This article is a great summary of the basic argument for Arnold, and liberalism in the GOP in general - incoherent, inconsistent, and naive, full of obfuscations and implausibly rosy scenarios, and the general attitude that conservatives can forget about having a voice in public policy.Balderdash.
Show me the error of this author's ways.Please start with THIS critical passage:
"...Abortion. Tom would prohibit first-trimester abortion, while Arnold would not.How is he "incoherent, inconsistent, and naive, full of obfuscations and implausibly rosy scenarios" here?If you think Tom can persuade Justices Kennedy and O'Connor to overturn Roe v. Wade, and can then persuade the California legislature to exercise its new-found power to prohibit first trimester abortions, then Tom McClintock is definitely your man.
Otherwise, there's not a dime's worth of a difference between Tom and Arnold on the issue of abortion..."
Maybe he cannot pursuade the justices, but he would have vetoed the bill to "protect the sancity of a woman's right to choose" in the State of CA signed by Davis.