Wed, October 8, 2003
Girls Can Get So Jealous
Just because Arnold didn't grope you, that doesn't mean he didn't grope anybody.
As a result of a conscientiously circulated mass email I received related to the California recall election, I was subjected to a column in the "L.A. Daily News" in which Jill Stewart rants about the perceived "liberal bias" in the media. Rather than clutter anyone's Inbox with my apoplectic rant in response, I'll dump the key points here for all to enjoy.
(If you want a little "context," you can read the "Daily News" column by following the "Why wasn't Davis investigated too?" link, at left.)
Why wasn't Gray Davis investigated? Gray Davis isn't running for office in this election. He has been elected, and re-elected. We know what kind of leader he is because we've seen him in office. We have information in the form of his track record as governor (like it or not) and articles like the "New Times" article Stewart mentioned. It's the replacement candidates, particularly newcomers like Schwarzenegger who have never held elected office, who need scrutinizing – we're trying to learn about their potential qualifications for the job, and have less time to learn about them than we normally would during an election cycle. Therefore, debates and questions about their history in other jobs must become the shorthand to gain as much perspective on them as possible in a brief period. Schwarzenegger only appeared in one debate and has been reluctant to specifically answer questions about his stances on most issues or his plans for rebuilding California. If Arnold is unwilling to tell us what kind of candidate he represents, investigations into his past are the only remaining avenue for appraising his potential as a gubernatorial candidate.
While some of the sources used by the "L.A. Times" were anonymous, a third of the women in the initial story were not. The allegations of most of the women were first mentioned in "Premiere" magazine years ago (as Stewart notes). It's by no means a surprise attack on Schwarzenegger. He knew that these women were out there saying these things about him, whether they were true or not. Reportedly, Schwarzenegger and his family (read: Kennedy relative Maria Shriver) expended great consideration over his decision to enter the race. Right up to his appearance on The Tonight Show, insiders speculated that Schwarzenegger wouldn't run, out of concern that a bid for public office would lead to investigations into his past. His staff had ample time to investigate the charges against him and prepare their response. Considering Arnold's penchant for sound bites in this campaign, it's surprising he was caught off guard at all.
Schwarzenegger himself has refused to deny the charges against him. It's telling that, rather than attempt to nullify the accusations against Arnold, Stewart chooses to speculate about Davis's record with women. The name of the game isn't "Who's Least Misogynistic?" These charges have been leveled against Arnold by several women independently; he needs to respond to them. If similar allegations come to light regarding Davis, he should respond to them. (It would be shady for recall supporters to act as though Davis's temper is a reason for the recall, since the text of the recall petition points out his mismanagement of finances and the energy situation but doesn't mention his Louise Woodward impersonation with his office staff.) The fact that allegations against Davis haven't arisen in a paper as prominent as the "L.A. Times" could very well be explained by bias at that newspaper. However, it could just as easily be that the accusations didn't pan out upon investigation back in the late '90s. Or that his accusers have recanted their accounts. To assume, in the current newspaper climate, that an organization as historic as the "L.A. Times" would risk its reputation by turning a blind eye to legitimate allegations is to make a pretty big leap.
© onebee · all rights reserved