California: Arnold Fesses Up and People Are Mad -- at the Messenger

Los Angeles Times ^ | October 3, 2003 | Steve Lopez

[Hildy]

Oh, please. I'm really getting tired of your suckers. See below.

[Kevin Curry]

The character flaw is in the man--it is not in the office.

Clinton's enablers and supporters made precisely the same excuses for Clinton that you are now making for Arnold Schwarzengroper, e.g., "They're all lying . . . they were all willing gropees . . . they were asking for it."

The more things change . . . .

[Dante3]

There are significan difference between the Arnold and Clinton situations.

I saw no great outcry in the media when Juanita Broaddrick's rape charges surfaced. It was hardly mentioned. And allegations of Clinton groping were practically dismissed.

[Mopp4]

Cool ! I just tried that and it works! Thanks for the tip

[EternalVigilance]

Alan Keyes issues formal endorsement for Tom McClintock

October 2, 2003
RenewAmerica staff


On Thursday, Oct. 2, Alan Keyes issued the following endorsement of Sen. Tom McClintock in California's recall election.

Next Tuesday's recall election has been forced upon a corrupt politician by you, a people that has awakened to its responsibility and right to reclaim self-government. On October 7th, you have the chance to repudiate the corrupt and unprincipled governor and the elite that has brought the state to the brink of disaster.

It would be tragic if the choice of his successor were itself corrupted by the same unprincipled forces that have made the recall necessary.

The alternative to Gray Davis is neither his incompetent heir apparent, nor an unprincipled millionaire celebrity who has exploited your serious efforts by purchasing a brief moment of superficial political prominence. This is not Arnold Schwarzenegger's moment; it is yours.

It is your moment to reassert the dignity of citizenship, and the capacity of a free people to answer its call in an hour of judgment.

Senator Tom McClintock, the candidate your political bosses don't want you to consider, has embodied throughout his political life the dignity and seriousness of the citizen vocation.

He is acknowledged by friend and foe alike to be the people's champion of fiscal responsibility in the California State Senate. He has foreseen and warned against the crisis we now face for over a decade. His knowledge and experience in issues of state finance are unmatched -- and make him the only candidate qualified to face this crisis.

Tom McClintock's principled and consistent stands on the other issues of permanent concern to this free people are well known. He is a generous and wise defender of the idea of citizenship, of equality before the law without regard for race, of private property rights and free enterprise, of the right and duty of responsible citizens to keep and bear arms.

He has been a constant defender of the marriage-based, two-parent family, of educational liberty, and of the crucial connection between moral character and liberty.

Above all, he has consistently grounded his policy judgments in the undying principles of the Declaration of Independence. Unlike either of his opponents, he is a champion of all the inalienable rights of man, including the most fundamental -- the right to life.

Senator McClintock knows that these principles were the source of California's greatness. Under his leadership, they can be so again.

Your would-be masters are convinced that you will not cast your ballot for the restoration of the substance of California's greatness, but can be stampeded into voting for a brutal simulation of leadership.

They are betting that you have permanently lost the hope for justice that is the first duty of the citizen, and will settle for the lesser of two evils.

Senator Tom McClintock has answered the statesman's call of duty for his entire public life, preparing himself to serve us in just such a moment. Now it is your turn to answer the citizen's call of duty.

I urge the good and responsible people of California to honor your long history of rugged individualism, and fulfill your promise of true national leadership, by electing Tom McClintock Governor.

Alan Keyes
RenewAmerica.us

[mplsconservative]

"The avalanche of last minute smears stink to high heaven and are close to reaching critical mass where there is a backlash."

Right on! I clearly remember the absolute ENERGY at our rallies for Pawlenty and Coleman after the Wellstone...ahem!...funeral. There was electricity in the air. If it can happen in Minnesota, it can happen in California. Go California! Get the Gray Out!

[Kevin Curry]

There are significan difference between the Arnold and Clinton situations

One is Democrat, the other is Republican. All other differences are mental fluff whipped up by the enablers of each boor.

[Republic If You Can Keep It]

the same excuses for Clinton that you are now making for Arnold Schwarzengroper

Except for perjury, obstruction of justice, & a few other minor details.

Nice try.

[KellyAdmirer]

The real loser in this isn't Arnold, it is the LA Times. Another loser is McClintock - heard any news about his positions while this is going on? It's only the final week of the campaign, and he has disappeared from the media. Everything is Arnold, Arnold, Arnold - and he is looking more and more sympathetic.

Interesting consequences to a really incompetent smear job.

[B Knotts]

I'm no Schwarzenegger fan, to be sure. But I still am more than willing to excoriate the L.A. Times for acting as an arm of the Democrat Party for running these stories at the last minute of the campaign. Mulholland couldn't have scripted their behavior better if he were himself the publisher.

The L.A. Times is finished as a serious newspaper, as far as I'm concerned.

[TommyUdo]

Perhaps a note of "thanks" is in order. The Slimes, with it's over-the-top Page One yesterday, may have comfirmed their leftist bias to some people who were still doubtful.

[mitchbert]

Clinton's enablers and supporters made precisely the same excuses for Clinton that you are now making for Arnold Schwarzengroper

While Arnold's behavior was appalling there are significant differences with regards to Klinton.

-He was a private citizen at the time
-He owned up to it, expressed what appears to be sincere regret, and did so almost immediately
-He didn't send attack dogs out to smear the accusers or paint them as trailer trash, kill their pets, etc
-There's no indication he continues to behave this way

My sense is most folks basically consider the matter closed.

[finnman69]

Remember this?

[sissyjane]

...and he didn't lie about it under oath did he?

[Sacajaweau]

Hillary is wondering how come this isn't working.

Could it be that Clinton never stopped his bad behavior?? That we didn't care about the sins of his youth

but only about the intern in OUR WHITEHOUSE. The one who saved the dress and told enough to Tripp which probably saved her life.

[murdoog]

I would have thought that at a gathering of conservatives, who rightly vilified President Bill Clinton for his raunchy scandal and nationally televised lies, there'd at least be some finger-wagging at Arnold.

The issue was never Clinton's sexual behavior for me. It was the bullying,lawbreaking, and abuse of office he used to cover it up. And I repeatedly said this during the impeachment. I do wonder if this write used the words "rightly vilified" during impeachment?

There has been a lot of bad news coming out about Republicans and conservatives lately (Rush, Arnold, the whole Novak-Bush-CIA flap). I don't mind if truly guilty people of any political stripe go down. But to use all this stuff to vindicate Clinton is wrong,wrong, wrong and quite frankly it turns my stomach.

[Angelwood]

I'm with you -- I would like to read the article but I will definitely not register to do so!

[dennisw]

LATIMES had a "team" of reporters working 7 weeks on digging up dirt on Arnold. And they came up with bupkis. (nothing)

[Stone Mountain]

He owned up to it, expressed what appears to be sincere regret, and did so almost immediately

No. He didn't admit anything until the LA Times printed their story. And even then he wasn't specific and appears to play off what are serious charges as being "rowdy." Would you accept such an explanation if it was your sister or daughter was treated in this way?

-There's no indication he continues to behave this way

The last story the LA Times mentioned occured in 2000.

[mitchbert]

Would you accept such an explanation if it was your sister or daughter was treated in this way?

Fair point. There's an old saying among some friends of mine who travel a lot on business...You can always tell a man who has a teenage daughter by how he treats a pretty young waitress in a bar...meaning they generally don't act like boors.

My point is that some people are trying to assign a moral equivilance to Arnold's actions and Clinton's, and I don't see the similarity particularly the way they responded when caught out. Heck, I try to lead as respectable a life as I can but there have been times when frankly (and thankfully they're in my past) where I behaved like an utter idiot. You grow up, try to learn and move on. As for him not admitting anything until it surfaced what do we expect of any politician? That their first public statements upon declaring for public office be a laundry list of any and all actions that may paint them in a negative light? Hardly. We'd have to ruled by monks.

There's a number of things that make me skeptical about Arnold's ultimate chances of being a successful governor, at least in the minds of people who have given him support, but his very Hollywood attitude towards women in the past really isn't one of them. But whatever, it's up to Californians to make that decision and live with the consequences, good or bad.