There was some reason to think, early on, that a Scwarzenegger win in California would be a benefit in the 2004 Presidential race. It should help to have a governor with an (R) next to his name in the big states. When you go to the pinnacle of conservatism, you find this
"William F. Buckley Jr. once answered a question about whom he intended to support for president by saying, 'the rightward-most viable candidate.'"It appeared that Ah-nuld (sorry, David) fit the bill. He's been showing himself lately, however, to be less and less "rightward" than advertised.
When Ah-nuld first announced his candidacy, I was trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. He's called himself a Republican for years - surely there must be something to it. Why would you choose a label that sets you apart from the majority of people in your life if you don't really mean it?
We knew from the start that he was not socially conservative, but were led to believe his fiscal standards would make him an attractive candidate. Every day that goes by brings yet another disappointing revelation. From Marie Shriver's strong involvement in the campaign, through Warren Buffet, to Rob Lowe, Schwarzenegger shows himself to be a true RINO. I believe that the Republican Party is big enough for people with many viewpoints, but he hasn't shown that he fits in anywhere.
There is one issue which I find some agreement with Ah-nuld, Proposition 13. Not because it is an example of 'direct democracy' (which I do not like, I'll write more about that later), but because I am in favor of lowering the tax burden whenever possible. I don't see a need for increased property taxes, but a reduction in irresponsible spending.
Many people have claimed that the lack of this revenue stream has been a stake in the heart of California's public school system. I wholeheartedly disagree. The public schools are not failing due to a shortage of funds, but because of a shortage of quality. The level of quality won't change by throwing more cash at it. If it was possible to overhaul the education system in CA (which would require some major artillery) it's budgetary needs would be greatly reduced. There are many examples of unnecessary spending (e.g. in administration) which could simply be eliminated.
Still worried about school funding? Go read Joanne Jacob's piece, she says it better than I would. Be sure to read the comments, also.
Ultimately, it doesn't matter what I think - I can't vote in CA anymore. When I lived in CA I saw my candidates lose over and over. Perhaps the "rightward most viable candidate" in the state is a Democrat. Perhaps that Democrat is Arnold.
UPDATE: Right Thinking has more on the campaign Lee makes the point that, no matter how liberal and non-Republican Arnie is, having the (R) next to his name means when CA remains in the dumper the right will get blamed, despite his status quo left policies.
Posted by Vox at August 19, 2003 12:49 AM | politics