leftward slide into a financial and moral cesspool and electing Arnold will only accelerate that slide.
Indeed. Bears repeating.
That's cool. This thread needs extra bumps anyway !! :O)
Like the other editorial (Investor''s Daily?)That would be:
Gov. Schwarzenegger [IBD Editorial Endorsing Arnold]
Posted by snopercod
On 09/13/2003 1:37 PM PDT with 112 comments
Investor's Business Daily ^ | September 15, 2003 edition | staff
True .. but I doubt many will get what Hugh is getting at
I cannot believe the folks that would sabotage California and vote for McClintock, giving way to someone that would be no better than and likely far worse than Grayout Davis. And the principled McClintock sticking to his guns instead of bowing out and reaping the likely political fruit for later on. What a guy !!Maybe it's a GOOD thing that the 9th Circus Court is trying to stop this !! < /sarcasm >
IBD jumping on board too, huh ? I didn't know that. Thanks ! ...
You know this for a fact huh?
Clarify part of that post ...
I cannot believe the folks that would sabotage California and vote for McClintock, giving way to someone that would be no better than and likely far worse than Grayout Davis [Cruz Bustamante].
Some of us totally 'get' what Hugh is 'getting at'.
He's cynically trying to tar all supporters of Tom McClintock with the Pat Buchanan brush.
Disgusting tactics, and very likely to backfire badly on him, the GOP, and even the Schwarzenegger campaign.
"Okay.LOL. Not quite, EV.Quote:
'I am an extreme liberal on social issues.'
That is his full quote.
But it doesn't matter..." - EternalVigilance
Sorry to have the FACTS get in the way of a good rant, but here is what the fair and balanced Associated Press reporter actutally wrote, in context.From:
Arnold is wrong on just about ALL of the issues that I care about, but he **is** able to help us take out the Gray Davis/Cruz Bustamante machine, so for now we must deal with him.California GOP's Future May Rest in the Hands of the 'Terminator':
SHOWDOWN AT MEATHEAD CENTRAL
AP ^ | Published: Nov 19, 2002 | Erica Werner Associated Press Writer
Posted on 11/18/2002 10:59 PM PST by Cinnamon Girl
LOS ANGELES (AP) - He has been a genetically engineered twin and a pregnant man, a barbarian and a spy, a kindergarten cop and a killer. Now some Republicans are casting Arnold Schwarzenegger as the next governor of California.
Fresh from the Election Day success of a $550 million education measure that he sponsored, the actor has become perhaps California's most promising GOP candidate - even though he is not yet running for anything.
"Arnold Schwarzenegger would do a tremendous amount to reinvigorate the party itself and the image of the party to most Californians," said Brian Todd of Bakersfield, a delegate to state party conventions.
The body-builder-turned-action-hero deflects questions about his political ambitions, but many Republicans expect - and hope - he will run for governor in four years.
The Austrian-born actor considered seeking the nomination against Democratic Gov. Gray Davis this past year. Supporters launched a "T2 in '02" movement, and T-shirts with the slogan were snapped up at the party convention in February. But Schwarzenegger decided not to run, citing his contract to film "Terminator 3," set for release next summer.
Instead, he drafted, funded and starred in TV commercials for Proposition 49, which dedicates as much as $550 million annually to before- and after-school programs. The measure passed by a wide margin earlier this month.
America's most successful actor-turned-politician, Ronald Reagan, blazed the trail a generation ago. Before becoming governor of California and then president, Reagan made the transition into politics as president of the Screen Actors' Guild and a spokesman for General Electric. Other celebrities who have switched to politics include former Carmel Mayor Clint Eastwood and Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura.
Schwarzenegger's name, wealth and potential to appeal to Democrats and moderates make him an attractive candidate in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans 45 percent to 35 percent.
"It's pretty clear that right now Schwarzenegger is a strong early front-runner for the nomination," said GOP consultant Dan Schnur. "Proposition 49 was the first primary of the 2006 governor's race if Arnold Schwarzenegger wants it to be."
Schwarzenegger, 55, told The Associated Press: "To me it's a great honor to be considered for those kind of things. I think it's great people say, 'He's the ideal candidate' or 'He can win.' Obviously, it's much better if people say that than if they say the opposite. But I don't have a plan like that."
Republican state Sen. Tom McClintock was viewed as a potential rival in 2006, but he conceded defeat Monday in the state controller's race. The move gave Democrats control of all statewide offices for the first time since 1882.
If Schwarzenegger runs, he could have the advantage of a Democratic field divided among four or five of the Democrats' statewide officeholders.
Another Democrat mentioned as a contender has been actor-director Rob Reiner of "All in the Family" fame, raising the prospect of a Terminator vs. Meathead matchup. But Reiner associates say he has no plans to run.
There are obstacles between the Terminator and the Republican nomination. GOP primaries in California tend to favor conservative candidates, and Schwarzenegger describes himself as "very liberal" on social issues. He favors legalized abortion, some gun control measures and gay adoption. His wife, Kennedy cousin Maria Shriver, is a Democrat...
CLICK HERE for the rest of that thread
As I posted elsewhere, voting for Arnold is like doing brain surgery with a blunt instrument:It isn't PRETTY, but we have NO CHOICE, and the patient will die if we do not attempt SOMETHING.
"It was George HW Bush's broken tax pledge."
Wallet over country, the excuse for eight years of Bill, and the definition of "conservatives" to some.
Selfish, "me first", "mymoneymymoneymymoneymymoney" whine, and they call it "principles" to feel better about themselves.
They dare call themselves a "base"?
I think not.
If George HW Bush's loss is no fault of Buchanan's, then McClintock's failure to lead is equally McClintock's fault, not Arnold's.
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.