To: Nonstatist
Unbelievably stupid admission Agreed. Its an transparent ploy he shouldn't have dignified with an admission. He's popular enought that he could've have attacked the media outlets for playing along & really done them damage.
15 posted on
10/02/2003 10:08:17 AM PDT by
skeeter
(Fac ut vivas)
To: skeeter; Nonstatist
Nonstatist: Unbelievably stupid admission
Skeeter: Agreed. Its an transparent ploy he shouldn't have dignified with an admission. He's popular enought that he could've have attacked the media outlets for playing along & really done them damage.
He acknowledged that he may have said things that might have offended some people on a rowdy set, and made an appology. Yes, he could have attacked the media outlets, instead he took the opportunity to do the right thing - admit the behavior that was bad and make ammends for it. The groping accusations, rightly enough, he didn't comment on since they never happened.
I respect Arnold for doing it.
48 posted on
10/02/2003 10:21:59 AM PDT by
kingu
(84% of liberal likely voters think Tom should stay in the race until the end.)
To: skeeter; Nonstatist
Nonstatist: Unbelievably stupid admission
Skeeter: Agreed. Its an transparent ploy he shouldn't have dignified with an admission. He's popular enought that he could've have attacked the media outlets for playing along & really done them damage.
He acknowledged that he may have said things that might have offended some people on a rowdy set, and made an appology. Yes, he could have attacked the media outlets, instead he took the opportunity to do the right thing - admit the behavior that was bad and make ammends for it. The groping accusations, rightly enough, he didn't comment on since they never happened.
I respect Arnold for doing it.
50 posted on
10/02/2003 10:22:27 AM PDT by
kingu
(84% of liberal likely voters think Tom should stay in the race until the end.)
To: skeeter; Nonstatist
Nonstatist: Unbelievably stupid admission
Skeeter: Agreed. Its an transparent ploy he shouldn't have dignified with an admission. He's popular enought that he could've have attacked the media outlets for playing along & really done them damage.
He acknowledged that he may have said things that might have offended some people on a rowdy set, and made an appology. Yes, he could have attacked the media outlets, instead he took the opportunity to do the right thing - admit the behavior that was bad and make ammends for it. The groping accusations, rightly enough, he didn't comment on since they never happened.
I respect Arnold for doing it.
52 posted on
10/02/2003 10:22:49 AM PDT by
kingu
(84% of liberal likely voters think Tom should stay in the race until the end.)
To: skeeter
Wow What everyone including the media is leaving out however, is that at the beginning of the statement he did say some of this is not true, they are only using the soundbite where he says he has behaved badly in the past.
74 posted on
10/02/2003 10:45:09 AM PDT by
ladyinred
(The left have blood on their hands.)
To: skeeter
Unbelievably stupid admission 100% agree. What was this man thinking?
Nobody I knew believes the LA Times. Everyone was disgusted with the tactics of the Times, and this thing was ready to completely backlash against the newspaper. It was good for another 5 percentage points for Anrold. The intent of the newspaper was so transparent. The timing, the "anonymous" sources ... it stunk to everyone, liberals, conservatives, people on the fence .... that article stunk and everyone knew it.
Then, Arnold steps up, and in one fell swoop validates the claims, vindicates the Times, and makes himself look terrible.
If he doesn't win, this will be why.
The man may just be honest, but it was a politically stupid move.
To: skeeter
"Agreed. Its an transparent ploy he shouldn't have dignified with an admission. "So he should have been like Clinton and denied everything?
Admitting to it and apologizing was the right thing to do regardless of whether it was the political thing to do. However the bigger question is, "Is this the result of a new found integrity that has developed since those days? Or is California electing a Clintonesque womanizer who doesn't have either a firm or correct set of values."
I hope it's the former.
287 posted on
10/02/2003 11:58:47 AM PDT by
DannyTN
(Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
To: skeeter
He did absoluteley the right thing. If he had denied it, they would trot out these gals and it would distract from this last week of campaigning. My God, who hasn't done anything offensive in 30 years? If he only has 6 women who have come forward,and this is the best they have, I'd say he's done pretty well.
359 posted on
10/02/2003 12:46:03 PM PDT by
Hildy
(SUCKER: Short-sighted Uncompromising Conservative Kool-Aid-drinking Elitist Republican.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson