Now there's a possibility that Arnold has a kid

from a seven year affair. On CNN Reliable Resources the editor of the National Enquirer said that they are about to break a story about this being a possibility - I LOVE IT!

Loves those kids!!!

pass on admitting that he had fathered her kid.

It was fun watching the reporters "listen" to the lady and Arnies staff - even though they took her aside and kept the press back - it may be some in the press had directional amp mikes - in any case some in the press start yelling "love child"

but of course this did not make the evening broadcasts, did it?

:-)

this is starting to sound like freepers talking about Jesse Jackson.

and the word to a song from the sixties is rolling through my head.
i think the song was harper valley pta...

thankyouverymuch

belly up to it now. it's a matter of principles with me.

an open debate about the issues but for his scripted appearance in ONE debate. I do agree with you as far as the child may be concerned, however as I have read the terms "love child," illegitimate child, and bastard on DU. The child should NOT be called names that are the equivalent of a scarlet letter.

Be that as it MAY, notice that Jesse Jackson's chances of holding public office were RUINED. Why should it earn Arnold a vote?

it shouldn't enter into it IMHO. people's private lives are not the public's concern. i've been yelling that from the rooftops since clinton. i'm not talking about the groping either as that may be a matter of law. i'm talking about this particular issue of whether he has a child by another women. it's not our business.

to tell you the truth, i'm disgusted that there aren't enough political issues that can be campaigned on to win this.
i can't go farther because i may be over the line already.

He made the choice.

have gone with this story if he had agreeded to more debates?

i don't believe that for a NY minute..

public interest when he gets to appoint 1400 positions many dealing with the status of women.

Arnold entered the race on August 6, the story took 6 or 7 weeks to confirm. As far as the story, the LA times did not run that so what is your issue? I thought we were only talking about his private life and NOT the allegations that he may have committed the crime of assault based on your first post.

Are you now changing the terms?

this thread is not titled arnie is a serial abuser.

was about his GROPING not about the possible child out of wedlock. Please look at your post.

I already agreed with you about the child. I simply stated that HE MADE IT ABOUT HIM...his campaign slogans are all about HIM but for gratuitous slams made at policies he CANNOT change.

he could have issued the most specific plan immaginable and given the story in the paper, all that would have been cast aside for these charges. seriously, can you see the media doing indepth analysis of his budget plans when there is sex at play?

on edit NSMA, i may responded to you incorrectly about changing the terms. i've been in about three of these threads and i'm a little dizzy about who said what, and when.

and remember I DO agree with your basic premise that if he had a child out of wedlock that is off limits and should NOT be a subject of concern.

If his budget plan were set aside by the charges of the child...that would be wrong but I doubt those charges would set it aside.

If his budget plans were set aside by the charges of sexual harrassment, that would be fine with me. I am tired of economics trumping social policy at every turn. People who DOn'T know the difference between right and wrong are responsible for our nations budget mess whether we are talking about Skilling, Lay, Milkne, Arnold or anyone else.

Their inability to distinguish legal behavior from behavior which is either ILLEGAL, USEd to be ILLEGAL or SHOULD be is why we have seem 7 trillion dollars leave our economy.

I trust their budget no more than their judgement on when to keep their hands to themselves be it with the public's money or their bodies.

i have no problem with the grop stuff being aired. if it's true he should own it and suffer the consequences. i wish it had come out earlier so it had time to develop more substance but better late than never.

i would have preferred if the times had spent seven weeks looking into the lay connection as well as the sex stuff because it's more important on the national level re:bush.

my only objection today was going into maria's looks and mental health, their marriage and his children, whoever they are.

sexist statements, prejudice about mental health cloaked as concern, and scarlet letter posts about marital infidelity. We both know that.
It is a shame. I'd expect better from educated people but make no assumptions that all who post here are educated nor sensitive ;-)

As far as the timing of the Times, if they had run this story PRIOR to him RUNNING for governor, I would have considered it TABLOID worthy since there was no reason to print allegations. They researched the story and published it when the research was complete.

The issue that featured Rush on the cover just came out. In fact, my local Walgreen's doesn't even have it yet, though the supermarket does. I believe the new issue comes out Thursday, which would be too late unless it's covered in the LA Times, etc. tomorrow.

because that was mentioned during the interview (how they wanted to get it out before the election).

and the National Press will follow their lead.

:toast:

:-)

:-(

:-)

the race because she didn't want all this stuff revealed. She knows all too well the kind of man she is married to. But naturally Arnie doesn't give a damn about the feelings of his wife and children and decided to run anyway. Well now he is going to have to deal with it.

She should have told him that she would leave him if he ran, for her own sake.

Don

all this couldn't possibly get rolled out within a month's time.

And with the press in abeyance, no problem!

Don't think Maria knew that there were so many other victims to come out of the woodwork.

CNN showed a poll this morning. Now only 50% of people agree with the recall, down about ten points, they said. They said the poll was taken after the revelations about Ahnold's womanizing. I think many Californians are deciding there IS something worse than Davis.

there's a lot worse than Davis - but I've been a Davis supporter so I'm biased. This Arnold character is sicker than I ever imagined.

... I'm going to CA with a pickup truck full of bumper stickers that read "DON'T LOOK AT ME.. I DIDN'T VOTE FOR HIM". I'll sell millions.. I'll make millions.

n/t

it's sexual battery. not "womanizing".

Unless he has run a "family values" campaign, this is irrelevant. I am not familiar enough with his campaign to know if he has or not.

If the allegations are true, Arnold is guilty of CRIMES, not just adultery or boorish behavior.

I think I've started two threads now about how his sexual assaults were not just adultery or boorish behavior. What I think is probably irrelevant is the subject of this thread, the "love child" allegations.

part of a pattern of behavior and I am really starting to wonder about how ugly the WHOLE story is. I've worked with professionals in the field of sexual abuse and know a lot more about this type of behavior than I wish I did.

A "love child" would likely only be evidence of a consensual sexual relationship. I am of the opinion that consensual sexual relationships between adults are private and only become my business when one of the parties makes it my business. In this case, if Arnold has been campaigning on what a stand-up family man he is, then it would be relevant. I don't know if that's what he's been doing or not. I suppose you could make the case that he has been since his wife has been campaigning so prominently for him.

In any case, there are some things that I feel public figures have a right to keep private, and this is usually one of them. I don't think it adds anything to the case that has already been made against him WRT the sexual assaults.

If Groper has a "lovechild," it's certainly relevant.

Keep in mind that Groper has been embraced by the Republican machine and in particular by the current resident of the Whitehouse. The Republican party has made traditional "family values" a central part of it's platform. It's continued endorsement of a boorish, megalomaniacal misogynst, notwithstanding the revelations regarding his pattern of sexual misconduct, further demonstrates the hypocrisy of the Republican Party as a whole.

Moreover, should Groper have a "love child," the manner in which he has contributed to the child -- emotionally, financially, etc. -- is a measure of his worth as a man. I certainly would like to know the details before he became my governor!

They portray themselves as the party of moral valuses and then they throw their full support behind Arnold who has such questionable moral values.

slip on over to freepville and see what they think of arnie.

I mean the party itself. All I can say is that it sure seems to me like the party has abandoned McC since they've asked him to withdraw from the race. surely there will be people who will vote for McC. But the party isn't doing anything to encourage this, afaik.

on this because voters say look at his wife and his great family life. Remember he ran a proposition to establish himself as pro kids. I think it sure has much to do with his image that he has carefully crafted that he had outside affairs and fathered children. Also, remember the allegations that he had an affair with a 16 year old. Then this lady in red allegation that she was 16. I don't know about the last two but I do believe they need investigation.

It's not that he has a "family values campaign", as much as that his party attacked Clinton for eight years.

that they have a lovey dovey, middle class (quiet desperation) type of relationship--this proves it is another lie.

And from what Maureen Dowd says, Arnold did not condemn Clinton--and now we know why.

If this information had been public two weeks ago then maybe something could have been made of it. I agree that a consensual relationship between adults is nobodies business, this just goes to show ahnies lack of feeling for anyone else.
If California elects this man, I don't think they'll elect another republican for a long long time.

if Arnie flagrantly broke the solemn vows he made to his wife, then why should we believe he'll keep his promises to the voters of the state?

If one of the Democratic Presidential candidates is revealed to have cheated on his/her spouse, would you not support that person because they broke their solemn vows?

Limbaugh, Lott, Gingrich, Novak, and the countless names from Iran/Contra, the savings and loan scandals, are there any that I am forgetting? Any more recent?

the tip of a HUGE iceberg! If 15 women and a "lovechild" have come out...just wait.

There would be a kid involved and it's not worth the pain and suffering. I said the same thing when it was told that Clinton had supposedly a "love child".

would suffer the fallout from this. Not right. I also remember what the Repukes did and said about Jesse Jackson when his "lovechild" was exposed. They are such hypocrites.

and because she must have two incredible parents, look at her shine.

If arn has a love child, odds are that he is not contributing to the child's well-being, and bringing this out will force him to do so.

Though from the story about the lady in red, sounds like she got a big payoff. That should pay for the diapers and college and more. (speculation, purely)

The only time a child out of wedlock should be discussed is if the person is a moral extremist. Arnold hasn't brought sex outside marriage up as an issue, so it's therefore unimportant.

They sure know how to sell family values

he wants to be a "Champion for Women", doesn't this challenge his credibility?

For that reason alone, these charges are fair game......

He doesn't say "Champion for Married Women" or "Champion for Marriage Vows."

Now, him saying he wants to be a "Champion for Women" while he's apparently sexually assaulted a whole bunch of women, THAT challenges his credibility.