Discussion:
Sadly, Tom McClintock doesn't see the set-up....
(too old to reply)
Nicholas Byram
2003-09-28 05:20:06 UTC
Permalink
Sadly, Tom McClintock doesn't see the set-up....He is pleased that the
Sacramento Bee, LA Times, SF Chronicle, and various TV Stations are giving
him good press? As if that liberal media would really support him? They are
only doing it to try to divide votes and insure a Crud Bustamante victory.


case in point below...
*****

McClintock takes to the airwaves

He sticks to his message on the state budget and his vow to finish race.

By Margaret Talev, Sacramento Bee

The morning after the big debate, everybody wanted a piece of Republican Tom
McClintock, whom many in his own party have come to see as the guy poised to
ruin Arnold Schwarzenegger's bid to take over California's governorship.

So, early Thursday, the conservative state senator, known for his intense
gaze and penchant for quoting the Declaration of Independence, headed over
to what's become his second home lately, a satellite studio in midtown
Sacramento.

There, he hunkered down for hours of interviews, in rapid succession, giving
a dozen television anchors across the country what they wanted:

--A display of his encyclopedic knowledge of California budget minutiae.
--Some good, old-fashioned fire and brimstone about how his
Democratic-controlled, economically troubled state is on a collision course
with disaster.
--And an insistence that he's not dropping out of the biggest race of his
career, the Oct. 7 election to recall and replace Democratic Gov. Gray
Davis, just because some beefy movie star rival -- who calls himself a
Republican but inhabits a different ideological galaxy -- wants him to.

In four straight interviews, with Fox News, CNN, an NBC affiliate from San
Jose and finally MSNBC, McClintock stayed very much on message. From show to
show, interviewers asked nearly all the same questions. His answers were
almost verbatim.

Will he drop out? "When I make a promise, I stand by that promise," he said
again and again. "I'm in this race to the finish line."

Even at 18 percent support, as some recent polling has shown, though, isn't
he trailing Schwarzenegger and the other top candidate, Democratic Lt. Gov.
Cruz Bustamante?

"Arnold has been pretty much dead in the water," he shot back, noting how
the actor's support has been in the mid-20s for weeks.

"Meanwhile, I've gone from an asterisk five weeks ago, behind Peter Camejo
of the Green Party, and I've moved into a solid third-place position. The
wind's been really on my side. And if that momentum continues into the final
stage of the campaign, I expect to win on election day."

*****
(But the "Momentum" is in large part liberal media manufactured! Don't you
get it, Tom???)
*****

But isn't McClintock, who opposes abortion and affirmative action and wants
to slash government spending, too conservative for California?

"I had a professor in college who used to say that a conservative is a
liberal who's been mugged," he responded. "Well, the people of California
have been mugged by their government, and they know it, and they want a
change."

What does he make of the insults traded between Schwarzenegger and
independent Arianna Huffington during Wednesday night's televised candidate
debate?

"I don't get involved in these juvenile, personal bickering matches that
have been going on," he said. "I've focused on the future of California from
Day One."

If McClintock seems an old pro at the TV game, it's just an act. Add up all
the interviews he's given in two decades in California politics and it
doesn't touch the magnitude of free, national media exposure he's squeezed
out of his recall candidacy since the race began in July.

*****
(Seriously, Tom, why are the liberal media giving it to you? Think about
it...)
*****

He knows it's the ideologically moderate and politically inexperienced
Schwarzenegger whose celebrity has ignited so much of the interest in this
race -- and in the other candidates.

As far as McClintock is concerned, that makes his own campaign all the
sweeter.

To his sensibilities, Schwarzenegger is a Republican-lite, perhaps the
choice for some pragmatists but not for the true believers, he said during a
break in the studio.

"Ronald Reagan taught us to paint our positions in bold colors and not paint
them in pale pastels," he said of the former California governor and party
icon. "This is no time for Republicans to be changing their principles."

Many nights, McClintock said, his dreams become an extension of the
campaigning he's done earlier in the day. He replays conversations with
supporters who cheer him on.

"When you go through a crowd of people wishing you well, it really is a
wonderful feeling," he said. "I get the reruns when I go to sleep. I kind of
enjoy that part of it."

So far, at least, the rising chorus of fellow Republicans pressing him to
drop out is something he can only hear when his eyes are open.
Marcus Cato
2003-09-28 06:42:31 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 05:20:06 GMT, "Nicholas Byram"
Post by Nicholas Byram
Sadly, Tom McClintock doesn't see the set-up....He is pleased that the
Sacramento Bee, LA Times, SF Chronicle, and various TV Stations are giving
him good press? As if that liberal media would really support him? They are
only doing it to try to divide votes and insure a Crud Bustamante victory.
So true,and you're right, he may not see it.

I'm starting to wonder what sort of fellow Tom is. Saying do-or-die
till election day is great, but deliberately putting yourself into a
position such that you cannot alter anything without appearing
dishonorable, there is something plainly unwise there, it has a
feeling of irrationality to it. And I haven't looked at his Senate
record, but I'm told he has a very poor record of getting things
through with support of fellow Republicans. If that's true, it says a
lot.
John
2003-09-28 15:04:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marcus Cato
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 05:20:06 GMT, "Nicholas Byram"
Post by Nicholas Byram
Sadly, Tom McClintock doesn't see the set-up....He is pleased that
the Sacramento Bee, LA Times, SF Chronicle, and various TV Stations
are giving him good press? As if that liberal media would really
support him? They are only doing it to try to divide votes and
insure a Crud Bustamante victory.
So true,and you're right, he may not see it.
I'm starting to wonder what sort of fellow Tom is. Saying do-or-die
till election day is great, but deliberately putting yourself into a
position such that you cannot alter anything without appearing
dishonorable, there is something plainly unwise there, it has a
feeling of irrationality to it. And I haven't looked at his Senate
record, but I'm told he has a very poor record of getting things
through with support of fellow Republicans. If that's true, it says a
lot.
Tom McClintock is simply an irrational person not worthy of
consideration as Governor.
Dave Lister
2003-09-28 21:36:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by John
Tom McClintock is simply an irrational person not worthy of
consideration as Governor.
Well, after all, he is a Republican. What did you expect?
n***@special.qom
2003-09-28 21:45:14 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 21:36:05 GMT, Dave Lister
Post by Dave Lister
Post by John
Tom McClintock is simply an irrational person not worthy of
consideration as Governor.
Well, after all, he is a Republican. What did you expect?
With a description like that? A democrat.

HAND
Len
2003-09-28 23:17:18 UTC
Permalink
The irrationality is due to all the duplicity the media can shove at
US.
All say Tom McClintock put on an excellent, informative debate,
because he knows his stuff. Arnold and that woman put on
entertainment, as that is the stuff they know.
Vote McClintock and tell the east coast synthetic creation of the
Council on Foreign Relations we want a REAL Republican.
Tom McClintock is THAT man for Governor.
Post by Marcus Cato
Post by Nicholas Byram
Sadly, Tom McClintock doesn't see the set-up....He is pleased that the
Sacramento Bee, LA Times, SF Chronicle, and various TV Stations are giving
him good press? As if that liberal media would really support him? They are
only doing it to try to divide votes and insure a Crud Bustamante victory.
So true,and you're right, he may not see it.
I'm starting to wonder what sort of fellow Tom is. Saying do-or-die
till election day is great, but deliberately putting yourself into a
position such that you cannot alter anything without appearing
dishonorable, there is something plainly unwise there, it has a
feeling of irrationality to it. And I haven't looked at his Senate
record, but I'm told he has a very poor record of getting things
through with support of fellow Republicans. If that's true, it says a
lot.
Neal Atkins
2003-09-28 23:26:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Len
The irrationality is due to all the duplicity the media can shove at
US.
All say Tom McClintock put on an excellent, informative debate,
because he knows his stuff. Arnold and that woman put on
entertainment, as that is the stuff they know.
Vote McClintock and tell the east coast synthetic creation of the
Council on Foreign Relations we want a REAL Republican.
Tom McClintock is THAT man for Governor.
McClintock is a nice guy. He won't win. Do you want Bustamante
(Grey-skies.lite) or Arnold? Make a decision.
Roger
2003-09-28 07:30:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nicholas Byram
Sadly, Tom McClintock doesn't see the set-up....He is pleased that the
Sacramento Bee, LA Times, SF Chronicle, and various TV Stations are giving
him good press? As if that liberal media would really support him? They are
only doing it to try to divide votes and insure a Crud Bustamante victory.
You must believe in UFOs and 100mpg carburators too.
Post by Nicholas Byram
case in point below...
*****
McClintock takes to the airwaves
He sticks to his message on the state budget and his vow to finish race.
By Margaret Talev, Sacramento Bee
The morning after the big debate, everybody wanted a piece of Republican Tom
McClintock, whom many in his own party have come to see as the guy poised to
ruin Arnold Schwarzenegger's bid to take over California's governorship.
So, early Thursday, the conservative state senator, known for his intense
gaze and penchant for quoting the Declaration of Independence, headed over
to what's become his second home lately, a satellite studio in midtown
Sacramento.
There, he hunkered down for hours of interviews, in rapid succession, giving
--A display of his encyclopedic knowledge of California budget minutiae.
--Some good, old-fashioned fire and brimstone about how his
Democratic-controlled, economically troubled state is on a collision course
with disaster.
--And an insistence that he's not dropping out of the biggest race of his
career, the Oct. 7 election to recall and replace Democratic Gov. Gray
Davis, just because some beefy movie star rival -- who calls himself a
Republican but inhabits a different ideological galaxy -- wants him to.
In four straight interviews, with Fox News, CNN, an NBC affiliate from San
Jose and finally MSNBC, McClintock stayed very much on message. From show to
show, interviewers asked nearly all the same questions. His answers were
almost verbatim.
Will he drop out? "When I make a promise, I stand by that promise," he said
again and again. "I'm in this race to the finish line."
Even at 18 percent support, as some recent polling has shown, though, isn't
he trailing Schwarzenegger and the other top candidate, Democratic Lt. Gov.
Cruz Bustamante?
"Arnold has been pretty much dead in the water," he shot back, noting how
the actor's support has been in the mid-20s for weeks.
"Meanwhile, I've gone from an asterisk five weeks ago, behind Peter Camejo
of the Green Party, and I've moved into a solid third-place position. The
wind's been really on my side. And if that momentum continues into the final
stage of the campaign, I expect to win on election day."
*****
(But the "Momentum" is in large part liberal media manufactured! Don't you
get it, Tom???)
*****
But isn't McClintock, who opposes abortion and affirmative action and wants
to slash government spending, too conservative for California?
"I had a professor in college who used to say that a conservative is a
liberal who's been mugged," he responded. "Well, the people of California
have been mugged by their government, and they know it, and they want a
change."
What does he make of the insults traded between Schwarzenegger and
independent Arianna Huffington during Wednesday night's televised candidate
debate?
"I don't get involved in these juvenile, personal bickering matches that
have been going on," he said. "I've focused on the future of California from
Day One."
If McClintock seems an old pro at the TV game, it's just an act. Add up all
the interviews he's given in two decades in California politics and it
doesn't touch the magnitude of free, national media exposure he's squeezed
out of his recall candidacy since the race began in July.
*****
(Seriously, Tom, why are the liberal media giving it to you? Think about
it...)
*****
He knows it's the ideologically moderate and politically inexperienced
Schwarzenegger whose celebrity has ignited so much of the interest in this
race -- and in the other candidates.
As far as McClintock is concerned, that makes his own campaign all the
sweeter.
To his sensibilities, Schwarzenegger is a Republican-lite, perhaps the
choice for some pragmatists but not for the true believers, he said during a
break in the studio.
"Ronald Reagan taught us to paint our positions in bold colors and not paint
them in pale pastels," he said of the former California governor and party
icon. "This is no time for Republicans to be changing their principles."
Many nights, McClintock said, his dreams become an extension of the
campaigning he's done earlier in the day. He replays conversations with
supporters who cheer him on.
"When you go through a crowd of people wishing you well, it really is a
wonderful feeling," he said. "I get the reruns when I go to sleep. I kind of
enjoy that part of it."
So far, at least, the rising chorus of fellow Republicans pressing him to
drop out is something he can only hear when his eyes are open.
Len
2003-09-28 23:20:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger
Post by Nicholas Byram
Sadly, Tom McClintock doesn't see the set-up....He is pleased that the
Sacramento Bee, LA Times, SF Chronicle, and various TV Stations are giving
him good press? As if that liberal media would really support him? They
are
Post by Nicholas Byram
only doing it to try to divide votes and insure a Crud Bustamante victory.
You must believe in UFOs and 100mpg carburators too.
He believes what another Republican (Lincoln) once told his opponent
"If I call a horse's tail a leg, how many legs does a horse have?"
"No, he has only four. Just because I call a tail a leg doesn't make
it one".
As in Arnold is a Republican. NAW
Tom McClintock IS and if YOU VOTE for HIM then he will send a message
that needs to be heard like a shot around the world.
Nicholas Byram
2003-09-29 00:57:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Len
Post by Roger
Post by Nicholas Byram
Sadly, Tom McClintock doesn't see the set-up....He is pleased that the
Sacramento Bee, LA Times, SF Chronicle, and various TV Stations are giving
him good press? As if that liberal media would really support him? They
are
Post by Nicholas Byram
only doing it to try to divide votes and insure a Crud Bustamante victory.
You must believe in UFOs and 100mpg carburators too.
He believes what another Republican (Lincoln) once told his opponent
"If I call a horse's tail a leg, how many legs does a horse have?"
"No, he has only four. Just because I call a tail a leg doesn't make
it one".
As in Arnold is a Republican. NAW
Tom McClintock IS and if YOU VOTE for HIM then he will send a message
that needs to be heard like a shot around the world.
Tell it to Red Roger, Len, who is voting for Crud Bustamante. And there are
enough others like him to put that anti-American slime into office.

Len, if there were a "Recall Primary", I'd be pulling for Tom all the way.
If there were a "Recall Run-off" provision, I'd be pulling for Tom too.

But there are no such provisions.

So we must get real, and deal with the alternatives available to us, lest we
be useful idiots for the Crud Bustamantes of the world.


Nick Byram (***@hotmail.com)

"If a right-winger says the earth is round, is one supposed to disagree? One
doesn't decide the truth of an idea according to whether it is left- or
right-wing, and even less by what the left or right wing decides to make of
it....In fact, if the truth seemed to me to be with the right wing, I would
go along with it." -- Albert Camus
John
2003-09-28 15:03:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nicholas Byram
Sadly, Tom McClintock doesn't see the set-up....He is pleased that the
Sacramento Bee, LA Times, SF Chronicle, and various TV Stations are
giving him good press? As if that liberal media would really support
him? They are only doing it to try to divide votes and insure a Crud
Bustamante victory.
case in point below...
*****
McClintock takes to the airwaves
He sticks to his message on the state budget and his vow to finish race.
The only thing McCintock the idiot moron is doing is sticking it to
California.
Dave Lister
2003-09-28 21:36:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by John
The only thing McCintock the idiot moron is doing is sticking it to
California.
How is he doing that, loon?
Smitty
2003-09-30 03:20:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Lister
Post by John
The only thing McCintock the idiot moron is doing is sticking it to
California.
How is he doing that, loon?
GBTF,YL!
--
Produced by Alan Smithee
Steven M. Scharf
2003-09-28 15:36:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nicholas Byram
Sadly, Tom McClintock doesn't see the set-up....He is pleased that the
Sacramento Bee, LA Times, SF Chronicle, and various TV Stations are giving
him good press? As if that liberal media would really support him? They are
only doing it to try to divide votes and insure a Crud Bustamante victory.
Do you think that it's possible that McClintock doesn't believe in
"Republican at any
cost?" Perhaps he believes, as do many, that an unqualifed buffoon movie
star
governor is not in the best interest of the state or the Republican party,
and that
enduring three more years of Davis (or, shudder, Bustamante) is better for
the state
than Arnold. McClintock entered the race not believing that so many
Republicans (and
Democrats) would be stupid enough to elect someone that was totally
unqualified.
Had Riordian (sp?) ran, McClintock would likely not have entered the race.

In any case, Arnold is almost certain to win anyway, unless the recall
fails.
Nicholas Byram
2003-09-28 16:48:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven M. Scharf
Do you think that it's possible that McClintock doesn't believe in
"Republican at any cost?" Perhaps he believes, as do many, that an
unqualifed buffoon movie star governor is not in the best interest of
the state or the Republican party, and that enduring three more years
of Davis (or, shudder, Bustamante)
You're right about that shudder, but unfair about Arnold. Arnold did not
just go straight from acting into the Governor's race, he has been actively
involved in political movements like US English and the California
Republican Party for years now, and has been busy writing ballot initiatives
(like his after school programs initiative in the last election).

I am reminded how people dismissed Ronald Reagan as an actor turned
Governor, when in fact he had been a union boss, an editorial writer and a
Republican activist and campaigner for years between when his acting career
faded and his gubernatorial ambitions began.

Why is McClintock in the race? Probably because he can't stomach Arnold's
me-too stances on issues like gun control, the Racial Privacy Initative, and
normalization of homosexuality. (Contrary to what many in the media think,
the abortion issue has been dead and buried in California for at least 35
years now, unless you consider public funding and parental notification for
minors to be big issues).

However, you should notice how McClintock, both in the gubernatorial debate
and on the campaign trail, has refrained from going after Mr. Schwarzenegger
personally, keeing his fire aimed at the Demunists.
Post by Steven M. Scharf
is better for the state than
Arnold. McClintock entered the race not believing that so many
Republicans (and Democrats) would be stupid enough to elect
someone that was totally unqualified.
Looking at the level of support for (shudder) Crud Bustamante, as you so
aptly put it, I think he would have known better! :-)
Post by Steven M. Scharf
Had Riordian (sp?) ran, McClintock would likely not have entered the race.
Wrong. McClintock opposed Riordan in the 2002 Governor's primary race,
precisely because he found Richard Riordan to be a me-tooer and Demunist
Lite, just like Arnold. In fact, Riordan was even worse than Arnold when it
came to the illegal alien issue.
Post by Steven M. Scharf
In any case, Arnold is almost certain to win anyway, unless the recall
fails.
If I knew that was true, I would certainly vote for McClintock, but I don't
share your "optimism", if it can be called that? :-)


Nick Byram (***@hotmail.com)

"If a right-winger says the earth is round, is one supposed to disagree? One
doesn't decide the truth of an idea according to whether it is left- or
right-wing, and even less by what the left or right wing decides to make of
it....In fact, if the truth seemed to me to be with the right wing, I would
go along with it." -- Albert Camus
Steven M. Scharf
2003-09-28 19:49:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nicholas Byram
(Contrary to what many in the media think,
the abortion issue has been dead and buried in California for at least 35
years now, unless you consider public funding and parental notification for
minors to be big issues).
It's been unburied lately. If Bush is re-elected (well technically he was
never elected, so perhaps "retained" is a better word), he'll appoint at
least two more right-wing Supreme Court justices, which will ensure
that Roe v. Wade is overturned. Once it's overturned, the governor of
a state will wield a lot of power on this issue.

At first I was considering a vote for McClintock despite his stance on
social issues. The abortion thing really doesn't worry centrists of either
party, but his stance environmental issues worries about everyone.

I'm just praying that the recall fails. Just saw the Mercury News today
endorsed no-one, and came out against the recall.
n***@special.qom
2003-09-28 21:25:35 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 19:49:10 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
Post by Steven M. Scharf
It's been unburied lately. If Bush is re-elected (well technically he was
never elected, so perhaps "retained" is a better word),
He was elected on a technically. If you're going to spew leftist
bile, at least spew accurate leftist bile.
Post by Steven M. Scharf
he'll appoint at
least two more right-wing Supreme Court justices, which will ensure
that Roe v. Wade is overturned. Once it's overturned, the governor of
a state will wield a lot of power on this issue.
True
Post by Steven M. Scharf
At first I was considering a vote for McClintock despite his stance on
social issues. The abortion thing really doesn't worry centrists of either
party, but his stance environmental issues worries about everyone.
Most people are unaware of any of McClintock's unpopular positions.
The DNC has spent their money and time on two fronts: Arnold and the
recall in general. Not that it's done them much good.
Nicholas Byram
2003-09-28 21:44:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven M. Scharf
Post by Nicholas Byram
(Contrary to what many in the media think,
the abortion issue has been dead and buried in California for at least 35
years now, unless you consider public funding and parental notification
for minors to be big issues).
It's been unburied lately.
Not in California. California had already gone to an "abortion on demand"
status as early as 1967, six years before Roe vs. Wade, with the passage of
the Belinson (sp?) Act, signed into law by then Governor Ronald Reagan. Note
that I said 35 years (okay make it 36), not 30.
Post by Steven M. Scharf
If Bush is re-elected (well technically he was
never elected, so perhaps "retained" is a better word),
Yes, he was. The election rules, as spelled out in the Constitution and
given the misnomer "electoral college", do not require simply a majority of
people, but a majority of people in a majority of states. This is an
election under Federalism, a representative republic, not a straight
majority rule plebiscite. Usually the two will give us more or less the same
result, but not always.
Post by Steven M. Scharf
he'll appoint at
least two more right-wing Supreme Court justices, which will ensure
that Roe vs.. Wade is overturned. Once it's overturned, the governor of
a state will wield a lot of power on this issue.
Will he really? Given that so-called "conservative" justices like Souter,
O'Connor and Kennedy couldn't bring themselves to overturn Roe vs. Wade
(even though their decision in Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, properly
applied, would mean just that, as Justice Scalia pointed out in a separate
opinion), it's seriously questionable if Roe vs. Wade could be overturned at
all!

Personally, I want Roe vs. Wade overturned. This issue should not be bogusly
"read into" a "living breathing" Constitution (read, an arbitrary and
capricious Constitution) that is subject to arbitrary and capricious judges.
It should be hashed out in the Legislatures, once and for all, where it
honestly belongs.

And no, I am not anti-abortion. If feminists want to establish "a
reproductive right" through the second trimester, then let the Roe vs.. Wade
Trimester Laws be passed by three fourths of the state legislatures, and
ratified as a new Amendment to the US Constitution. If the homosexual
activists wish to normalize their relationships on par with marriages, then
let them do likewise, and not shop around for judges to capriciously impose
their will.

That is true American democratic government, i.e., a representative
federalist constitutional republic. That is the American Way. For example,
Women's suffrage did not fall from on high in 1920. It was fought state by
state (territory by territory in some cases pre-statehood), finally leading
to ratification into the US Constitution in 1920.
Post by Steven M. Scharf
At first I was considering a vote for McClintock despite his stance on
social issues. The abortion thing really doesn't worry centrists of either
party, but his stance environmental issues worries about everyone.
Does it really, Steve? I have honestly yet to hear or see anyone make a big
deal about the environment on any editorial or campaign yet!

I suppose one could say that the massive illegal alien influx is having a
detrimental impact on our environment (trash, sprawl, congestion, crime,
etc.) but again, that issue is being addressed as immigration, not
environment per se.


Nick Byram (***@hotmail.com)

"If a right-winger says the earth is round, is one supposed to disagree? One
doesn't decide the truth of an idea according to whether it is left- or
right-wing, and even less by what the left or right wing decides to make of
it....In fact, if the truth seemed to me to be with the right wing, I would
go along with it." -- Albert Camus
Neal Atkins
2003-09-28 21:52:15 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 21:44:04 GMT, "Nicholas Byram"
Post by Nicholas Byram
Personally, I want Roe vs. Wade overturned. This issue should not be bogusly
"read into" a "living breathing" Constitution (read, an arbitrary and
capricious Constitution) that is subject to arbitrary and capricious judges.
It should be hashed out in the Legislatures, once and for all, where it
honestly belongs.
Try reading the 9th amendment sometime. Unless of course you believe
that "the people" only HAVE EIGHT RIGHTS.
Nicholas Byram
2003-09-28 22:16:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Neal Atkins
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 21:44:04 GMT, "Nicholas Byram"
Post by Nicholas Byram
Personally, I want Roe vs. Wade overturned. This issue should not be bogusly
"read into" a "living breathing" Constitution (read, an arbitrary and
capricious Constitution) that is subject to arbitrary and capricious judges.
It should be hashed out in the Legislatures, once and for all, where it
honestly belongs.
Try reading the 9th amendment sometime. Unless of course you believe
that "the people" only HAVE EIGHT RIGHTS.
Maybe you should read it too! What do you think State Legislatures are there
for? Or, on an even more direct level, state ballot initiatives?

Or do you prefer arbitrary whims of capricious judges? Do you want this
recall election overturned on specious grounds, like three snakes of the 9th
Circut tried to do? Judging from your other posts, Neal, I think not.

Really, I don't disagree with your presumably pro-choice view of abortion!
However, ther ability of judges to capriciously ramrod laws down people's
throats, even if you happen to like the particular law, is the exact sort of
thing this recall election is fighting against.


Nick Byram (***@hotmail.com)

"If a right-winger says the earth is round, is one supposed to disagree? One
doesn't decide the truth of an idea according to whether it is left- or
right-wing, and even less by what the left or right wing decides to make of
it....In fact, if the truth seemed to me to be with the right wing, I would
go along with it." -- Albert Camus
Neal Atkins
2003-09-28 22:37:29 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 22:16:41 GMT, "Nicholas Byram"
Post by Nicholas Byram
Post by Neal Atkins
Try reading the 9th amendment sometime. Unless of course you believe
that "the people" only HAVE EIGHT RIGHTS.
Maybe you should read it too! What do you think State Legislatures are there
for?
Not to catalog "rights".
Post by Nicholas Byram
Or, on an even more direct level, state ballot initiatives?
Ah, so if 50% +1 "votes" for slavery, that will be re-instituted as a
"right"?
Post by Nicholas Byram
Or do you prefer arbitrary whims of capricious judges? Do you want this
recall election overturned on specious grounds, like three snakes of the 9th
Circut tried to do? Judging from your other posts, Neal, I think not.
Since the Supreme Court is now considering if speech can be limited by
the Federal Election Commission, "capricious judges" will always be
with us. At least until "internet government" goes into effect and
everybody gets to "vote" on everything all the time.
Nicholas Byram
2003-09-28 22:56:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Neal Atkins
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 22:16:41 GMT, "Nicholas Byram"
Post by Nicholas Byram
Post by Neal Atkins
Try reading the 9th amendment sometime. Unless of course you believe
that "the people" only HAVE EIGHT RIGHTS.
Maybe you should read it too! What do you think State Legislatures are there
for?
Not to catalog "rights".
Sigh. State legislatures, in a representative republic, are where items not
spelled out in the Constitution are to be decided. Where, praytell, did a
"right" to abortion emerge from, that a state government is supposedly
trying to "catalog"?
Post by Neal Atkins
Post by Nicholas Byram
Or, on an even more direct level, state ballot initiatives?
Ah, so if 50% +1 "votes" for slavery, that will be re-instituted as a
"right"?
Uh, we do have a 13th Amendment dealing with that matter. Next issue,
please!
Post by Neal Atkins
Post by Nicholas Byram
Or do you prefer arbitrary whims of capricious judges? Do you want this
recall election overturned on specious grounds, like three snakes of the 9th
Circut tried to do? Judging from your other posts, Neal, I think not.
Since the Supreme Court is now considering if speech can be limited by
the Federal Election Commission, "capricious judges" will always be
with us.
The best way to avoid capricious judges is to deal with the Constitution as
it is, and not try to read what we wish to be in a "living, breathing
document." (sic)
Post by Neal Atkins
At least until "internet government" goes into effect and
everybody gets to "vote" on everything all the time.
Actually, that would be even worse. That would throw all representative
republican rule of law out the proverbial window.

Nick Byram (***@hotmail.com)

"That all our public freedoms and democratic rights often depend on
autocratic legal institutions is an irony, if you're stupid enough to think
so. And life is full of ironies for the stupid....There wouldn't even be any
democracy to defend if our every national whim were put into law. We'd
sacrifice the whole Constitution for those lost kids on milk cartons one
week, and the next week we'd toss the Rights of Man out the window to help
victims of date rape." -- P.J. O'Rourke, "The Parliament of Whores"
Neal Atkins
2003-09-28 23:11:00 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 22:56:46 GMT, "Nicholas Byram"
Post by Nicholas Byram
Post by Neal Atkins
Post by Nicholas Byram
Post by Neal Atkins
Try reading the 9th amendment sometime. Unless of course you believe
that "the people" only HAVE EIGHT RIGHTS.
Maybe you should read it too! What do you think State Legislatures are
there
Post by Neal Atkins
Post by Nicholas Byram
for?
Not to catalog "rights".
Sigh. State legislatures, in a representative republic, are where items not
spelled out in the Constitution are to be decided. Where, praytell, did a
"right" to abortion emerge from, that a state government is supposedly
trying to "catalog"?
Oh? Never heard that one before. So there are only 8 rights and the
50 various states get to decide what are "rights" and what aren't?
Post by Nicholas Byram
Post by Neal Atkins
Post by Nicholas Byram
Or, on an even more direct level, state ballot initiatives?
Ah, so if 50% +1 "votes" for slavery, that will be re-instituted as a
"right"?
Uh, we do have a 13th Amendment dealing with that matter. Next issue,
please!
But you want the states to decide what is a "right" and what isn't.
Utah can have poligamy and Kalifornia will just confiscate all private
property and "redistribute" it. Yah. Sounds like heaven to me.
Post by Nicholas Byram
Post by Neal Atkins
Post by Nicholas Byram
Or do you prefer arbitrary whims of capricious judges? Do you want this
recall election overturned on specious grounds, like three snakes of the
9th
Post by Neal Atkins
Post by Nicholas Byram
Circut tried to do? Judging from your other posts, Neal, I think not.
Since the Supreme Court is now considering if speech can be limited by
the Federal Election Commission, "capricious judges" will always be
with us.
The best way to avoid capricious judges is to deal with the Constitution as
it is, and not try to read what we wish to be in a "living, breathing
document." (sic)
Rights exist whether they are recognized or not.
Post by Nicholas Byram
Post by Neal Atkins
At least until "internet government" goes into effect and
everybody gets to "vote" on everything all the time.
Actually, that would be even worse. That would throw all representative
republican rule of law out the proverbial window.
Exactly. That is why the Constitution is written the way it is. It's
not a changeable document. Neither does it list or catalog every
right that "we, the people" have.
n***@special.qom
2003-09-28 22:22:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Neal Atkins
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 21:44:04 GMT, "Nicholas Byram"
Post by Nicholas Byram
Personally, I want Roe vs. Wade overturned. This issue should not be bogusly
"read into" a "living breathing" Constitution (read, an arbitrary and
capricious Constitution) that is subject to arbitrary and capricious judges.
It should be hashed out in the Legislatures, once and for all, where it
honestly belongs.
Try reading the 9th amendment sometime. Unless of course you believe
that "the people" only HAVE EIGHT RIGHTS.
First, you're an idiot, Neal.

Second, there is an actual abortion-related argument involving the
ninth amendment, since you think you've uttered Magic Words, you don't
need to make it. As I said, you're an idiot.

Third, because that argument's pretty weak on its own, the SC relied
primarily upon the fourteenth. But what with your Magic Words, you
probably don't know about that argument, either.

Fourth, there's also a strong rebuttal to that argument.

Now, since you haven't actually made that argument, and have only
recited your Magic Words, I'm not sure what to rebutt. So, I'll call
you an Idiot again and give you a second chance to make an even bigger
ass of yourself.

You idiot. And yes, I suppose abortion rights, but not federal
usurption of state rights. You're still an idiot, you idiotic
simple-minded idiot.

Now I feel better.
Neal Atkins
2003-09-28 22:38:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by n***@special.qom
Post by Neal Atkins
Post by Nicholas Byram
Personally, I want Roe vs. Wade overturned. This issue should not be bogusly
"read into" a "living breathing" Constitution (read, an arbitrary and
capricious Constitution) that is subject to arbitrary and capricious judges.
It should be hashed out in the Legislatures, once and for all, where it
honestly belongs.
Try reading the 9th amendment sometime. Unless of course you believe
that "the people" only HAVE EIGHT RIGHTS.
First,
Uh huh. Nice that you didn't have an argument to make.

Fool.
n***@special.qom
2003-09-29 12:07:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Neal Atkins
Post by n***@special.qom
Post by Neal Atkins
Post by Nicholas Byram
Personally, I want Roe vs. Wade overturned. This issue should not be bogusly
"read into" a "living breathing" Constitution (read, an arbitrary and
capricious Constitution) that is subject to arbitrary and capricious judges.
It should be hashed out in the Legislatures, once and for all, where it
honestly belongs.
Try reading the 9th amendment sometime. Unless of course you believe
that "the people" only HAVE EIGHT RIGHTS.
First,
Uh huh. Nice that you didn't have an argument to make.
Look, you idiot. I called you an idiot because instead of making an
argument, you chanted "Ninth Amendment." I'm amazed that you spelled
it correctly.

Do you have anything other than mantra, you freaking idiot?
Len
2003-09-28 23:17:26 UTC
Permalink
Tom McClintock IS The Man.
Arnold is a synthesis creation of the east coast Council on Foreign
Relations.
Those with heart AND brains will vote for Tom and not follow the herd
mentality you and the media espouse for Arnold. All say he is great,
then turn and say vote for The Monster from The East.
Crap and a pox on you and yours.
Post by Nicholas Byram
Sadly, Tom McClintock doesn't see the set-up....He is pleased that the
Sacramento Bee, LA Times, SF Chronicle, and various TV Stations are giving
him good press? As if that liberal media would really support him? They are
only doing it to try to divide votes and insure a Crud Bustamante victory.
case in point below...
*****
McClintock takes to the airwaves
He sticks to his message on the state budget and his vow to finish race.
By Margaret Talev, Sacramento Bee
The morning after the big debate, everybody wanted a piece of Republican Tom
McClintock, whom many in his own party have come to see as the guy poised to
ruin Arnold Schwarzenegger's bid to take over California's governorship.
So, early Thursday, the conservative state senator, known for his intense
gaze and penchant for quoting the Declaration of Independence, headed over
to what's become his second home lately, a satellite studio in midtown
Sacramento.
There, he hunkered down for hours of interviews, in rapid succession, giving
--A display of his encyclopedic knowledge of California budget minutiae.
--Some good, old-fashioned fire and brimstone about how his
Democratic-controlled, economically troubled state is on a collision course
with disaster.
--And an insistence that he's not dropping out of the biggest race of his
career, the Oct. 7 election to recall and replace Democratic Gov. Gray
Davis, just because some beefy movie star rival -- who calls himself a
Republican but inhabits a different ideological galaxy -- wants him to.
In four straight interviews, with Fox News, CNN, an NBC affiliate from San
Jose and finally MSNBC, McClintock stayed very much on message. From show to
show, interviewers asked nearly all the same questions. His answers were
almost verbatim.
Will he drop out? "When I make a promise, I stand by that promise," he said
again and again. "I'm in this race to the finish line."
Even at 18 percent support, as some recent polling has shown, though, isn't
he trailing Schwarzenegger and the other top candidate, Democratic Lt. Gov.
Cruz Bustamante?
"Arnold has been pretty much dead in the water," he shot back, noting how
the actor's support has been in the mid-20s for weeks.
"Meanwhile, I've gone from an asterisk five weeks ago, behind Peter Camejo
of the Green Party, and I've moved into a solid third-place position. The
wind's been really on my side. And if that momentum continues into the final
stage of the campaign, I expect to win on election day."
*****
(But the "Momentum" is in large part liberal media manufactured! Don't you
get it, Tom???)
*****
But isn't McClintock, who opposes abortion and affirmative action and wants
to slash government spending, too conservative for California?
"I had a professor in college who used to say that a conservative is a
liberal who's been mugged," he responded. "Well, the people of California
have been mugged by their government, and they know it, and they want a
change."
What does he make of the insults traded between Schwarzenegger and
independent Arianna Huffington during Wednesday night's televised candidate
debate?
"I don't get involved in these juvenile, personal bickering matches that
have been going on," he said. "I've focused on the future of California from
Day One."
If McClintock seems an old pro at the TV game, it's just an act. Add up all
the interviews he's given in two decades in California politics and it
doesn't touch the magnitude of free, national media exposure he's squeezed
out of his recall candidacy since the race began in July.
*****
(Seriously, Tom, why are the liberal media giving it to you? Think about
it...)
*****
He knows it's the ideologically moderate and politically inexperienced
Schwarzenegger whose celebrity has ignited so much of the interest in this
race -- and in the other candidates.
As far as McClintock is concerned, that makes his own campaign all the
sweeter.
To his sensibilities, Schwarzenegger is a Republican-lite, perhaps the
choice for some pragmatists but not for the true believers, he said during a
break in the studio.
"Ronald Reagan taught us to paint our positions in bold colors and not paint
them in pale pastels," he said of the former California governor and party
icon. "This is no time for Republicans to be changing their principles."
Many nights, McClintock said, his dreams become an extension of the
campaigning he's done earlier in the day. He replays conversations with
supporters who cheer him on.
"When you go through a crowd of people wishing you well, it really is a
wonderful feeling," he said. "I get the reruns when I go to sleep. I kind of
enjoy that part of it."
So far, at least, the rising chorus of fellow Republicans pressing him to
drop out is something he can only hear when his eyes are open.
Sonic
2003-09-29 00:41:56 UTC
Permalink
Arnold is really a pro business democrat, lets just call him what he is.
Having said that, he's still a baby step in the right direction..

Brian
Post by Len
Tom McClintock IS The Man.
Arnold is a synthesis creation of the east coast Council on Foreign
Relations.
Those with heart AND brains will vote for Tom and not follow the herd
mentality you and the media espouse for Arnold. All say he is great,
then turn and say vote for The Monster from The East.
Crap and a pox on you and yours.
Post by Nicholas Byram
Sadly, Tom McClintock doesn't see the set-up....He is pleased that the
Sacramento Bee, LA Times, SF Chronicle, and various TV Stations are giving
him good press? As if that liberal media would really support him? They are
only doing it to try to divide votes and insure a Crud Bustamante victory.
case in point below...
*****
McClintock takes to the airwaves
He sticks to his message on the state budget and his vow to finish race.
By Margaret Talev, Sacramento Bee
The morning after the big debate, everybody wanted a piece of Republican Tom
McClintock, whom many in his own party have come to see as the guy poised to
ruin Arnold Schwarzenegger's bid to take over California's governorship.
So, early Thursday, the conservative state senator, known for his intense
gaze and penchant for quoting the Declaration of Independence, headed over
to what's become his second home lately, a satellite studio in midtown
Sacramento.
There, he hunkered down for hours of interviews, in rapid succession, giving
--A display of his encyclopedic knowledge of California budget minutiae.
--Some good, old-fashioned fire and brimstone about how his
Democratic-controlled, economically troubled state is on a collision course
with disaster.
--And an insistence that he's not dropping out of the biggest race of his
career, the Oct. 7 election to recall and replace Democratic Gov. Gray
Davis, just because some beefy movie star rival -- who calls himself a
Republican but inhabits a different ideological galaxy -- wants him to.
In four straight interviews, with Fox News, CNN, an NBC affiliate from San
Jose and finally MSNBC, McClintock stayed very much on message. From show to
show, interviewers asked nearly all the same questions. His answers were
almost verbatim.
Will he drop out? "When I make a promise, I stand by that promise," he said
again and again. "I'm in this race to the finish line."
Even at 18 percent support, as some recent polling has shown, though, isn't
he trailing Schwarzenegger and the other top candidate, Democratic Lt. Gov.
Cruz Bustamante?
"Arnold has been pretty much dead in the water," he shot back, noting how
the actor's support has been in the mid-20s for weeks.
"Meanwhile, I've gone from an asterisk five weeks ago, behind Peter Camejo
of the Green Party, and I've moved into a solid third-place position. The
wind's been really on my side. And if that momentum continues into the final
stage of the campaign, I expect to win on election day."
*****
(But the "Momentum" is in large part liberal media manufactured! Don't you
get it, Tom???)
*****
But isn't McClintock, who opposes abortion and affirmative action and wants
to slash government spending, too conservative for California?
"I had a professor in college who used to say that a conservative is a
liberal who's been mugged," he responded. "Well, the people of California
have been mugged by their government, and they know it, and they want a
change."
What does he make of the insults traded between Schwarzenegger and
independent Arianna Huffington during Wednesday night's televised candidate
debate?
"I don't get involved in these juvenile, personal bickering matches that
have been going on," he said. "I've focused on the future of California from
Day One."
If McClintock seems an old pro at the TV game, it's just an act. Add up all
the interviews he's given in two decades in California politics and it
doesn't touch the magnitude of free, national media exposure he's squeezed
out of his recall candidacy since the race began in July.
*****
(Seriously, Tom, why are the liberal media giving it to you? Think about
it...)
*****
He knows it's the ideologically moderate and politically inexperienced
Schwarzenegger whose celebrity has ignited so much of the interest in this
race -- and in the other candidates.
As far as McClintock is concerned, that makes his own campaign all the
sweeter.
To his sensibilities, Schwarzenegger is a Republican-lite, perhaps the
choice for some pragmatists but not for the true believers, he said during a
break in the studio.
"Ronald Reagan taught us to paint our positions in bold colors and not paint
them in pale pastels," he said of the former California governor and party
icon. "This is no time for Republicans to be changing their principles."
Many nights, McClintock said, his dreams become an extension of the
campaigning he's done earlier in the day. He replays conversations with
supporters who cheer him on.
"When you go through a crowd of people wishing you well, it really is a
wonderful feeling," he said. "I get the reruns when I go to sleep. I kind of
enjoy that part of it."
So far, at least, the rising chorus of fellow Republicans pressing him to
drop out is something he can only hear when his eyes are open.
Loading...