ON FREEPERS AND CALIFORNIA

I was recently directed to FreeRepublic by my Dad, who has been using it as his primary source of news for quite awhile now. I've been reading it extensively now for a month or so, picking up on familiar names, starting to understand the nuances and the lingo. I'm even able to recognize people by their previous views and predict which ones are going to respond in which way. It's a really fun exercise in getting to know new people.

As I come up to speed in this medium, however, it's amazing to me how quickly some of the forums degenerate so quickly into derision, name calling, and rhetoric. The gubernatorial recall race in California, for example.

In every related forum that I've read, the respondents can best be classified into three groups of people: Liberals, "pragmatic" conservatives, and "principled" conservatives. I haven't read much, if anything, from actual liberals here, but it's amazing how quickly the other two groups label each other as liberals. Here's my take on how the groups are actually divided:

Liberals

"Pragmatic" Conservatives

"Principled" Conservatives

My Two Cents

I tend to automatically identify myself as a "principled" conservative. My Dad is a VERY principled conservative. After watching events in California unfold, however, I've found myself drifting over into the pragmatic end of things, much to the dismay of my Dad.

California has been dragged inexorably toward the left by the liberal establishment. California has always been a strong-bed for liberalism in this country, so that's not much of a surprise. But what strikes me about this migration is that it's been slow and steady. Californians didn't suddenly wake up one day and exclaim, "Today, let's elect Vladimir Lenin as our leader!" No, it was a gradual, incremental process.

Now I could say something really derogatory about liberals like: "Sure! They can compromise their principles and elect progressively more liberal, moderate Democrats because they have no principles." But I don't believe that to be the case. I DO think, however, that they have taken a more reasoned, far-sighted approach to politics than we have been able to. They understand the old axiom that it's much easier to boil frogs when you turn the heat up slowly.

I think Republicans need to learn this lesson. Instead of suddenly reaching to the farther right and selecting a candidate that represents the ideal of conservative values, we need to recognize that it took a long period to get to where we are now, and the road back is not going to be traveled instantaneously either. Additionally, as we've slowly drifted left, the lines distinguishing what's moderate and what's considered extreme have also drifted left. 20 years ago, Tom might have been considered a moderate candidate. Heck, most Democrats of 50 years ago would be considered Republicans today.

Complicating matters is that "principled" conservatives are being forced to choke down another issue: If Arnold wins, he's either going to win again in the next election, or he's going to lose to a Democrat. There is no apparent way for another, farther-right conservative to nose into the process anytime soon. In fact, many "principled" conservatives would argue that as we keep electing moderate Republicans, it'll become harder and harder to introduce a true conservative candidate.

On the Rantings

Arnold: Despite my misgivings about your stand on some core issues, the advisors you're surrounding yourself with, and the way you've conducted yourself in the past, we're counting on you to steer the state of California back toward its former glory.

Tom: I admire your principles and your moral will. I hope we can figure out a way to allow you to represent our values, if not in 2006, or in this venue, then certainly again in the future.

To the rest of the conservatives (myself included), I guess I'd say this: We all believe in something, we all make decisions, we all get frustrated at other people who hold different views from ours; but we all want basically the same thing in the end. Intelligent, civilized people can disagree without over-the-top rhetoric, and without burning too many bridges.

Excellent first post (I think)! You and I are in the same SUV, or we have two of them pointed at Davis and Cruz Busta Our Wallets! Your summary needs to be repeated:

"Arnold: Despite my misgivings about your stand on some core issues, the advisors you're surrounding yourself with, and the way you've conducted yourself in the past, we're counting on you to steer the state of California back toward its former glory.

"Tom: I admire your principles and your moral will. I hope we can figure out a way to allow you to represent our values, if not in 2006, or in this venue, then certainly again in the future.

"To the rest of the conservatives (myself included), I guess I'd say this: We all believe in something, we all make decisions, we all get frustrated at other people who hold different views from ours; but we all want basically the same thing in the end. Intelligent, civilized people can disagree without over-the-top rhetoric, and without burning too many bridges."

Excellent:

Just the thoughts of Arnold and Tom must be driving the rats of California into a deeper drug induced depression. Let send them into terminal depression this Tuesday!

Lets kick Davis out this Tuesday and make our guys #1 and #2!

Welcome to Free Republic, Egon.

This coming Tuesday we need to make the Rats really big losers!

#1. We need to vote/drop kick Davis out of office with a resounding margin!

#2. We need to vote for our guys to make them #1 or #2 in this race with Cruza Busta Our Wallets a brunt out flash in the rat pan.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/994615/posts

CA: Democratic Party will be the biggest loser
The Long Beach Press Telegram ^ | Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 10:08:34 AM PST | Jill Stewart

Posted on 10/03/2003 11:03 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

The only things that can be predicted at this point in the frantic final days of the race to recall Gov. Gray Davis are that panic reigns inside the camps that are losing, fur will now fly with gobs of flesh attached, and the losers won't just be the three men who voters reject as governor.

The new Los Angeles Times Poll, which echoes the recent Gallup-conducted poll for CNN-USA Today, shows something truly intriguing besides big support for recalling Davis next Tuesday.

The poll indicates that the "progressive" agenda Davis and the AFL-CIO union honchos believed Californians would back -- whose essential message was higher taxes to support burgeoning state welfare programs, softer treatment for illegal immigrants and minimal cuts in the bureaucracy -- failed miserably. Two key findings stand out, beyond 56 percent support for recall, and Schwarzenegger's solid 40 percent to 32 percent lead over Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante.

First, groups that might have warmed to the images Davis projected -- Davis arm-in-arm with the crowd from the failed bilingual education movement as he signed a bill giving licenses to illegal immigrants, Davis promoting his vastly skyrocketing expenditures for health insurance for the children of working parents -- had second thoughts.

The Times poll says two out of 10 liberals now want to oust Davis, as do 54 percent of women, union members, and the elderly, and 53 percent of voter-rich Los Angeles County. Democrats are defecting to Schwarzenegger so fast we may need a new term -- not the Reagan Democrats but the Recall Democrats.

Second, California voters don't want social conservative state Sen. Tom McClintock as governor, but they nevertheless accept much of his conservative message.

How else to explain the 62 percent approval rating for McClintock? And a stratospheric 75 percent of them said he had the integrity and character to do the job. About 62 percent said that about Schwarzenegger, but only 48 percent said it of Bustamante -- a comment on his entanglements with Indian gaming money.

One clear message from this poll is that Californians don't much like the leftist slant gripping Sacramento Democrats, which just resulted in a raft of new job killer anti-business bills. The approval rating for McClintock and the 63 percent disapproval of the driver's license law bill should strike fear into legislators who fought budget cuts and pushed for bloated state spending.

The media have focused on the horse race, but a larger struggle is afoot here. California has not seen a battle for power like this since 1966, when Republican neophyte Ronald Reagan wrested the governorship from longtime Democratic Gov. Pat Brown.

For nearly a decade, the far right has trapped the Republican Party in a murder-suicide soap opera, putting forth right-wing candidates for statewide office who can't win elections. The far right, which is better-organized and willing to fight dirtier than Republican moderates, has crippled its party. The Democratic Party of California has benefited enormously. The party has risen to its greatest power in more than 20 years. The last thing partisan Democrats want now is a moderate Republican governor who could tame the ultra-conservative tail that wags the dog in the California Republican Party.

Schwarzenegger, as governor, would pursue moderate policies even as he pursued fiscal conservatism. That means moderate Republicans, who fled their party, would come back to the fold. The Democratic Party could be taken on.

So, no, this ain't just about Arnold and Gray. These clashing tectonic political plates are the reason why former President Bill Clinton urged Davis nearly two years ago to declaw moderate Republican Richard Riordan, former mayor of Los Angeles.

Clinton, although a purported friend of Riordan's, advised Davis to trash Riordan in an unprecedented Democratic expenditure during a California Republican primary. It worked, and Riordan lost miserably to conservative Bill Simon. So Davis is panicking. My, how that changes a man. Davis refused to face the other candidates in the debates to which he was invited. Now Davis is demanding Schwarzenegger debate him, and the Davis and Bustamante camps have begun to trade insults with one another.

The only thing Davis or Bustamante can hope for is something with which to taint Schwarzenegger. But they'd have to top the Oui magazine article, shrugged off by many voters.

The fear among Democratic leaders is palpable. They watch helplessly as the Republican Party in California undergoes a transformative moment, in which its members put aside ideology and social concerns to go all pragmatic.

After what Davis did to Riordan, the Democratic Party believed it would enjoy years of control in Sacramento. Davis and the Democratic majority moved further and further left to appease unions and others -- but the populace didn't. Now the Democrats have to find a way, with just a few days left, to hang onto to their brass ring.

Jill Stewart is a California TV, radio and print political commentator, who can be reached at www.jillstewart.net.

Excellent comments.

My biggest frustration with the recall posts over the past two months is that the "principled" conservatives think they have a corner on the definition of "conservative." I suppose it's because conservatism has become as broad and as widespread as it is that there are many different "flavors" or hues of conservatism. The "principled" ones ought to be glad for this, but they want to run the rest of us out of the movement, even though this would relegate conservatism back to the 20% or so of the electorate that it was during the Eisenhower Administration. So, what concerns me is someone who is a conservative, has been voting conservative for years, is all of a sudden deemed NOT to be a conservative by the "principled" ones. I've posted on FR that there are sound conservative reasons to vote for Arnold...in fact I've posted such comments so often that my fingers are bleeding from the typing. But the "principled" ones still insist that "Arnold is a Leftist...Arnold is a Kennedy." Frankly, I'm sick of it. And I'm really weary of the "blowhard" wing of the conservative movement.

But thank you for your breath of sanity in the midst of a very divided FreeRepublic.

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.