I hate to say it, but Arnold gave the right response

Obviously, denying the charges outright would have been stupid. First, nobody would have believed him, and second, it would have only invited more people to come forward.

But by basically saying "yeah, I did some stupid, even hurtful things in the past and I apologize for them and hope to redeem myself," I think he has limited the damage.

And seriously, how much damage will there be? The L.A. Times article merely confirmed what most people already suspected. And sadly, his behavior probably isn't all that out of line for the way rich male movie stars act. Indeed, I'm sure some people were suprised that only six women came forward.

Plus, Arnold's Democratic opponents are going to have a hard time beating him over the head with this -- especially if Clinton, another serial groper, comes back to California again to campaign for Davis.

well considering he just admitted to sexual assault, if those women who came forward press charges quite a bit of damage dont you think?

Only two were willing to be identified in the story and neither of them have pressed charges. For all we know, the statute of limitations has probably run on most of these.

I just don't see this story changing the minds of many of his supporters.

His supporters don't care anyway.

there will be 2 or 3 women and others who will now get their butts to the polls and slap his terminated ass back down to Hollywood.

that I'm skeptical he's changed. The way he answered Huffington during the debate gives me the impression that he isn't a better person now. My 2¢

Admitting to doing wrong doesn't make you a hero, it means you made a mistake and are willing to acknowledge it. That is just the right thing to do.

We'll all be better off when we STOP applauding people who take responsiblity for their actions and holding them up as heroes.

but the most recent allegation against Arnie was just three years ago, in 2000, and the pattern of behavior makes me think it's probably happened even more recently.

And where do you get off calling Clinton a "serial groper?" No accusation of non-consensual sexual acts by Clinton has ever been substantiated. Just what we need having one of our own spouting Freeper smears.

I was a Clinton supporter in the 1992 campaign, but had friends working for other Democratic campaigns. They all heard the same things.

I also wouldn't put too much weight on the fact that people haven't come forward. First of all, that's not quite true -- Paul Jones came forward. And besides, nobody had come forward with respect to Arnold until the Premiere article a few years ago.

I'm not saying this makes Clinton the devil. Hell, I voted for him twice. But he sure as hell ain't no saint.

But Paula Jones' case was dismissed by the judge and Ken Starr came up with nothing despite the millions he spent trying to dig up anything he could find. It's too easy in this media-dominated world to assume that allegations equal guilt.

Personally, I make a HUGE distinction between consensual and non-consensual sex, and despite what your friends working for "other Democratic campaigns" may have heard, no one found any evidence that Clinton ever committed anything resembling sexual assault.

Besides, wasn't this thread supposed to be about Arnold? Why bring up Clinton in the first place? Does the fact that Arnold admitted to sexual assault he did commit make him more honorable to Clinton denying sexual assault he didn't commit?

The Clinton defense against sexual harrassment has lowered the bar in these matters and will allow Ahrnold to escape unscathed. Remember, its only about sex; sexual behavior does not have any bearing on a person's ability to lead; it's a private matter; etc.

And if Paula Jone's claim was baseless, why did Clinton settle for around $800K?

A good President would want America to stop dwelling on his oppents' lies. (I'm no Clinton fan either. He signed the DMCA, he's not been overly gay friendly (He supported sodomy laws when he was in AK and he explicitly supported the likely unconstitutional Offense Against Marriage Act), praised Jefferson Davis while governor of AK, whored too much to the ChiFascists, and escalated the War on Drugs (First "Black" President my ass.))

He was governor of Arkansas (AR).

than Bill .IMO

As long as it happened at some point in the past, it was a youthful indiscretion.

... described his 40-something affair as a "youthful indiscretion".

I guess it's all relative. If you're 80, then 40 seems youthful. But traditionally, the two words together "youthful indiscretion" implies something that happened as a teenager, or late teenager... or if you want to push-the-envelope, it could be something you did in your early 20's.

Republican hypocrites!!

-- Allen

http://eightballmagazine.com/diatribes/volume01/diatribes024/diatribes475-494/diatribes493.htm

Oversexed Arnold Schwarzenegger Gets A handful Of British Talk Hosts!
"Riot Fuel" by Eightheadz, creator of 8BM.com During his promotional visit to Britain this week Arnold Schwarzenegger groped Denise Van Outen on the Big Breakfast and behaved in a similarly oversexed and over here fashion with a clearly panicked Melanie Sykes on ITV's Celebrity.

The Sun in England newspaper reports that Sykes was chatting with Arnold when, as cameras rolled, he grabbed her around the waist.
She pushed his hand away, saying: "Get your hands off me - I'm scared."

I don’t blame her. Any actor who excels at playing barbarians and robots and has trouble understanding English is not the kind of guy that I want to have to tell to get his hands off my ass.

http://www.celebritysexnews.com/newsitems/arnoldtittytwister.shtml

Arnold Schwarzenegger: I'm da titty twister!

Arnold Schwarzenegger (December 11, 2000) If an incredible and amusing report coming out of the UK last week is true, we may finally know why Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger gets along so well with those randy Kennedy boys. According to British TV host Anna Richardson, the lecherous action star pulled her onto his knee at the end of an interview she was conducting with him, demanded to know if she'd had a boob job, then pinched one of her nipples.

It was a bit of a shock for the chesty host of the British television show Big Screen. She told the UK tabloid The Sun that the incident made her feel angry and embarrassed, but also a little helpless. "I wanted to say, 'You dirty bastard.' But you can’t tell a powerful man like him to fuck off."


"He kept saying how fantastic I looked and staring at my boobs," complained Richardson. "When I went to shake his hand he pulled me on to his knee, saying 'I really want to know if your breasts are real.'"
...Anna says she stood up then and told him "You’re making me nervous." But Arnold told her to relax and pulled her back on his knee. Finally, he let her up, and according to Anna, "patted my bum as I went off."

A TV insider who was among seven other people present for the interview backed up Anna’s claims: "Everyone was in shock. He appeared obsessed with Anna’s boobs." But Arnold's UK spokesman shrugged it off, telling The Sun, "I don’t know anything about this particular incident but Arnie is a big flirt, as is Anna.

That may be the case, but it's a hell of a way to charm a babe, and Arnold is a married man. So no one can say for sure if there will be any further repercussions, but given Anna's embarrassment and anger over the incident, this could well be the one time that Arnold won't be back.

and still really never apologizing. "the right response"...well, i do agree that it won't change any die-hard supporters minds. and it might actually gain him the votes of other unapologetic gropers...probably rapists and misogynists too.

So I guess Gray will be losing Clinton's vote :)

Sorry, it had to be said (you set yourself up for that one)

Sorry, it had to be said. :argh:

Okay... how about Alan Keyes?

that's a new one on me :shrug:

Essentially what he said was, "it's not true, but I'm sorry." He said most of what was in the article was untrue and said he was on "rowdy movie sets." The problem is that some of these assaults (and that's what they were) were not on movie sets, and a lot of them were in front of witnesses. He apologized, but he wasn't specific about what he was apologizing for.

I wasn't pleased when my former party attacked Clinton for receiving oral sex from a WH intern. I believe politicians should use past positions on issues to stain a candidate's prospects of garnering support. Using a candidate's personal life to destroy a candidate's image has always struck me as being wrong.

Anyways. Vote NO on the recall!

I fear you are right. I think too many people will say, "we forgave Clinton" and look the other way.

without interference. The women's bosses, husbands, co-workers, Arnie's friends, hell, probably even his wife, all said, "Oh, don't worry about it. He's famous. Just stay away from him."

And all is forgiven.

All it takes is an "apology."

is not the right response. As a grown man, he is just now getting around to apologizing....for "behaving playfully" on "rowdy film sets"....

Excuse me but:
1. Those Rowdy film sets are ARNOLD'S FILM SETS.....FOR ARNOLD MOVIES....THAT ARNOLD EARNS A LOT OF MONEY FOR.

2. Behaving playfully means what and to whom?....for the women that didn't ask for this behavior, it was not playfull but offending. Since ARNOLD ONLY CARES WHAT THE BEHAVIOR IS TO HIM, the word play doesn't hold up.

3. Grown man who want to be governor should not hang out at rowdy playfull movie set and harrass women!

4. the "SORRY" is a little late and convenient.

are well known, strong, feisty people.
If they are intimitated and feel threatened is very telling.
Arrnuld seems to get a kick out of threatening strong women, because he has so much power.
That debate with Arianna Huffington was shown in UK, he was disgusting. It was a clear threat, it made my skin crawl.

...or drinking while driving. But should saying he's 'sorry' give him a free ride when HE and other RWingers would use this sort of information against Democrats?

- He should apologize to the women he gangbanged and 'groped'. His past should disqualify him for office.

with liberal/feminist tendencies.

Doesn't follow the news too closely.

Had NEVER heard the accusations against Arnold. Was going to vote for him.

Thought Arianna was baiting him and way out of line. When I said, perhaps style-wise... but you know she was right... this woman asked what I meant. Ran down the Story in Oui, and in Premiere (?) from his UK massmedia grope in 2000. She was appalled.

If this hurts him - it will be because many folks haven't paid close attention - all they saw was Arnold on Oprah and the circuit. And now the media frenzy around the story - makes more people want to get their hands on the original story. ANd given that in each case it is verified by a second person (and the stories are rather gross), and he has now admitted it... suddenly folks who have not seen through the glitzy media shield - will get a glimpse of Arnold the Barbarian.

was never in doubt. If elected the people of California already have prepared a recall for the next go round. This is better than the superbowl!

Clinton a serial groper? Sexually active with willing partners is more like it. Serial groping is an entirely different thing - done to someone who is NOT willing. How can you compare the two? Unless you believe Paula Jones.

or Kathleen Willey

or Juanita Broadrick

those were three women who charged Clinton groped them or worse. You can believe them or not.

Personally, I think Paula Jones was probably a misunderstanding, where Clinton thought he was going to get serviced by a groupie, and Jones was naive enough to think the governor just really wanted to meet her.

That's just my opinion though. Your mileage may differ.

On edit somehow I had typed "him" when referring to Jones. An honest mistake, or a deeply repressed Freudian slip?

The Hunting Of The President by Joe Conason and Gene Lyons.
That has more truth about the Paula Jones affair, Juanita Broadrick and anyone else that accused him.
Also read Blinded By The Right and The Dyslexication Of George W Bush because it all ties together.

Juanita Brodderick. However, you might not have heard about that one, as the LA Times buried that stories. Apparently, they only slime Republicans.

I think this will hurt and I DO THINK more women will come forward.

It won't hurt in rural areas or with the die hard Davis haters but it will hurt with MOTHERS WHO HAVE DAUGHTERS...and there are LOTS of those in California.

don't treat this as the thing that will keep AHH-nold from winning...if the charges were serious enough, the women would have called police.

I'm not saying that makes AHH-nold's glad-handling ok...but it will be spun that way.

by the harrassment issues or any belittling of women.

Life is about choices...if women choose to willingly involve themselves with that doofus...than that is their choice.

I don't think this will hurt Arnie.

If the media did it's job then the Republican ticket would be split, assuming that Republicans care about his acts. Their partisanship usually overrides anything like that.

On Comedy Central.

There is no way a Democrat with Arnold's background would still be in the race at this point.

What we have seen in California is one of the most obvious cases of the media deciding who will be elected in modern history.

Every day they bash or ignore Davis and Cruz and every day they have something great to say about Arnold.

One major negative article by one big paper in the entire election cycle about a guy with his background?

The political press in Sacramento knew all about it. They called him Gary Condom. But they never ratted him out until the Levy story broke.

He'd still be in Congress today if Chandra Levy hadn't disappeared.

1) he hasn't stopped doing the groping. From other accounts printed throughout the years, his sexual assault habit wasn't something confined to the 70s or something.

2) this is akin to saying "I used to be a rapist, but I stopped," or "I used to be a murderer, but haven't killed anyone since 1982." Sexual assault isn't like jay-walking or speeding or even smoking crack. The crime is serious and the victims feel real pain because of it.

He responded in the best way he could, but if the dems DON'T take advantage of the fact that he commited sexual assault and should have to go to every home in his neighborhood introducing himself as a sexual abuser, then I have lost all hope.

now be passed off as "youthful indescretion." Some youthful indescretion is more harmful than others.

Why should he be able to get away with this? It's not like he didn't know better? But, because he had money and power.....it was considered "cheeky."

issue. We keep getting plenty of cannon fodder.

First he lied. Then he got caught. He just admitted the obvious. It's not what he did. It's the character this kind of humiliation of women reveals. Arnold is a megalomaniac who thinks nothing or no one can stand in the way of his will to power. This guy is REALLY weird.

that will call their character SERIOUSLY into question in their youth.

The Dems are the party of ETHICS!

More right wing LIES Where was it ever proven that Clinton did any of that. What was proven and admitted to was consensual. If you can't back that up I call it LIES

The poster here has fallen into the Limbaugh trap of making unproven allegations facts after a while.

:puke:

Just what we need at DU.

"Only six women" came forward. "Merely confirmed what most people already suspected."

It's okay, boys will be boys, you know. Nothing important or disqualifying about a serial groper -- and no, Clinton was never charged with groping.

More absolutely disgusting sexism. YES, sexism. Defending/apologizing/minimizing/trivializing Arnold's sexist and possibly illegal behaviors is as SEXIST as the day is long.

Eloriel

if outrage over actual transgressions committed by politicians were substantial, Bush would never have gotten into the White House

I've frankly been pretty appalled at the pass Arnold's been given by some folks. It's disgusting. It's no big deal, if it was serious the women would have pressed charges sooner, it has no bearing on his ability to govern? Wtf, did I just walk into crazyland?

Women who have been assaulted by some blue-collar UPS guy or something have been afraid to come forward. Is it really that big a stretch to think that a woman might be even more afraid to press charges against a famous guy with a lot of money? Do the words "Kobe Bryant" mean anything to you? His accuser has been called everything from a moneygrubbing shrew, groupie, etc. I don't blame these women for not pressing charges. They'd be crucified by the same people who are excusing Arnold's behavior now.

Jesus H. Christ.

Between my previous post and this, I actually read the L.A. Times article. At this point, to hear even the slightest minimization or trivialization of these charges by ANYONE is likely to make me go fucking postal.

And no, Dolstein, Arnold DIDN'T give the right response. The right response would have been: I'm dropping out of the race. His other career should be over too. This man has gotten away with violating women for years and years now, because of his size and strength, his position, his money, his power. That's what he's getting off on: no one can stop me. It's beyond disgusting. And the OTHER right response is that Maria Shriver should divorce him, post haste. If not, she's an enabler. And then he should be sued into oblivion. And then forcibly castrated.

Eloriel

forcibly castrated. ouch! but I do agree with most of your post just not the barbaric part. It is something a fundlementalist might say. Caught stealing chop off the hands. I don't like that harsh of sentence but different strokes.

Of COURSE I wouldn't actually endorse such a thing. But ... I can dream.

:evilgrin:

Eloriel

I love ya.

:)**

He has three young daugthers too, what message does it give them?
What message will his son get, that it is ok to show no restraint and force yourself on a women and say, "I was just being playful."

What message does it give to young boy watch Arnie videos?
That not only is it ok to grope a woman, intimitate her and humiliate her but someone that does so, admits to some of it can still make millions from a movie, be idolised and elected into high office.
Are we saying that everything they were taught was wrong, that it is ok and the women do not matter?

I'm talking about the press and independents/swing-voters

Your indignation should mean something to them, but they could give a shit.

None of the women ever pressed charges.

As far as being accused goes, Clinton was accused of violent rape by Juanita Broadrick.

Clinton maintains his innocence. Clinton was investigated by the biggest government investigation in history and no evidence of any Groping was found. Do you honestly believe Ah-nold could withstand even a cursory investigation?

that is true.

I think if Clinton just would have been honest about the whole Paula Jones mess from the beginning and admitted what happened, people would have been a lot easier on him.

As far as no evidence, that's not true. You start with the two professed victims coming forward on national TV with their stories. That is evidence. Then each of them had people that they told the story to at the time. That is evidence too.

Now if you think they are all lying, that's fine. Then you don't believe the evidence, or you think the evidence is weak or made-up or whatever, but to say there was no evidence is just wrong.

Arnold has indeed been up against this before but never charged. That is correct. His womanizing is as well known here as side streets during rush hour traffic.
He confirmed and validated the story this morning when he could have said the whole thing was a political lie and all he had to do was survive until Tuesday. He didn't. This makes me think there is a bigger more serious event lurking that he did not want to encourage to surface.

As far as Clinton and the Juanite Brodderick issue. Let's not forget thaat 80 million dollars were spent investgating everything he did. THe RObert Ray report addressed this charge and found no credible corroboration.

sorry, this isn't clinton where the women were clearly being paid by the right wing to smear the President. These allegations against arnold have been around for a long time before he started running.

Well said.

When I saw that clip with Arianna Huffington, I saw a man that gets off on taking down strong women. He knows he has physical strengh and
enough star-power to treat women how he likes, he can always over power them. That is what the woman's head down the toilet thing is about too. What the hell will if you add Govenor of California to his
ego?
Youthful indiscretion is no excuse, most teenage boys know that groping is not a good thing to do.

Every woman in the history of the universe has had to deal with mashers and when you complain or object to the boorish behavior, the response is almost always the same -- "Don't take it personally." You're too sensitive." "Ah, I didn't mean anything by it." Sound familiar?

What's more apauling is that there are males ON THIS BOARD who apparently think the same way.

I couldn't stand the slimeball before and had heard groping rumors about him, but when taken altogether, it's a clear pattern. And these are just the women who came out. How many more are out there? My guess? HUNDREDS! ANY man who does this to women has NO RESPECT for the female gender. We are made of of tits, ass & p***y. That's it. That's our sole contribution to the history of the world.

Goddess I hate this mutha!

especially in here.

Arnold was correct in apologizing but he didn't
do it to anyone he's attacked, he did it in a
couple of sentence soundbite to quell the chat
so his political bus tour could get on the way.

It was just politically savvy as usual.

what he did was MINIMIZE what he did as "being playful," and he apologized for that.

Some of them are obvious trolls, but others I think may be serious.

I was utterly shocked today to have three -- THREE -- of my males friends who I thought were a little more evolved than the average Joe, tell me essentially the same thing:

Yeah, what he did was sleazy but, hey, at least he admitted it and he apologized, right (as if it straightened the whoel matter out).

When I heard that same sentiment repeated by a local news anchor I just about wnated to rip my hair out.

by a strange guy for no reason other than the
guy can get away with it.

Empathy needs to be taught in schools coz
it's not being taught at home anymore.

I'm going to be looking at two things...

1. I think this pretty much eliminates any chance of McClintock getting out of the race.

2. I'm interested to see how much Clinton shows up in public with Davis now for the rest of the campaign.

were about me. :shrug:

I have to wonder if women would want to work in a state where the governor has broad leeway to make appointments to state agencies that have broad authority over matters such as sexual harassment in the workplace.

and might i add...a more appropriate comparsion than bill clinton.
and we hope you survive the recall effort :hi:

HE'S A DISGUSTING PIG WHO SHOULD RESIGN FROM RUNNING FOR OFFICE. HE IS A GOD DAMN DISGRACE. And CLINTON IS NOT A SERIAL GROPER. EVER HEARD OF THE WORD CONSENSUAL????????????????????????????????????????

Juanita Broderick or Paula Jones? What makes the "anonymous sources" in the Arnold story any more credible than women who had the guts to come forward, subject themselves to character assasination, and make their accusations against Clinton?

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

Pure and simple. If he denied it, it would have just gone on and on. His "admission" killed the story.

it seems to me he could have gotten more mileage out of that...at least from his supporters. this seems like copping to a lesser offense to me...a plea bargain of sorts. we'll see if his calculation worked...frankly, i don't think it killed anything.
might have added more fuel to the fire, in fact.

I'm not saying that what Arnold did to these women was right. Far from it. I'm just saying that, from a political standard, he gave the right response.

Bingo! He have the "politically correct" response.

it was a good tactical move, though

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I didn't think she ever tried to make a dime out of the scandal. She's pretty well off. Link please?

Monica and Gennifer and Paula all tried to get the cash register going -- Monica the most I guess.

i believe so. and Paula Jones was thrown out of court

and she stuck to her guns, and testified so to the federal grand jury.

she said that the charges were cooked up for monetary gain by her husband at the time.

Link please.

Never heard of that? Link please?

Read The Hunting Of The President by Joe Conason and Gene Lyons.
Not a direct link but a damn good book that fully explains the Broadrick accusation. It is sickening people still believe it.

my mother always taught me you can't use "but everybody does it" as a line of defense. i think this will hurt him. it better. call everyone you know in cali and tell them to get out and vote NO RECALL. sort out the gray davis thing later, like next real election.

Davis is toast.

Hillary is going to be president someday. :)

.

is this kind of political posturing that's seen as "the right thing to do" just to get elected when it clearly ISN'T the right thing to do if you're a feeling human being.

Politically, Arnold gave a good tactical answer. As Chris Matthews pointed out, politicians always go for the coverup, and he thought that Arnold gave the proper answer.

As a groper, Arnold joins other notables such as Bill Clinton, Jack and Bobby Kennedy. Arnold has not been accused of rape, as William Kennedy Smith and Kobe Bryant were. Kobe Bryant, in particular, has been defended strongly in this board by some of the same people that are expressing horror at Arnold's behaviour.

BOB PACKWOOD nb. unwilling victims- not consentual. Thurmond was another toad

Don't worry IndianaGreen, I'm not associated with the Clinton-Bartcop-MarcPerkel good ol' tequila boys; I've never held a cigar in one hand and an "escort" in the other.

And mostly I thought Clinton's handshake was sorta limp.

:evilgrin:

peace

Since you feel that Arnold's lame excuse for illegally groping women was "the right response", do you feel the same way with his equally lame reaction to his praising of Adolf Hitler?

not be public officials. It didn't occur to the bastard to apologise BEFORE he was running for Governor.

Just want to make sure that if he dismisses things he did to women it is no less forgivable in the public eye than statements that make him appear to be a Nazi sympathizer..at least according to your political accumen.

Do you think he will be destroyed in the eyes of all Repukes? Dems? Women?

Or is dolstein right?

just about any moderate Dem/Independent women who were thinking of voting for him, and perhaps a few of the GOP gals who are feminists.

maybe that will be enough to keep him from becoming governor

although we brought a homemade poster to our Local wells Fargo this AM and won three no on recall ;anybody but Arnold, votes from the women there. The local Palm Desert tv station only showed forgiving pukes on tv tonite. One consultant was honest , and admitted ,"it could hurt him"

The article went to great legnths to be credible. So much so that Arnold was forced to tell the truth. Women voters are not monolithic but many are mothers.

I think this will also have an effect on conservative Repulicans who are sincere in their conservatism and there are many.

I do think some Republican Orange county mothers who thought poorly of Clinton will not think well of him.

I do think it will have an effect.

He is already forced to make excuses for himself.

I will agree that this is going to make more Repubs vote for McClintock

losing Christian Conservative votes to McClintock too.

I had just asked Dolstein the same question. See #78. :hi:

Hey, what would you say to your teenaged daughter if she got a job as an intern in Arnold's office?

I am so sorry, it seems this pig has never run into a woman who could use the metaphorical knife.

Damn, this had better be the end of his short career in politics or I am going to be pissed.

I can take you Arnold. Tom McClintock can take you. Gray Davis can take you. Arianna Huffington can take you.

You are the weakest link.

Good Bye.

Would you want your daughter around Big Dog?

Sexual double-standards are not attributes that are exclusive to Republicans.

What is it with this fucking straw dog bullshit...Every post you make on this subject convinces me you wish the worst for us.

in fact..Juanite Brodderick changed her story:

Ever hear of the book "The Hunting of the President" by...


...Joe Conason and Gene Lyons, and published in 2000 by St. Martin's Press in New York? Ever hear of the Arkansas Project, an operation funded by the American Spectator, who received their funds from Richard Mellon Scaife?

From page 345-346 of the aforementioned book:

"Nor was Paula Jones the only witness called whose story was far from persuasive. With the exception of Larry Nichols, Larry Case, and Say Mcintosh, virtually the whole cast of characters from the sexual side of the 'Clinton scandals' either filed afadavits or gave depositions between October 1997 and January 1998. Juanita Broaddrick had done both, adamantly insisting that the allegations made in Phillip Yoakum's widely circulated letter claiming Bill Clinton had sexually assaulted her in a Little Rock hotel in 1978 were spurious. No copies of tape recordings Yoakum claimed to have made of her allegedly confirming the charge ever materialized. Nothing surfaced that hadn't previously been reported. None of the president' accusers had done very well."

Webster's defines "spurious" as: "2. false; counterfeit; not genuine".

The story promoted by those associated with the Arkansas Project was completely false. But, do you really think she would have been given any television airtime to tell her side of the story during that point in time?

Please note the timing of the filing of the deposition and affadavit given by Juanita Broaddrick as sometime between October 1997 and January 1998. Clinton was president until January 2001, wasn't he?

I'm surprised that anyone, particularly if they knew about the Arkansas Project, believed ANY of the nonsense leaked to the press during Clinton's presidency.

Lyons and Conoson, two of Clintons longest running defenders say you shouldn't?

And if Sean Hannity says Rush is innocent, that would be good enough too I guess.

Broadrick is a professional woman and a Democrat. She hasn't as far as I know made any money off her story. She told her story on 60 Minutes, and that was it. She went back to her life. I haven't heard of any books or movies, or lines of handbags, or lectures or cabaret performances.

read books such as Blinded By The Right which confirms the systematic
attempts to derail the Presidency. The Hunting Of The President as about The Akansas Project and the same vast-right wing conspirancy that Hillary wrote about.
And if the incident happened in 1978, why wait nearly twenty years, the man had been Govenor, it would have finished him before he even thought to run. And why go to the media and not the police?
I seem to remember the story get alot of coverage but rags like The National Enquirer at the time.
The Freepers believe the story word for word, the delight in calling him a rapist. I am not saying you are a Freeper but you are using the same arguement that they do.

working with Bill Clinton. I don't believe he is a groper nor that he is ignorant of the meaning of consent. He work have had plenty of women working for him, only Monica had anything to tell the press about. Bill Clinton had a moment of stupidity and it nearly cost him his marriage, it was very public and very embaressing. It will be a shadow over him for the rest of his life.
His own daughter is a strong, well -adjusted, successful
young woman, so he must have done sometime right when he raised her.He and Hillary must be very good parents to raise a teenager in The White House so well.
I would have little trouble with a daughter of mine working for Bill Clinton, infact I would be proud of her, for having that level of success.

Arrnuld however shows no embaressment, no understanding of what he is apologising for and used a polictical debate to humilate a candidate, which was show around the world. I would not want a son of mine working for him let alone a daughter.

I really have very little respect for the man.

Anyway, to your points...

Clinton hired Gennifer Flowers onto the state payroll while he was having an affair with her. Though she says she did very little work for the money, she would still qualify as a woman working for him who had plenty to say to the press.

I don't think Clinton ever was in any jeopardy of losing his marriage. Of course we're each just posting our opinions. Mine is that Hillary came to terms with Bill's wandering ways long before he ever became president.

On Juanita Broadrick - I saw her on TV on 60 Minutes or one of those clone type shows. She explained why she waited 20 years and why she spoke up then. You can believe her or not. As far as I know she has not been after money or publicity. She told her story one time in a very reputable venue, and then she left the stage. No book deals, no movies, no websites. I believed her. Others may not. That's their choice. It's been posted here that she admitted she made it up for money and she recanted. I have never seen either of those things and have asked for links which seems like a reasonable request.

As far as books, I read political and history books voraciously.

There are some books I don't have any interest in though. There are too many others to read.

I would never read anything from Dick Morris. He for whatever reason has a thing for the Clintons and I would not trust anything he wrote because he slants so badly against them.

Conversely, I have no interest in Gene Lyons. He's made a career of defending the Clintons for 20 years now. I have no doubt that if Bill was on tv handing out Hustler magazines to 3rd graders, there would be a Gene Lyons column the next day in the paper defending him.

David Brock is in my opinion just a weirdo. He wrote these incredible conspiracy stories about how Bill was killing people down in Arkansas. Then he gets outed as a gay and then he's on the other side writing these conspiracy stories about what the right is doing. Sorry, not interested in him either.

I guess for a person who reads an awful lot I sound like I don't like books, but it's more choosing which books to read. There are many more good books than I could ever hope to get through, so I try to choose wisely.

I'm just finishing "Off Camera" by Ted Koppel. Light reading (diary style), but an interesting read of the impeachment proceedings by a pretty unbiased source.

Anyway, hope I haven't offended. I enjoy the conversations.

It was like, sorry ok, let's get on with me and them I'll tell you more about me. Sorry is bullshit in politics. Unfit to serve.

Move on nothing to see here, yup, "groped" a buttload of gals, but no big deal, I don't have a problem, on-set "hijinks" you know, no need to talk about it further....now, about that car tax!

and the media loves it

he's trying to appeal to white-men who don't like Bush...he's a pot-smoking, movie-star with a lot of money, trophy wife (hate to say) and the ability to grab-ass and get away with it

I'm not endorsing the asshole, but politics (as many Nader detractors have reminded me) does not foster a lot of reason...he could easily weather this storm


However, Arianna is trying to do something...posting a new GD thread

to see how she beats him senseless with this. :)

by the California penal code as misdemeanor sexual battery.

Consensual sex between adults is one thing (think Clinton, if you must), but grabbing someone without invitation is breaking the law. And how many times did this "let's bring California back" Republican break *this* particular law?

And now the latest thing -- back in 1975, Arnie said he admired Hitler. Yep, just the guy I want for my governor. Not!

NO on the recall, damn it!

Okay, you're right in that Arnold couldn't deny it. They had the drop on him. He had to admit it and say he was sorry. He could have been more contrite, but I not not sure that would have helped him.

If I had done what Arnold did, I'd be out of a job. It's just not acceptable any longer. These events happened only about three years ago, not back in the wild seventies. Whatever Arnold was then, he is too old now to be acting like a curious teenager.

I don't know how bad Arnold is going to be hurt by this, but he will be hurt. For him, the election can't come soon enough.

that McClintock didn't drop out. In that case, conservatives wouldn't have anywhere else to go.

I wouldn't be surprised if McClintock starts taking Republican votes back and Arnold starts to slip.

and that the Latino community will split their vote 60-40 in favor of a recall, but will vote solidly for Bustamante.

It is about time the rest of you admit that Davis is toast, and that he has nothing to offer that will solve California's problems, and that now is the time for California to have a Latino for governor.

Yes, Davis is toast. However, recalling him by itself won't solve the state's problems. Recalling him and replacing him with an empty suit certainly won't.

I don't think there are very many people out here who are going to vote for a candidate other than Bustamante simply because Bustamante is Latino.

It is unfortunate, but the Republicans are again selling the voters that bill of goods that Reagan sold. We have serious problems, and they are telling us that those problems can be solved painlessly. They're telling us that taxes don't need to be raised, just cut spending and the state's budget problems will be solved.

Baloney. It's going to take a combination of both tax increases and spending cuts and it's going to hurt. After the crooks in the Bush junta are removed from power, we might be able to do something about recovering funds from the corporate pirates who robbed Californians blind a couple of years back; however, for now, we can't count on that.

Gee that's interesting...he eliminated all but 8 billion of the debt.

Since all of your posts on this matter have been emotional responses to hit pieces in newpapers, perhaps you should take a moment to review what he actually DID accomplish while in office.

When you are through with that perhaps you can compare that to his two predecessors:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=459617#461392

I've always respected you IG but your ignorance on who Davis really is astounds me. It now makes me very suspect of your judgement that you would speak without at least a balanced set of facts.

Nothing else matters.

In the debate last week, Tom McClintock had it all over Arnold. One could disagree with McClintock all day long (and we certainly do at DU), but still recognize that McClintock has an idea of what he would do if elected. It may not be the right thing or the best thing in our opinion, but it's an idea. Arnold, on the other hand, was speaking in platitudes and being flippant with Arianna. The suit may be big and imposing, but it's still an empty suit.

If Republicans wanted somebody who knows what he's doing, they would have gone to McClintock after the debate. Better yet, Republican moderates would have opted for Peter Ueberroth, a man of proven ability, in the early going and made Arnold an also-ran.

It's hard to imagine a less qualified candidate for public office than Arnold. And that could have been said before this.

This may stop more people from deciding to vote for Arnold. However, I doubt it will change the minds of very many who have already decided to vote for him. We're doomed.

To watch the CA GOP - even some of it's most staunchly conservative members -- line up behind Arnie instead of McClintock because they view Arnie as a "winner" is a sad thing indeed. They are do desperate to take over the state they are willing to sell-out their most basic of GOP tenants. (Hey, kind of like the Dems voting Bush lite!)

I have said that I disagree greatly (and that's putting it MILDLY) with McClintock on his positions, but he is what he is and makes no bones about it: a classic, southern CA, conservative Republican. He's the real deal.