Ahhh nold

Whew! Finally! Ahhh-nold may rescue Minnesota from the ignominy of being the only state to heretofore have an "action figure" as Governor. }(

California, here I cum -- oops, there you go.:+

could he do worse than davis? at least he would not have his eye on the white house (i think that was part of davis' problem). from those of us outside of california, thanks guys for the entertainment value of your politics.

Well we have had another 2nd rate actor as Gov., Ronnie.

But this really will be great entertainment, Arianna Huffington and Gary Coleman entered today. Guess Garys motto will be "I'm here for the little people".

He just announced on Leno that he WILL run!!!

>Guess Garys motto

>will be "I'm here for the little people".

I thought it was, "Who you votin' for, Willis?" :+

While I appreciate the entertainment value of California's latest send-up of the democratic process and quickly acknowledge that I may be a stick in the mud, I cannot shake the troubling double-exposure in my mind. On the one hand, we have the greatest military and economic power in the recorded history of the world effectively dominating the entire planet. On the other hand, driving that power is George W. Bush & Co.; and one of that nation's largest components can't get it together to stick with a governor whom it elected by a huge majority only a few months ago. A citizen of another developed nation might well ask, Where is the sense in all this? Why do these people have the right to determine my future? Why should I believe what they tell me, that God's in his heaven and all's right with the world?

And why -- finally -- is this funny?

I'm with you, I'll vote no on the recall, but the cool thing is your vote still counts for the replacement if the recall passes.

I'm not sure who I'll vote for, I think Arianna would be great, the current Lt. Governor would be OK from what I know (it'd be great if he appointed Gray Lt. Governor then resigned... ), and the fun of voting for Gary Coleman could be hard to resist... :+

All that said, I'm not sure Arnold would be so bad. Fiscally conservative (I think no matter how liberal you are CA needs that right now...) but supports education and other important things, and I really like his 'screw the special interests' and 'he'd work for the people not big business' platform. He doesn't speak very well (he's only lived here 20-30 years, what do you expect...), but he does have a degree and was a self-made millionaire from business dealings before he was a bodybuilder/actor. And I love how independant he was from his political advisors in deciding to run!

Any other republican gets in, I'm there to sign the recall the day after he's sworn! It's time for progressives to stop simpering in the corner and start being big assholes like the neo-conservatives! Can't win an argument? Just scream over the opponent's points ala Bill O'Reily! I join Larry Flint in praying for O'Reily's death... Wouldn't accomplish much though, so very many more like him... I kind of wish Flint could be a serious candidate!

I really wish mainstream and journalism would stop being a contradiction wherever used together!

You see what happens when I don't get my fix of 'newest reviews' in the morning? I start arguing politics! Only you can prevent this, HooBoy! :7

Personally, I hope the Republicans behind the recall drive get what they wish for and win the governorship, because they will immediately go down in flames. California's problems aren't attributable to Gray Davis, they're structural. We have a dysfunctional legislature that has ducked out of dealing with virtually every major issue, leaving the field wide open to law-making by badly (or weaselly) drafted initiatives that have locked the state into a legal straight-jacket, tying the hands of both legislature and governor.

Whoever takes over from Davis will find out soon enough that his/her hands are tied by the same restrictions. Beginning with the infamous Prop 13, California voters have been persuaded by the extreme right wing to pass all kinds of laws restricting the legislature's ability to raise taxes or spend money. The result is that spending in many areas has been cut to the bone over the years. California's once-superlative public education system now ranks with the lowest in terms of per pupil expenditures. When times were booming, some of the problems could be papered over because tax revenues increased in spite of all the restrictions. Now that California is experiencing bad economic times, the state finds it has denied itself the tools for addressing the problems. A new governor will only be able to solve the state's financial crisis by cutting services that already have been severely cut in past years. That will mean hacking away at the already decimated educational system, reducing even more the no-longer-generous social welfare benefits provided to poor people (so there'll be even MORE homeless roaming the streets), letting roads/bridges/highways continue to deteriorate, etc. Unless there's a miraculous economic turnaround tomorrow or the next day, or the voters wake up to the damage they've caused and agree to repeal some of the restrictive revenue initiatives they supported in the past, California is heading for an epic collapse. I truly hope that when it happens, it's one of the right wingers who supported all the initiatives leading to this who's sitting in the driver's seat. At least it'll be poetic justice.

By the way, karma seems to be alive and spinning and schadenfreude fans can rejoice: Nasty Darrel Issa, the millionaire right-wing S.O.B. who used his own money to finance the recall process in the hope of winning the governorship for himself (after he was knocked out of the race in last year's Republican primary) has withdrawn from the race in tears because of Schwartzenegger's entry into the contest. Nothing like having the prize snatched away a second time before even getting the chance to run for it! Maybe Issa will finally get the message, but somehow I doubt it. x(

As for me, after 30 years living here I'm leaving California at the end of the month. It's broken, and I don't expect it to be fixed within my lifetime. It's sad, because it's like watching the once-magnificent Titanic sink into the ocean, but I didn't vote for any of the suicidal initiatives, and I'm not going down with this ship.

Will, Davis was not elected by a "huge majority" in the last cycle. He was already so unpopular going into the last election that he barely managed to defeat Simon, who ran one of the most inept campaigns in recent political history.

James, it's my understanding that Arnold made some money in California real estate during the 70s and 80s, but that hardly marks him as a financial genius. During that period all you had to do to make money in California real estate was buy a house and hold onto it. The principal reason Prop 13 passed is that the inflation in residential real estate prices had pushed values up so high that homeowners were being presented with property tax bills they couldn't pay -- people with modest incomes couldn't afford to live in their own homes any longer.

What would convince me that Arnold knows what he's doing is to see him take the budget that Davis just signed and tell us what changes he would make if he were governor. If he can't come up with a better budget than the present governor, what exactly would be the point of electing him? The same goes for the other challengers.

>What would convince me that Arnold knows what he's doing is to

>see him take the budget that Davis just signed and tell us

>what changes he would make if he were governor. If he can't

>come up with a better budget than the present governor, what

>exactly would be the point of electing him? The same goes for

>the other challengers.

There is no point of course. A huge number of Californians have gotten caught up in a scapegoat frenzy and are looking for a fall guy. Never mind that it doesn’t make sense. Various things came together and tanked the California economy. The govenor's political opponents have successfully mobilized two camps: Smart Republicans who smell blood and are going to take advantage of the situation and an ignorant mass of people who have been convinced that it is Davis’ fault simply because it happened on his watch.

I do not fault the Republicans – that’s just politics as usual – but I almost hope for the worst just so the ignorant mass can get what they deserve. And I will admit that it brought a great smile to my face to see Issa shedding those crocodile tears. Talk about having your grand plan thwarted! (I’m not bitter or anything. Yeah, right.)

I have never been a huge Davis fan, but mostly because he is so lackluster. He has always felt like an administrator rather than a leader. However, he was elected and this is ridiculous that we are not just waiting until the next election to take care of this. Do these idiots actually think anyone can step in and single-handedly fix the California economy?

It will be interesting. It’s going to be a choice between lesser evils and I have no sense for how the election will go. I know they got the required signatures, but there are an enormous number of people who are offended by this process and the perception that Issa bought the recall. Maybe we’ll see a backlash and the recall will fail. Won’t that turn out to be a wonderful use of scarce tax dollars?

>Will, Davis was not elected by a "huge majority" in the last

>cycle.

Thanks, and of course you're right. After I had hit the "Post Message" button I realized that I was wrong about the size of the majority. What dominated my thinking is the fact that the majority of eligible Californians voted in the election. Unfortunately, that alone is newsworthy, and I let its importance grow in my memory.

This is one of those instances in which I think the internal politics of a particular state have serious consequences for the rest of the nation. That might not be true of a state with a tiny population and a minimal influence on the rest of the country's culture, to say nothing of its economic and political life. For those reasons, it seems to me that the situation in California is relevant to all U.S. citizens.

Did he ever escort? I was looking at some old pics from his early body-building days in Austria, and my gaydar went crazy!

I've been wondering about this as well... It's my understanding that many/most modern day bodybuilders are available for muscle worship at the least, usually more for more $$$$. It probably makes $400/hr look like a bargain though...

And there was a huge gay following for his bodybuiler movie... he didn't really need the $$$ though so maybe he stayed out of it (or was completly impotent at the time from the steroids he's never taken...).

He's already made comments about Davis and negative campaigns... I do wonder what may 'come out' during the campaign.

I would be willing to bet that given that Davis has a history of negative and dirty campaigning, that Davis is supported by the Clintons, that the Clintons had access to the FBI files (filegate scandal, if you remember), that the Clintons used the files before (did you really think that all those people came out of the woodwork to blame the anti-Clinton congresspersons without someone looking them up), then if there were something to this it would have been brought up long before now. If there were something about someone helping Arnold in Austria a long time ago, that person is probably senile by now and even the liberal media would not bank on that one!!

There have always been rumors about Arnold's availability when he was younger and a starving young bodybuilder, alone in a foreign land. There are also a few nude shots floating around somewhere. I don't know that anyone much cares in California. This whole election is such a circus anyway! And there's already a porn actress and Larry Flynt in the race, so any youthful indescretions on Arnold's part will seem like minor stuff in comparison.

On the whole, if he's a social liberal but fiscal conservative, he fits neatly into the mold of what most California voters seem to want. But, wait! Isn't Gray Davis a social liberal but fiscal conservative? Is everyone else just as confused, or is it only me

(Don't get me wrong, I'm no great Gray Davis fan, but compared to what he was running against he looked like the Messiah! He may not win charisma contests, but then, does anyone remember two-term governor George Deukmejian? That guy was so gray and colorless that to this day nobody knows what he looks like!)

>If there were something about someone

>helping Arnold in Austria a long time ago, that person is

>probably senile by now and even the liberal media would not

>bank on that one!!

I am not sure. I just read this week that his father was a Nazi officer, and former UN Secretary General (and another former Nazi) Kurt Waldheim was the best man at his wedding. Apparently, he paid off some LA Jewish groups to keep all this quiet. Let's see if they honor the contract! A gay Nazi for Governor, what will they think of next?

That sounds like wishful liberal thinking.

I don't see how Arnold could be a Nazi and make it in Hollywood at all these days! A lot of Germans and Austrians were sons of Nazi officers and soldiers. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China if the sons are not Nazis?

At the time Arnold was married was there any scandal in the press about Kurt Waldheim? As the Secretary General of the UN, having him as best man would be a coup, especially since he was marrying into the Kennedy clan (for what that was worth).

I think we should just talk about what Arnold is and what he stands for, not what somebody wants to make of him. If you want to take your analogy further, then the son of a wife beater would not be suitable for anything since he is by definition a wife beater since his father was. Same principle.

>I am not sure. I just read this week that his father was a

>Nazi officer, and former UN Secretary General (and another

>former Nazi) Kurt Waldheim was the best man at his wedding.

I believe you are mistaken. Kurt Waldheim was not at Arnold's wedding, and he certainly was not his best man. I believe he sent a gift to the couple for their wedding, but he was not there.

>Apparently, he paid off some LA Jewish groups to keep all this

>quiet. Let's see if they honor the contract!

I was surprised to see that Simon Wiesenthal was so quick to denounce the media reports (including one in Slate) regarding Arnold's links to Waldheim and other Nazis. Even though the Slate article - like all the "Nazi" smears against Arnold - contained nothing but innuendo and rank guilt by association, it nonetheless surprised me that Wiesenthal was so eager to defend him.

But then, last week, Schwarzenegger released his tax returns which included a list of charitable contributions, one of which was a several hundred thousand dollar donation to the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles. That clarified everything.

>I think we should just talk about what Arnold is and what he

>stands for,

I’d love to…if he would just tell us. So far we know what he was involved with prior to becoming a candidate and that amounts to youth physical fitness programs. He says he has “a plan” but won’t give any details. He is completely running on his celebrity and has obviously decided that is enough to get him by. Why answer questions when you might alienate the people who disagree with you?

What’s really, really sad is that this clown could actually get elected with this tactic!

I'll bet you'll make a huge donation!

>I think we should just talk about what Arnold is and what he

>stands for, not what somebody wants to make of him.

It looks like this is going to be a fun one for the Jewish neo-cons. How are you going to get around this one. An interesting double standard is developing. Imagine if his name were Sharpton or Jackson, would so many be so quick to brush off Arnold's Nazi past?

http://www.newhavenregister.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=9998464&BRD=1281&PAG=461&dept_id=7581&rfi=6

Some take a low blow at Arnold

Zev Chafets 08/13/2003

I want to say something about the accusations that California gubernatorial candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger is — how to put it? — too Austrian.

But before I do, I need to make something clear about my attitude toward Austria: I don’t like it.

All my life I have endeavored to avoid Austrian products (not hard if you’re not into beer and cookies). I’ve never visited the place and don’t intend to.

My aim isn’t to singlehandedly destroy the Austrian tourist industry. It’s just that hanging out with Adolf Hitler’s countrymen isn’t my idea of a relaxing vacation.

I’d probably dislike Austria no matter what kind of country it became after World War II. But the modern version strikes me as an unnecessarily nasty place. Decades after Germany took responsibility for the crimes of the Nazis, Austria still falsely portrays itself as Hitler’s victim instead of his enthusiastic supporter.

The country seems to have a passion for louses. In the 1970s, Austrian Chancellor Bruno Kreisky was a prominent supporter of Yasser Arafat and other Arab terrorists. More recently, the neofascist Freedom Party has been a member in good standing of Austria’s coalition government. That party’s leader is Jorg Haider, an admirer of Hitler and friend of Saddam Hussein.

Before Haider, there was Kurt Waldheim. The fact that the former U.N. secretary-general was a Nazi war criminal didn’t deter the Austrians from electing him president in 1986.

Which brings me back to Arnold. Since announcing his candidacy on the Jay Leno show, he has become the object of a campaign to smear him as a Nazi sympathizer. The paint comes mostly from "Arnold: An Unauthorized Biography," written by Wendy Leigh and published in 1990.

Waldheim is the brush.

According to Leigh, Schwarzenegger is close to Waldheim — so close, in fact, that he invited the ex-Nazi to his Hyannis Port, Mass., wedding to Kennedy cousin Maria Shriver. Waldheim thoughtfully didn’t show up, but he did send a gaudy gift. This reportedly prompted Arnold to declare his love (and Maria’s) for Herr Waldheim.

This friendship forms the basis of a politically motivated gambit to disqualify Arnold from political office. Slate’s Timothy Noah summed up the campaign nicely: "If Schwarzenegger doesn’t renounce Waldheim in a highly public way, he can forget about ever becoming governor of California."

Really?

Schwarzenegger was born in 1947. He has lived most of his life in the United States. True, his father was a Nazi police official in the old country, but that isn’t Arnold’s fault. In fact, it was Arnold who outed the old man by asking the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center to investigate his father’s past.

Schwarzenegger himself is a strong supporter of Israel and a generous contributor to Jewish causes. For this he has been declared kosher by no less a hard-liner than the head of the Wiesenthal Center, Rabbi Marvin Heir.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not an Arnold fan. I’ve never liked his movies or his cheesy public persona. I also don’t care who becomes the next governor of California. To me, it’s like the debate over gay bishops in the Episcopal Church — interesting, but not my problem.

What I do care about is the cynical manipulation of Hitler’s legacy for political purposes. Casting Schwarzenegger as a Nazi sympathizer — for the greater good of Gov. Gray Davis or any of the other candidates — is a crime against human memory.

By trivializing evil, California’s Holocaust impliers become, wittingly or not, allies and accomplices of the Holocaust deniers.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Zev Chafets is a columnist for the New York Daily News, 450 West 33rd Street, New York, N.Y. 10001; e-mail: [email protected].

Arnold, schmarnold.

THIS is the candidate we should all get behind (you should pardon the expression):

http://www.marycareyforgovernor.com/

(hey, at least she's GOT a platform!)

>(hey, at least she's GOT a platform!)

Arianna Huffington also has a platform, instead of stale, simple one-liners, and it's a good one.

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/03/39/dissonance-cooper.php

Success is a good sign

I would rather go with a successful person, instead of the losers, so many politicians are. A successful person does not have to put people down every chance they can. A sure sign of a loser is their negativite approach to life, so they will screw up everything they touch. And that is the state California finds itself in.

Things would go much better, if people voted for the person and not the party. It is killing them and they won't admit it. Too bad!x( :-( ;(

RE: Success is a good sign

Well, is it possible the good citizens of California are starting to wake up from their long slumber? According to last night's TV news, a new L.A. Times poll shows Democratic Lt. Gov. Bustamante leading! (35% to Ahhnold's 22%!) This could change, I know, but it's an interesting statistic, given all the media frenzy over the Musclebound One's candidacy!

BTW, can anyone explain exactly what it is Ahhnold's had done to his face? Terminal Botox? Too many face lifts? The close-ups on the tube last night were really quite scary! He looks like an animated figure from a wax museum! Not a wrinkle in his vast forehead, and all the skin on his face looking very stretched and thin! Where's the National Enquirer when you really need them?