PING! 
Your One Stop Resource For All The California Recall News!
Want on our daily or major news ping lists? Freepmail DoctorZin.
Posted on 08/27/2003 3:59:45 PM PDT by journey7873
Posted on Drudge and Smoking Gun: The California recall campaign is officially getting dirty...
And Dick Cheney (2 DWI)
Yes, and it has warning for a society that permits the slaughter of innocent children. Heard of abortion? Arnold thinks it's fine. The Bible also warns about the longevity of a society that accepts the homosexual agenda. Arnold thinks that's fine, too.
Please enlighten me.
Think Teddy will put family first?
I wouldn't hold me breath.
I did enjoy the movie. You have a problem with adult debauchery?
One of the things that amuses me about McClintock supporters such as yourself and others is their tendency to be exclusive of anyone who might have had a good time in their youth. Arnold was single at the time. There was no indication that the sex was anything other than voluntary. Jeez, back when I was in college, I had two girls at the same time once. Does that disqualify me from serving as dogcatcher? Does the fact that I had two girls make it a female gang-b*ng instead of voluntary sex? When do I get my freaking interview?
By the way, I used to drink a lot more beer in those days, too!
Clinton was a lying bastard from the getgo; we didn't resent his drug abuse and his nose candy abuse. We figured that it was par for the course for a man with no character traits save those which gave him power. We resented his lying about all the little things. We really got bent out of shape when Colonel Holmes' letter came out. That kind of thing mattered to us. If Bill Clinton hadn't been anything other than a serial liar, he'd have been treated better by us. But if he had been truthful, he'd have been Bill Bradley, not Bill Clinton.
Like it or not, this won't hurt Schwarzenegger. In California, his cool quotient just went up. And I know that just burns you up, because you want the real conservative, McClintock, to win this race and you know that Arnold is in the way of your dream.
But the fact is, in 2003, Arnold can win and McClintock can't. How do I figure this? I was out in California visiting my mom, my sister, and her husband in late July. My sis and her husband are professionals who live in the West Valley. Both are registered Democrats. Both are impressed with Arnold and will probably vote for him. His mix is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. That's what those swing California voters are going for.
Would they vote for McClintock? Put away the hash pipe and step away from the keyboard if you believe that they would even think of voting McClintock.
This race is about winning the Governor's chair, not setting a moral example for others. You set the moral example by how you govern. McClintock cannot win this race, and knows he cannot. But he's a politician like Arnold, and the time will come when he will pull out of the race. The only question is the price he will ask. McClintock doesn't want to be blamed by the Party for handing the race to Cruz. But if he stays in long enough, he can extract enough concessions from Arnold to make sure that he has a hand in the crafting of next year's budget and the imposition of spending caps.
Oh, and Arnold has to take care of McClintock's Thousand Oaks consituency, as well. You know that is going to be on TMC's list of demands. Arnold will meet those demands, too.
Politicians are more or less the same, in that they will do almost anything to secure a victory. Pretending that one is holier than the other is a fool's errand.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
You are not.
He said stuff about drugs and sex, and I wonder how much was true and how much was playing to the audience of the magazine. Even if true, though, I am not shocked and doubt many people will be. People who find this just scandalous, I think, would not have voted for him anyway. He was a grown-up and said candid grown-up things and I respect him for that.
As for this being comparable to Clinton, I don't see any suggestion of alleged rape, or of lying under oath, or of improper conduct on taxpayer time.
Since Democrats really have no standing to hold this stuff against anyone, I find its release curious. I have a sneaking suspicion that Arnold's camp itself is getting this stuff out early, so there are no last-weekend surprises as in 2000 that might cause actual damage. The opposition would have waited longer. This just creates more buzz around Arnold and will suck air and discussion time away from the other candidates without doing him much if any damage.
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.