OUI, OUI: ARNOLD PUMPS UP ORGIES AND DOPE IN '77 SHOCK INTERVIEW

Drudge Report ^

[NBarnes]

Palm_OScar wrote:

What's Drudge's beef with der Arnold, anyway?

Well....

Schwarzenegger says he approves of civil unions with full/near-full marriage-like benefits for gay couples. He wants to increase spending and offers no program cuts to pay for it. He's already flip-flopped and waffled extensively about taxes, and with Buffet as an advisor, see tax increases, especially a revision of Prop 13, as on the table is simply realistic.

Drudge is far from the only one that feels that a choice between Davis/Bustamente and Schwarzenegger isn't much of a choice for a real conservative.

[tame]

DOWN WITH LEFTIST RINO'S! VOTE FOR McCLINTOCK!

[tame]

What's Drudge's beef with der Arnold, anyway?

Um...besides the fact that he's a leftist...Hello?

Arnold's the problem, not the solution.

[strela]

DOWN WITH LEFTIST RINO'S! VOTE FOR McCLINTOCK BUSTAMANTE!

[tame]

R.I.N.O alerrrrrrrt!

[tallhappy]

I have pastors at my church that used to be gang members. Are they not qualified either? If they repent has God not forgiven them?

Excellent point.

There's never been any indication that he has repented or had a conversion.

That is a key, as you point out.

Another important aspect is that God can forgive someone for even the most heinous act -- and his claim to have partaken in a gang rape is quite heinous.

But this does not mean the people who have repented still don't face the Earthly consequences.

[Thumper1960]

Ohhhh....yeah. This interview is a good one.

(yawn)

Desperation calls for serious measures!

(bigger, steroid yawn)

[Sabertooth]

How and ever, if AS did drop out, methinks that the California middle ground would move back to Davis and the recall would fail. A pretty good educated hunch, based on how Californians have voted since Clinton won the state in 1992.

I think national analyses of CA's electorate since 1988 have been highly superficial. I dealt with that a bit, over here. (shameless plug warning, btw)

While some of the erratic poll results we've seen are certainly due to poor methodology, I think they also reflect a genuine volatility which might well last through to election day.

As for what might happen in the event of an AS withdrawal (not that I expect one, at this point, I'm just running with your hypothetical), there are again a lot of variables which defy conventional two-party dynamics in CA. Bustamante is the face of La Raza here, and won't ever pull well among blacks. I believe this puts a cap on his potential statewide support at between 35% and 45% (barring a strong voter fraud turnout, I'd lean toward the lower). Proposition #54, the racial privacy referendum, may well skew October 7th turnout further to the right.

All of the energy in this recall is coming from the right, and I'm skeptical that it would simply dissipate if Arnold were to withdraw, as in your hypothetical.

[Thumper1960]

You knew better at 29?

That just proves that you are unfit to be Kalifornia governor.

[Thumper1960]

"and his claim to have partaken in a gang rape is quite heinous"

There's a world of difference between a gang rape and a gang bang. From the "indications", the woman was willing.....and probably loved it.

[xzins]

guess?


LOL. :>)

[Hoverbug]

A fully comprehensive list of EVERY Clinton supporter, WITH QUOTATIONS, regarding "It's just about sex" would be interesting at this point...

Go ahead and add your name to the list. If it's OK for your guy, it's OK for their guy.

Hb

[xzins]

1977. That would be about 26 years ago.

That would have made Arnold a 20 something.

Do we hold folks' youthful parties against them?

[Hoverbug]

You are absoluterly 100% correct.

Here's a quote from 68grunt im message #114: Social conservatives are destroying this country worse than the lying liberals.


Conservatives are worse for this country than lying liberals???????? How Cintonesque.

I hope the people who are being swayed by the argument that "a conservative can't win in California" see this thread and realize exactly what kind of people are pushing that line.

There are people on FR defending behavior that Jim Robinson won't even allow a link to, let alone be described here.

Sabertooth is exactly correct when he states in message#112: Is there anyone here who hasn't figured out that if the Democrats have any weapons grade dirt on Arnold, they'll wait untill the GOP's eggs are all in his basket before dropping the bomb?

Wake up California.

HB

[Hoverbug]

That's because he realizes (as do the RATs) that Davis will be recalled, that a RAT doesn't stand a chance of winning after the mess they've made of this State, and that the real race is between Arnold (the dems only hope) and McClintock.

Hb

[section9]

Your skepticism is warranted. However, I believe that it would be a lot easier for Davis/Bustamante to run against McClintock than to run against Arnold. They would craft their commercials accordingly, making Mr. Mecha look like the soul of moderation.

Aside from the ethnic vote, I think the white "security moms" would go Cruz's or Davis' way in the absence of Arnold.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Proud Legions]

I would like to see that! And there are those of us who are socialally conservative as well as fiscally who would argue having another conservative US Senator is much more important than having a conservative Governor. Not that I would not like both, but if I can only take one....

The one caveat: that Arnold and his buddies, once in power in CA (our at least partly so), don't restrict guys like McClintock from CA Republican power politics. It would be VERY tough for McClintock to get elected to the Senate without Armold's suppost if Arnold were Governor. I believe Arnold would support him...what is your take on that?

To all: I don't think it matters one way or another whether any of us like Arnold or not. There is no way an interview from 1977 is going to hurt Arnold. Remember, this is CA, and many voters out there from both parties either did what Arnold did or dreamed of doing what Arnold did back in his youth. I did not, nor do I condone it at all, but if you think it will matter to more than a very few CA voters you are very mistaken. If this is the best the Dems got, they are in trouble. If this was SC or Texas it might be different, but not CA in 2003. IMHO anyway.

Off to work...

[Proud Legions]

Note to self...don't try to spell anything correctly this early in the morning...it just doesn't work.

Oh well.

[glory]

I agree they really were bad, but so were a lot of people. Not all of us who end up being conservative, even moral conservatives, started that way. Doesn't, nor should it, preclude us from living a changed life and teaching for that life from the beginning.

[dmz]

as long as it was accompanied by all freeper postings excoriating x42 for sex, lies and drugs.