The Wall Street Journal's John Fund writes on Arnold Schwarzenegger's difficulties in securing endorsements from fellow Republicans. It's due entirely to his refusal to take a position on any issues important to conservative -- except on those issues where he is known to disagree with social conservatives (as do I).

I remarked below that the Democrats -- some of them at least -- appeared to be making the same mistake that they made with Bush, underestimating his intelligence because he talks funny. One could infer from that that I supported Arnold. But inasmuch as it's any of my business as a Texan, I haven't really decided yet. I like the fact that he's entered the race just for the sake of seeing some good political theater; and as the BlogFather points out, simply shaking things up once in a while is a good thing in itself. No doubt he would be a better governor than Grey Davis, or Davis's interchangeable replacement part, Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante; but fainter praise than that I cannot imagine.

I understand Arnold's position in this. He's at the head of the pack on the basis on name recognition and public affection alone. Start attaching policy positions to him -- any policy positions, conservative, liberal or otherwise -- and he alienates people who disagree, and creates an avenue of attack for his opponents. Absent policy, there's little to attack: his lack of government experience might be a hindrance in other circumstances, but it's an asset in a throw-the-bums-out election like this; and Californian voters who admired Bill Clinton's mojo will hardly be turned off by stories of womanizing. All that's left is the Kurt Waldheim thing, and that's pretty weak stuff.

Arnold's a Republican in a state where, to put it mildly, Republicanism isn't cool -- to say nothing of how his wife's family must feel about it. He must belong to the party for a pretty compelling reason. But he's pro-gay, pro-choice, and at least moderately anti-gun. So what is it that draws him to the GOP, if it's not social conservatism or gun rights?

Should the voters have to wait until after election day to find out?

(By the way, I tried researching Arnold's position on gun policy earlier, but Google let me down: lots of hits, but no answers. If anyone can point me to a reference on his previous statements on gun ownership, I'd be grateful.)