Question for Republicans about Schwartzenegger

[Kodiak]

Well, he did once star in the movie "The Running Man"...and has just finished "The Rundown".

Which makes me wonder if he is fit for the job as Governor:

How will he be as Governor?
"Dr. Doolittle"

How should we describe his term?
"End of Days"

What will he do about the deficit?
"Eraser"

How will he approach any inquiry into his past?
"True Lies"

How do we know he will do something for the elderly with constipation?
"Last Action Hero"

How do we know he will do something about violence in schools?
"Kindergarten Cop"

What if California is hit by a terrorist attack?
"Terminator 2: Judgment Day"

What's he going to do about the wildlife?
"Predator"

What's his economic plan going to be called?
"Raw Deal"

If he has a mistress, what will she be called?
"Red Sonja"

How will he find money to solve California's debt?
"Scavenger Hunt"

How will he solve the problem of obese Californians?
"Stay Hungry"

How will historians describe his term?
"The Long Goodbye"

Folks, you heard it here first: Arnold is qualified!

Did you get that from somewhere else, or did you come up with that on your own?

Kudos, Claus, either way...

 

[CFLarsen]

Kodiak,

I confess! I confess! The comfy chair!

It was me...and dead easy, too

 

[Kodiak]

Kodiak,

I confess! I confess! The comfy chair!

It was me...and dead easy, too

Show-off...

 

[Larspeart]

Arnold isn't 'really' a republican. He is a conservative independant from what I can tell. He is running onthe republican platform because it'll get him mroe votes. Lots of non-party types run as a party candidate to grant them more votes, or campaign funds (which arnold says he won't take, God bless him!).

As far as pot smoking- so what? it should be legal anyway.

Steroid use- I believe it was legal at the time he did it in the sport he was in, AND he was living in Austria (not the USA) at the time. Again, so what?

Womanizing- Have you seen Maria Shriver? That toothpick is gross! No, seriously, I don't think Californians care about that. They want their lives and their economy back on track. Arnold has proven himself to be a superb businessman, heavy donater to charity, and a self-starter/self-motivator.

I almost wish I lived in California so I could go vote for him. I wish him the best of luck. SCREW lifer politicians! They don't know a damn thing about what the people want. They simple listen to the party bosses wishes and needs, accept a boatload of Special Interest cash, and vote accordingly.

 

[CFLarsen]

Show-off...

Challenge me, you furball. Choose an actor, let's pretend he/she will run for office (your pick) and I'll come up with something better.

 

[davefoc]

Clancie,
I think the premise of your thread is flawed. As to items 1 and 2, numerous people have expressed my views about these issues.

As to item 3 let me rephrase the question in what I view as a more fair way.

Would I think Schwarznegger was morally contemptible if he has oral sex with a twenty year old intern in the Governor's office. Yes

Would I think Scharznegger was morally contemptible and favor his forced removal from office if he lied about that under oath. Maybe

Would I think it was morally contemptible if he had an extramarital affair. Hmm, I would be disapointed because I would see such an action as the breaking of a trust and probably wouldn't vote for him, but I might.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

As to item 3 let me rephrase the question in what I view as a more fair way.

Would I think Schwarznegger was morally contemptible if he has oral sex with a twenty year old intern in the Governor's office. Yes

That's your "more fair" way? Sounds to me like you were predisposed to hand down a judgment of guilt and therefore crafted a question that got you there. What say you leave out the words "morally contemptible," "twenty year old," and "intern." And for that matter, what does a location have to do with anything? Now, try this on for size:

How would I feel upon learning that the Governor engaged in mutually agreed to sexual activity with a fellow government employee with the knowledge that there was no quid pro quo and the activity was unrelated to the administration of either of their duties?

Would I think Scharznegger was morally contemptible and favor his forced removal from office if he lied about that under oath. Maybe

More of the same.

And as to the "lied under oath" part, it's beyond tiring how this gets repeatedly trotted out as a way of shutting down debate. Briefly, lying under oath is commonplace and taken for granted by prosecutors. It is up to them to prove how actions, not words, contributed to a wrong.

Would I think it was morally contemptible if he had an extramarital affair. Hmm, I would be disapointed because I would see such an action as the breaking of a trust and probably wouldn't vote for him, but I might.

How do you know a "trust" was broken? Open marriages are quite prevalent. And there are other possibilities as well. With that in mind, there's not enough to go on in this imaginary scenario and so the question should be tossed aside.

But even if a private "trust" was indeed broken, what does that have to do with how the chap conducts himself in regard to his official duties?

 

[RandFan]

Arnold isn't 'really' a republican.

Really? What constitutes a republican? I'm beginning to think that there are few if any republicans or democrats?

He is a conservative independant

What is a conservative independant?

I would say Arnold is libertarian. Socially liberal and fiscally conservative with a significant number of exceptions to both. If he says he is a republican then he is a republican.

 

[RandFan]

How would I feel upon learning that the Governor engaged in mutually agreed to sexual activity with a fellow government employee with the knowledge that there was no quid pro quo and the activity was unrelated to the administration of either of their duties?

A fair point but in truth isn't fratrinization between a superior and subordinate problematic?

I din't care for the investigation and I was against the impeachment but I think Clinton showed a lack of charachter and wisdom. Such behavior would have gotten him fired if he had been in just about any other situation.

IIRC Clintion himself was concerned about blackmail in regards to the issue. I think it would have been better if he had an affair with someone who was not his subordinate and in a place other than the oval office. JMO.

 

[jj]

Challenge me, you furball. Choose an actor, let's pretend he/she will run for office (your pick) and I'll come up with something better.

Ok,
Donald A. Novello (Father Guido Sarducci, "The Lazlo Letters", etc)

The office is "Governor of California".

And, yes, HE IS RUNNING....

 

[davefoc]

Regnad Kcin,
Obviously you and I are going to disagree about this and I suspect that nothing that I say will bridge the gap.

However, I felt my questions were exactly fair given the point of this thread. I think the point of this thread was whether a person that generally votes Republican would feel the same way about Schwartzenegger if he did the same kinds of things that Clinton did with regard to his womanizing.

For me, the answer is an easy yes, if we are talking about what Clinton did and not womainizing in general. So to answer that question the specifics were important.

And the specifics that made me feel that Clinton's behavior was significantly worse than a normal extramarital affair were:
1. Sex with a subordinate suggesting a conflict with sexual harassment restrictions
2. Sex with a person in the president's office suggesting a lack of respect for the office.
3. Lying about it under oath as part of a legal proceeding. Then lying about the lying.

While I would have been disapointed by a president for activities similar to items 1 and 2 only item 3 would have concerned me to the point that I would have begun to see a justification for impeachment in it. You are right that perjury is routinely committed and not punished in our legal system. However, I view it as a very serious act. I think that it is even more serious when it is committed by a person responsible for appointing of judges where integrity is a critical factor.

Perhaps, the only place where you and I are in agreement was in your comment about how did I know if a trust was broken. I don't think any of us know about this when we look at the outside of a marriage and clearly in some marriages monogamy is not part of the bargain.

 

[Clancie]

Posted by RandFan

In truth isn't fratrinization between a superior and subordinate problematic?

I din't care for the investigation and I was against the impeachment but I think Clinton showed a lack of charachter and wisdom. Such behavior would have gotten him fired if he had been in just about any other situation.

Well, at least you're consistent. Many Republicans I talk with aren't consistent about so called "lack of character" issues at all.

But I do disagree with your quote above. If Clinton was a manager at a small company and was having an affair with a female subordinate do you really think he would have been fired? Or if he was the President of the company having an affair with one of the VP's?

Having seen similar working relationships many times, I totally disagree. The subordinate usually quits or changes jobs, if the working relationship is too awkward. I've never seen the superior fired for it, or even that it impeded future career progress.

 

[Clancie]

Posted by davefoc

Would I think Schwarznegger was morally contemptible if he has oral sex with a twenty year old intern in the Governor's office. Yes

First, I think noting her correct age is important. Monica was already over 21 (and had already had one affair with another married man--both relationships were clearly consensual, in fact, she initiated both of them).

Posted by davefoc

Would I think it was morally contemptible if he had an extramarital affair. Hmm, I would be disapointed because I would see such an action as the breaking of a trust and probably wouldn't vote for him, but I might.

Well, we differ there. I might be disappointed to learn it, but I would still feel it wasn't my business--just like Clinton's wasn't, imo.

I think the issue of sexual harrassment is much more important. Schwartzenegger hasn't responded to those charges anywhere that I can see. (And am I the only one who remembers that video clip of him and the model/actress who complained about his inappropriate behavior while they were working together? I can't find any mention of it online, but I assume it will be addressed somewhere. Premiere magazine brought up the womanizing so hopefully it will be cleared up.

Posted by davefoc

However, I felt my questions were exactly fair given the point of this thread. I think the point of this thread was whether a person that generally votes Republican would feel the same way about Schwartzenegger if he did the same kinds of things that Clinton did with regard to his womanizing.

Well, I was really thinking in more general terms: "Would you be angry at AS for an extra marital affair as you were at Clinton for his relationship with Monica"?

And, to me, a more important issue is sexual harrassment. If AS is guilty of that, I would think he was morally unsuited for public office.

Posted by Larspeart

As far as pot smoking- so what? it should be legal anyway.

Well, Larspeart, that’s an interesting question for him to answer, isn't it? I can't see him agreeing with you, though, that pot should be legalized.

And that's my basic peeve these days....not so much the "right and wrong" of politicians or voters (most of it doesn't matter to me anyway)....but the individual hypocrisy.

 

[CFLarsen]

Clancie,

Don't you have some analyzing to do???

 

[jj]

Clancie,

Don't you have some analyzing to do???

Hey, Claus, didn't you see my response to your challenge above? Where you asked for the name of a celibrity (Don Novello, i.e. Father Guido Sarducci, Lazlo J Toth, etc) and a position (Gov. of California, yes, he's really running)?

I want to see him win. He can swear himself in as Father Guido.

 

[davefoc]

Clancie said:
"Well, we differ there. I might be disappointed to learn it (referring to extramarital affairs), but I would still feel it wasn't my business--just like Clinton's wasn't, imo."

OK, suppose the guy cheated his business partner instead of his wife. Would that be different? Is it ok to cheat on your wife but not your business partner or is neither relevant? At what point does a person's violations of private trusts become relevant?

 

[Clancie]

Posted by davefoc

OK, suppose the guy cheated his business partner instead of his wife. Would that be different? Is it ok to cheat on your wife but not your business partner or is neither relevant? At what point does a person's violations of private trusts become relevant?

davefoc,

I never said its "okay for someone to cheat on his wife." I very much sympathized with Hillary--and Chelsea--at the time. I thought they both handled an extremely difficult (and unfortunately publicly discussed ad nauseum) situation with a great deal of grace.

I didn't think it was "okay". I thought it was "none of my business".

As for the business partner...well, that's interesting, but I'd wonder how he "cheated"? I mean, did he break the law? That is relevant to running for public office. Did he show poor management skills? Did he cover his mistakes?

People point to Schwartzenegger's "businesses" as some reasons he would be a good governor. If he (or anyone) had unethical business dealings, I guess I'd look at the specifics--see if it was true and the circumstances--and weigh it accordingly. I think past work experience counts because he's basically applying for a job. His marital relations are none of my business.

And, business being what it is, I might still vote for the person depending on the specifics of the "wrongdoing", who knows? (After all, our President probably was guilty of insider trading--much worse than Martha Stewarts', too--and...there he is! In the Oval Office! And no one cares!)

Posted by jj

Hey, Claus, didn't you see my response to your challenge above? Where you asked for the name of a celibrity (Don Novello, i.e. Father Guido Sarducci, Lazlo J Toth, etc) and a position (Gov. of California, yes, he's really running)?

I want to see him win. He can swear himself in as Father Guido

lol, jj.

But maybe Claus would rather try his luck with Gallagher, that "comedian" who used to do the "celebrity roasts" in the 80's? Or Gary Coleman ("Arnold" from "Different Strokes", who tells us that he's still a virgin at 33)? They're both running, too.

One thing California's got with our 135 candidates...it's choice.

And for those of you who like Independents...any thoughts about Arianna Huffington? (Her ex, Michael Huffington, who ran for Gov a few years back, has endorsed....Schwartzenegger).

 

[davefoc]

Clancie said:
"I thought they both handled an extremely difficult (and unfortunately publicly discussed ad nauseum) situation with a great deal of grace."

Agreed.

But I had mixed feelings about Hilary's handling of the situation. On one hand she was the aggrieved wife and I don't think that she could have handled that any better than she did. It was a difficult situation for everybody involved and I don't know how she could have done anything better.

Hilary, also seems to be one of the very best political minds in the country, meaning she knows how to campaign, how to handle missteps by the candidate and how to affect public opinion in the way that she wants to. I think, with that hat on, she performed brilliantly but disingenuously. So one can admire her for her skill there while at the same time recognizing that part of that skill is to be willing to lie when it is in the best interest of the candidate you are working for. I don't see this as a Republican/Democrat issue. Republican campaign managers probably try to cover up embarressing information and/or lie about it just as much as Democratic ones.

 

[Clancie]

Posted by davefoc

But I had mixed feelings about Hilary's handling of the situation. On one hand she was the aggrieved wife and I don't think that she could have handled that any better than she did.

So we agree on that. But.........

Hilary, also seems to be one of the very best political minds in the country, meaning she knows how to campaign, how to handle missteps by the candidate and how to affect public opinion in the way that she wants to.

I agree. She's very effective. But I think she can only affect public opinion for those who are receptive to her. There are many who still hate the Clintons, and Hillary often takes the brunt of that criticism now, being the most visible Clinton.

So one can admire her for her skill there while at the same time recognizing that part of that skill is to be willing to lie when it is in the best interest of the candidate you are working for. I don't see this as a Republican/Democrat issue. Republican campaign managers probably try to cover up embarressing information and/or lie about it just as much as Democratic ones.

You mean "lie about the timetable" that she knew of Clinton's affair? Personally, I think her timetable is plausible--she may not have been looking at the NY Times (for obvious reasons) and friends may not have told her about the ongoing coverage (for obvious reasons).

Personally, I think Clinton kept the truth from her as long as he thought he could (and probably told himself he didn't want to hurt her and Chelsea, was hoping it would go away, etc).

Anyway, if she "lied" about the timetable or not, I think she was entitled to keep it private if she wanted to. I hope I would have had the self control to do the same thing, in her situation. (Imagine how ugly if the President and First Lady were undergoing a nasty and very public divorce proceeding, while still occupying the White House, with the press just eating it all up. Like the Giuliani's, only much, much worse).

Actually, I think she and BC both handled it well (after all, the humiliation and ridicule dragged on for years and Bill Clinton didn't have an emotional breakdown like Nixon did...just went to work every day and did his job for the country. Not easy, imo. Not easy at all. Personally, that showed more "character" to me than most people gave him credit for, then or now).

 

[RandFan]

But I do disagree with your quote above. If Clinton was a manager at a small company and was having an affair with a female subordinate do you really think he would have been fired? Or if he was the President of the company having an affair with one of the VP's?

Many places that I have worked for including Universities and coperations expresly forbid it.

Having seen similar working relationships many times, I totally disagree. The subordinate usually quits or changes jobs, if the working relationship is too awkward. I've never seen the superior fired for it, or even that it impeded future career progress.

Our personal experiences are anecdotal. I don't have the evidence to prove my claim. I'm quite certain of it based on my experiences though. I will modify my statement to say many if not most places would have fired him