Schwarzenneger molested women, apologizes

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

So molesting women is OK if someone on the other side of the political spectrum was at the receiving end of unsubstantiated allegations of similar conduct?

Wow. Let me make a note of that.

[Giant_Squid]

Sheesh, looks like someone joined the wrong party.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well he did marry a Kennedy .

[SlowwHand]

At least he didn't molest children.
These women sure picked a hell of a time to go public with their grief.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well it was the same with Clinton. They came out when he was big and popular. It is easier to do it when someone (usually in the media) believes, or seemingly believes, you.

[General Ludd]

They don't need to dig up dirt on Arnold, they can just watch Pumping Iron.

[Saint Marcus]

I compare Arnold's admission of guilt and his apology with Clinton's denials and attacks on his accusers. I am dying to hear what the Clinton defenders say about Arnold.

Clinton had affairs, but didn't molest women. Arnold had affairs AND molested women. If you can't see the difference, you must be up to your neck in Republican ass.

[monolith94]

I would love to see Arnold get elected governor of California. I love Democrats like him.

[Tuberski]

He just wanted to "Hear the lamentation of de women."

ACK!

[Berzerker]

I will note, however, that Clinton always stoped when turned down.

Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broderick would dispute that.

This story isn't new, these women came out with this in the past and the LA Times article is based on a much earlier article in a magazine (can't remember the name of it). While it will be interesting to see how Clinton's apologists deal with this, it will also be interesting to see how Clinton's critics of his sexual mis-deeds handle it. I'm already seeing the "it's our guy" routine from both sides

Do past sins (even crimes) of this nature dis-qualify a candidate? Apparently Arnold was doing this as late as 2000 when he was already married. If true, could I hold my nose and vote for him? Nope, I'd vote for McClintock at this point if I had been leaning towards Arnie (assuming there's no libertarian on the ballot).

[St Leo]

Originally posted by Datajack Franit
I guess that the real reason why someone would want to become a democrate is the freedom on insulting minorities, yet pretending to defend them against tyranny

Minorities?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus




Clinton had affairs, but didn't molest women. Arnold had affairs AND molested women. If you can't see the difference, you must be up to your neck in Republican ass.

Either you have censored news in Europe or you believe Clinton's smears.

Have you ever heard the name Kathleen Willey? She went to Clinton to beg for help for her husband who would later in that same day commit suicide. She was distraut beyond belief. She did not go into the oval office seeking a sexual assault. But that is what she got. In the words of the Washington Post, "the president kissed her, groped her, and placed her hand on his genitals."

When Willey appeared on 60 Minutes, she was more than credible. Clinton then tried to smear Willey.

Clinton is the single most dispicable president in history.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/players/willey.htm

[Ned]

Originally posted by Berzerker


Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broderick would dispute that.

This story isn't new, these women came out with this in the past and the LA Times article is based on a much earlier article in a magazine (can't remember the name of it). While it will be interesting to see how Clinton's apologists deal with this, it will also be interesting to see how Clinton's critics of his sexual mis-deeds handle it. I'm already seeing the "it's our guy" routine from both sides

Do past sins (even crimes) of this nature dis-qualify a candidate? Apparently Arnold was doing this as late as 2000 when he was already married. If true, could I hold my nose and vote for him? Nope, I'd vote for McClintock at this point if I had been leaning towards Arnie (assuming there's no libertarian on the ballot).

Bustamente, Clinton supporter, called today for a criminal investigation of Schwarzenegger.

Double standard?

[Ned]

In a major speech tonight, Bustamante again called for a criminal investigation of Schwarzenegger.

BTW, the news is that the LA Times began its dirt digging on Schwarzenegger when he announced his candidacy, and has had this story for two weeks. They held it to the eve of the election, consistent with a long pattern of dirty politics in California where the left smears the Republican candidates with some charge or another just prior to election day. Gray Davis is noted for this, but here he denies that he is behind the LA Time story. Regardless, the timing of the story is arranged to be as unfair as possible.

Welcome to California. Welcome to liberal politics.

[JohnT]

I'm tellin' ya... it doesn't matter to Schwarzneggar if he wins or loses this race (as long as he makes a credible showing that is) as long as he is able to air out the dirty laundry in a campaign that nobody is going to fully blame on him if he loses. Next time he goes after an office, all this stuff will be old news.

He's really in a win-win situation here.