Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Arnold's corruption of Republican Party
World Net Daily ^ | 10/6/2003 | ALAN KEYES

Posted on 10/06/2003 8:23:46 AM PDT by kellynla

I have an urgent message in my heart, and I will speak plainly about it, as I feel I must. It concerns Tuesday's recall election in California. First, two unhappy facts must be faced.

On all the matters that touch upon the critical moral issues, Arnold Schwarzenegger is on the evil side. This is a fact. A mere list of the positions he supports is enough to make this plain: abortion as a "right," cloning of human beings, governmental classification of citizens by race, public benefits for sexual partners outside of marriage, disrespect for property rights against environmental extremism, repudiation of the right to bear arms – no more need be said to show that this candidate is wrong where human decency, human rights and human responsibility bear directly on political issues.

A second fact is this: Unnaturally divorced from these issues, conservatism mutates into mere immoral greed, to match the immoral lust of contemporary liberalism.

Accordingly, there is no choice in the California Recall race for people of good conscience except Sen. Tom McClintock.

But many good people – and especially conservatives in California – are in denial. They do not, or will not, see that they have but one choice.

What makes this so hard for some who profess to be conservatives to understand? Apparently, it is fair-seeming, "pragmatic" arguments that we must grasp a victory for "our party," and that it is shrewd for Californians in the present election to choose the "lesser of two evils." Let us consider the wisdom of these arguments.

First, as to our "victory." Last week, we saw Schwarzenegger does not deny habitual crude offenses against young women. Rather, he theatrically, vaguely and impersonally apologizes for them, before a roaring crowd of adoring fans, admitting neither any connection between action and character, nor any need for genuine penance or reformation. Arnold had, he says, no "intention to offend." And he "apologizes" from the stage while his hired guns blame the whole thing on a vast left-wing conspiracy. Cheers. Adulation. Let's move on.

Does this remind you of anything? The Republicans who vote for Schwarzenegger will owe Bill Clinton an apology for having given the nation the impression that they sincerely believed character to be an issue for those claiming high office.

Our "pragmatic" fellow Republicans, yearning for Arnold to be governor because of what they imagine he will do on this or that particular policy of secondary importance, seem quite willing to forget what Washington, the Father of this Republic, always kept in mind – that the most powerful education our children get is the good or bad example of those in authority.

Such "pragmatism" seeks foolishly to raise to the level of grave responsibility and high leadership in the Republican Party a man whose prominence will establish in the public mind the false notion that Republican attacks on Clinton's lack of character were simply partisan ploys. The problem with "speaking no ill" of fellow Republicans, and expressly shielding such "leaders" as this man, is that we must be ever after silent in the face of the very defects we would loudly and rightly call to account in a Democrat, a Libertarian or anyone else.

Such silence reduces all talk of morality to a cynical, partisan show – which precisely serves the purposes of those who are trying to drive every shred of moral concern from our political discussions. This outcome is an enduring defeat that overshadows any transitory victory of office-holding.

Now, as for the "lesser of two evils." It is true that we must sometimes act so as to accept something bad, intending to avoid something worse. But this truth does not apply to the California Recall for two reasons. There is not merely an acceptable, but an outstanding third option before the state's voters; and a victory for Arnold will be worse than a failure to replace the Democrats, bad as they have been.

"Republicans" like Schwarzenegger enjoying power and prestige are a worse evil than the Democrats. Because they wear the Republican label, they defuse the opposition that would otherwise be roused against the positions they take. They operate in politics as the AIDS virus operates in the body – it fools the cell into thinking it is a defender against infection, all the while silently reprogramming that same cell to work for the death of the man.

A sign of the extent of this infection is the position many who think of themselves as principled conservatives are now taking in California. Not long ago, the question facing conservatives was whether to support candidates whose commitment on the most critical moral issues was in doubt. Now many so-called conservatives are eagerly surrendering to the political triumph of a man who aggressively advertises himself as an enthusiastic liberal on the most important of these issues, the matter of life and death.

Failure to address fundamental moral issues has already brought this republic to the brink of death. The issue of abortion, for instance, does not present us with a challenge of "more or less," in which we can rest content with only marginal progress, much less accept stalemate or conduct a limited retreat. Such a strategy may well be the permanently wisest course in some economic, or diplomatic matters.

But a nation that sanctions abortion as America does now has crossed fundamentally from blessings to curses. If we do not correct our course, we live in the last era of true liberty in America. To be a moral conservative in our time is to understand this fact, and its implications for our politics. This deep truth, not ephemeral poll numbers, is what the truly practical statesman must keep in mind.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is of the party of surrender on the question of life. Indeed, he stands with, and has always stood with, the enemy. He asserts that there is a fundamental "right to choose" death for the innocent unborn. The justification offered by his collaborators for allowing such a surrender by a "leader" of the GOP, our national pro-life party, is that the evils of a Schwarzenegger victory will be less than the evils of a Davis or Bustamante victory. This justification cannot be defended by anyone who truly believes that moral issues are of critical importance.

The essential primacy of the moral issues is precisely what conservatives supporting Schwarzenegger are forgetting, for all their alleged political shrewdness. This forgetfulness suggests a profound lack of wisdom, a loss of vision of the truly big things. In these days of fateful decision for self-government, loss of vision of the end is a worse fault than the lack of shrewdness about the means.

The Schwarzenegger corruption of the Republican Party – and apparently, of a significant portion of the conservative leadership of that party – in the name of victory threatens to undermine the very reason for the party's existence.

The worst enemy Republicans face in the political realm is not the Democrats, but the power of evil that lurks in all hearts. In the context of this true reality, the decision to vote for Schwarzenegger is not a clever tactical calculation. It is a strategic blunder. Troy did not fall until the Trojans brought the horse into their city. The Greeks offered them a false victory, and so destroyed them. The leadership of the California Republican Party does not appear much wiser than the Trojans', nor, I fear, will its fate be any happier.

Why have Arnold's "conservative" supporters been so sure from the beginning that the apparent electoral weakness of McClintock, the choice of merit, was not due to their failure to support him, as they bowed before an idol of false pragmatism?

It seems that many California Republican leaders never even seriously considered the recall as an opportunity to make their real case to the people of California. As I write this, the under-funded and under-reported McClintock defeats Bustamante in head-to-head polls, with Arnold off the ballot. A vast majority in the state understands even now that Tom McClintock is the candidate most able to handle California's fiscal crisis. Californians told pollsters, by a two-to-one margin, that McClintock won the debate, that two-thirds of them also said would be crucial to their choice on Oct. 7.

The recall had providentially presented Californians with the prospect of electing a principled moral conservative statesman to handle a crisis of government fiscal and budget policy that he has spent his entire career preparing to face. McClintock's predictable surge in the polls from an asterisk to nearly 20 percent, as voters began to focus on the question of who would replace Davis, and before his widely watched victory in the debate, positioned him for a final surge to victory.

California Republican leaders could have viewed this moment of opportunity through the lens of the statesman, not of the director of sitcom casting. But instead of uniting behind the obvious man of the hour, they increasingly viewed McClintock's surge as a problem, and have done their best to sabotage it.

All the clever calculations of "conservatives for Arnold" utterly disregard the demoralizing effect of such pragmatism on those who do respect their moral obligations – voters and prospective candidates alike. Such game-playing feeds the cynical reaction that disparages stands of principle as unrealistic and impractical. It tempts those who should rally round the courageous leaders raising the standard of principle to abandon them instead. All the while, our pragmatists mouth hollow words of praise for those, such as McClintock, who have consistently demonstrated their willingness to do what is right.

Tom's supporters are called arrogant for persisting in making moral judgments. Think about that for a moment. Why is it "arrogant" to act on what human beings can know, rather than to act as if we had knowledge that can only belong to God? Is it humble to have more faith in what the pollsters extrapolate in the present, and consultants predict about the future, than in what the Lord and reason have revealed to us all as the unchanging moral truth?

We cannot know the future. We cannot even be sure of how things stand at the moment. But one thing we can know with certainty is that many California Republicans now openly prefer a candidate they acknowledge to represent evil (the "lesser" of evils, as they call it, is evil still) over one who represents what they know to be good. Only God can have full and certain knowledge of the circumstances, of who is winning and a more viable candidate. The future lies in the care of Providence. But decent men can have certain knowledge of the right, of which candidate stands for moral truth and which against it.

Instead, the "pragmatic tough-mindedness" of our strategists of Republican "victory" leaves a good, courageous and decent leader like McClintock to his own devices, and studiously avoids examining the hard consequences of that abandonment. What could still be a moment of principled Republican unity behind a candidate uniquely qualified to address the crisis in California, threatens to become instead a nationally watched step in the moral suicide of a great party.

And here the circle of surrender is completed. Conservative leaders abandoning both principle – and principled men – do so, they say, because a decent political agenda cannot win at the polls. And yet, by this very abandonment, they pursue a persistent and thoughtless course destined to ensure the very scarcity of moral leadership they claim drives them to vote for Arnold. Surely there is no foolishness like the wisdom of the proud.

So much for the strategists, and their specious arguments. Now, one brief word to the citizens.

At the end of the day, it will not be leaders, but citizens, bold to vote their consciences, who will prevail. Or, not daring to do so, who will prove the ultimate cause of defeat and disarray. No religious conservative can deny that it is a serious moral obligation of religious political leaders to stand against abortion. And yet pro-life Christians voting for Arnold would neglect the obvious corollary – that it is the moral obligation of Christian voters to support pro-life leaders, such as Tom McClintock, when they take the right stand, especially against so-called Christian politicians like Schwarzenegger, a professed Roman Catholic, who is violating this obligation of his professed faith.

This nation desperately needs leaders who have the courage and integrity to stand without apology for policies that are morally right. If we have any such leaders left, it is surely thanks to God's grace and providence – and no thanks to the wisdom of self-terminating conservatives.

I pray to God that decent citizens will choose one of the few such men left to us in this hour of judgment for California and America.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: alankeyes; corruption; gop; liberalism; mcclintock; party; republican; schwarzenneger
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 841-846 next last
To: outlawcam
Living in Texas it is easy for you to be "pure".

For those of us suffering under the devastation that Davis has brought to this state, we don't have the luxury of taking a chance that either Davis or Busted could win.
341 posted on 10/06/2003 10:35:00 AM PDT by sd-joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: Writesider
ROFLMAO:

YOU: LOL...such ignorance writ large.

Keyes was UN Ambassador when Reagan was President.

Now who's showing his ignorance?

342 posted on 10/06/2003 10:35:27 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies]

To: Hillary's Lovely Legs
but his meaning was implicit

Not from your quote it's not. Sorry.

343 posted on 10/06/2003 10:35:33 AM PDT by Sir Gawain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
But he likes President Bush! < /extreme sarcasm >

EXCERPT:

The Tovia Singer Show, Israel National Radio

Alan Keyes

November 12, 2002

SINGER: Are you going to be running for president in the next opportunity that opens, Dr. Keyes?

KEYES: Well, I'm a Republican, and I think that as I assess the situation of the Bush administration, I'm like everybody else. They don't do things--some of the things they do I don't like, some of the things they do I like. I think, on balance, this president has been strong, and I will support him for reelection. So that takes care of 2004.

Beyond that, I think it's a matter of my own sense that I never got involved in politics anyway, except as I felt impelled to stand and speak for things that I deeply cared about. If it appears that I can do some good by doing that, I'll consider it again. If not, I'll support somebody who I think is going to do a good job for the country.

SINGER: Well, you know, you've transformed so many people. You've touched so many individuals around the world. When you spoke, when you raised your voice, when you--even during the debates, we listened to you. And people were stunned by your words; deeply touched. And I know that Jewish people and those Christians who have a deep love and affection of Israel are deeply moved by your support of the state of Israel, and we'll be watching you and we'll be supporting you in your, hopefully, upcoming run for presidency for heading the Republican Party.

344 posted on 10/06/2003 10:36:43 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: sd-joe
He was NOT the U.N. Ambassador. You were not wrong.
345 posted on 10/06/2003 10:37:38 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

To: kellynla; EternalVigilance; Aquinasfan; Rabid Republican
It does look as though Mr. Schwarzenegger is able to learn. Please see the Wes Pruden article.
http://www.washtimes.com/national/pruden.htm
I'm sorry that I made a conclusion on limited information. The apology recorded in this article is much more honest and humble than the explanation he gave on the Oprah show.

I'm grateful that some one was willing to show the way to learn better.
I hope that if he is elected, conservative pro-life Republicans will support Mr. Schwarzenegger and help to teach him more about the importance of human rights.
346 posted on 10/06/2003 10:38:06 AM PDT by hocndoc (Choice is the # 1 killer in the US)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
I love to watch these arguments by so many that don't live in California and have no clue about how we have deteriorated under Davis and the fact that it would probably be worse with Bustamonte.

It's so easy to coach from the perspective of a spectator.

If I'm drowning and I see someone offering a rope, I'm not going to pass it by because it isn't exactly the type I would have chosen.

Of course the ones who would let the rope pass are often the same ones with the loudest scream as they finally go under for the final time.

347 posted on 10/06/2003 10:38:16 AM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
Hey, buddie....I am a woman.....I've been "groped".....and I know what it takes to deal with a groper...you deal with it AT THE TIME...YOU DO NOT Save it for later!!! And, if it happens at work, or with someone who influences your job, you report it.....Your really grasping here....sheesh.
348 posted on 10/06/2003 10:38:23 AM PDT by goodnesswins (Free People are NOT Equal; EQUAL People are NOT FREE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I see you fit this description to a T:

Real conservatives would probably describe the mutants in a similar fashion.

You have defended nothing rationally.

You have only blindly ridiculed what you vaguely perceive at the edges of your myopic stare.

349 posted on 10/06/2003 10:38:38 AM PDT by eskimo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 312 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance; Howlin
Did you see the post I was responding to? He said something terrible - absolutely TERRIBLE - about President Bush.

Has he gone through a radical change?
350 posted on 10/06/2003 10:39:04 AM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (I'm not perfect, but parts of me are excellent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
>> "A million conservative Republicans is not chicken feed." <<

No it is not, and I admire Keyes for his principled positions and his promoting them to the public.

However, it comes down to the fact that Conservatives ALONE do not have the numbers to win major elections.
351 posted on 10/06/2003 10:39:21 AM PDT by sd-joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 335 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
If I'm drowning and I see someone offering a rope, I'm not going to pass it by because it isn't exactly the type I would have chosen.

Excellent analogy, Southie.

352 posted on 10/06/2003 10:39:56 AM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (I'm not perfect, but parts of me are excellent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 347 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
and furthermore...."on a bus, in a park, in a crowd?" Yeah, right....Arnold goes out in the public to grope strangers.....it's bad enough that all this stuff is ALLEGED.....and your making up even more possibilities....
353 posted on 10/06/2003 10:42:27 AM PDT by goodnesswins (Free People are NOT Equal; EQUAL People are NOT FREE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 348 | View Replies]

To: sd-joe
Living in Texas it is easy for you to be "pure".

I wish I could be "pure," but I'm not in the "purest" sense of the word. However, when I am given a clear choice between something that is right and something that is wrong, I do the best I can.

That, in itself, doesn't differentiate between you and me. You are undoubtedly doing the best you can. Assuming you are, in your heart, conservative, I'm just trying to convince you that your deepest beliefs are worthwhile and right, and reason, articulately expressed, will carry the day for you, if you have the courage to apply it.

Whatever the result, good luck. It looks like the allegations against your man are taking their toll on the recall support, and you may be saddled with Davis anyway. At the end of tomorrow, we may be chiming back and forth "if only this happened," but I certainly hope justice rules the day.

354 posted on 10/06/2003 10:42:43 AM PDT by outlawcam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

To: sd-joe
Neither do liberals. And that's the point. Schwarzenegger is running too far to the left.
355 posted on 10/06/2003 10:42:44 AM PDT by B Knotts (<== Just Another 'Right-Wing Crazy')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Well, he just can't make up his mind, can he?

"I've been watching closely, and I have not seen a single serious Bush administration initiative that corresponds in reality to the agenda of liberty and of conservative principles."

356 posted on 10/06/2003 10:43:00 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Thanks for understanding. A
When I re-read the post I was afraid I should have put in a smiley face for the humourless posters.
357 posted on 10/06/2003 10:43:09 AM PDT by hocndoc (Choice is the # 1 killer in the US)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
What if it's a rope made of snakes and they bite you halfway up your climb and you fall and drown anyway? At least if your arms weren't poisoned from snakebites, you could've swam. ;-)
358 posted on 10/06/2003 10:43:19 AM PDT by Sir Gawain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: sd-joe
However, it comes down to the fact that Conservatives ALONE do not have the numbers to win major elections.

And moderate to liberal Republicans have even less electoral heft minus conservatives. That's why everyone, even Democrats, runs as conservatives. When they don't they die.

The latest example? Gray Davis. He was so arrogant he ran left; and it finished him and Bustamante.

359 posted on 10/06/2003 10:43:39 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: sd-joe
I thought I saw it somewhere. So why did Arnold drop out?


http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0501tidbits1.htm


Schwarzenegger drops bid to run for governor

Arnold Schwarzenegger is opting out of the 2002 race to become California's governor, saying his film career and family have taken precedence over politics.

"I have to be selfish at this point ... and take care of those things," the 53-year-old actor told the Los Angeles Times. "The movie projects came together. ... I have to keep up my end of the deal. It's not like it could have gone this way or that."

He said that he was not abandoning the idea of running for office as a Republican, but was only postponing his plunge into politics until his four children, ages 3 to 11, are older, the Times said April 25.

The Austrian-born former bodybuilder shares moderate views on gun control and abortion rights that match those of most California voters.

Schwarzenegger, whose film credits include "Pumping Iron," "Total Recall" and "End of Days," has two film projects in the works. He said he will focus on finishing a sequel to "True Lies" and production will begin later this year on "Terminator III."

Republican Secretary of State Bill Jones already has declared his candidacy and William E. Simon Jr., a Los Angeles investment banker, also is considering seeking the GOP nomination.

Incumbent Democrat Gray Davis, who likely will seek a second term, so far faces no serious threat from within his party.

360 posted on 10/06/2003 10:43:44 AM PDT by Rabid Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380 ... 841-846 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson