Listening to Mickey Kaus and Marty Kaplan (USC Annenberg associate dean and Norman Lear Center director) on Warren Olney's "Which Way LA"; Kaplan is a man without a clue - he explains that Arnold won because the people were voting for a movie version of reality, in which they could have "candy and ice cream and not gain any weight," instead of (implicitly) supporting someone who had the experience and knowledge to "deserve" the win.
What an arrogant ass, to mince my words.
A while ago, I challenged a co-blogger who suggested that I wasn't qualified to opine on an issue of diplomacy. I replied:
They're missing a few things when they suggest that. The most important thing is actually the simplest, which is that the genius of the American system is that there certainly are experts on game theory, diplomatic history, and policy who have substantive and valuable expertise in these areas. And they all work for guys like me. Our Congress and our President are typically business men and women, lawyers, rank amateurs when it comes to the hard games that they study so diligently at ENA (Ecole Nationale d'Administration). And that's a good thing, in fact, it's a damn good thing. It is a good thing because the unique power of the United States comes from our willingness to diffuse power down into the ranks - to act in ways outside what a small cadre of mandarins sitting at a capital can envision.
Kaplan's twice an idiot then, because hasn't it been Gray Davis who's promised free ice cream and candy without weight gain? Cruz "Nationalize gasoline" Bustamante seems in the same vein as well.
My thoughts exactly (but I always say that). Schwarzenegger symbolizes the strength and vitality of American Democracy. Rather than flee to self-defeating extremes on the right or the left - often represented by the too smart by half Enarchists you mention - the pragmatic, moderating voice of the people came through loud and clear.
Mr. Gonzalez,
I don't live in California so I don't have a dog in this fight but it would seem to me the people of the state were fed up with the blatant pandering and inside politics of Grey Davis much more than they are enamored of the faux populism of Mr. Schwarzenegger. Arnold is an enigma still. No one knows how he will govern. "Terminate the politicians in Sacramento" is not a plan. It's a slogan. It worked for Arnold because of the vapid nature of Mr. Davis' feeble attempts to remain governor rather than on it's merits. My only fear is that Arnold is a political trojan horse. A vehicle into which republican policy can enter the castle without the people noticing until it's too late.
Nick Foresta
Nick:
What in the world do you think is going to happen? You think that, even IF Arnold is a "trojan horse" of "republican policy" (whatever that is), that he can rule single-handed?
Let's say that he was actually a hard-right Republican of the most extreme sort. Last I checked, Arnold is governor, not dictator. He cannot end the teaching of evolution. He cannot fire the entire state's employees. He cannot round up Muslims or Jews (although, I suppose, he could try to issue an executive order to that effect). He cannot make fundamental Christian prayer mandatory.
Even if he tried to do any of those things, there'd still be the Feds to address.
And THAT is assuming that Arnold actually WAS a fundy right-winger. By most accounts, he's mostly actually a moderate to liberal Republican. So, to what end is this "trojan horse" you so fear?
Perhaps isn't there too much being read into these "intemperate" remarks of Kaplan,Kuehl et.al?
I'd like to think it is a step in a long process of coming to grips with a staggering political loss.
Step#1 DENIAL. "The voters where too stoopid to understand the real issues.
Step#2 ANGER. "Hey lets get our own recall going!!!"
Step #3. ACCEPTANCE "Well, let's just see how this Arnold guy works out. We sure have a lot of problems in this state.
Dean,
Not to nitpick, but was it really necessary to suggest that "rounding up Muslims and Jews" is on the adgenda of the far Right? Get real!
Dean was exaggerating to make a point... I don't think "fire all the state's employees" is on the Right's agenda, either.
Actually, Joe, I'm prepared to accept the "fire all the states employees" line because, well, I actually wouldn't mind it all that much. Keep the cops, but let the rest go and start re-hiring from scratch. :)
I consider the "round up Muslims and Jews" comment an excessive smear because 1) Arnold has been compared, entirely unjustly, to Nazis throughout the campaign, and 2)conservatives in general are routinely called, in all sincerity, racists, sexists, Nazis, Taliban, etc. Non of this has any relation to reality.
Look, I can stand having my policy positions lampooned for effect--from "smaller government" to "fire all state employees" is an acceptable rhetorical strech. The other positions Dean mentions--ending the teaching of evolution, making prayer "mandatory"--are also stretches, but minor ones in the same spirit. I didn't comment even though I know Dean is wrong about those points. The "round up" comment is not even a faintly plausible stretch from any position held by any reasonable conservative.
I can't stand the non-stop, utterly false charges of racism and intolerence of various kinds. Not even as a joke. Not even "for effect." Given that "intolerence" is the cardinal sin of American politics, it just isn't OK to throw that charge around just because someone is a Republican. There are a number of us conservatives who would go to the barricades, "assault weapons" in hand, to prevent a round-up of Muslims and Jews (see you there, AL).
To put it another way: My Jewish friends thought SNL's "Cawfee tawk" was hilarious. They would doubtless be less amused by, say, a Jewish slumlord character, even in a comedy. See the difference?
Rob,
Sigh.
My examples were ALL intended as exaggerations. As I noted (or thought I did), these "positions" would be ones of the most extreme hard-Rightist, which I do not believe Ah-nuld actually is. Hence my inclusion of making Christian prayer mandatory (which, to the best of my knowledge, goes far beyond the moment of silence that many religious conservatives would like to see).
As a conservative, I am fully aware of what "my positions" are caricatured as being. I sort of thought that was the point I was trying to get across to Nick Foresta and his "trojan horse" argument, i.e., even if you believe the most extreme of stances, how would Arnie actually get them through?
Certainly, I never intended to imply that anyone HELD such views. But humor (or sarcasm, in this case) in written form is evidently quite hard to get across. I'm sorry that it apparently failed in this case.
Dean,
I don't mean to be a pain in the ass. But as I said, exaggeration I can take. "Mandatory prayer" = No big deal. But "round up Muslims and Jews" isn't an exaggeration--it's an outright fabrication.
More importantly, it's a fabrication which many on the Left believe, or at least say they believe.
Maybe I'm hypersensitive. Sorry.