It's not the "sexual assault" it's the "womanizing"

Arny's support from Republicans makes them condoners of womanizing, cheating on one's spouse, taking other men's women. OK? We need to stop shouting "sexual assault" and "sic the law on him." That is lame and doesn't work. Our strong play is to simply exploit the taboos and deap-seated feelings Clinton brought out with Monica.

Arny is someone who cheated on his spouse, who dishonored marriage. The Republicans have now made themselves official endorsers of that -- something the Dems never did with Clinton. Played right, the GOP's big Arny win can turn into a huge philosophical loss for the Repubs. It is a blow amidships for them, and we need to help widen the hole.

Crying "sexual assault" will backfire. When Arny takes his pictures with the smiling little Bush, it should be a picture of a womanizing spouse-cheater and a corporate puppet.

People didn't believe it because of tis timing.

Let the story takes its time winding through the courts, etc. (some of these women, I believe, are going to sue) and people will start to get it and wake up.

That's fine, and I hope Arny ends up socked with a big judgement or in the slammer (if he's guilty).

But my main point is core philosophy. The sanctity of marriage is an important thing to people, and the GOP has enjoyed a perceived advantage there. It's a deep gut level issue with men and women both, particularly with boomers who have been through divorces and rough times.

The GOP has endorsed infidelity. If Arny committed sexual assault, let the law run its course. But the GOP has opened a Pandora's box.

Henry Hyde didn't phase them neither did Newt Gingrich. Most of the Republican leaders have been married more than once and been exposed as the hypocrites they are but people don't care. They just want to be on the winning side and right now that is the Republican side. Things change and if fidelity were truly an issue with voters the Democratic leaders shine. Almost all are with their one and only spouse of many years and have wonderful children but like I say people don't care.

after the election. Well, he sure did, when asked at his first appearance he waved his hand and said: "That's old news."

None of these women reported any of this to the authorities when it happened. It's disgusting, but 20 years form now, will we have women trying to pin their girl-kissing-girl antics on the men in bars who watched?

What I really, really don't understand is why no one made mention of Arnold's total lack of experience. While he was out pinching girls' breasts, others were gaining experience or trying to educate themselves to be political leaders. The only qualifications I've heard that Arnold has is that he stays up all night watching CNN and FOX - until Maria comes in and forces him to go to bed.

but his wife has to force him to go to bed with her?

nice catch.

"Arny's support from Republicans makes them condoners of womanizing, cheating on one's spouse, taking other men's women."

Let's remember that although our intentions are good, words can backlash if not carefully crafted before we put them up for the world to see.

Don't be ridiculous. It's not ownership. It's a bond and a bond that the Republicans just spat on.

If someone hands you a candy heart that says "Be Mine" are they asking to become your owner? Get real!

arnie did more than cheat, he assaulted and humiliated women. If Clinton haters cannot see the difference between assault and consensual sex then the problem is with them and not for me to minimize arnie's behavior to sugar coat it for them to make it easier to swallow.

It's about the GOP's condoning of spouse cheating and womanizing. Arny is scum if the allegations are true. But the GOP has sullied itself, and that's a big picture that can help engulf one particular little man named Bush. If the GOP loses its sanctimonious "face" over Arny (and it has), they start their big slide.

Arny is the styrofoam that just knocked a heat tile off of the Republican's right wing.

I re-read your initial post and I'm in agreement with your point.

. . and apply a logical analysis - coming to the justifiable conclusion that RW morality is a political illusion that's only use is for trashing democrats.

The neo-cons (since Gingrich) have invested heavily in creating a visceral hatred of the left - to the point that taking power from dems and humiliating us trumps their own heralded "family values".

Instead of condemning themselves for their own hypocracy (something they have never exhibited in my memory) - they will be savoring the sweet irony of killing us with a creature who embodies our own worst values (in their eyes). That or they'll just be happy with whatever works to get Bush* in for another term.

Do you realize how this post sounds? "So what if Arnold grabbed women without their permission? Calling it assault is lame. We need to say that the problem is cheating on his wife."

Good grief!

Thanks for giving me the chance to clarify more...

I'm not saying "so what" about the sexual assault charges. If they succeed, so much the better. But even if they don't, it's time to celebrate. Paradoxical, I know.

Celebrate that the GOP has endorsed someone who at a minimum cheated on his wife. The GOP just spat on the sanctity of marriage live and on camera. To my knowledge, it has never happened before.

The Dems condemned Clinton for his behavior with Monica. The Republicans endorsed Arny enthusiastically. It's night and day, consensual or not.

The thing is - some of the cases WERE sexual assault. There has been a lot of semantic ways of downplaying issues of assault and rape against women for years. To just make it "bad boy behavior" when it is MUCH more serious than that, adds to the attitudes that make these crimes and behaviors far to common.

That does not mean strategy should be push Assault, over Bad Behavior. It means that one should not back away from one to push the other. Find the way to push the overarching message and framing of the issue that you believe will be more effective (and you are probably not incorrect on that point), but that does not at the same time downplay the assault angle. The image of having someone uninvitedly reach down my pants to stroke my private parts - is frankly - repulsive. Just playing it as philandering (connotes consenusal) especially given how high profile the charges were made, does have long-term unintended consequences.

So how in that message does one not fully back away from the nature of his actions while not highlighting those actions as the framing of the issue for the public?

Find how to do that - and you have the effective message.

Arny was unfaithful to his wife at a minimum, and tests of marital faith occur every single day in the minds of nearly all people. The GOP has endorsed Arny who at a minimum was unfaithful to his wife. That's my point.

We may or may not be able to pin sexual assault on Arny. If so, fine. But people at large have a very high standard of evidence for believing such charges. The womanizing case is cut and dried, and hits every American in a deep part of their psyche.

the philandering is bad line. It is a gimmick. Many of them cheat as well (rates for cheating within marraige are, afterall, quite high). Thus pinning it on Arnold doesn't work the way it did on Bill. Because it was never, imo, about that in the first place. It was just a 'hook' on which the talkingheadwing echo chamber could deried, denegrate and sneer at Clinton day in and day out.

They know they have their own cheaters. And those folks keep getting elected.

I don't think it really makes a difference to them. And if the media isn't harping 24/7 as they did with Clinton (and it was the HARPING, not the content, which had a long term effect), then there is no impact anyway.

I think more to point is reminding of the boorish behavior aspect. His penchant for talking about cumming (on Oprah no less), for refering to women's body parts and women themselves as cunts. He is really a rather gross person.

Like Jesse Ventura, this persona is so ingrained that he can't keep it under control all of the time. He will say stupid things in public that will be offensive and show just what a gross, crude man he is. The thing is, I belive his attitudes are much worse than Ventura's and as a result the things he will inevitably say and do in public will make Ventura's legendary slips look like childrens' stories.

Many Minnesotan's refer to cringing at the image of bafoon from some of Ventura's antics. Now think of Arnie doing the same but in magnitude (eg More frequently and more vulgar).

Let Arnie become the embrassment.

This way one doesn't fool ourselves to believe that womanizing will work against him, nor do we down play the grossness of his behavior. Just amplify what a boor he is, and how gross his comments are, and how consistent the alleged behavior is with the language he uses. That last part one doesn't have to even work at - people will remember the charges. Play up his comments and attitudes towards women (and he will keep saying stupid stuff to give more and more material) - and folks will make the connection to the allegations... and grow a tad bit more uncomfortable... because the consistency is there.

True, the GOP has cheaters and they know it. But here is what is absolutely critical: They enjoy an advantage over the Dems in morality not because they do the right things but because they say the right things. It's paradoxical, but it runs miles deep I would argue, right to the core of denial and unwritten laws that most live by.

We are not ever going to get the pubbies on hypocrisy. They say they are for something, stray from it, and pray for forgiveness (enter rehab, become reborn, etc.). Then they are magically back on track. The pubbies have mastered the art of self-redemption. Witness Jimmy Swaggart, George Bush and, soon, Rush Limbaugh.

I don't want Dems to say "pooh-pooh on Arnold's cheating." I want us to use it as a powerful wedge with people that don't like the idea of cheating, people whose lives have been hurt by it, who have an internal psychological struggle over it every day.

The pubbies have given the go-ahead for cheating. That is the way it should be framed. If you don't like the idea that your spouse might be cheating on you, which party condemned a cheater (Clinton) and which party cheered one (Schwarzenegger)?

why did Maria support Arnold? She knew what she was in for, ie. the drugs, womanizing etc...because my theory, however, vapid is that Maria told Arnold that she would support him, but once he was elected and somewhat "established" he must switch to the Dem party.

I am not on crack, but I believe this could happen, I mean it's not like Arnold is a "real" Republican.