Skip to comments.
How the Los Angeles Times *Really* Decided to Publish Accounts of Women Who Said They Were Groped
JillStewart.net ^
| October 14, 2003
| Jill Stewart
Posted on 10/14/2003 2:25:41 PM PDT by John Jorsett
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
To: John Jorsett
Very enlightening piece, worth the lengthy read. I hope this stuff is getting out so people in California will undertand just how loony the editor the the LA Times is.These people are so far around the bend with their hatreds they are practically foaming at the mouth.
2
posted on
10/14/2003 2:49:47 PM PDT
by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: All
3
posted on
10/14/2003 2:49:59 PM PDT
by
Support Free Republic
(Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
To: John Jorsett
Wow. I knew it was bad, but this is psychosis-territory.
4
posted on
10/14/2003 2:54:56 PM PDT
by
publius1
(Almost as if he likes it...)
To: publius1
Unfortunately, most editors are far left liberals and thus they hold the American public by their own biased standard and push their thinking onto us insteading of DOING their jobs which is EDITING...It's so far out of control all over the main papers in the big cities that it's not worth buying any of those DNC talking points anymore!
To: John Jorsett; Sabertooth
A leak about the story's contents from the Times to the Democrats might explain why Democratic operatives seemed able to mount an incredibly fast and coordinated attack on Schwarzenegger the moment the story appeared. Not the only such leak in the campaign. Bill Clinton, the day before the Ninth Circuit three-judge panel issued its ruling, gave every indication of being aware how it would rule, and Gray Davis immediately pounced on the ruling when it was released the next day. A Novak column a few days later said left-wing lawyers were well aware of how the panel would rule in advance.
That leak violated judicial ethics.
To: goldstategop; BlessedAmerican; Miss Marple; glowworm; PhiKapMom; dalereed; lainde; SAMWolf; ...
7
posted on
10/14/2003 3:16:47 PM PDT
by
DoctorZIn
To: John Jorsett
Think they ran first with the steroid story, and delayed coming out with the groping story, because at the time of the steroid story Gray Davis was still using Bill Clinton as a campaigner?
To: John Jorsett
...These are not bad people. An unthinking mass response, completely unthinking, is the only explanation I have." They drank the Kool-Aid. And Helen Thomas wonders why the President doesn't get his information from the newspapers.
9
posted on
10/14/2003 3:25:07 PM PDT
by
eggman
(Social Insecurity - Who will provide for the government when the government provides for all of us?)
To: aristeides
That leak violated judicial ethics. You incorrectly assume that ethics rules apply to liberals.
10
posted on
10/14/2003 3:26:54 PM PDT
by
eggman
(Social Insecurity - Who will provide for the government when the government provides for all of us?)
To: John Jorsett
No one has mentioned the comment by Arianna during the debate that "everyone knows how you treat women".
This was the line where Arnold responded that he had just the right part Arianna could take in the next Terminator movie.
Obviously, Arianna also knew what was coming, well before dirty Thursday.
11
posted on
10/14/2003 3:47:21 PM PDT
by
narby
To: John Jorsett
Corrupt presstitutes haven't won an elections since hitlery's. But they keep trying.
12
posted on
10/14/2003 3:56:20 PM PDT
by
JoeSixPack1
(POW/MIA Bring 'em Home, Or Send us Back!! Semper Fi)
To: All
Hi folks,
Don't you just love this place? Are you becoming addicted to FR? I am a Freepaholic. I have to tune in every day. This is the best place on the planet to get unbiased news, and the best analysis, bar none. You know that. I know that.
Because of the free exchange of information, and high level analysis, this site is one of the top sites in the world. There are over 1 million threads here, for you to peruse. And your comments are seen by everyone, in every country.
Did you know this site was started by one determined, stubborn son-of-a-gun who is in a wheelchair? Do you know that to this day he is still in charge? Do you know that this place is funded entirely by donations? Nobodys getting rich off this place. Its 3 months at a time.
Some of the brightest people in the world come here daily, to learn, and read what YOU have written. People like Rush (bless him), Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, both Houses of Congress, their staffs, World leaders, and all freedom lovers come here.
In some countries, you could go to jail for posting here. For real. It's that powerful.
Communists in power HATE this site. They can't control the propaganda. Come to think of it, communists NOT in power hate it, too. So does the Democrat leadership.
Do you want this site to stay here? There is no membership fee. The fundraisers are to keep it going, 3 months at a time. Think about that. 3 months at a time.
China would love this place to fail. So would Chavez, Castro, the idiot running North Korea, Tom Daschle, and Hillary.
I know it sounds like such a little amount, but I am humbly asking you to consider donating just $3 a month. A dime a day. I know it sounds like nothing, but it is everything. It really is. Put it on a credit card, and that's that. The link is at the bottom of the main page, way, way down. You will join us freedom lovers who are committed to spreading the word, and letting people all over the world have a place they can get unbiased information. Your dime a day is 100 times more than the guy in China who is reading this can afford. And he will go to jail if he is caught reading this. Think about that.
I've been here since '97, and know how this site has changed the world. Become a permanent part of it. I am asking you, personally.
Please. Your pride will swell, and rightly so. It feels good.
That guy in China, wanting freedom, depends on YOU.
13
posted on
10/14/2003 4:11:34 PM PDT
by
MonroeDNA
(Please become a monthly donor!!! Just $3 a month--you won't miss it, and will feel proud!)
To: narby
No one has mentioned the comment by Arianna during the debate that "everyone knows how you treat women". Very good catch. You're right....
Obviously, Arianna also knew what was coming, well before dirty Thursday.
14
posted on
10/14/2003 4:41:35 PM PDT
by
Auntie Mame
(Why not go out on a limb, isn't that where the fruit is?)
To: Cicero
The problem with the LA Times and other media outlets is not that they are biased towards the Left, or against Arnold. This is still America, the First Amendment is still valid, and they have the right to publish anything they want to publish (short of slander or libel).
The real problem is that, after they publish a Leftist hit piece, they come back and say that they are merely unbiased obsevers, just reporters of information.
They must think that we just fell of the back of the turnip truck or something.
15
posted on
10/14/2003 5:31:41 PM PDT
by
the lone wolf
(Good Luck, and watch out for stobor.)
To: the lone wolf
I made a similar point on another thread on the topic of media bias. Bias in itself is not unethical, but refusing to admit it exist is.
To: narby
Yep, she was in the loop.
What makes me laugh outloud is the context of Arnold's so-called "groping". By all standards, he comes off as a rich frat guy getting drunk and groping drunk women or driving along the strip playing loud music and propositioning every woman, crudely, they see.
I don't know what's worse. Men coming up to women (as I saw so many times in college) and making remarks like, "oh baby, you are going to be sucking my Richard tonight" while the women laugh or the fact it worked and they went home with those women.
Then, I throw in the Hollywood factor. Hollywood is one giant film orgy the way the tabloids write. Every leading actress is doing the leading actor while cheating on their leading actor/actress spouse. Meg Ryan is thrown around like a Raggedy Ann doll.
Do any of these women say Arnold forced sex on them? No. Do any of them claim they lost jobs if they said no to him? No.
The 2 out of 15 (first 6, then 15...I still have yet to find the stories of #7-15) that did go on record were an old English has been that was probably just happy Arnold said "Hi" to her while she was slutting on some set for a bit part. I've read she has a worse reputation in England.
I don't even remember who the other one was, since her story was so lame it made me laugh. I've had women grope me worse than her story.
But there was that one woman I believed. The one that looked like she was 80 years old and had about two facelifts a year for a decade. Only because she looked more like Arnold's wife Maria and I thought he might be into that type of woman! ;-)
And isn't Hollywood the casting couch city of sin? Isn't groping and sex games going on all the time? If not, then I'm cancelling my subscriptions to the Enquirer, Star, etc. lol
Then there is the hypocrisy issue the press bandies about. They are, as usual, trying to set up a moral equivalence to give themselves cover for their flip-flops. They say "well, the Republicans attacked Clinton for this and give Arnold a pass" and the Republicans, rightly, point out the Dems and feminist giving Clinton a free pass.
Even Gloria Steinem (sp) came up with the "one grope" rule. And their hypocrisy knows no bounds. First, they ignored their employer/employee rule of power in sexual harrassment when it came to Paula Jones. They ignored the "women don't lie about rape" rule with Juanita Brodderick. They ignored the crude advances by Clinton to Kathleen Willey because she "liked him" as a President and sent nice letters. They ignored the threats made to Elizabeth Gracen that forced her to live overseas.
Real women, with real facts about real laws being broken by Clinton. They didn't hide behind anomity and most were afraid, earlier, to even come forward because they had been so imtimidated by Hillary's bimbo-eruption hit squad.
To compare that to Arnold and the unsubstantiated claims made against him is ridiculous. His "apology" was brilliant. It was, again, like a frat boy just saying, "yeah, we got carried away at that kegger and I apologize to any woman I might have offended while playing nude Twister with them".
And I can imagine Arnold getting out of line once in a while, but he wasn't vicious or hurtful...if you believe all the anonomous stories the LA Times had for years, not 7 weeks. But I then don't believe most of them knowing how many women were probably just throwing themselves at him like a mother and daughter trailer trash team going to a Def Leppard concert and getting to the after party doing that mother/daugh....nevermind.
17
posted on
10/15/2003 12:03:01 AM PDT
by
Fledermaus
(Wake Up America, You're Dreaming!)
To: Tamsey; Tempest; onyx; My2Cents; EggsAckley; Victoria Delsoul; kattracks; PhiKapMom; ...
In case you missed this really good article. I just got around to reading it.
Interesting, kind of, isn't it? Article attacking the attacks on Schwarzenegger, and in two days not a lot of comment.
I observe, you decide.
Dan
18
posted on
10/15/2003 6:45:41 AM PDT
by
BibChr
("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
To: John Jorsett
Bump to the top.
(Andrew Sullivan features this today ... well worth the read.)
19
posted on
10/15/2003 7:15:34 AM PDT
by
aculeus
To: BibChr
Thanks for the ping! Where are all the comments is right? That really is telling!
20
posted on
10/15/2003 7:27:55 AM PDT
by
PhiKapMom
(AOII Mom -- Don't forget to Visit/donate at http://www.georgewbush.com)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson