GOP has star-power dilemma: How will party use Schwarzenegger? [Kerry vs. Arnold?]

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | June 19, 2004 | Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer

[RonDog]

.

       www.sfgate.com        Return to regular view

---

GOP has star-power dilemma
How will party use Schwarzenegger?
- Carla Marinucci, Chronicle Political Writer
Friday, June 18, 2004

With less than three months to go before the Republican National Convention in New York City, a prime-time cliffhanger is in the works over whether the Bush camp will use it or lose it -- the megawatt influence and star power of California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Among the most sensitive issues is whether Schwarzenegger, a GOP marquee name, will be given a prized prime-time speaking spot at the party's presidential convention August 30-Sept. 2 at Madison Square Garden.

On the pro side: As the party's star actor, Schwarzenegger would get worldwide attention, and -- to the delight of networks -- draw millions of potential viewers to the now scripted-for-television political convention.

On the con side: The White House worries about lavishing too much attention on one Republican elected official who has shown an uncanny ability to upstage the party's star, Bush himself. A prominent role for Schwarzenegger also could anger the Republican right wing, which opposes his social views on such issues as abortion and same-sex marriage.

Ken Mehlman, campaign manager for Bush-Cheney '04, in an interview with The Chronicle, made no commitment on the specific role the Bush team expects the California governor to play, saying only that Schwarzenegger "is one of the great leaders of our party.''

Asked about talk that the White House is worried Schwarzenegger might outshine Bush at the convention, Mehlman downplayed the matter, suggesting that Schwarzenegger is one of many stars in the GOP...

[b9]

Thanks, Ron. This should be easier for you, not having two freeps back-to-back like the other would have been.

[counterpunch]

Liberal taxation and liberal spending equals liberalism. "Largesse" actually means "liberal giving". When you say government largesse, you're talking about government liberal giving, or liberalism. This applies to both social and fiscal issues and is right out of political science 101.

lar·gess also lar·gesse
n.

1.
    a. Liberality in bestowing gifts, especially in a lofty or condescending manner.
>    b. Money or gifts bestowed.

There are very few issues where restricting or not restricting social behavior through law fits into the definition of "largesse". Welfare and social programs do. Outlawing behavior based on a moral code does not.

State and federal funding of abortion clinics would fit the definition of "largesse". The legality or illegality of abortion itself does not, however.

Idiot! I never advocated electing Arnold over Bustamonte.

No, you never did, and that's just the problem. Idiot.

There is no such thing as an ideal candidate and Arnold doesn't advance the conservative agenda. Arnold advances the liberal agenda.

You have still failed to demonstrate how Arnold advocates a "liberal" agenda. Arnold is more conservative than the previous governor and the state legislature. Arnold's positions are more conservative than current California state law. So how is he advancing liberalism?

Your problem I think is that you construe anything which is not stringently conservative as being "liberal".
There is a broad middle between the two, and this is where Arnold sits on social issues.
Arnold is right in the mainstream of Californians, as well as the mainstream of the GOP.

Look. There is no common ground for you and I to agree on when it comes to Arnold Schwarzenegger. Arnold is the antithesis of Reagan conservatism.

You're dead wrong there. For someone who claims to know so much about Reagan, you sure lack an appreciation for his respect and ability for compromise. Arnold gives conservatives 80% of what they want, and that is right in alignment with Reaganism. Arnold's personal economic heroes are Milton Friedman and Adam Smith, just like Ronald Reagan. Reaganism is, and always will be, about neo-liberalism primarily, American success, and a can-do attitude, not about self-righteous castigation of sinners. Arnold exudes all of this.

Arnold's abortion stance is right in line with the very law that Ronald Reagan signed into being as governor of California. You will have to clear up this matter of cognative dissonance before you proceed any further. How can you use Ronald Reagan's name as a blunt object to bash others over the head for supporting the very laws Reagan signed?

Should GovRino wake up one day and have a conservative epiphany, I'll be there to welcome him onboard. Until such time, he remains an enemy of conservatism and a detriment to the California GOP.

The end is nigh! Repent ye sinners!

[RonDog]

LOL!

We live in a "target-rich" environment. :o)

There are ALWAYS other FReeps around here...

- THURSDAY, June 24: Kerry/Streisand fundraiser at the Disney Concert Hall
THEIR concert begins at 8 pm, OUR FReep starts at 6 pm

- FRIDAY, June 25: Michael Moore's propaganda/hit piece "Fahrenheit 9/11" premieres in L.A.
(details to be determined)

- SATURDAY, June 26: Bill Clinton will be signing "My Lies" at 10 am
- at a "black" bookstore here in L.A.

Check out THIS thread from one of LAST YEAR's Hillary! book-signing FReep:

Hillary Does Arkansas (Lying History Double-Header After FReep Report)
July 26, 2003 | sweetliberty
Posted on 07/26/2003 8:31 PM PDT by sweetliberty

Our first FReep of the weekend was in Little Rock at the Sam's Club. We were unable to secure permission to be on the parking lot, however, the kool-aid drinkers had been herded inside anyway. We actually ended up with quite a conspicuaous location on a busy road where the entrance to the Sam's is also the entrance to the Walmart next door and we were there through the evening rush and beyond.

Present were FReepers DCBryan1, Budge (in his new motorized scooter embellished with American flags), stop_the_rats, nolu chan, sonofron, gogirlgo, Travelgirl, maxplunder (formerly Don Friovinai) as Bill Clinton, sweetliberty as Monica Lewinsky, lurker Ann, stop_the_rats' husband, and Chad, a friend of DCBryan1...

-- snip --

sonofron and sweetliberty

CLICK HERE for the rest of that thread

[RonDog]

For the BILL CLINTON FReeps, I am thinking about some kind of variation on THIS classic image (by FReeper REGISTERED) - now hosted on www.strangecosmos.com:

HEY, BILL!
BRING BACK the
WHITE HOUSE SILVERWARE!

See also:

FReep BILL CLINTON:
NYC, L.A, San Francisco, Seattle, Denver, ARKANSAS, Chicago, Atlanta, D.C.

[Tamzee]

... the best way to further conservativism is to prevent Democrats from being elected ...

Not just Democrats, but liberals and RINO's too.

Yippee!!! That just leaves conservatives at about 20% of the electorate... that's PLENTY to further conservatism by overriding the entire other 80% that isn't good enough for us, right?

So tell us... what's the big plan?

[Tamzee]

We live in a "target-rich" environment. :o)

And you guys do the whole country proud :-)

[Tamzee]

reproduce your art onto a huge sign for our Hollywood FReep

That would look wonderful!!! I'm so jealous that I won't be there to see the reactions to it...

[Tamzee]

I forgot about John Stoos... the left would have used his name and writings to market McClintock as a religious extremist. We would have been slaughtered.

[Reagan Man]

I offered you an easy way out, but you didin't take it. Oh well.

>>>The legality or illegality of abortion itself does not, however.

Another definition of largesse is an "extremely liberal generosity of spirit". That clearly defines what we have today. An arm of the federal government, specifically, the Supreme Court, have taken that generousity of spirit and through their 1973 decision, sanctioned the killing of unborn human life. You pro-aborts are something else.

>>>You have still failed to demonstrate how Arnold advocates a "liberal" agenda.

Wrong. I've given you specifics. If you choose to ignore the details I supplied, there's not much I can do about it.

>>>Arnold is more conservative than the previous governor and the state legislature. Arnold's positions are more conservative than current California state law. So how is he advancing liberalism?

Politically, Arnold is left of center. When you start out on the political left and move towards the center, thats called being less liberal, not more conservative. If you can't grasp that simple example of logic, you're in bigger trouble then I thought. Two issues that define liberalism, are abortion and the RKBA. Arnold is in sync with both. He's pro-choice, he supports extension of the AWB and he's not ambiguious about either issue. Arnold also has no intention of cutting income taxes or reducing spending. Once again, he's increased the budget by $4 billion. Nuff said.

>>>Your problem I think is that you construe anything which is not stringently conservative as being "liberal".
There is a broad middle between the two, and this is where Arnold sits on social issues. Arnold is right in the mainstream of Californians, as well as the mainstream of the GOP.

The American political spectrum is diverse, but the political center isn't as big as you think. If you call yourself a conservative, you're probably a Republican or independent. If you call yourself a liberal, you're probably a Democrat. There are exceptions though. Moderates exist on both sides and wishy washy centrists are smack in the middle.

I don't mean to repeat myself, but you leave me no choice. On social issues Arnold calls himself a "social liberal". Period. Now, that may place Arnold in the mainstream of Californians, but out here in fly over country, Arnold's way left of the mainstream.

>>>For someone who claims to know so much about Reagan, you sure lack an appreciation for his respect and ability for compromise.

Again, I have to repeat myself. Reagan compromised as a last resort and never sold out his principles. Reagan was always a principled conservative and a pragmatic politico.

>>>Arnold gives conservatives 80% of what they want...

Bull. 25% at best and that's being generous.

>>>Arnold's personal economic heroes are Milton Friedman and Adam Smith, just like Ronald Reagan.

Reagan followed the teachings of Smith and the advice of Friedman. Arnold pays lip service to both and nothing more.

Neo-liberalism?!

Never heard Reagan called a neo-liberal. Reagan was a traditional conservative and a republican.

>>>Arnold's abortion stance is right in line with the very law that Ronald Reagan signed into being as governor of California. You will have to clear up this matter of cognative dissonance before you proceed any further. How can you use Ronald Reagan's name as a blunt object to bash others over the head for supporting the very laws Reagan signed?

First off, there is no inconsistency. Ronald Reagan moved on. His position on abortion developed over the years. From the second half of the 1970`s, until his recent death, Reagan was a strong pro-lifer. You're attempt to equate a position Reagan took prior to Roe V Wade and apply it in todays reality, is pure historical revisonism.

I've come to the conclusion, you're a smart aleck and not the brightest bulb in the pack either.

[counterpunch]

You are dismissing 40% of all Republicans.

>>And you're dismissing 60% of all Republicans.
>>Are you really so obtuse that this escaped your notice?

Actually, I'm dismissing a mere 28% of all Republicans, and an even smaller 22% of all voters, according to the recent CBS poll.

You are actually dismissing 70% of all Republicans, and 77% of all voters.

ABORTION SHOULD BE:

Generally available
39%
Available, but with stricter limits than now
38%
Not permitted
22%


PARTISAN DIFFERENCES ON ABORTION
Abortion should be...

Generally available

Democrats:
43%
Republicans:
29%
Independents:
42%

Available, but with stricter limits than now

Democrats:
35%
Republicans:
41%
Independents:
38%

Not permitted

Democrats:
21%
Republicans:
28%
Independents:
18%

Arnold belongs as a keynote speaker at the GOP convention, precisely because he fits the GOP majority view.
Majority of GOP don't support pro-life agenda

[counterpunch]

When you start out on the political left and move towards the center, thats called being less liberal, not more conservative.
Oh, the incomprehensible, inexcusable, tortured logic.

Neo-liberalism?!
Never heard Reagan called a neo-liberal. Reagan was a traditional conservative and a republican.

Clearly you've never heard of a lot of things that you should have. Also, you didn't follow the LINK that I provided.
I expected as much ignorance, which is why I provided it the first time.

Your lack of knowledge and the sheer ignorance you have demonstrated here disqualifies the rest of your post from even a response.
Really, it disqualifies you from further participation in this discussion, though I'm sure that won't stop you.

[Reagan Man]

>>>Oh, the incomprehensible, inexcusable, tortured logic.

Your rhetorical reply seems tortured. LOL Have you always had this much trouble comprehending the english language?

>>>Clearly you've never heard of a lot of things that you....

I saw your link. I know what a neo-liberal is. Reagan was no neo-liberal. Reagan was a traditional conservative and a republican.

I expected as much ignorance...

You are the epitome of ignorance. On this entire thread, you've tried to redefine who Ronald Reagan was and who Arnold Schwarzenegger is. You've tried to bend and shape Reagan to form to your leftwing political ideology. Sorry, it didn't work. And your efforts to make Arnold into a cosnervative are laughable! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

The truth is, you've disqualified yourself.

[counterpunch]

You've tried to bend and shape Reagan to form to your leftwing political ideology.

Neo-liberalism is the antithesis of left-wing.

"Left-wing" is an economic philosophy. It is Marxism-socialism. "Right-wing" is neo-liberalism.

I know what a neo-liberal is. Reagan was no neo-liberal.

Really?

[Excerpted from Wikipedia]

Neoliberalism is a political philosophy and a political-economic movement beginning in the 1960s -- and increasingly prominent since 1980 -- that de-emphasizes or rejects modern, New Deal, or statist liberal doctrines, focusing instead on achieving progress and social justice by more free-market methods, especially an emphasis on economic growth, as measured by changes in real gross domestic product. Because of close association between this philosophy and neoclassical economics, and confusion with the overloaded term "liberal", the term neoclassical philosophy is advocated by some.

The term neoliberalism does not mean a new version of the "liberalism" of the modern period -- that is John Dewey, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt or the Liberal Party of Great Britain, but of classical "liberalism" as it was understood in the 19th century -- the establishment of a stable medium of exchange in the gold standard, and the reduction of localized rules, regulations and barriers to commerce. This philosophy justified and encouraged the "first era of globalization" which came to an end with the shocks of the First World War and the collapse of the Gold Standard (just as neoliberalism is associated with the "second era of globalization" after World War II). "Liberalism" in the classical sense is still the meaning of the word in many nations, including most of Latin America.

The neoliberal "policy revolution" may have started with the violent ouster of the social-democratic government of Salvador Allende in Chile by General Augusto Pinochet and the U.S. government. But it culminated with the Reagan government in the United States and that of Margaret Thatcher in Britain, along with the fall of the Soviet Union and the fading of social democracy as alternatives to unbridled capitalism. These governments not only shifted their own countries' policies toward laissez-faire (with the major exception of Reagan's deficit-spending policies) but used their control of the major Bretton Woods institutions to impose their policies on the rest of the world. So nowadays, neoliberalism is generally seen as synonymous with the "Washington Consensus," the dominant policy view at the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the U.S. Treasury Department at the end of the 20th century and the start of the 21st.

[End excerpt]

"...it culminated with the Reagan government in the United States..."

Tell me again that you know what neo-liberalism is, or that Ronald Reagan was not a neo-liberal.

[Tamzee]

It's an immense pleasure following your posts... thank you :-)

[Reagan Man]

You back for some more?! LOL

Yes, the term neo-liberal is very fashionable with all you liberal Republicans, aka. "new" liberals.

No matter how you attempt to spin it, you can't make Reagan into something he's not. At the heart of Reagan was a principled conservative Republican whose pragmatism was part of his traditional values and beliefs. Reagan was strong on defense, big on tax cuts&tax reform, he supported limited government and he was a pro-lifer to his core. Reagan respected the rights of the unborn.

Stop trying to morph Reagan into something he's not. Reagan's legacy is that of a traditonal cosnervative and a republican.

[L.N. Smithee]

He's what I would consider a social moderate. A social moderate tolerates the gay pride parade. A social liberal joins in.

Which is why the rumored Dump Cheney-Get Giuliani move is a non-starter.

[counterpunch]

Well now you've just become redundant. Your insitance that you're winning and utter denial that you have been soundly defeated reminds me a bit of the Black Knight from Monty Python's Holy Grail.

Tis but a scratch... just a flesh wound! I'm invincible!

[counterpunch]

Yes, the term neo-liberal is very fashionable with all you liberal Republicans, aka. "new" liberals.

[from Wikipedia, yet again]
The term neoliberalism does not mean a new version of the "liberalism"
[End]

How many times must I club you over the head with your own severed arm?

[counterpunch]

At the heart of Reagan was a principled conservative Republican whose pragmatism was part of his traditional values and beliefs. Reagan was strong on defense, big on tax cuts&tax reform, he supported limited government and he was a pro-lifer to his core. Reagan respected the rights of the unborn.

That sounds like you're describing John F. Kennedy, to me. And for good reason. Kennedy was the last president to enact a tax cut prior to Reagan. He was also everything else you listed. And he was even considered a "liberal" at that time.

In fact, prior to Ronald Reagan, "traditional conservatives" were all students of Keynesian economics.
Ronald Reagan broke the mold. He fashioned a new kind of conservative movement, centered on the neo-liberal economics of Milton Friedman. He was considered a radical by the old guard of the "traditional conservative" Republicans. He was dismissed as not a serious contender by the Nixon-Ford party establishment.

[Reagan Man]

What have I been soundly defeated at?

Not adhereing to a certain definition of neoliberal, doesn't mean I've been soundly defeated.

When I saw the term neoliberal, like any good student of the english language, I looked it up. Here's what it said:

English Dictionary

Computer Dictionary

Thesaurus

Dream Dictionary

Medical Dictionary

Search Dictionary:

NEOLIBERAL: Dictionary Entry and Meaning

Pronunciation:			n`eeowl'iburul
Matching Terms:			neoliberalism
WordNet Dictionary
	Definition:		[n]  a liberal who subscribes to neoliberalism [adj]  having or showing belief in the need for economic growth in addition to traditional liberalistic values
	Synonyms:		liberal
	See Also:		liberal, progressive

 

COPYRIGHT © 2000-2003 WEBNOX CORP.

HOME | ABOUT HYPERDICTIONARY