Today on Blogcritics
Home » Character Assasination’s Politics of Cowards, Paradox Remains

Character Assasination’s Politics of Cowards, Paradox Remains

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

California Governor Davis plays a good game of politics, unfortunately, his game is the politics of cowards. The game was well-orchestrated, gathering numerous women together to accuse Arnold Schwarzenegger, on the final days of the campaign, of sexual harassment, assault and more.

This story has been widely reported by liberal news sources, such as the L.A. Times, who, by the way, refused to report Davis’ bad temper on numerous occassions, which he gave into frequently, shoving, shaking staff members and screaming the F-word more frequently than Nixon screamed the Lord’s name in vain while in the White House.

What is clearly in play is the politics of personal destruction, obviously advised by top-Democrats, perhaps in fear that Arnold could give Hillary a run for her money in 2008.

Political campaigns should not be about personal attacks. They should be about the issues at hand that the people of any given state or nation feel are important, wherever the election’s held. Too often the issues are ignored while attacking politicians and the media focus on personal attacks and cooked-up allegations, and when such allegations are release three days before the election, you can bet the attacks are what the media will focus on, rather than the issues at stake in the election, even though the issues will affect people’s lives more than any political-attack allegation.

Having worked on quite a few political campaigns since 1996, I speak from experience. Politics is an ugly business. Mud-slinging too often gets in the way of what really is important to the people. And, boy, it sure does hurt when people throw me around so much! Yes, pun intended.

In this case, mud-slinging is painful to the people of California. It also demeans their intelligence and shows that the party who is promoting these partisan attacks clearly has no respect for their thoughts on the issues at stake.

Davis is incredibly unpopular on the issues, so to evade talking about the issues, it is clear that Davis has cooked up a spectacular smear campaign against Arnold. Am I saying Arnold is perfect? No. Hardly. I’m sure he’s philandered just as many women as former President Bill Clinton, but the fact that all of these allegations came out three days before the election shows that it’s only a smear campaign against Arnold. Why has no one asked if these women were paid or supported by any of the liberal think tanks? after all, Ms. Flowers was supported by a conservative think tank seeking to sink Clinton.

If these were real, the media would have let the cat out of the bag a long time ago when Arnold announced his candidacy, but they appear to be pure political smears under the guise of something that we all feel is unjust.

Tomorrow Californians have a choice: (1) An angry man who beats his most loyal staffers and pushes highly damaging economic policies unbeneficial to the state of California, and seeks to stay in power by any means, no matter how negative or dishonest, or, (2) A philanderer, similar to Bill Clinton, who may be able to fix the economy and make the state the golden gate of opportunity setting an example for all of America to see, as it once did.

The bottom line? The choice is California’s to make, but the nation will be watching, as the winner, whomever it may be, may be a serious contender for their party’s nomination in 2004 or 2008.

Powered by

About Mr. Real Estate

  • http://www.well.com/~srhodes Steve Rhodes

    There is no way Gray Davis will ever run for President even if he isn’t recalled. And there is little chance the constitution will be changed and Arnold will run even if he is elected Tuesday.

    It is true it will help Bush if Arnold is elected and even if he isn’t I expect Arnold will do a lot of campaigning for Bush (once he explains exactly which of the allegations sound like him and which aren’t true).

  • John Mudd

    Just a note, I have some clients from California seeking to move their business here to Florida because of California’s horrible regulatory policies and tax policies, just FYI. I’m sure if they feel that way, there are probably more of them out there who feel the same. Without businesses, it really is hard to create jobs, unless of course California becomes a socialist state.

  • http://www.makeyougohmm.com/ TDavid

    Has Arnold come forth yet and laid out what issues he agrees with that are consistent with the Republicans? Sadly, all I see are allegations about the type of guy he is, rather than focusing on the policies and ideas he has if he should get into office.

  • http://www.slumdance.com/blogs/brian_flemming/ Brian Flemming

    John,

    Regarding…

    California Governor Davis plays a good game of politics, unfortunately, his game is the politics of cowards. The game was well-orchestrated, gathering numerous women together to accuse Arnold Schwarzenegger, on the final days of the campaign, of sexual harassment, assault and more.

    and

    What is clearly in play is the politics of personal destruction, obviously advised by top-Democrats…

    and

    Davis is incredibly unpopular on the issues, so to evade talking about the issues, it is clear that Davis has cooked up a spectacular smear campaign against Arnold.

    Do you have a scrap of evidence to support this accusation that is so “clear”?

    If not, how is it so “clear”?

    The L.A. Times editor says they found these women, that none of the stories were brought to them by a Schwarzenegger political rival.

    I’m certainly open to actual evidence to the contrary, but I have yet to see any.

  • http://www.tude.com/ Hal Pawluk

    The Clinton and Schwarzenegger problems regarding women are different in kind.

    Consensual philandering is one thing; sexual assault is an entirely different matter.

    I’m 100% for dumping Davis, but don’t agree that Schwarzenegger is the right alternative, given that McClintock is in the race.

  • http://www.well.com/~srhodes Steve Rhodes

    McClintock will come in third, but I hope lots of people like you vote for him giving Bustamante a chance to win on question 2.

  • John Mudd

    (1) The L.A. Times isn’t very credible, given that it long-refused to report Gov. Davis’ physical assaults of his own staff and

    (2) Clinton was accused of sexual assault and philandering with permission, however, no one really knows how much was done by permission and how much was done by intimidation by using his office to intimidate, and many have said he has committed sexual assault on quite a few women, including some women, but they’re just allegations, similar to Arnold’s case.

    (3) There’s really no difference in Clinton and Schwarzenegger, except that one is a Republican and the other a Democrat. Philandering is philandering. Assault is assault. That’s my point. If anyone is going to criticize Arnold for it, then they better criticize their boy, Bill Clinton, for the same thing. However, this is not the case. The same “feminists” attacking Arnold supported Clinton, who was widely accused of sexual harassment as well as sexual assault.

    What it all comes down to is do you want positive change or do you want an angry failure to remain in office, all things being equal (and I would say physically assaulting your staff is equal to assaulting a woman, especially if those staff members were women, assault being assault)?

    I would much rather see positive change in California, since it so often sets the trends for our entire country, than I would see an angry man who can’t even negotiate a budget deal with a legislature when the media’s run by his liberal friends. After all, if you control the information that gets out, and you’re right, the legislature shouldn’t be able to hold you, the governor, hostage in a budget deal.

    If you can’t negotiate a budget deal, then you’re a total tool and don’t deserve to be the leader of the state.

    You should go sell retail goods in a retail store where your skills for negotiation are not needed.

    Furthermore, you should be pay taxes for all the mistakes you made as governor that destroyed California’s economy, which has certainly dragged down the American economy over the years.

    If Davis is re-elected, he should forsake his salary to pay off California’s $38-million debt and a multi-million dollar settlement for the emotional damages and physical damages he caused members of his staff for assaulting them.

    The proof, Brian, is in the past several years of Gov. Davis’ failed leadership to balance California’s budget, to strengthen its economy and create jobs and to improve its education system. There’s only one choice for making things right in California again, and it’s not Sen. McClintock, either.

    The choice is clear. The choice is Arnold. http://www.JoinArnold.com.

  • http://www.tude.com/ Hal Pawluk

    Re: (6)

    Bustamante is moving down, with the latest poll a few minutes ago putting him at 26%, McClintock at 18%, AS at 34% (he’s dropping, too) and Undecided at 22%.

    A few points off AS and a big slice of the undecided and we might have a Truman-Dewey-style repeat :-)

    I hope a lot of people vote for McClintock, too :-)

  • http://www.tude.com/ Hal Pawluk

    “Philandering is philandering. Assault is assault. That’s my point.” (7)

    If it is your point, your next statement is wrong:

    “If anyone is going to criticize Arnold for it, then they better criticize their boy, Bill Clinton, for the same thing.”

    Clinton was criticized for philandering, Arnold is being criticized for assault. It’s not the same thing.

    That’s the real point:

    Dump Davis and don’t vote for Schwarzenegger.

  • John Mudd

    Actually, Clinton was criticized for both philandering and assault, however, he was only caught philandering.

    Clinton allegedly assaulted (actually the term used was “raped”) someone who went to prison for a land deal.

    Much like Arnold’s case, Clinton’s was alleged. Both were alleged assaults. Arnold, unlike Clinton, has no alleged philandering, which one would think there would be if there are, in fact, assaults.

    Davis, unlike Arnold and Clinton, simply has allegedly physically assaulted his staff members, at times causing physical damage. The L.A. Times doesn’t write about this, though, even though it’s well-documented.

    Funny how that works. What liberal media? The liberal media seems to ignore physical attacks by liberals and ignored sexual assault and rapes by liberals, alleged or true, in order to save all their newspaper space to attack conservatives.

    I agree with you on the bottom line. Davis is definitely bad for California, and so is California’s biased media bad for California.

    Maybe everyone in California should move to Florida. It’s a little warmer, but we have no income tax, few regulations and plenty of other incentives for businesses to relocate here, and for people to move here as well.

    No one has to worry about paying off a huge $38-million deficit, a stupid car tax or a huge income tax.

    If Davis gets re-elected and you’re fed up with California, visit my website. I’ll help you find everything California has to offer without all the negative aspects that make it seem like you’re in a whole other socialist country where you’re taxed too much and not given anything in return.

  • http://www.tude.com/ Hal Pawluk

    Well, that’s new for me – getting spammed in a Blogcritics thread.

    Good night.

  • mike

    Here’s an excellent solution to the excess of candidates on the recall ballot, unfortunately too late to be implemented for this election.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3165106.stm

  • http://www.well.com/~srhodes Steve Rhodes

    You obviously haven’t watched local news which is the dominant media in California. It isn’t liberal, it isn’t conservative, it just sucks and stays focused on car chases (unless a movie star is running in a recall).

    I’m not one to defend Davis, but there is no $38 billion dollar deficit. The budget is balanced and it would have been far sooner if the Republicans hadn’t blocked reasonable tax increases on the rich.

  • John Mudd

    Well, I don’t live in California, so I can’t really watch the local news. I get my coverage from MSNBC, the L.A. Times, the Examiner and the Chronicle, which are all pretty easily available.

    If there’s no debt or deficit, then why do I keep hearing that there is one?

  • Laurie K.

    >>The budget is balanced <<

    No, it indeed is not. I work at a community college, and we will be receiving only a fraction of the apportionment stated in the budget simply because what is in the state budget is a fantasy. Last year, we cut everything back in the second half of the fiscal year by about 25%. This year we expect at least that much, and have had to plan our budgets for up to 40% reductions. There are 106 other colleges, and I’m sure they’re all doing the same.

    In addition, the plentiful borrowing written in the budget may well be illegal and I believe is expected to be challenged in court. So not only is it not really balanced at all, it’s also rather fanciful.

    Laurie K.

  • http://www.slumdance.com/blogs/brian_flemming/ Brian Flemming

    If the recall succeeds, the ignorance of people such as Laurie K. and John Mudd will be part of the reason.

    By “ignorance” I don’t mean anything insulting.

    But the fact is that many California voters believe, as non-Californian John apparently does, that CA has a $38B deficit. This is, plain and simple, not true. The budget is balanced. Next year there is a projected $8B deficit.

    The state was hit hard by the recession that hit the rest of the country–as always, in fact, it got hit harder than much of the rest of the country. The tech industry crash was especially brutal. Capital gains tax revenues sank. A lot of other factors contributed. Davis had to balance the budget dealing with a rule that required a supermajority in the legislature to pass it. (Which mean the budget had to slash programs, because the hardcore Republican anti-tax cult wouldn’t allow any significant taxing for new revenue.)

    But as far as many California voters know, the whole problem is, “Gray Davis caused a $38B deficit.”

    The media failed to correct this utterly false impression, but I don’t know if it’s their fault or not.

    The facts were available to any curious person who wished to discover them. Instead, many people formed their impressions from media blowhards repeating the “$38B deficit/Gray Davis’s fault” mantra over and over.

    Maybe they fucking deserve the Governator.

    Not that I won’t work to recall him.

  • John Mudd

    Brian, no one cares about the technicalities. Furthermore, the insensitivities of the California liberal-left to people’s needs, such as Laurie’s and California’s community college system, are why Gov. Davis will probably be on his way out of office by the time you read this.

    Cheers.

%d bloggers like this: