Here it is. The LA Times unloads it's dirt on Schwarzenegger.
UPDATE: "I know that the people of California can see through this trash politics. Let me tell you something, let me tell you something. A lot of those that you see in the stories is not true, but at the same time, I have to tell you that I always say, that wherever there is smoke, there is fire. That is true. So I want to say to you, yes, that I have behaved badly sometimes. 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 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'm trying to do. When I'm governor, I want to prove to the women that I will be a champion for the women, a champion for the women. And I hope that you will give me the chance to prove that. Now let's go from the dirty politics back to the future of California." -- Arnold Schwarzenegger, this morning in San Diego.
UPDATE: California Insider gives some background on the LA Times reporters bringing us this story, and some commentary. Quotable:
The piece is credible, and disturbing. The disclosure of the incidents does not seem to have been orchestrated by an opponent’s campaign, although The Times does not describe in detail how it came upon the women other than to say they did not approach the newspaper on their own or through any of Schwarzenegger’s campaign rivals. Although none of the women involved ever filed a legal action against Schwarzenegger, the behavior described is abusive and crude ...
I think Schwarzenegger is helped as much as he is hurt by the timing. The campaign has prepared the world for the possibility of late chargtes of a personal nature. And he might be able to use the timing itself to try to fend off the allegations.
UPDATE: More from California Insider. Quotable: ".. he is trying to have it both ways by denying the specific allegations in The Times while apologizing for other behavior not linked to specific women or actions."
UPDATE: Der Schwarzengroper -- Kausfiles has an instant reaction.
UPDATE: Another instant reaction from LA Observed. Quotable:
I haven't read every Schwarzenegger investigation piece, so I don't know all that's come before, but my sense is this adds cases but isn't a huge revelation. Anyone who believes the probable next governor is without character issues hasn't been listening or doesn't care. Is the story's timing suspicious? Not to me. You work these kinds of stories as long as you can, trying to get everything there is to get and cross checking all you can. There's no urgency to rush into print at the risk of being wrong. The only timing consideration for me is to not run the story so late it hits unfairly, on the final weekend. In this case there is adequate time for the Schwarzenegger campaign to respond, if they wish. But I doubt they were surprised anyway. (Sean Walsh does give the blanket denial in the story.)
UPDATE: Xrlq weighs in. So does Fresh Potatoes. And here's boomshock. Also, Andrew Sullivan.
UPDATE: And Peter Robinson. Quotable:
Arnold has now apologized ... An acceptable statement in itself, but one that raises questions about Arnold's political judgement. Since he knew all along that he has behaved like a boor--and done so with such frequency that accounts of his behavior were bound to come out--why didn't he issue this apology weeks ago, addressing the issue early to get it out of the way? And if Arnold thought it best to try to hide the issue instead, what else might he still be trying to hide?
''When I am governor," Arnold continued, "I want to prove to the women that I will be a champion for the women, a champion of the women."
We can all guess what that means. Since he has behaved like a serial predator, Arnold will attempt to placate women by supporting the whole radical, feminist agenda.
What effect will this morning's charges have on the recall? I couldn't say. But as of yesterday, polls showed Arnold ahead of Bustamante by 10 to 15 percent. If Arnold's lead now evaporates, permitting Bustamante to claim the governor's mansion, no one will be able to blame McClintock. Arnold will have brought it on us himself.
UPDATE: Now Hugh Hewett:
Readers of the report on Arnold Schwarzenegger in this morning’s Los Angeles Times should ask themselves when did editorial standards change at the paper. In January 2001, the Los Angeles Times censored a George Will column because it contained a reference to Clinton victim Juanita Broadderick. I discovered the censorship during a broadcast and the public outcry over it forced the editors at the Times to admit error:
“George F. Will's column on Thursday's commentary page, as edited by the Times, omitted the author's statement that it is reasonable to believe that President Clinton 'was a rapist 15 years before becoming president.' Although some might dispute Will's interpretation of the facts, it is his opinion and should have been included in his column”.
Higher-ups in the newspaper had to reverse an earlier decision to delete the reference in the Will column and issued the explanation quoted above. Still, one has to wonder why the concern of the paper towards Clinton's reputation displayed in the original edit of the Will column, as well as in the handling of the TrooperGate story and its refusal to take seriously Kathleen Wiley’s allegations, has now sharply evolved into an aggressive stance on harassment allegations when they are leveled against a Republican. Bloggers with more time available to them than I may well be able to compare and contrast the Tammny Times’ treatment of all these stories, but only a fool would trust the Los Angles Times to accurately and fairly report the story of this sort on a day this close to an election.
Posted by Greg Ransom
| TrackBack
