Governor Schwarzenegger - Page 9 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-03-2003, 06:09 PM   #121
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
I think its Rubbish that Democrats and Womens groups are coming out now to attack Arnold on his alleged "sex actions" from decades ago. Where the hell were all these Womens groups when several women came out to say that Bill Clinton Raped them? These Women groups care more about their pet political issues than whether any of these women were actually harmed. They'll use them when their politically useful, ignore them when their politically not. For the political party to do that is one thing, for Womens group that should be concerned strictly with the health of women, this is not understandable.
True, but don't tell me that Republicans aren't guilty of the same hypocrisy? If Clinton pulled half the shit that Bush did during his administration thus far, we'd be embroiled in scandal.

It's interesting on how easy the GOP is willing to forgive the CIA leak, but went on the war path with something as relatively innocuous as Whitewater.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
Old 10-03-2003, 06:20 PM   #122
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 07:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
It's interesting on how easy the GOP is willing to forgive the CIA leak, but went on the war path with something as relatively innocuous as Whitewater.
There is no GOP forgiveness on the CIA leak.

White House Deadline Set for Leak Probe Records

Quote:
Each employee must sign a form certifying that all documents have been produced or that they have no documents related to the probe.

Gonzales said he gave the employees until October 7 "to ensure compliance with the time deadlines imposed" by the Justice Department.
This will rightfully be prosecuted.
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 10-03-2003, 06:38 PM   #123
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:56 AM
i think we crossed threads




If they wanted the truth they would have got the legal authority to walk in on day one or two and seized computers and corespondents records, phone logs etc. They might have found evidence that could prove where the leak came from.

Right,

Here is a search warrant, we will be back in, say 10 days, please preserve any evidence that might incriminate you, leading up to 10 years in federal prison. Now be sure and save that incriminating evidence.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 10-03-2003, 06:44 PM   #124
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 07:56 AM
Walk in on every employee of the Executive Branch? It would take 10 days to mobilize such an army. And an independent counsel, even if appointed on Monday, would be no faster.

It is too hard now a days to eliminate evidence.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 10-03-2003, 06:45 PM   #125
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
It is too hard now a days to eliminate evidence.
Unless the Justice Department doesn't care to find any.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 10-03-2003, 07:04 PM   #126
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 10:56 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
I think its Rubbish that Democrats and Womens groups are coming out now to attack Arnold on his alleged "sex actions" from decades ago. Where the hell were all these Womens groups when several women came out to say that Bill Clinton Raped them? These Women groups care more about their pet political issues than whether any of these women were actually harmed. They'll use them when their politically useful, ignore them when their politically not. For the political party to do that is one thing, for Womens group that should be concerned strictly with the health of women, this is not understandable.
Preach it!!!!
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 10-03-2003, 07:35 PM   #127
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 11:56 AM
Sting, I won't try to deny partisan politics behind this, and other similar, scenarios.

But...

I can think of several valid reasons why a woman wouldn't necessarily come forward with this type of accusation before he was running for governor. First, as one of THE Hollywood leading men, he's immensely rich and powerful, as any governor or Senator or president who has done the same thing. Secondly, now that he quite conceivably hold a seat of some power, it matters a lot more now than before.

For the life of me, I will never understand why the women who have the guts to step into the glare of a harsh, circus like public and state the truth (which, as he himself admits, it was) are treated as if THEY were the ones doing the harrassing, not the other way around. Purposefullly or no, it ends up perpetuating that "boys will be boys" bullshit that in part allows women to be raped at a tragic rate.

Cheryl

PS I don't know about N.O.W or other women's groups, but this woman screamed bloody murder at Clinton too.
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 10-06-2003, 10:11 AM   #128
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,983
Local Time: 10:56 AM

Of course it's a tabloid, so who knows...

London tab: Terminator fathered love child
By Inside Track
Monday, October 6, 2003

A London newspaper has reported Arnold Schwarzenegger secretly fathered a child with a California flight attendant while he was married to Maria Shriver.

According to The Daily Mail, the woman, Tammy Baker-Tousignant, has told her friends the actor and candidate for governor is her son's father, though she has previously denied the claim to the British press, and Arnold insists it is not true.

The National Enquirer confronted her outside the suburban Brea, Calif., home she shares with her husband, and she said only, ``I don't want to talk about this.''

The Enquirer cited an ``inside source'' who said the two were very close a decade ago.

``She was in her mid-20s when she and Arnold first met and struck up a friendship,'' said the source. ``She was a flight attendant aboard a private aircraft that Arnold frequently chartered.

``While Arnold was married, he was smitten by her bubbly personality,'' the source said, adding, ``She was equally smitten by his celebrity status.''

The Eniquirer also said the source claimed the affair went on for some time - prompting a good deal of gossip - and that Maria Shriver got wind of it in the late 1990s and arranged for Baker-Tousignant to lose her job.

The Enquirer's source also said, ``Even the woman herself admits that over the years, many people have commented to her on how much her son bears a physical resemblance to Arnold.''

The source also said no father's name is listed on the son's birth certificate.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 10-06-2003, 10:51 AM   #129
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 07:56 AM
Gray Davis Battery Against Women

The Story the LA Time never wanted to publish:

[quote]Originally published in New Times Los Angeles, Nov./Dec 1997

Closet Wacko Vs. Mega-Fibber

By Jill Stewart

I have this file, labeled Gray Davis, that for the last few years I've been stuffing with all the bizarre little tales that are quietly shared among journalists and political insiders about the man who, though probably viewed as a blandly pleasant talking head by most Californians, is in fact one of the strangest ducks ever elected to statewide office.
Long protected by editors at the Los Angeles Times--who have nixed every story Times reporters have ever tried to develop about Davis's storied history of physical violence, unhinged hysteria and gross profanity--the baby-faced, dual personality Davis has been allowed to hold high public office with impunity.
Perhaps you are among the millions never told of Lieutenant Governor Davis's widely known--but long unreported--penchant for physically attacking members of his own staff. His violent tantrums have occurred throughout his career, from his days as Chief of Staff for Jerry Brown to his long stint as State Controller to his current job.
Davis's hurling of phones and ashtrays at quaking government employees and his numerous incidents of personally shoving and shaking horrified workers--usually while screaming the f-word "with more venom than Nixon" as one former staffer recently reminded me--bespeak a man who cannot be trust with power. Since his attacks on subservients are not exactly "domestic violence," they suggest to me the need for new lexicon that is sufficiently Dilbertesque. I would therefore like to suggest "office batterer" for consideration as you observe Davis in his race for governor.
The most disturbing aspect of Davis's troubled side is the ease with which the power elite in California, many of whom know he is unbalanced, laugh off the long public deception that has created Davis's public persona. "He'll never be governor," one well-known Democratic state senator explained to me last year, justifying his own failure to criticize or out Davis. "He'll never be the Democratic nominee," the senator insisted.
And that's certainly how things stood, in my own mind, until Davis announced his intention to run for governor. It quickly became apparent that Davis's only Democratic "competition" would be Al Checchi, a guy who squeezed $50 million out of a lot of little people ten years ago in his sudden vault from silver-spooned graduate of Harvard Business School to Texas mega-multimillionaire during the reorganization of Disney. The Disney deal made Checchi an instant player who immediately began dreaming of becoming a senator--or was it governor?--of Texas.
So self-absorbed in building his millions is Checchi that, although he has lived in Beverly Hills with his family for much of this decade--when he wasn't decamped to his mansion on Lake Harriot in Minneapolis during his takeover of Northwest Airlines--most of my friends still think Checchi comes from somewhere in Northern California. They can be forgiven their ignorance, because throughout the civic debates that have embroiled Los Angeles, Checchi has been a cipher. He is a leading champion of no causes, has established no meaningful charities, has left no laudable trace. He's the 312th richest man in America, and nobody can even pronounce his name.
So it was with alarm that I read the very similar speeches given by these two men as they both offered plans to reform the dismal academics in California's public schools, a scandal that many observers believe will be the hot issue in the governor's race.
In his speech to the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco last week, Checchi at least had the nerve to identify teacher incompetence and lack of teacher testing as a key problem. Davis, who has long slept with the power anti-reform teacher's unions in Los Angeles and other cities, could not bring himself to utter such a blasphemy. In his only major divergence from Checchi, in a speech to Town Hall of Los Angeles in September, Davis largely blamed parents.
Observing this pair of oddballs, the notion struck me: Isn't it a fatal flaw of the Republicans, not the Democrats, to promote candidates for top office who have no right to lead a civil society? How can it be that the Democrats suddenly suffer Dan Quayle Disease, after their years of carping about the Republicans' penchant for nominating louts and fools? More specifically, why on earth is the California Democratic Party allowing such sour milk to rise to the top, when California so desperately needs great men and women in charge?
One cannot get a straight answer to these questions via official channels, such as the Party itself. But one can at least delve into the true nature of the life and times of the disturbing Davis and, as his detractors predictably dub him, of checkbook Checchi.
Most crucial of all is the fact that both Davis and Checchi have based their considerable career successes on the perpetuation of carefully crafted whoppers.
"I guess Gray's biggest lie," says his former staffer who notes he often flies into a rage, "is pretending that he operates within the bounds of normalcy, which is not true. This is not a normal person. I will never forget the day he physically attacked me, because even though I knew he had done it before to many others, you always want to assume that Gray would never do it to you or that he has finally gotten help."
On the day in question, in the mid-1990s, the staffer was explaining to Davis that his perpetual quest for an ever-larger campaign chest (an obsession she says led Davis to routinely break fundraising laws by using his government office resources and non-political employees to arrange fundraisers and identify new sources of money) had run into a snafu. A major funding source had dried up. Recalls the former staffer: "He just went into one of his rants of, 'Fuck the fucking fuck, fuck, fuck!'" I can still hear his screams ringing in my ears. When I stood up to insist that he not talk to me that way, he grabbed me by the shoulders and shook me until my teeth rattled. I was so stunned I said, 'Good God, Gray! Stop and look at what you are doing! Think what you are doing to me!' And he just could not stop."
Perhaps the worst incident--long known to Davis-adoring editors of the Los Angeles Times but never published by them--was Davis's attack four years ago on a loyal aide in Los Angeles who for years acted as chief apologist for his "incidents."
The woman refuses to discuss the assault on her with the media, but has relayed much of the story to me through a close friend. On the day in question, State Controller Davis was raging over an employee's rearranging of framed artwork on his Los Angeles office walls. He stormed, red-faced, out of his office and violently shoved the woman, who we shall call K., out of his way. According to employees who were present, K. ran out clutching her purse, suffered an emotional breakdown, was briefly hospitalized at Cedars Sinai for a severe nervous dermatological reaction, and never returned to work again.
According to one close friend, K. refused to sue Davis, despite the advice of several friends, after a prominent Los Angeles attorney told her that Davis would ruin her. According to one state official. K. was allowed to continue her work under Davis from her home "because she refused to work in Davis's presence."
(Checchi's campaign should get a copy of the tape recording Davis left on K.'s home telephone, in which he offers no apology to K. but simply requests that she return to work, saying, "You know how I am."
Well, we do now Gray.
Of course, the problem is that Davis's only serious Democratic opponent, Checchi--though not missing obvious nuts or bolts like Davis--has also built his entire public life on a disturbing fabrication which throws into severe doubt his ability and worthiness to run California state government.
As a San Jose Mercury News writer and a New Times writer showed in recent exposes of Checchi's history at Northwest Airlines, Checchi's claims that he "saved" Northwest in a dramatic takeover in 1989, and that he deserves to be governor of California because he is a turnaround genius, are not supported by the facts.
Northwest was not, in fact, a troubled airline when Checchi--using inside information from his best college buddy who sat on Northwest's board of directors--dreamed up a plan for buying up Northwest stock with other investor's money and forcing Northwest into a position of selling the company to Checchi and pals. In fact, the company spiraled into trouble and near-bankruptcy under Checchi, requiring both major union concessions in 1993 and a huge government bail-out in 1992.
Yet Checci openly chortles about how he risked less than $10 million of his own money on the original $3.65 billion takeover deal, which has today made him a very rich man.
He is very, very proud and has every reason to be," insists Darry Sragow, Checchi's campaign manager.
With two men running for governor who are so willing to gloss over their questionable histories, the unsettling tradition of "opposition research" may play a more critical role than ever in the history of this race. (Op Research, if you're not a cynic in the know, is the practice of hiring political assassins to dig up dirt. The damaging info is: A) widely broadcast or B) dangled in private before the offending candidate as a way to silence that candidate on a major issue on which they have been personally compromised.
Garry South, the talented campaign manager hired by Davis, has hired op research whiz Ace Smith (I'm not kidding about that name) who operates his assassin outfit from the Bay Area. Darry Sragow, the inspired campaign manager hired by Checchi, has hired the Berkeley and Houston firm of Rice and Veroga.
I asked both camp if they intend to go after the really Big Lies both men are relying upon: Gray as the mild-mannered man of decency, Checchi as the savvy savior of troubled institutions.
Says Elena Stern, an official with Checchi's campaign: "Al is adamant about not running a negative campaign, so he will only offer comparisons, not attacks." One "comparison" Stern pointed out is that Davis' camp recently planted a hit story against Checchi in the San Francisco Chronicle claiming that Checchi is facing a discrimination lawsuit by a fired worker. The fine print, however, is that the suit was thrown out by the 9th Circuit three years ago, and it arguably has little remaining merit. Says Stern, "By comparison, Gray Davis has actually lost a race discrimination lawsuit" filed against him by a former female employee.
But is the Checchi camp going to unveil to voters Davis's history of violent "incidents" and hysterical fits? Stern wouldn't say, and Sragow said he "questions whether they way a candidate acts in private has anything legitimate to do with the campaign. So I don't think you'll be hearing from us about whatever violence is alleged amongst Gray's staff or others."
By contrast, South, who admits that Ace Smith has been digging up dirty for Davis's use "for nearly a year" seems far more prepared to discuss the lie holding up the house that Checchi built.
"Until he fucked up Northwest Airlines, Checchi had visions of sugar plums about running for office in Minnesota, and there were numerous local news reports about that in '89, '90 and '91, and about Checchi even meeting with political consultants," says South. "He denies it now because he needs to look like a loyal longtime resident of California, but we think voters want to know that his interest in California is recent indeed."
The ploy of trying to cover up one's sudden self-serving interest in California did not work for another carpetbagging multimillionaire, Michael Huffington, and it is likely to backfire on Checchi as well. For example, California voters will be disturbed to know that shortly after the employees bailed out Northwest and the government spent nearly $1 billion saving the airline, Checchi sold his Minneapolis mansion in 1994, abandoned all thought of running for office there, and escaped back to Beverly Hills. Once back, he barely took a breath before hiring consultants to explore running for California governor.
These two dreary choices for governor leave me hoping that DiFi will jump into the race. Feinstein's hatred for Gray Davis is well-known, and a source close to her confirmed to me last week that "She is still weight a late entry"--in part because she can't imagine a worse fiasco than Governor Gray. And there's a solid chance that the Republican gubernatorial candidate, Attorney General Dan Lungren, can beat the tainted Democrats at the polls next year. But, unfortunately, Lungren is as free of meaningful ideas as Kathleen Brown, who ran for governor in 1994, and voters may reject Lungren as swiftly as they did Brown.
So my question is simple: how did we get stuck in the position of hoping that the job of governor of California, one of the most august positions of power in the Western world, is not won by a mega-fibber or a closet wacko. The Democratic Party likes to wheeze on about how it has all the answers. I'd love to hear them explain this one.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 10-06-2003, 03:08 PM   #130
Babyface
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 27
Local Time: 03:56 PM
Perhaps Gov Cruz will promise free counseling under his health care plan for these former, but errant Davis office employees.
__________________
julles is offline  
Old 10-06-2003, 03:46 PM   #131
Babyface
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 27
Local Time: 03:56 PM
The Davis Touch
A Democratic operative is behind part of the Times’ latest story
by Bill Bradley

The L.A. Times has a story Saturday about three more women who allege that gubernatorial front-runner Arnold Schwarzenegger engaged in sexual misconduct over the years. Schwarzenegger, on his bus tour north of Fresno, said charges in the story "are absolutely untrue."

The Times maintains that none of the women came forward at the behest of Schwarzenegger’s opponents. That claim, however, is looking increasingly dubious. One of the three women in the story says she came forward at the urging of Jodie Evans, described by the Times as a peace activist and "co-founder of the women’s peace group Code Pink." At best, this is an incomplete, misleading description.

Here’s what the newspaper should have said about Evans. She is actually a former close colleague of Gov. Gray Davis, a longtime Democratic operative and a friend of noted Democratic hit man Bob Mulholland. Evans is also the ex-wife of Westside financier Max Palevsky, the man who gave Gray Davis his first job in politics as the fund-raiser in Tom Bradley’s 1973 mayoral campaign.

Oops! Someone should have told John Carroll, the Times editor and anti-bias crusader.

Evans worked closely with Davis in the administration of Gov. Jerry Brown. While Davis served as Brown’s chief of staff, Evans was Brown’s chief fund-raiser and director of administration in the governor’s office.

Why didn’t the Times give an accurate description of Evans, who has pushed at least one woman to come forward with last-minute charges? On the campaign bus outside Fresno just now, I asked veteran Times columnist George Skelton, who acknowledges the reality of Evans’ deep ties to Davis and the Democrats, why the Times described her so disingenuously.

"Maybe the reporters and editors just didn’t know," he says.

The Times is presenting itself authoritatively on these matters. If the Times doesn’t know where the stories are coming from, what else does it not know? If the Times is not ignorant about these connections, that is a whole different kettle of fish.

As most Californians know by now, Davis is the champion of negative campaigning and has nearly perfected the strategy of last-minute allegations breaking in the final days of the campaign. It should not be surprising to Times Mirror Square that his fingerprints appear on at least the latest story.
__________________
julles is offline  
Old 10-06-2003, 05:36 PM   #132
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,181
Local Time: 03:56 PM
This article is pretty funny. First of all the original claim in the LA Times was six women not three (This number has now grown to 15). Davis said that he didn't put the story out there, leak it or anything to the Times. Republicans and Democrats and Arnold's team have admitted all along that stories would come out, now they are mad cause they did in the last week of a ONE MONTH CAMPAIGN!?!?!

The funniest part is that Bradley tries to implicate Davis by association with a reporter at the LA Times. This to me, is even worse than the "un-named women" that have made acusations against Arnold. It doesn't prove anything except for the fact that MAYBE this woman indeed likes Davis and does not want the recall and did it for her own satisfaction, but nothing shows it was done at the behest of Davis.

And just because it did come out in the last week or so, we should then just ignore it and say it isn't important or a big deal that women were sexually harrassed and insulted by him? I don't think so.

I must admit, at first when it was only a handful of women (excuse the pun) mostly a long time ago, it didn't seem like that big of a deal. But 15 women over 25 years going all the way up to three years ago starts to make me wonder what Arnold is really like in his private life. Makes him seem kinda creepy to me.
__________________
womanfish is online now  
Old 10-06-2003, 06:59 PM   #133
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,673
Local Time: 09:56 AM
I asked a friend of mine who's spent some time with Arnold and his wife(designed his house) what he thought about the allegations. He said he wasn't surprised. He said he's a really nice guy but he's pretty arrogant, and has seen him cross certain social lines, especially with women, because he thinks he can get away with it. But is it overblown, who knows?
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 10-06-2003, 08:49 PM   #134
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 07:56 AM
I find it amazing that Arnold is expected to answer allegations from anonymous sources. Even the CA attorney general is getting in on Davis' act.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 10-06-2003, 09:03 PM   #135
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:56 AM
There are quite a few that are not anonymous.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com