Schwarzenegger: McClintock a Pawn of Pro-Bustamante Indians

NewsMax ^ | Spet. 19, 2003 | Carl Limbacher

[Long Cut]

I will pose to you gentlemen the question I asked in post #488:

"Just think about it for a moment...if Schwarzenegger really WAS as much of a Leftist as some here claim, why would he not simply declare as a Democrat (which would gain him the acclaim and $$$ of most of his own Hollywood colleagues) and run as such? Certainly, in CA it might give him an advantage."

Respectfully, your opinions?

[Kevin Curry]

So, who really wants to win?

Is winning everything? Is winning at all costs what floats your boat? Apparently, it is.

Conservatives with their heads screwed on straight will vote for McClintock, but never for Schwarzenegger.

On the other hand, conservatives intoxicated with the lust for power--however illusory--will sober up and vote for McClintock if Schwarzenegger isn't available.

It's that simple.

[BobS]

You asked me a few questions. There's no need to get emotional about this stuff, you know. I'll support McC is he's the last one standing. But I know my vote will be cancelled out by the enemy.

Now, let me ask YOU a quesion! Would you prefer to die a "principled" death on the battlefield, or would you prefer to be the sniper who causes the enemy to scurry around and run away?

[Long Cut]

"Is winning everything?"

Winning is the goal in politics. The losers get no influence on any policy.

[BobS]

On "conservatives intoxicated with the lust for power"

A principled LOSER has no POWER to change ANYTHING. Like sex, it feels good doing it, but what is the angle AFTER?

[sruleoflaw]

THERE ARE FEWER GOP STATEWIDE CANDIDATES -- running as a Republican (Trojan Horse) is Arnold's best shot. I am astounded that people don't see Arnold for the leftist he is through and through.

Long Cut, since you have such faith in our state's little leftist, please explain to me the differences between Arnold, Cruz and Gray on some issues:

-- Proposition 54

-- The job-killing Family Leave Act

-- General abortion

-- Proposition 187 (and be real here, Arnold says it's history and he'll do nothing about it)

-- Homosexual domestic partnerships (even though the people here supported Proposition 22 to define marriage between a man and a woman)

-- Tax levels (Arnold won't sign the no tax hike pledge -- and he is tossing you all bones) When your boy Arnold hikes taxes (if California sadly elects this socialist), I PLAN TO COME AFTER THIS LEFT-WING AUSTRIAN SOCIALIST WITH POLITICAL FIRE. I have a radio show, the chance to write op-eds for two newspapers and other options -- and I plan to roast him the way I'd roast Cruz or Gray).

Dude, Arnold is a vulgar, gross human being. Any man who brags about sticking a woman's head into a toilet and calls Prop. 54 supporter "right-wing crazies" is a sick puppy.

Now tell me what you admire about our little leftist?

[Long Cut]

If I might, I'd also like to hear your opinion of the analysis presented in post #483.

Thank you for a considered opinion.

[sruleoflaw]

You didn't even touch my question.

I say the Bustamante numbers are inflated...and the Republican left standing wins -- but not necessarily if it's Arnold because I'll never vote for the little leftist.

Your analogy is flawed. I can be an attack dog against the Democrats and I'll also be an attack dog against Arnold.

[68 grunt]

I used to have great respect for some of these posters

This is the nature of a sleeper. Plant, my friends, pretend to be rightwing, but not x-treme. Not until their issue is assigned. We are incredibly infiltrated here, and have to judge each post on the character of the poster. I have no problem with any opinion being expressed, but the goal of a sleeper is to awaken at the time to do the most damage in their sabotauge.

[Long Cut]

Well, I adressed some of these points in post #488.

As for the Family Leave Act, I agree that it is bad, and anti-business. I can only say that a pro-business-and-growth Republican, like Schwarzenegger, might look at it with an eye towards fixing it properly, which Davistamante certainly will not.

As to Prop. 187, See above. Schwarzenegger voted FOR it, so he is at least comfortable with it, and would presumably not veto similar legislation. IMHO, he does not wish to open a new can of worms just yet by starting a war with the judiciary (time enough for that later), and after all, it IS slightly unseemly for a candidate to attack a judiciary descision. His recourse is to appoint different judges, if possible.

As to homosexual domestic partnerships and abortion, I can only say that these issues are not key issues in this particular recall. Homosexuals vote, too, and some of them might even vote for a pro-business candidate (many of them own businesses) if they felt no direct threat from him.

Schwarzenegger would be insane to take a "No New Taxes" pledge. He (and no candidate, for that matter) can see what natural disasters or terrorist attacks might happen in the future, especially in California. Much as "No New Taxes!" SOUNDS good to us on the Right, a candidate is wise to avoid it. He HAS stated, repeatedly, his distaste for ever-higher taxes, and that's worlds apart from what Davistamante is saying. There is no evidence he "will" raise taxes on a whim, as you say, just because he won't take a reckless pledge he might have no choice but to break. An incantation like "No New Taxes!", let's be real, means nothing from ANY politician. Bush 1 proved that.

As to abortion, I think you are painting with too broad a brush. Schwarzenegger is prochoice; this does NOT mean he favors as many abortions as is humanly possible, hyperbolic rhetoric to the contrary. In fact, he supports a PBA ban, which is WAY more than you'll get out of Busdavis.

As for Prop. 54, I confess I am underinformed about it, so I cannot in good conscience make a comment thereto.

[Long Cut]

"THERE ARE FEWER GOP STATEWIDE CANDIDATES -- running as a Republican (Trojan Horse) is Arnold's best shot."

There were FOUR Republicans running when this recall started, and NO Democrats until Bustamante jumped in. Schwarzenegger could EASILY have jumped over Busta. Sorry, no sale on that one.

Schwarzenegger has been a registered Republican for over twenty years...why, if you are correct, has he not changed parties in all that time?

[MattAMiller]

I like McClintock, I really do. But he has not been impressive the last few weeks. If he doesn't see what's going on then he's totally lost touch with reality. I understand if he's bitter about being asked to defer to Scrwarzenegger, but he's becoming less of an alternative candidate and more of a destructive interloper.

[Artist]

"Dude, Arnold is a vulgar, gross human being. Any man who brags about sticking a woman's head into a toilet and calls Prop. 54 supporter "right-wing crazies" is a sick puppy."

I've heard the gang-banging/treating women like sex toys and trash anecdotes about Arnold....but I've missed the "toilet" story. What's that about?

[BobS]

I didn't talk past you! I answered your most important question- Would I support McC?

If you want to be an attack dog, I suggest you transform into the great-looking light brown coyote who ignores me while in search of his favorite food- fat field rabbits! He knows me and tolerates me because we happen to both work on the same radar range for our own purposes:) And this is where WE are! I wonder if I should share my lunch with you? Would you wolf it down and demand my share too?:):) LOL!

I went grocery shopping this morning. While in line I picked up a fat magazine that had ALL of Arnold's pics in it. Nothing unexpected. Bodybuilders must do certain things to get rewards and recognition. Maybe he should challenge Bustymountass for his next reward- who can bench-press Clinton the longest:)

You think Arnold is a flagrant liberal. I don't think so. At worst, he's nonchalant about gays. In THIS area I think someone needs to sit him down and tell him why those butthole-surfing bug-chasers have a limited lifespan!

I am very Right! But if logic, math, strategy and insight can't convince others to think deeper, beyond their passions, I can't help. I've been through the McCain and Buchanan wars on FR in 2000 and this one has the same aroma.

Thinking of aroma, I have a rack of ribs ready for the BBQ. I may buy some beer! Hmmm. Beer mixed with Lea & Perrins and painted on those ribs has me salivating already:):)

Oh, those Bustymountass numbers are UNDER-inflated, when you add all those public -employee unions who get as muckh time off to vote!

Happy Sunday
Bob

[68 grunt]

Dang well said! Its all about the middle ground!

[FairOpinion]

I think your analysis is excellent and it's exactly right.

I think your post 483 from the other thread deserves reposting here.


POST BY Long Cut:

---

Allow me to clarify:

About 1/3 of California voters are Right-wing. Another 1/3 are solidly Leftist/Dem, and we know already who they're going to vote for...Davis, with Busta as a backup. The final 1/3 are what we would call "undecideds", "moderates", or "middle-of-the-road". It is among these voters that a winning candidate will find his margin of victory.

With this group, it is VITAL that a candidate not do anything which could drive away their votes. They are as leery of the Right as of the Left; a candidate MUST make them comfortable with himself.

Arnold Schwarzenegger's "moderate" stands on some social issues put them at ease...they want the state's problems solved; they do not want it done by someone they feel is too "far out".

Facts are stubborn things, it is said. Among this group of vital votes, it is stubborn fact that few are gunowners who know what an "assault" weapon is, and are nervous about folks that want them. Besides, they are already banned in CA.

It is stubborn fact that while some may be uncomfortable with abortion, they are similarly uncomfortable with a total ban on it.

It is stubborn fact that they may feel uncomfortable with illegal immigration, but they do not wish to be tarred with the "racist" brush, and accept it because, hey, who's going to mow the lawn and clean the house?

To sum it up, this middle ground of nonetheless vital voters is perfectly happy with the status quo, at least on social issues. What they want is a fiscal solution to the state's fiscal and budget problems which doesn't clobber them too much.

It should be obvious now why Mr. Schwarzenegger appeals to this group. Couple that with his built-in name recognition and inherent popularity, and his relentlessly positive, optimistic attitude, and you have a recipe for a win.

It is also obvious that Tom McLintock, as much as we conservatives here agree with him (I personally like his stance on guns, for instance, not that he can do sod-all about it), will scare those voters right back to their ultimate status quo...Davistamante.

These people like stability; to get them to even consider a change at all is an accomplishment. Too radical a change will have them saying "NO!"


483 posted on 09/21/2003 6:45 AM PDT by Long Cut (Even in Summertime, Iceland is COLD!)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/986033/posts?page=483#483

[Tamzee]

Just think about it for a moment...if Schwarzenegger really WAS as much of a Leftist as some here claim, why would he not simply declare as a Democrat (which would gain him the acclaim and $$$ of most of his own Hollywood colleagues) and run as such? Certainly, in CA it might give him an advantage.

I agree strongly and have been trying to point out the same for weeks. If his only interest was a lust for power as Governor and his values are really as liberal as folks are making out... he would have had a complete sweep of the election running as a Democrat.

[NittanyLion]

"Just think about it for a moment...if Schwarzenegger really WAS as much of a Leftist as some here claim, why would he not simply declare as a Democrat (which would gain him the acclaim and $$$ of most of his own Hollywood colleagues) and run as such? Certainly, in CA it might give him an advantage."

I don't have the slightest idea, nor does it matter. The few political stances he's taken are decidely liberal. The man can call himself anything he wants, for as long as he wants, but ultimately his positions determine with which party he most closely fits.

[BibChr]

See above. I'm still waiting, too. Since I've already done my part, it's your turn

[sruleoflaw]

Let's check some of the issues:

Arnold SUPPORTS the Family leave Act, just like Cruz and Gray. I've got the article.

Arnold opposes Prop. 54 -- just like Cruz and Gray

Arnold supports abortion and homosexual domestic partnerships -- just like Gray and Cruz. Forget trying to cut Arnold some slack; he's a loose guy who is happy to support the pro-aborts. I see no decency in him.

Arnold won't sign a no tax hike pledge -- and will raise taxes, just like Cruz and Gray. (I trust him like a three-dollar bill).

And let add that Bonnie Reiss, one of his new advisers is buddy-buddy with leftist Norman lear, the Christian basher who founded People for the American Way, which opposes the Bush judges and seeks to purge Christianity from society, as well as opposed the Ashcroft nomination. So we have Reiss the leftist as Arnold's long-time friend and campaign advisers who opposes everything I stand for. ANY CONSERVATIVE OR CHRISTIAN WHO VOTES FOR ARNOLD DESERVES TO HAVE THEIR POCKETS PICKED.