50 Reasons to Not Vote for Arnold

September 10, 2003 2:31 PM

Metro Santa Cruz's 50 Reasons to Not Vote for Arnold for Governor

And no, none of the reasons are because of awful movies like Jingle All the Way or Junior. Real reasons like the fact that he's a chauvinist, his father was a Nazi, he used to run the President's Council on Fitness and now admits to using steroids to win bodybuilding competitions, he has no plan on how to fix the state's budget issues just that he's gonna clean house. Or the fact that he made up the story about gang raping a black woman for the Oui interview back in 77' (think about that, he lied about participating in a gang rape, that's pretty demented behaviour). Interesting reading and damned scary if this is the next governor of the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world.
posted by fenriq (41 comments total)

his father was a Nazi

That's a damn good reason to not vote for his father.
posted by PrinceValium at 2:36 PM on September 10, 2003

fenriq, I couldn't be more disgusted with this moron, but you're using some sloppy language here. If you read the Oui interview, there's no mention whatsoever of rape. It's reprehensible enough that he was crowing about being one of several men having sex with a black woman. And it's not so much that he's "a chauvinist," which without a modifier just means someone who's unwaveringly devoted to some unnamed person or cause - it's that he's a complete sexist asshole. Just trying to clear that up.
posted by soyjoy at 2:42 PM on September 10, 2003

Is a Gang-Bang the same as a Gang-Rape? (I just read the Smoking gun article, I don't know if the actual Oui article made it sound more like a rape.)
posted by stifford at 2:42 PM on September 10, 2003

Living 3,000 miles away I really don't have much standing on this issue, but I'd consider his involvement with 'Jungle All the Way' a lot more persuasive then the gack you quote. That movie was unforgivable. [Sorry, life's too short to read the source material; I'm sure you've captured the essence]
posted by mojohand at 2:42 PM on September 10, 2003

Even the article agrees that, just because his dad was a Nazi, he shouldn't be considered in the same group - they just point out that it's a bit creepy. The Kurt Waldheim bit is also creepy. However, both of those reasons shouldn't really figure in - they're trivia.

After all, there are so many other reasons to not vote for Arnold. The primary one is simple - he doesn't have a damn clue as to how to govern. Even Jesse Ventura would've been a better choice. He can't even manage himself - how can he effectively manage California?
posted by FormlessOne at 2:43 PM on September 10, 2003

reason #51: he's a republican
posted by Peter H at 2:45 PM on September 10, 2003

Pretending to have participated in a gang rape almost seems worse than actually having done it.

Almost.
posted by Robot Johnny at 2:46 PM on September 10, 2003

#52: a personal friend of bush and reagan
which is just fucking scary when you think about it
posted by Peter H at 2:48 PM on September 10, 2003

robot johnny - ha, tell sam peckinpah that.
posted by Peter H at 2:50 PM on September 10, 2003

Pretending to have participated in a gang rape almost seems worse than actually having done it.

Did anyone read the article? Anyone?
posted by PrinceValium at 2:52 PM on September 10, 2003

#53: conan the destroyer was a totally weak sequel.
posted by Peter H at 2:56 PM on September 10, 2003

The list of reasons to not vote for him is very long indeed. And soyjoy, thanks for pointing out the loopholes in the post.

I grabbed a few of the eye poppers and yeah, he is an utterly sexist asshole. His joking about not letting his wife or mother leave the house with him in pants is just a sad reflection of his inner warpings. His father being a Nazi AND inviting Waldheim to his wedding are beyond creepy to me.

I'm just trying to do my part to shed some light on the kind of man he is and how woefully ill equipped he is to run the state.
posted by fenriq at 2:56 PM on September 10, 2003

"50 Reasons Not to Read Another Article With Reasons Not to Vote for Arnold"
1. You've already made up your mind.
2. You've already heard all the headline-making ones.
3. You'd rather hear more about Gary Coleman's checkered past.
4. - 50. Rinse. Repeat.
posted by wendell at 2:59 PM on September 10, 2003

posted by Witty at 3:05 PM on September 10, 2003

some googlism on arnold has revealed the following subsequent reasons to fear this austrian's command of the fifth largest economy in the world:

#54: arnold is a potbellied pig rescued by wildlife surival sanctuary
#55: arnold is critical of those who support zealously the outward forms of christian faith but are reluctant to admit
#56: arnold is not an interesting man
#57: arnold is that he's a flaming marxist and his neighborhood is full of commies
#58: arnold is a cartoon

the list, she can not keep from growing!
posted by Peter H at 3:07 PM on September 10, 2003

You didn't like Conan the destroyer? Hell, that's the only reason to vote for him as far as I'm concerned.
posted by ciderwoman at 3:08 PM on September 10, 2003

ciderview - how ya doin. the reason i'd consider it a worthy reason is that conan the barbarian is SO much better. however, i will give him half a reason to be voted for for his performance on the audio commentary on the barbarian DVD

anyway tho, getting back to the really scary point
once again for those in the backseats that might not be able to hear too well
thats control of

the

FIFTH!! LARGEST!! ECONOMY!! in the WORLD!!

that is scary shit to go to an action moviestar bodybuilder who was sent from the future to murder the woman who will give birth to our greatest leader
posted by Peter H at 3:14 PM on September 10, 2003

oops, that's ciderwoman, not ciderview - scuse me
posted by Peter H at 3:15 PM on September 10, 2003

I'm in hopes that Arnold really has no support at all from the electorate, that everyone's just letting him run and encouraging him with attention in order to have something to laugh at, some comic relief as a moment's respite from serious considerations about the real candidates.

Nobody disillusion me.
posted by orange swan at 3:18 PM on September 10, 2003

reprehensible enough that he was crowing about being one of several men having sex with a black woman.

On the other hand, if she wasn't *black*, then ...

Was there a reason for specifying the woman's race?
posted by Ayn Marx at 3:26 PM on September 10, 2003

you know if they just hadnt let him off that island to find his twin brother, none of us would be in the mess we are right now with that bozo.

i hereby make this reason #59

#59: he was scientifically created from the sperm of a bunch of scientists, whereas if one thing had gone different he would instead be a squat balding fatty man instead of a hungarian athlete
posted by Peter H at 3:27 PM on September 10, 2003

"but I'd consider his involvement with 'Jingle All the Way' a lot more persuasive"

But you forget that we had a *president* who starred in the movie "Bedtime for Bonzo". Being in a really bad movie is a positive in American politics.
posted by y6y6y6 at 3:28 PM on September 10, 2003

>the
>FIFTH!! LARGEST!! ECONOMY!! in the WORLD!!

These seven words have been batted around like a beach ball in the bleacher seats. Admittedly, I don't follow the race that closely, but it boggles me California is a larger than France or the U.K. Or India, Italy, Brazil, China. Does the economy sneak up the ladder because it is an economy of a strong currency?

(Not a snark at you, Peter H. Only a question and general befuddlement.)
posted by philfromhavelock at 3:32 PM on September 10, 2003

Not my state. Whatever his father was (he was a Nazi)k Arnold in fact dug this info out by requesting a study by Simon Weisenthal Foundation. Do we hold him responsible for his father's past?

The main problem (unless you are a Democrat or Republican) is that a govenor in California now must (1) raise taxes (2) cut programs, (3) both...

Now how many candidates have specifically said they would do 1,2, or 3? How otherwise can you get out of deficit, since unemployment etc seem not helping out at all and business are not going to move there at this time.
If he or anyone could solve that, he would get my vote (and she would too if Arianna), but then I don't live there.
posted by Postroad at 3:38 PM on September 10, 2003

.. and it is not really a $38 Billion deficit anymore as a budget was passed although everyone seems to have missed that. There is an $8 Billion shortfall on the end of it but that seems almost manageable after $38 Billion.
posted by stuartmm at 3:41 PM on September 10, 2003

philfromhavelock - no snark felt, i actually don't have the answer for you. i think entertainment, agriculture and other things have to do with it, since they are massively profitable exports as well as domestic money-makers. wish i knew tho. sorry if i'm wrong too, cos then i sound like an idiot. i've just heard it in a lot of different places.

i can say with some confidence tho that four years of a man who (in real life) battled lou ferrigno for TOUGH MEATHEAD OF THE YEAR will likely not keep the state in the #5 spot for long. (cue the sound of an anvil impending on california's already desperate times)
posted by Peter H at 3:50 PM on September 10, 2003

philfromhavelock, here are the numbers as of the end of 2002. I can't vouch for them, of course.
posted by samuelad at 3:50 PM on September 10, 2003

First, I read the OUI interview. It was a "gang bang," not a "gang rape." Two VERY different things.

Second, I would never vote for the guy because, as much as I hate politicians, we desperately need someone at the helm of this fucked-up state that has EXPERIENCE in government. Experience with budgets, taxes, working with the legislature, understanding of the issues. Someone who can lead the legislature and who has real ideas. Someone who didn't just get interested in the goverment of this state and the issues it is facing a few months ago, but someone who has been following and thinking about it for years.

This state is so royally messed up that putting a complete neophyte in charge would be such a tremendously poor idea that I'm really appalled that he even has a chance. This is not the time for a filppant vote. This state needs help and needs it NOW. Desperately.

Now, I don't know which of the useless candidates possesses the above qualities, but I do know that Arnie possesses the very least of them. Even less than Ariana Huffington.

We need a real leader with experience. Not this guy.

I don't care if he gang banged women, if he took steroids, if he smoked dope, if his father was a Nazi, if he's a bad actor. I care about his political experience because THAT is what matters. That is what we need.
posted by aacheson at 4:04 PM on September 10, 2003

it boggles me California is a larger than France or the U.K. Or India, Italy, Brazil, China. Does the economy sneak up the ladder because it is an economy of a strong currency?

Try comparing any of those countries to Cali in any of these areas:
Semiconductor Industry
Defense Industry
Entertainment Industry
Space Industry
Information Industry

Oh, and throw in a healthy dose of:
Natural Resources
Tourism

Still boggled?
posted by badstone at 4:24 PM on September 10, 2003

aacheson -

Yes, the state is way fucked-up, but it's nothing a single leader can do anything about. Yes, Davis sucks, but he's basically a scapegoat for a problem that really lies in the houses. We really may as well elect Gary Coleman or Gallagher, nothing's going to change until the Assembly and Senate change.
posted by badstone at 4:32 PM on September 10, 2003

#59: he was scientifically created from the sperm of a bunch of scientists, whereas if one thing had gone different he would instead be a squat balding fatty man instead of a hungarian athlete.

Hungarian? Austria has had no political connection to Hungary since the Austro-Hungarian empire ended with World War I in 1918. There is quite a difference between the two countries.        Bad PeterH, Bad!
posted by y2karl at 5:38 PM on September 10, 2003

Was there a reason for specifying the woman's race?

You'll have to ask Arnold, Ayn. He's the one who specified it.
posted by soyjoy at 7:25 PM on September 10, 2003

Reasons 1-50 should be: he has no policies. That's all the persuasion you need.
posted by riviera at 7:48 PM on September 10, 2003

Thanks for that lao link, samuelad. It's a figure that's bandied about but with no numbers tacked on, but again, admittedly, I'm not following it closely. It looks as if France is on the heels and Italy and China are comparable. (I wish, though, that I did nay have to use a ruler to compare the stats; all that space and the graph is cramped.)

Try comparing any of those countries to Cali in any of these areas:
From what I've read France is the fourth largest auto manufacturer, a net exporter of military widgets and knowledge of widgets, a big agricultural producer and Paris is the world's most popular destination. It seems counter-intuitive to me that China and/or India, with thirty times the population of California, has a smaller economy. Which is why I wondered if the strength of the U.S. currency influences the rankings or if the rankings influence the value of the currency. (Grade thirteen economics, the late eighties, heh.)

Still boggled?
I read Stan and Jan's Berenstains' B Book as a child :)
posted by philfromhavelock at 7:57 PM on September 10, 2003

"Experience" is a complete non-reason for supporting or opposing a candidate for political office. Our (California's) last two governors were some of the most politically-experienced in the state's history, yet they oversaw the complete destruction of our state's fiscal health.

Most of the "experienced" politicians who are running or who have run for governor are just people trying to get their tickets punched - they act as though they deserve the office they're running for. Show me someone who can inspire loyalty in the people around him/her and knows how to pick advisors and I'll show you someone that is qualified for any public office.

Experience may be a good criteria to consider when choosing a lover, but not a candidate for public office.
posted by BrandonAbell at 8:36 PM on September 10, 2003

philfromhavelock, per capita GDP, and 2003 largest economies.

Recalling that the US varies between about 27% and 33% of the global economy, and California is 10% of the US (in fact its economy is outsized, so 13% by GDP), it doesn't seem that strange at all. The figure may be 'bandied about', but there's no reason to disbelieve it; the numbers for GDP are fairly reliable overall. The rank claimed has risen from seventh-largest to sixth and most recently fifth over the last decade or so; in 2001, France was overtaken. This rise was helped by the robust 90s economy, coupled with virtual recessions in areas such as Southeast Asia.

On preview, your comments about India and China are good questions, but keep in mind that their median wages are minuscule by comparison. Labor costs being low, goods are sold for less, reducing the "value" of the economy on a per-item basis; currency valuation can also keep pricing artificially low, a recent bone of contention between the US and China. Both economies continue to grow much more rapidly than the economy of a mature industrial nation such as the US, so in several years either might easily challenge California. But for now, much of their workforce remains in low-output jobs such as farming. Until the 80s, neither really made any progress in creating an industrial export economy.
posted by dhartung at 11:10 PM on September 10, 2003

y2karl - heh, nice. if you think 08:21's something to talk about you shoulda seen what he did to me with his gang of rape crazy austrians from 08:23 thru 08:46 !! they were hungary for love i'm tellin ya. read the article.

(to those of actual descent from those countries, my authentic apologies - to those living in california during this mess tho, my apologies in triplicate)
posted by Peter H at 11:44 PM on September 10, 2003

here's another debate question
if arnold wins, and with jesse's earlier success - does it prove that any beefhead alpha-moron with a history of showing the macho off in the entertainment industry can, in fact, take over america? only 48 states left boys! get pumpin. there's some jerky in it for ya. arf! arf!

god america sucks lately.
posted by Peter H at 11:48 PM on September 10, 2003

I thought most people thought Jesse was doing a pretty good job.
posted by thirteen at 3:11 AM on September 11, 2003

It was a "gang bang," not a "gang rape." Two VERY different things.

Only if you assume that the woman described in the interview consented. Considering how tough the issue of consent is to navigate when only two people are involved, I'd love to hear Gov. Steroid field questions from the press about how it is granted in a group of 20.

There are a lot of good reasons not to vote for him. I'd put this "gang bang" incident near the top of the list. Whether real or imagined, it says volumes about what the guy thinks of women.
posted by rcade at 3:15 AM on September 11, 2003

"Whatever his father was (he was a Nazi) Arnold in fact dug this info out by requesting a study by Simon Weisenthal Foundation."

He did so only after an article was published on Schwarzenegger (I think this was part of the Spy Magazine article, but I'm not certain about it...) showing his father's Nazi Party identification.

Giving the Simon Weisenthal Foundation money and having them do a study on his dad probably had a lot more to do with damage control and keeping the Hollywood establishment happy more than strongly refuting anti-semitism.

Schwarzenegger still invited Kurt Waldheim to his wedding, shocked the wedding guests by toasting him, allowed his name to be used on posters supporting Waldheim's political campaigns, and visited Waldheim as recently as 1998.

This, of course, doesn't even touch on the claims that back in the 70's, he used to play and give people records of Hitler's speeches...

What frustrates me the most about this is that the fact that Schwarzenegger gave the Simon Weisenthal Foundation money seems to give him undeserved credibility amongst the Jewish community, without any regards to his actual behavior otherwise. It might have been Schwarzenegger's dad who was audited, but it was Schwarzenegger himself who was plaudited.

I hate to be the one to say it, but perhaps by encouraging people and companies to "buy off" their Nazi-related guilt, Jewish organizations are inadvertently supporting negative stereotypes. Perhaps this policy should be extended to its logical conclusion, so that war criminals can get off with a fine?!
posted by insomnia_lj at 4:20 AM on September 11, 2003