Schwarzenegger Candidacy Proves Republican Party's Lack of Commitment To Conservatism

Chuck Baldwin Ministries ^ | 10-03-03 | Baldwin, Chuck

[Theodore R.]

Schwarzenegger Candidacy Proves Republican Party's Lack of Commitment To Conservatism

By Chuck Baldwin

Food For Thought From The Chuck Wagon October 3, 2003 If there is anyone left who truly believes the Republican Party is committed to genuine conservative principles, the candidacy of bodybuilder/actor Arnold Schwarzenegger to be California's next governor should be enough to set the record straight.

Despite Schwarzenegger's extreme liberal views, he has won praise from Republicans nationwide. On virtually every issue worth noting, Schwarzenegger comes down on the left side of the page.

Schwarzenegger is pro-abortion, pro-homosexual rights, pro-gun control, pro-green, and pro-illegal immigration. He even said that Clinton's impeachment made him "ashamed" to call himself a Republican.

Furthermore, Schwarzenegger's immoral escapades make even Bill Clinton look unsoiled. He once bragged in an Oui magazine interview about participating in sex orgies, not to mention his repeated admissions of drug use.

In spite of his personal and philosophical discrepancies, Schwarzenegger has received accolades from notable conservatives such as Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Pat Robertson, not to mention practically the entire national Republican hierarchy.

Writing for The New York Times, Frank Rich correctly observed, "It is hilarious to watch conservatives, the same conservatives who often decry phony Hollywood liberals and their followers, betray their own inviolate principles to bask in Arnold's hulking movie- star aura so that they might possibly gain a nominal Republican victory in the bargain."

By supporting a liberal such as Arnold Schwarzenegger, Republicans demonstrate that they have no real loyalty to conservative principles. Beyond that, by supporting Schwarzenegger, they have turned their backs on a true conservative gubernatorial candidate, Tom McClintock.

However, people who are paying attention know that this is the rule, not the exception, for the Republican Party. In race after race, Republican heavyweights will throw their support behind a liberal candidate and will starve out a conservative candidate. This is not an accident or a coincidence. It is the party's plan A. The Republican Party no more desires conservatives in political office than the Democratic Party does, and people who think otherwise are only deceiving themselves.

At some point, conservatives must awaken to the reality that they do not have a political party in Washington, D.C., that represents them. They must, at some point, be willing to abandon the Republican Party and unite around a party and a candidate that will courageously and consistently promote their principles. Can I get a second for Judge Roy Moore and the Constitution Party?

© Chuck Baldwin

[South40]

At some point, conservatives must awaken to the reality that they do not have a political party in Washington, D.C., that represents them.

Anti-Bush; anti-Arnold. Good post. It shows where you stand quite well.

I suppose you'd rather we hadn't elected GWB and allowed al gore to win the 2000 election. That's what some want with their diatribes against Arnold, the only man who can beat bustamante.

[My2Cents]

Serial groping

Serial...as in two women over 30 years who can actually be identified.

[My2Cents]

Well, I guess you have no choice but to slit your wrists. If you insist in "all-or-nothing," you will get nothing. I see nothing wrong with incremental chance, and I see reasons for hope in this strategy.

[PhiKapMom]

The True Conservative Party -- sure looks like it to me from comments I have seen on here recently. Wonder if that Foundation of his is a springboard to take his supporters and bolt the Republican Party for 2004 so he can say "I Told You So" if Republicans lose in Nov 2004?

[South40]

I'm quite sure I don't agree with most anything you have to say. Don't take that personally...it's just the way it is.

[My2Cents]

I do remember that Arnold said on his announcement for candidacy that he wants to bring businesses back in CA so they can pay for welfare programs.

Excuse me, but that last phrase in your statement is a convenient amendment of Arnold's position. This is what makes me furious about the "puritans" around here...inventing comments they attribute to Arnold, and then attacking Arnold for their inventions. Very unfair of you, old boy.

[My2Cents]

Anti-Arnold and anti-Bush...Thank you for clarifying your position.

[PhiKapMom]

We have two folks on here registered in the last two weeks -- that speaks volumes to me and I value their comments -- zero, zip, nada! They are proving the point of disruptors trying to start flame wars.

[Alberta's Child]

Last week someone pointed out the dramatic difference between Ronald Reagan's political positions while he was governor of California and his political philosophy while he was President of the United States. They were so stark that you wouldn't even recognize them as the same person.

If anything, Schwarzenegger's candidacy proves that California is really beyond hope -- because a substantial number of people in that state actually consider him a right-wing threat.

[South40]

UnabashedConservative
Since Sep 24, 2003

What more need be said?

[My2Cents]

incremental chance = incremental change

[EllaMinnow]

Leftward from what starting point?

[South40]

You sure didn't, newbie.

Go back to DU.

[My2Cents]

PKMom, very seriously, there are some very conservative Christians who think that increasing social calamity will hasten the return of Jesus Christ. They consider it a plus to actually encourage social calamity, or rather, to do nothing about it.

[republicofdavis]

"he fondly calls pro-lifers "right-wing crazies.""

He did not call pro-lifers "right-wing crazies," fondly or otherwise. He is alleged to have made that statement about people who support Prop 54