When Bill Clinton groped women, we said that was a reason to state he had no morals and should be kept from office. We were right of course, but the Dems said, "So What?"
Now, Arnold is proven to grope women, the Dems say he is unfit to hold office because of that, and the Repubs are saying, "So What?"
Who is the bigger hippocrite here? Us with Arnold? Or the Dems, with Clinton?
And don't bring up Juanita, groping is still groping, and is certainly a reason to say someone is unfit, regardless if there is a worse charge after that, groping is still a reason to say someone is unfit!
And a guy like McClintock, with no baggage, and great ideas and a wholesome attitude and outlook, is considered not worthy of voting for or supporting as a party.
Is it any wonder why the Republicans are called THE STUPID PARTY?
I certainly WILL bring up Juanita when you try to compare Arnold to Clinton. With Juanita, Clinton used physical VIOLENCE and abuse of his political power... With Juanita, Clinton forced her down, bit through her lip to keep her pinned and RAPED her... and this was while he was in one of the highest offices in the state.
Even if the allegations of ALL the women are true about Arnold which is more likely they are NOT all true... but even if they were, what he did was rude and inappropriate. To equate patting a woman's butt with violent rape is outrageous.