Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by IJ Reilly, Oct 2, 2003.
I think I'm moving to Laughingstock with you... Or, where are we going, and why are we in this handbasket?
- IJ Reilly
I was expecting this tactic. Low and dirty.
Somebody sees the vulnerability to Womens issues Arnie has, and pulls out these she says-he says BS. Nobody wins these, and nobody can prove anything.
Low and dirty is right, but I'm talking about Schwartzenegger.
According to the Times, they initiated this investigation and were not given the names of these women or any information by any of Arnold's opponents, including Davis. Unfortunately for Arnold his life in the open and statements he has made over the years don't boost his credibility on this issue.
Yeah Arnold would be in a much better position if his past didn't include many other incidents of harassment of women. I'm a little skeptical just because of the timing and the fact that Davis is well known for his down-and-dirty politics, but Arnolds past history doesn't help him.
Much of the California media, especially in the southern part of the state, has given Schwartenegger pretty much a free ride until now. It seemed like every time I unrolled my morning paper, it was just another Hollywood moment for Big Arnie. Now that it looks like he might win this election, they are finally taking an appropriately critical look at him. So the only problem I have with the timing is, "why not a month ago?"
Did anyone read the rest of this article? The man's behavior is truly revolting, and you can bet if the Times can find six women willing to relate stories of Arnold grabbing their body parts, trying to remove their clothing, and making crude and lewd advances, probably dozens more out there haven't told theirs yet, or are unwilling to do so.
Arnold speaks.... First he says it's not true, then in the next breath says he has bahaved badly in the past, and apologizes to those women he has offended. Are Californian's really going to elect this guy? If only 30% of people vote for him, I can only guess how long it will be before some erstwhile Democrat gets irritated and starts a recall.
Don't people realize that Arnold wasn't born in this country so it doesn't do any good to talk about his qualifications for being a democratic president?
Republican president you mean? Yeah a lot of us realize that Arnold could never become president without a constitutional amendment because he was not born here. It's actually kind of a silly requirement in this day and age. I can see why the founders put that in, but it could probably be safely removed, and would allow many qualified immigrants the opportunity to rise to the level of president.
I was thinking about all the issues involving our last democratic president and women.
Ohhh... sorry, I missed that. Lol
Arnold is now saying that these charges are true. He says they are from being on "rowdy sets" and that these are actions he now sees as inappropriate. What happened to it was all a Governor Davis smear? I can't believe this man could actually be our Governor in less than a week. Wake up, California!
According to past precident, and the forgiveness of the voting public, fondling women is a non issue at worst for Arnie, and a political skill thusly qualifying him for office.
We need to be careful when picking up the swords of others, they still have cutting edges that can hurt the wielder as well as the intended target.
Sorry, I don't accept the past precident. I don't give a damn about consentual sexual relations on the part of a past President or Arnie. I do care about folks who think it's ok to grab and insult the nearest woman they see. That is true for Clinton or Arnie. This is not the behavior that I want to see in my next governor. The women of Calfornia aren't his playthings no matter if he thinks it is done in "rowdy" good humor or not. Of course, I wasn't going to vote for the idiot anyway. Let's see if it makes a difference to the rest of the California electorate.
I agree, but you and I have little power to influence the thoughts of the voting public (myself even less then you as I'm not registered to CA).
Past precident is precicely what this story is attempting to leverage - the precident that Arnie has done it before, he might do it again.
My issue is using one precident, while simultaniously attemping to abrogate others that relate.
They want to play on that field? They'd better be ready to play the whole game, and not just the aspects that favor the home team.
ok perhaps I misunderstood your first post. We might agree, but I'd like to know the specifics your statements are refering to. I guess I'm just confused as to what is the point you are trying to make. Not necessarily your fault, I can be rather dense at times.
I had fault here as well, I suppose I relied too much on my reputation as a poster that tends to not argue the finer points.
I try to discuss the overarching issues as that is what I do for a living - go for the problem, not the symptoms of the problem. Kill the problem that is generating the symptoms, and many of those symptoms die on the vine.
This thread is about how Arnie is being accused of groping. I feel we don't have enough information to weigh the truthfulness of this - nor should we even try. The question I ask is why the timing? Hmm. Somebody is up to something - then I dig a little deeper.
The problem is mudslinging. This story occured because Arnie is becoming a 'high poppy' in the buch of candidates, and therefore the most likely to attack.
Ergo, even if he is guitly of these things, we need to remember that he is not the first. While abhorrent in it's own right, this incident needs to be considered in it's context - is this a pattern with others?
It appears to me that certain interested parties are using this as a tool to make Arnie lose - it is a distraction really. I see tactics behind it, and those tactics speak louder to me than this issue because it is those tactics we aren't supposed to be smart enough to see. This is the underbelly of the beast and shows the difference between the groper, and the Old Boys Network.
I fear the OBN more than the groper as it is OBN's that create and perpetuate more corruption than pretty much anything else.
You're not dense, I'm just nosey
Just think about this method of thinking, then sit back and watch the news. You'll be amazed at what you see. I liken it to Neo suddenly being able to see the code of the Matrix at the end of the first movie.
It is entirely possible that there is more to this than a newspaper doing its job in trying to investigate the candidates for political office. I don't know if the LA Times reporting is done on the basis of its editorial policy, but I'd like to see a lot more evidence of that before I'd say it is so. I do take notice that they say none of this material came from any other campaign. Even if it is part of some "old boy network" in its origin, that does not make the story unimportant. Arnie is asking us to give him a lot of power over our lives for the next 3 years and I don't think that should be done on the basis of this whirlwind campaign and movie lines delivered in lieu of substance. Who he is, behind the movie persona, takes on added importance in this situation.
*puts on spelling nanny hat*
*doffs spelling nanny hat*
LOL -- thank you spelling nanny! Can I send you my homework for correction?
Ha, spelling errors are just a pet peeve of mine...especially if I see them perpetuated across several posts/posters.
I figure the level of intelligent discussion in here warrants a little extra care in this regard sometimes.
As I said previously, Schwarzenegger had been granted the full red carpet treatment by the California media for the first several weeks of this abbreviated campaign. It's only in the last week or so that serious questions have been asked about his fitness for the job of running the State of California. And to repeat, the question should not be "why now?" but "why not a month ago?"
I find the suggestions that these investigations are "politically motivated" to border on the offensive, as if we don't really deserve to know whether someone running for high public office might be a reprehensible person. I've been hearing for years now how "character matters," but I think we're in the process of revealing a serious hypocrisy with respect to who should have to actually demonstrate good character. I've also been hearing about "people needing to take responsibility for their actions." While it's all well and good for Schwarzenegger to apologize now for his boorish past (and not very distant past, I might add), I have to notice that he never made any excuses for it before the spotlight was thrown on his personal history during an election. So what we're seeing, it seems to me, is not a person taking responsibility, but political damage control.
Good for Arnie. He owned up.
Whenever these things pop up in a political campaign, the first thing I think is that it is politically motivated - of course it is, it's a political campaign. But I have to wonder if it is truthful or not - and timing is a clue to the motivation and trutfulness.
Well, he's just confirmed it is true - wel at least that he probably offended people, but the amazing thing is he took responsibility, especially on an item that's really just accusations. He admitted it, and therefore throws himself on the mercy of the voter.
I'm not defending his actions in the past at all, he probably was quite the jerk - could still be, but at least he didn't dodge or mince words.
Deathbed conversions are always the least convincing.
Questioning whether the stories were true in the first place suggests one of two things: (1) that you didn't read the entire article, and notice that most if not all of the stories these women told to the paper were verified by friends, colleagues or family members who'd heard them long before Schwarzenegger ran for governor; or (2) that you think the LA Times might be up to a political hatchet job.
For the third and I hope final time, the California media's treatment of Schwarzenegger up to this point verged on the reverential. I've still yet to hear anyone in the media ask Schwarzenegger why somebody who couldn't be bothered to even vote in most of the recent elections is now qualified to run the state.