PDA

View Full Version : California's McClintock becoming a leading conservative voice in Congress




bobbyw24
11-23-2009, 06:37 AM
WASHINGTON — Republican Rep. Tom McClintock says the federal government has wasted enough money subsidizing solar power, calculating that it would take 22,000 acres of solid solar panels to duplicate the energy from a single nuclear plant.

"This is an industry that exists solely off the dole, by the dole, and for the dole," McClintock said in a speech on the House floor last month.

Two weeks later, he proclaimed that Congress was "disconnected from reality" as he accused environmentalists of producing a water crisis in his home state of California "for the enjoyment and prosperity of the Delta smelt."

That same week, he joined 11 other House members in voting against an extension of unemployment benefits.

And then he voted against a trillion-dollar health care bill, noting that it included the word "shall" 3,400 times.

In a Democratic-led Congress, McClintock hasn't had much of a chance to shape policy in his freshman year. But that hasn't stopped him from flexing his conservative muscles, particularly this past month.

Ten months after coming to Congress, McClintock has emerged as one of its most outspoken and consistently reliable conservatives. And it's looking as though he might be sticking around for a while, thanks to a hefty campaign account that seems to be scaring away the competition.

McClintock, who lives in Elk Grove but represents a sprawling north state district anchored in Placer and El Dorado counties, survived a recount against Democrat Charlie Brown to win election last November. He has established himself as California's top Republican federal fundraiser, collecting more than $838,000 in the first three quarters of the year. And with so much money in the bank, no Democrats have announced plans to oppose his re-election in 2010.

The Washington-based Cook Political Report, which handicaps congressional races, ranks McClintock's district as a "Solid R," as in solidly Republican. And the Rothenberg Political Report, another congressional handicapper, says McClintock's seat is not "in play" for 2010. Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain won the district 54 percent to 44 percent in last year's presidential race.

"With those fundraising numbers, I think McClintock is trying to stop any Democratic opponents before they even get started," said Nathan Gonzalez, political editor of the Rothenberg Political ReporT. "I don't think Republicans in California can be completely at ease because of the surge in Democratic registration last year, but I don't think McClintock is very vulnerable at this point."

While McClintock is getting a free ride from Democrats, the national Democratic Party is aiming its sights at other California Republicans they deem more vulnerable, such as Dan Lungren in the Sacramento suburbs (3rd District), Ken Calvert in Riverside County (44th District), Mary Bono Mack in the Palm Springs area (45th District) and Brian Bilbray in San Diego (50th District).

With Democrats focused on other seats in California and across the nation, Gonzalez said: "Any challenger that may creep up against McClintock will probably have to do it on their own. Democrats may have lost their opportunity to win the seat last year."

Representing a politically safe district makes it easier for a member of Congress to speak his mind. And McClintock rarely holds back.

In an interview last week, he said Democrats have "greatly alarmed and aroused the American public" while achieving nothing politically by passing their health care plan. He said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is most interested "in taking over" the U.S. health care system.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/79314.html

specsaregood
11-23-2009, 07:37 AM
I like McClintock and he was fair to RP during the primaries (gave him a nice interview when guest hosting on an AM station) but he disappointed me when he endorsed ole Fred.....

John of Des Moines
11-23-2009, 10:53 AM
Question has to be asked: "Is he a member of the CFR or any similar globalist organization?"

That's my simple litmus test.

paulpwns
11-23-2009, 10:57 AM
Neo-Con.

RevolutionSD
11-23-2009, 11:00 AM
McClintock endorsed Freddy boy and I'm pretty sure he's pro war. :( Nothing to see here except some nice rhetoric...

Jamsie 567
11-23-2009, 11:06 AM
He plays the field but he is pretty decent in his stances and will back the liberty movement policies. He won't change the system but an allie that we can fight with.

specsaregood
11-23-2009, 11:12 AM
Like I said, he gave RP a fair interview early on in the primary process, it was disappointing when he endorsed fred.
YouTube - Part #1, Tom McClintock interviews Ron Paul (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSEVpueChIE)
YouTube - Part #2, Tom McClintock interviews Ron Paul (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onckGDwPPac)

klamath
11-23-2009, 11:52 AM
Neo-Con.

This word is getting real real old. Is this the attempt at new mcCarthyism. When people have real concerns about Real neocons it will be dismissed as extremism without a second though. The label is plastered on anyone that disagrees with people anymore.
I guess RP endorsed a neocon (McClintock) so therefore RP must be a neocon.

paulpwns
11-23-2009, 12:16 PM
This word is getting real real old. Is this the attempt at new mcCarthyism. When people have real concerns about Real neocons it will be dismissed as extremism without a second though. The label is plastered on anyone that disagrees with people anymore.
I guess RP endorsed a neocon (McClintock) so therefore RP must be a neocon.

No it means he a is a neo-conservative, that supports nation building and endless wars. If you support trillion dollar spending overseas YOU ARE NOT CONSERVATIVE. RP's endorsement of him was a political compromise. Big deal.


Sorry I called a spade a spade.

LibertyEagle
11-23-2009, 12:59 PM
No it means he a is a neo-conservative, that supports nation building and endless wars. If you support trillion dollar spending overseas YOU ARE NOT CONSERVATIVE. RP's endorsement of him was a political compromise. Big deal.


Sorry I called a spade a spade.

Does he support the following, because I don't think he does?:


More important than the names of people affiliated with neo-conservatism are the views they adhere to. Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:

1. They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual.
2. They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.
3. They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.
4. They accept the notion that the ends justify the means—that hardball politics is a moral necessity.
5. They express no opposition to the welfare state.
6. They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.
7. They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.
8. They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.
9. They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.
10. They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill advised.
11. They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem.
12. They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.
13. Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should not be limited to the defense of our country.
14. 9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.
15. They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)
16. They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.
17. They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party.
-- Ron Paul
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm


Sometimes, people are just misled that the wars we are fighting really have nothing at all to do with our national defense. They aren't into nation-building at all. It doesn't make them neocons.

specsaregood
11-23-2009, 01:11 PM
No it means he a is a neo-conservative, that supports nation building and endless wars. If you support trillion dollar spending overseas YOU ARE NOT CONSERVATIVE. RP's endorsement of him was a political compromise. Big deal.


Sorry I called a spade a spade.

Did you listen to the interview I posted? I don't recall him disagreeing once with RP in regards to the war and they did discuss it. In fact he agreed with RP on the need to declare war.

paulpwns
11-23-2009, 01:16 PM
After looking further into his record, I take back my previous statement.

You are right, I was too quick to label him, but I am still concerned about his foreign policy views and his No Votes on Iraq issues.

He is actually the best thing CA has going for it.

Brian4Liberty
11-23-2009, 02:07 PM
On calling everyone a neo-con...

Unfortunately, human nature is such that there are two very easy ways to manipulate people. It depends on the person. It somewhat corresponds to the Left/Right paradigm. It's pretty simple:

- It's for the children, the weak, the poor, the kittens and the puppies. You better do something right now!

or

- Are you a man or a mouse, show weakness and they will laugh at you. They hate you, they want to kill you, you better do something right now!


Today, the socialists use the first one, the neo-conservatives use the second. One of those two arguments will work on the vast majority of the population. It's in the human genes. They could be called Darwinian arguments. They are often used in combination for maximum effect:

- Go kill them before they come here to kill our kittens!

james1906
11-23-2009, 11:09 PM
I voted for him for Gov in 2003. No regrets on that.

HOLLYWOOD
11-23-2009, 11:44 PM
http://i533.photobucket.com/albums/ee332/McLieberman/DSC01296.jpg
http://i533.photobucket.com/albums/ee332/McLieberman/DSC01293.jpg