The Wall Street Journal Seduced by Sleazy Schwarzenegger

posted also to:
alt.current-events.iraq
alt.current-events.war-on-terror
alt.current-events.war-on-terror.hussein
alt.current-events.war-on-terror.iraq
alt.current-events.war-on-terrorism
alt.current-events.war-on-terrorism.iraq
alt.war.iraq
October 11, 2003|1:11 PM

The Wall Street Journal Seduced by Sleazy Schwarzenegger

What can The Wall Street Journal be thinking? On Friday, Oct. 3, The
Journal’s editorial page applauded Arnold Schwarzenegger for his
"candor" in admitting some truth to the accusations by several women
that he had touched them sexually without their consent. The paper
minimized the allegations by saying that all that was proven was that
the actor "can be a boor" and that his statements were "a welcome
contrast to the usual political stonewalling or denials." Sounding like
a bunch of 1950’s-era martini-guzzlers, the editors of The Journal gave
Mr. Schwarzenegger a figurative big slap on the back and rewarded him
because he did not "deny, dissemble or wag his finger into a camera and
drop a whopper." The movie star, in The Journal’s eyes, is apparently
the paragon of virtue because he apologized for having, as he put it,
"behaved badly." Ignoring the evidence—that Mr. Schwarzenegger is
clearly a slimeball whose "apology" was so vague as to be meaningless, a
political incompetent who would sink the state of California further
into the mud, and a man who used to admire Hitler’s way with a crowd—The
Journal could barely contain its moist-eyed admiration for the
ex-bodybuilder.

Just who is this man The Journal so admires? So far, over a dozen women
—15 and counting—have come forward to accuse Mr. Schwarzenegger of
making physical and verbal advances which left the women feeling shaken
and frightened. And if 15 have spoken publicly, imagine how many more
are keeping quiet. Several of the women have allowed their names to be
printed, indicating just how serious they are taking the matter. Others
still work in the film industry and worry about retribution. Their
accounts span a quarter century—1975 to 2000. Mr. Schwarzenegger has
admitted some of the behavior but dismisses it as just being "playful."
As reported by the Los Angeles Times, the women hardly saw the movie
star’s actions as good-natured fun and games. To quote just a few:

"He was laughing like it was all a big joke. Well, it wasn’t. It was scary."

"There was this tongue just lunging down my throat. I am in shock at
this point. I wanted to throw up from the taste."

"He would pin me against the corner in the elevator."

It’s abundantly clear that Mr. Schwarzenegger views women as objects to
be cruelly toyed with and humiliated for his own amusement, and as
threats to his muscled masculinity whom he must dominate. No
conventional politician could get away with Mr. Schwarzenegger’s acts
and words. Nevertheless, he has seduced a large segment of California
and one of the country’s most respected newspapers.

With politics in California having sunk so low, can the rest of the
nation be far behind? Mr. Schwarzenegger, who at press time seemed to be
within reach of his strange and disturbing victory, is a genuine example
of the way in which the public has lost its capacity to distinguish
between mediocre politicians and sleazy, shallow charlatans. The owners
and editors of The Wall Street Journal should be ashamed of themselves.

Let’s let one of the women have the last word: "What could you do? He
was the highest-paid actor in the world. I was a peon."

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 2246 +0200 (CEST), "privacy.at Anonymous
Remailer" wrote something wonderfully
witty:

>
>posted also to:
>alt.current-events.iraq
>alt.current-events.war-on-terror
>alt.current-events.war-on-terror.hussein
>alt.current-events.war-on-terror.iraq
>alt.current-events.war-on-terrorism
>alt.current-events.war-on-terrorism.iraq
>alt.war.iraq
>October 11, 2003|1:11 PM
>
>The Wall Street Journal Seduced by Sleazy Schwarzenegger
>
>What can The Wall Street Journal be thinking? On Friday, Oct. 3, The
>Journal’s editorial page applauded Arnold Schwarzenegger for his
>"candor" in admitting some truth to the accusations by several women
>that he had touched them sexually without their consent. The paper
>minimized the allegations by saying that all that was proven was that
>the actor "can be a boor" and that his statements were "a welcome
>contrast to the usual political stonewalling or denials." Sounding like
>a bunch of 1950’s-era martini-guzzlers, the editors of The Journal gave
>Mr. Schwarzenegger a figurative big slap on the back and rewarded him
>because he did not "deny, dissemble or wag his finger into a camera and
>drop a whopper." The movie star, in The Journal’s eyes, is apparently
>the paragon of virtue because he apologized for having, as he put it,
>"behaved badly." Ignoring the evidence—that Mr. Schwarzenegger is
>clearly a slimeball whose "apology" was so vague as to be meaningless, a
>political incompetent who would sink the state of California further
>into the mud, and a man who used to admire Hitler’s way with a crowd—The
>Journal could barely contain its moist-eyed admiration for the
>ex-bodybuilder.
>
>Just who is this man The Journal so admires? So far, over a dozen women
>—15 and counting—have come forward to accuse Mr. Schwarzenegger of
>making physical and verbal advances which left the women feeling shaken
>and frightened. And if 15 have spoken publicly, imagine how many more
>are keeping quiet. Several of the women have allowed their names to be
>printed, indicating just how serious they are taking the matter. Others
>still work in the film industry and worry about retribution. Their
>accounts span a quarter century—1975 to 2000. Mr. Schwarzenegger has
>admitted some of the behavior but dismisses it as just being "playful."
>As reported by the Los Angeles Times, the women hardly saw the movie
>star’s actions as good-natured fun and games. To quote just a few:
>
>"He was laughing like it was all a big joke. Well, it wasn’t. It was scary."
>
>"There was this tongue just lunging down my throat. I am in shock at
>this point. I wanted to throw up from the taste."
>
>"He would pin me against the corner in the elevator."
>
>It’s abundantly clear that Mr. Schwarzenegger views women as objects to
>be cruelly toyed with and humiliated for his own amusement, and as
>threats to his muscled masculinity whom he must dominate. No
>conventional politician could get away with Mr. Schwarzenegger’s acts
>and words. Nevertheless, he has seduced a large segment of California
>and one of the country’s most respected newspapers.
>
>With politics in California having sunk so low, can the rest of the
>nation be far behind? Mr. Schwarzenegger, who at press time seemed to be
>within reach of his strange and disturbing victory, is a genuine example
>of the way in which the public has lost its capacity to distinguish
>between mediocre politicians and sleazy, shallow charlatans. The owners
>and editors of The Wall Street Journal should be ashamed of themselves.
>
>Let’s let one of the women have the last word: "What could you do? He
>was the highest-paid actor in the world. I was a peon."
>
Arnie been groping butts for years, rather well known fact he likes a
firm tuckus. So he gets close to political office and a couple crawl
out of the woodwork as usually happens. He admits he likes to cup a
comely ass and says he's sorry won't do it again mea culpa and all
that horseshit people like to hear. BFD

Now if these women were so outraged at his conduct where were the
charges after he felt them up? No where that's where. It was all
politically motivated and really had nothing to do with the erection.
Whoops I mean election.

No wonder the country is going down the shitter, the average joe is an
idiot.
--

ZombyWoof

The wages of sin are death, but after taxes are taken out,
it's just a tired feeling.

In article <86bbb4662d90e9ec5a1bcf3edc57805f@remailer.privacy. at>,
privacy.at Anonymous Remailer wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Off-Topic Drivel Snipped<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

So what?

Who cares?