Home / Schwarzenegger: ‘I’m deeply sorry’

Schwarzenegger: ‘I’m deeply sorry’

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

In response to the L.A. Times story, Arnold has suddenly decided he is sorry for his past misogynistic behavior. L.A. Times again:

Responding to a report that he has inappropriately touched six women, one as recently as in 2000, Arnold Schwarzenegger acknowledged this morning that he had “behaved badly” in the past but said he was “deeply sorry.”

“Yes, I have behaved badly sometimes,” he said. “Yes, there were unruly movie sets.… I did things I thought were playful. But now I recognize that I have offended people and to those people that I have offended, I want to say to them, ‘I am deeply sorry about that, and I apologize because this is not what I am trying to do.’ ”

Speaking at the kickoff of his “California Comeback Express Bus Tour” in San Diego, the gubernatorial candidate said if elected he would be a “champion for women,” and that he hoped voters would “give me the chance to prove it.”

During the short address, Schwarzenegger urged voters to turn away from what he called “trash politics,” and at first said that “a lot of things,” in the media are “not true.” But in the next breath, the actor acknowledged that he always says “where there’s smoke there’s fire” and proceeded with his apology.

Now he recognizes it? It has to be published on the front page of the L.A. Times before he recognizes it?

Perhaps the bad behavior he’s sorry for includes this playful sort of fun:

During the production of the 1991 mega-blockbuster Terminator 2: Judgment Day, a producer on that film recalls Arnold’s emerging from his trailer one day and noticing a fortyish female crew member, who was wearing a silk blouse. Arnold went up to the woman, put his hands inside her blouse, and proceeded to pull her breasts out of her bra. Another observer says, “I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. This woman’s nipples were exposed, and here’s Arnold and a few of his clones laughing. I went after the woman, who had run to the shelter of a nearby trailer. She was hysterical but refused to press charges for fear of losing her job. It was disgusting.”

Powered by

About Brian Flemming

  • No, Al, you won’t. I have removed that ability from everybody except site administrators.

    Also, I don’t believe Brian suggested any such thing, just that it could be done for nefarious purposes.

  • I reject Brian’s apparent premise that editing out comments on a thread constitutes some kind of dark conspiratorial abuse of some random schmuck’s free speech.

    All should please feel hereby notified that I will delete any abusive, inappropriate comments I wish to from threads under MY posts. And I won’t be asking Brian Flemming’s permission to do so.

  • Brian, On the technical issue, I thought about warning you that you would still think you were able to change the comment, rejected only at the save button, but then I thought it might be fun if you typed in something really long and lost it, so I kept my mouth shut. I figured you would be smart enough to back up to get it back, and I was right. Still, that moment of frustration, please tell me that it was exquisite! Lie if you must, I want to visualize that split-second of frustration. You animal-lover, you.

    P.S. I followed the stats link, and I don’t see Arnold anywhere on the list. Am I missing something?

    Anyway, I think we’ve tried to stay away from plugs for partisan politics. The one semi-exception was the Send Chris To Iraq plug that we phrased in a non-partisan way, and even that was yanked, for now at least. If you guys ever team up and get things together, that’s different. Still, it’s Eric’s playground, so he can run whatever he wants there.

  • Ah, I got that MoveOn alert this morning and didn’t even notice the link to my site. No wonder I have a so many hits from Yahoo Mail and the like.

    Don’t know if I’ll make it to Beverly Hills at 8:30 a.m., but it’s tempting. And thanks for the nomination.

    I will be in Santa Monica at 5 p.m. tomorrow for this protest, however, and plan to take some pictures.

    Tomorrow would be a good day to have “Your Complete Arnold Headquarters” be the promo at the top of the home page through Oct. 7. If Eric did that, I’d cover the press conference for Blogcritics.

    And I don’t have to tell Eric how good Arnold is for site traffic here (click the top entry page), do I, Eric?

  • Phillip,

    “Permission denied” in loud red type.

    So I wasn’t able to post this.

    Phillip Winn:

    And I just want to clarify about the dog-fucking thing–that was a mistake. I mean, yes, I do like to fuck dogs. In fact, man-on-dog is one of my favorite activities, third only to man-on-man and man-on-child. It’s not just one thing.

    However, that said, I did not mean to reveal any of this. I’m taking some medication that makes me a little too candid lately.

  • CBS just showed a bit of the interview with Anna Richardson and it seemed that Arnold was coming on to her, not the opposite as his flak tried to spin it. Though it would help to show the whole interview.

    Yes, it would have been better if the article had appeared earlier, but would you rather have had the Times rush the article into print without doing enough investigation?

    I’m sure there will be some making of the LA Times story stories that will provide more details.

    And I nominate Brian to cover this MoveOn press conference early Friday morning where they will unveil an Arnold anti-woman ad. Moveon actually included a link to the copy of the Premiere article on Brian’s site in the email asking people to contribute $500,000 to run the ad Sunday & Monday.

  • this has nothing to do with the good of the electorate. it’s pure politics (the LA times story i mean).

    if proper debate and consideration were among the times’ concerns, they would have run this story a month ago, especially since THEY went looking for the story.

    the precedent in 92 and 00 seems to suggest that 5-7 days before the election is the optimal time to put out this kind of dirt.

    this is not to defend arnold.

    but it would be nice if we had more time for these charges to be properly considered.

  • Okay, Brian, you dog-lover, you! Once I realized my bone-headed blunder, I found the right permission and fixed it (I think). Now you shouldn’t be able to edit this comment. Please confirm this. Thanks. Thanks a lot. 😉

    TDavid, it all depends on what we’ve changed the meaning of the word ‘to’ to. 😉

  • lol “I cannot remember” — is this Ronald Reagan or The Terminator?

    (now that I’ve posted twice after saying I wouldn’t post any more in this thread, I guess that was an inaccurate statement LOL)

  • Again, this isn’t about a court of law. This is about who will run our state.

    And ABC news reports more shit from his past is hitting the fan:

    Yet even as he tried to put out that fire, another broke out.

    ABCNEWS obtained a copy of an unpublished book proposal with quotes from a verbatim transcript of an interview Schwarzenegger gave in 1975 while making the film Pumping Iron.

    Asked who his heroes are, he answered, “I admired Hitler, for instance, because he came from being a little man with almost no formal education, up to power. I admire him for being such a good public speaker and for what he did with it.”

    He is quoted as saying he wished he could have an experience, “like Hitler in the Nuremberg stadium. And have all those people scream at you and just being total agreement whatever you say.”

    The author of the book proposal, Pumping Iron’s director, George Butler, told ABCNEWS today that the quotes needed to be seen in context, and that Arnold never said anything anti-Semitic.

    “I cannot remember any of these,” Schwarzenegger told ABCNEWS. “All I can tell you is that I despise everything Hitler stood for. I despise everything the Nazis stood for, everything the Third Reich stood for.”

  • Eric Olsen

    Thanks MD, every woman – every person – has the right to her own space, and her ya-ya’s are certainly within that space.

    There is no such thing as an “innocent” fondling of an unconsenting woman’s breasts. It is comparable to a woman walking up and grabbing a man’s package – serious space invasion.

    I can also understand TD’s concerns about “innocent until proven guilty” and the blackmail potential of sexual harassment charges – it’s a minefield.

    I lived in Hermosa Beach in the ’80s when the entire McMartin family was driven into the toilet by what turned out to be false accusations of child abuse. They lost everything including their reputations. It was like the Salem Witch Trials.

    In this case, though, there seem to be enough similar but unconnected reports that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that the issue is real. And, ironically, his apology confirms that he had something to apologize for.

    It astonishes me that people who claim to “love” women forget that women are people’s grandmothers, mothers, sisters, daughters, nieces, aunts, friends, colleagues, teachers, etc., etc., and not just, or even primarily, sexual objects. Arnold seems to have learned this only through the necessity of ambition, which may indicate he hasn’t really learned it at all.

  • Ok, I couldn’t resist: Phillip likes to fuck dogs?

    (that has to be the added comment) LOL

  • Argh! While I’m not actually all that friendly to dogs, I am an idiot! I have had a serious case of brain drain this afternoon.

    I put in code to prevent people from deleting comments, but I did nothing whatsoever to prevent editing them. Oops!

    And to think, I asked for trouble from Brian! Back into the source code I go…

  • Hmm, darn it. I wonder if you’re somehow not running the new code…more testing is required.

    And even though I didn’t pledge anything regarding your second attempt, I did promise to leave things alone the first time, so I’ll leave #33 alone. But if you’d like to be kind to me, you might think about the fact that I don’t actually swear myself, and that comment could cause someone apoplexy someday.

    Nah, that’s probably an incentive for you to leave it! 😉

  • Phillip – how many times do I have to post that this is alleged activity? You are proceeding as if this incident is with the lady is a fact and I’m not proceeding with that same assumption. Isn’t that obvious?

    If that is indeed what happened, then I’ve already said (three times now?) it was unacceptable, illegal and wrong. Do you read like part of my posts or something? Do you miss out on bold print or what?

    I don’t see why you keep posing hypotheticals which defend him.

    Steve, I don’t see why people keep saying I’m defending somebody I’m not defending. It seems rather like I’m trying to defend myself for asking questions about the situation and making a comment that was intended to be about dating in the workplace contributing to an environment that MIGHT (did anybody see the word “might”) solicit unwanted advances.

    This will be my last post on this discussion as I have no desire to even give the impression that I am in favor remotely of anybody who treats other human beings as is being alleged here. I do, however, care very deeply about people being innocent until proven guilty.

    There is something known as process of the law. There is a lot of assumption in guilt going on this thread.

    I hope none of you that are so quick to admonish people that haven’t had due process of the law are ever faced with someone making an accusation against you.

  • Phillip,

    On the technical commenting matter, I still have privileges.

    I added a little comment to the end of your Comment #33.

    I like dogs, too, but, really, one can take these things too far.

  • I’m often astounded by the ignorance of people about sexual harrassment and violence.

    Most rapes are not reported. Most women who are beaten do not report it.

    Just because a woman doens’t report something to the police doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. And if they had brought a civil suit, they would be accused of making it up to get money.

    I can completely understand why they wouldn’t bring up this behavior by one of the most powerful men in Hollywood.

    What you wrote is just another example of the all too common attitude of blaming the victim.

    If you actually read the LA Times story, many of them did tell people about what happened at the time or long before Arnold ran for office. And they didn’t come forward and accuse him of this. A team of three reporters tracked them down.

    While I’m sure there have been women who have hit on a guy who Molly Ivins has said looks like “a condom stuffed with walnuts,” these women didn’t. And while he issued a blanket denial of the stories in this article, he has said he behaved badly (which allows him to at least try to duck questions on the specifics).

    I don’t see why you keep posing hypotheticals which defend him.

  • My reasons for opposing the recall and disliking Schwarzenegger were well-stated by Eric.

    I think at least one guy is underestimating the seriousness of behavior such as a man with no relationship to a woman touching her breasts — anywhere, including a movie set. To touch them suggests that a man does not see women as owning their bodies the way men do. Talking about’em is bad enough. But, touching the ya-yas? That’s way over the line.

  • TDavid, come on. You’re kidding, right? “Arnold went up to the woman, put his hands inside her blouse, and proceeded to pull her breasts out of her bra.” In public!

    I stand by my assertion that this is unacceptable behavior regardless of the setting. Everything I’ve ever read or heard about movie sets suggests that the illusion of free-and-easy sex that we sometimes see on screen is just that – an illusion. Certainly strip clubs set very strict rules regarding physical contact. And finally, everything I’ve ever read about Hefner suggests that spontaneous physical contact as described above would be unwelcome at the Playboy mansion as well.

    Your comment (#4) clearly stated that we shouldn’t judge the situation without taking into account the environment, and specifically suggested that a movie set might be just the sort of relaxed environment where a highly-paid actor might walk out of his trailer, physically grope a woman and expose her breasts to the people around her and this might just be welcome.

    I’ll say it again, there is no such place. Not then, not now, not ever.

    Heck, from what little I know about porn movies, such behavior would be unwelcome even there. This woman was not an actress, after all, but an off-screen staffer. If she wanted some time in the sack with Arnold and had told him so specifically, that still doesn’t excuse public groping and exposure.

    Also, I like to fuck dogs. I just thought everyone should know.

  • Ok Phillip, let’s take your statement:

    “TDavid, there are no circumstances ever which make the purported behavior acceptable”

    Sorry, this is inaccurate 🙂

    If the woman on the site led Arnold on or they had been friendly and she looked forward to these moves then yes, there are circumstances that would make this acceptable

    I am simply saying: what if the woman told Arnold she wanted it? This is a He Said, She Said, as far as I’m concerned because intent wasn’t established until after the fact (this is 3 years later, yes?).

    If this situation was so traumatizing (and I think an inappropriate advance like described would be, btw), then why didn’t the person immediately complain after the job was over? She was still worried about her job and decided to only complain when Arnold runs for political office? Something doesn’t pass the smell test.

    We all know now that the advance wasn’t welcomed — today — but how do we know at the time that it wasn’t welcomed?

    The timing is very suspicious. If this complaint was while the filming took place or right after the film was over this would be more credible on its face.

    Kobe appears very guilty because of this woman complaining right after the incident, which is the logical time for someone to step up and complain.

  • TDavid, I read and understood what you said clearly. I merely took issue with your view of what goes on on “unruly movie sets.”

    As for finding romance in the workplace, in 25 years, I have dated a co-worker three times. I have not dated many times more than that. Yes, people sometimes use the job as a meet market, but given what I hear from people I know, most do not. They’re too busy trying to please The Man.

  • I feel it important to repost what I said above for those who didn’t read it or seemed to have skipped past it entirely:

    Naturally I find Arnold’s actions — if they are true — disturbing, illegal and totally unacceptable, but there has been no court ruling here.

    I edited the “now” to be “no” but otherwise that is verbatim from comment #10.

    Also, if you look at my initial comment I used something called a question mark (-> ?). That character, I was always taught anyway, usually means that someone is asking a question. Which means I was looking for information, not condemnation from the collective. How could I have made that any clearer here? (again, that is simply a question and is not served up with sarcasm)

    Now let’s address the issue of harassment in the work place which was what compelled me to post here, not the totally unfounded assertion that I am defending inappropriate acts against women or men. By Arnold or any man or woman.

  • Personally, I don’t get involved with women I work with. But that isn’t the issue here (particularly since Arnold was married during much of this time it isn’t about restricting his dating opportunities).

    We’re talking about someone who is likely to be elected to run this state on Tuesday. This isn’t about if he might be convicted in a court of law (though if you bring up Kobe Bryant, it shows why none of these women decided to press charges). It is about if he should be elected.

  • Sorry, TDavid, I read “I don’t go around touching other people in suggestive or inappropriate ways nor am I in favor of those who do, but it seems to me like this happened on and in the context of the “unruly movie set” where fictional sex and innuendo is a common happenstance, yes/no? Therefore a sense of closeness might be there that escapes the crudeness of similar behavior in other settings.” and thought you meant, well, what you said. Which is why my response was “TDavid, there are no circumstances ever which make the purported behavior acceptable. I don’t care if you’re on a movie set, in a strip club, or at the Playboy mansion. It’s just not right!”

    If you didn’t technically say that you excused Arnold’s behavior, neither did I technically say that I disagreed with you. 🙂

  • oppositely, hmmm, maybe “to the opposite” would be better. Somebody will correct me, I didn’t look it up lol

  • Phillip, Natalie, Brian and anybody else who clearly didn’t understand what I posted, I didn’t ever say anywhere what Arnold allegedly did was acceptable or excusable (in fact I said very oppositely), if he did it without consent, so get off the whole I’m lobbying that this behavior is acceptable because it happened on a movie set. Forget the movie set for a moment and apply it to any work setting.

    And Brian, if one follows your analogy about not using a trial then every accused man or woman is guilty until proven innocent among a jury of his peers. That’s not how the judicial system works.

    Gimme some credit here, folks, and work off what I said, which seems to be a problem in the commentary. Does anybody here disagree that the workplace is a common dating venue?

    Is this really that hard a concept to follow?

    If you work somewhere you get to know people and maybe some of those people wanted (I’m not saying they did or didn’t, I’m simply floating this possibility) Arnold to give them attention.

    What about that possibility? Celebrities complain all the time about this. Does the name Kobe Bryant ring any bells?

    I’m not saying these women wanted to be groped because they worked on a movie set, so please read and comment on precisely what I said, which was commenting on the aspect that the workplace is a known dating venue. That’s a fact.

    How many of you met a boyfriend, girlfriend, etc, through work — or a friend of someone at work?

  • Eric Olsen

    you rule

  • I suspect it has been a non-issue because it never occurred to most posters that they could delete comments. Now that the ability has been outed, I’ve attempted to turn it off.

    Brian, feel free to try again here. 😉

    By the way, I didn’t just speed things up, I actually put in a feature that rejects duplicate comments. If not a single character in all four fields has changed, it doesn’t post again.

  • Eric Olsen

    All post writers can edit the comments on their posts – I thought everyone knew this. I fix typos all the time – you can too. I have deleted many spam comments, I delete duplicate comment postings regularly (though they have died down since Phillip has sped up the process – way to go).

    This is a bizarre obsession. I once deleted a comment I didn’t like, apologized for it, said I wouldn’t delete anything written by a Blogcritics writer again. I haven’t.

    This is a non-issue, as is confirmed by the fact that you haven’t heard anyone complain about it, and you would have heard based upon the holy hell that was raised the one time I did do it. There are 20,820 comments here – if any of this was an issue, it would have been an issue.

  • Arnold also treats men like shit.

    This earlier LA Times article hasn’t gotten as much attention.

  • I have done some poking and confirmed that all thread starts can delete any comment on that post. Wow! And barely a dozen lines away from the last change I made to permissions!

    Brian, please try to edit this post. Insert whatever you wish. If you succeed, I’ll leave it there as my punishment for not fixing it correctly. Thanks!

    [Phillip Winn is a doody-head. –Brian]

  • Good to know, Phillip.

    The two incidents I am thinking of involved comments deleted by the thread starter pretty much on a whim–the comments were not spam nor unusually offensive. The thread starter simply didn’t like them being there, so he deleted them.

    And no marker was left–the comments were deleted entirely.

    These are just two I know about. I have no idea what else those thread starters and/or others have done.

    I consider it a flaw in the system, personally–especially because the Blogcritics audience doesn’t know that these disappearances are part of the deal here. Blogcritics looks for all the world like an open book. It isn’t obvious that if someone writes “Brian, are you fucking crazy?” I can just send that comment into a black hole if I feel like it.

  • Nat, the quote actually starts with “Power corrupts.” Absolutely power simply corrupts absolutely. Brian doesn’t have absolute power here. 🙂

    TDavid, there are no circumstances ever which make the purported behavior acceptable. I don’t care if you’re on a movie set, in a strip club, or at the Playboy mansion. It’s just not right!

    Brian, I wasn’t aware that people had the ability to edit comments on their own posts. That’s what I get for going around as ‘god’ all the time. I’ll have to check this out. I’m surprised and think it will need to be disabled. Also, I assure you that I’ve never deleted a comment outright, though I’ve edited a few (always with an [Edited by admin] tag). I even replaced one entirely with a short note explaining that spam once lived there, but no deletions.

  • Careful, Bri. Absolute power corrupts. 🙂

    Thanks, hon.

    TDavid, consent is the issue. Those who have alleged that Schwarzenegger “behaved badly” apparently did not consent. On-screen romances are a completely different, er, affair.

  • California gubernatorial candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger responded today to allegations by six women that he groped them inappropriately over the last three decades by acknowledging that he had “behaved badly” in the past and saying he was “deeply sorry.”

    “And so what I want to say to you is that, yes, I have behaved badly sometimes,” the actor said in front of supporters in San Diego. “Yes, it is true, that I was on rowdy movie sets and I have done things that were not right which I thought then was playful, but now I recognize that I have offended people. And those people that I have offended, I want to say to them, ‘I am deeply sorry about that and I apologize, because this is not what I’m trying to do.’ ”

    State Sen. Tom McClintock, the only Republican challenge to Schwarzenegger in the race, was “distraught” about the comments, campaign director John Feliz said, because it again distracts from the campaigns most compelling issue: how to put California’s fiscal house in order.

    “It is not about Arnold’s behavior years ago on movie sets,” Feliz said, adding that today’s story in the Times disturbed McClintock and that he felt the apology was “very general at best.”

    Related, there is an interesting page at the Disinfopedia about raising standard of evidence as a weasely argument technique.

    Can’t dismiss the seriousness of the allegations? Claim that because there has been no jury trial and verdict that the allegations aren’t worthy of discussion.

    (Unless it’s about a blowjob, of course. Then the standard of evidence is, oh, somebody told somebody who told somebody else a rumor.)

  • Btw, I believe this is the first time I have ever edited somebody’s comment.

    Feels weird to have that power.

    Actually, it makes me wonder how others have used it.

    (What I know of two deletions of comments by others in the past already concerns me enough. I try not to think about it.)

  • Nat,

    Fixed it.

    The tag to close the italics was


    instead of


  • Brian – I’m sure that you’ve worked with other people and therefore you get to know them beyond some stranger you see at the book store or the library. The workplace is where many, many people meet their boyfriends, girlfriends, husbands, wives, etc.

    The workplace has historically been a great place actually to meet people, and is not the same as walking up to someone in a public place that you don’t know.

    Actors getting involved with each other and people involved in the movie set? Pick up People’s Magazine! You want to say that this doesn’t happen?

    As for this comment:

    Arnold’s alleged (and, to a significant degree now, generally admitted)

    Where did Arnold to “a significant degree, now generally admit” this was what happened? I have visited all the links and haven’t seen that anywhere. Stick to the facts, please.

    What this boils down to — with the information I’ve read — is a He Said, She Said, so don’t represent it as a fact. Alleged fact, yes, but fact no.

    Now that is “just stupid”

  • Brian or BC staff, could you fix #9, please? I did something wrong in formatting that wipes out most of the posting. Thanks.

  • Nobody on a movie set mistakes the time when the camera isn’t rolling as “fiction.” Just doesn’t happen.

    And as far as love scenes go, actors painstakingly negotiate and ask permission before performing a scene. It’s Acting 101. Even a kiss is negotiated–“I’m going to grab you like this and move in like this, is that okay?”

    Arnold’s alleged (and, to a significant degree now, generally admitted) actions have nothing to do with some kind of blurry line between reality and fiction on a movie set. There is no such line. Crew members are not mistaken for actors playing a scene. Off-camera areas are not mistaken for fictional worlds.

    We’re pretty crazy out here, but we’re not that crazy.

    I’m sure some of Arnold’s supporters (with the help of his hints) will blur their eyes as they look at the issue and say, Oh, it was just a movie thing. Fiction.

    But that’s just stupid.

  • er, no court ruling that would be.

  • Duh, Natalie, Brian just posted it (comment #6) after I made my comment.

    Steve, I wasn’t sticking up for Arnold’s alleged actions (and that is what they are, alleged), I was pointing out that many sexual harassment claims are completely bogus and the playfulness happens on both sides.

    Arnold apologized for offending some ladies, so obviously he did something that inappropriate — or at least that he felt deserved his apology to that effect. It doesn’t mean he admitted to the sequence of events as described by his accusers.

    Naturally I find Arnold’s actions — if they are true — disturbing, illegal and totally unacceptable, but there has been now court ruling here.

  • TDavid: Did you read about him pulling a woman’s breasts out of her brassiere and groping them? Come on.

    I have been on a number of movie sets. Sometimes the atmosphere is playful and unruly, but only sometimes. And “playful and unruly” does not mean taking people past second base without their consent is OK. Anyone who doesn’t get that isn’t qualified to be dogcatcher.

    In the vast majority of love scenes, for example, the rule is don’t touch anything beyond what is scripted or mandated by the director.

    Arnold did something that I can’t imagine would ever be acceptable. I wish that woman had filed charges. Yes, the primary problem is that Arnold has no experience. Apparently, he has no sense of judgement either. Now he’s going to be a champion for women? Yeah, right — as if we need anything from the likes of him other than to be left the hell alone.

    I feel sorry for California. And for those who will suffer because of the precedent that could very well be set on the 7th.

  • Just because a woman works on a movie set, doesn’t mean the overpaid star has a right to grab their breasts or ass, ask them to stick their finger in their pussy so he can smell their finger, or ask if a guy has ever stuck his tongue up their ass.

    Nobody is going to say a handshake or hug is the same kind of thing. That is a false sliperly slope argument. What Arnold is accused of doing was wrong.

    The fictional sex and sexual language is clearly spelled out in the script for those who appear with Arnold. That doesn’t give him the right to be an asshole to other women in the crew or at the places he eats.

    As I’ve said, there are certainly lots of other reasons to not vote for the recall and Arnold, but this shows his trying to deflect the criticism by saying he liked powerful women was bullshit. What he called being playful was crudge and humiliating. And unfortunately too many men who aren’t movie stars also engage in that kind of behavior and use the same excuses.

  • The Naked Gun body condoms, is that what you are promoting, Eric?

  • Premiere:

    During the production of the 1991 mega-blockbuster Terminator 2: Judgment Day, a producer on that film recalls Arnold’s emerging from his trailer one day and noticing a fortyish female crew member, who was wearing a silk blouse. Arnold went up to the woman, put his hands inside her blouse, and proceeded to pull her breasts out of her bra. Another observer says, “I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. This woman’s nipples were exposed, and here’s Arnold and a few of his clones laughing. I went after the woman, who had run to the shelter of a nearby trailer. She was hysterical but refused to press charges for fear of losing her job. It was disgusting.”

  • Eric Olsen

    LOVE EVERYONE (but wear protection)

  • Hmmm, so was he slapping women on the ass on the set or what?

    I don’t go around touching other people in suggestive or inappropriate ways nor am I in favor of those who do, but it seems to me like this happened on and in the context of the “unruly movie set” where fictional sex and innuendo is a common happenstance, yes/no? Therefore a sense of closeness might be there that escapes the crudeness of similar behavior in other settings.

    Pretty soon simply shaking someone’s hand or a hello hug is going to be considered misogynistic behavior or sexual harassment, I fear.

    The world needs more love, not truly inappropriate, indecent touching, but love.

  • Eric Olsen

    Well Mike, occasionally we agree – I am very concerned about the precedent too. Too much “democracy” leads to a perpetual campaign and nothing ever getting done, which is a feature not a bug to some people, but I am not one of them. Governmetn has some very real and important responsibilities.

  • mike

    I think this could actually end of helping Arnold. “I was wrong and now I’m on the straight and narrow.” Americans love that stuff.

    I think Arianna came across as so shrill and harping in the debate that she threw a lot of support to Arnold.

    It’s too bad, because the recall is a bad idea and will set a terrible precedent.

  • Eric Olsen

    I am neither for nor against Arnold. It certainly seems he has some behavior to apologize for, and that he may have some issues with respect to women, namely repecting women. It seems to be a somewhat legitimate issue. I still say the biggest problem I would have with him if I were still a Californian, is that he has no experience with holding political office whatsoever, not with running so immense an organization as the government of California.

    As I have said all along I would vote no on the recall because it’s frivolous, wasteful, and very partisan. If you vote someone in, he stays in unless there is an impeachable offense.