Arnold and California Recall

I'm not sure how I feel about the recall since I live in NJ, but it has been interesting to watch and hear the opinions of others.

What strikes me about Arnold's campaign is that it is no different from many a politician's? All candidates try to cast doubts and aspersions (did I spell that right?) upon the acts and actions of their opponents. There's always the lie of ommission, too. Nothing new. Lots of promises, but no explanation of how. The politicians tell people what they think they want to hear.

Since I don't live in CA, I don't have an opinion on Davis. With regards to Arnold, he isn't stupid and maybe he can turn the state around. He's a successful businessman.

BTW, do we need to worry about Arnold becoming President (following in the footsteps of actor and former CA governor Ronald Reagan)? I don't think it can happen since he's wasn't born American, but is naturalized. Of course, that was true for the 1st several presidents, too. Anyone else got more clarity on this?

If Arnold were to become speaker of the house and the president and vice president were assasinated, would he [as the speaker of the house] become president regardless of his citizenship? (Sorry - the question came out of my recent viewings of The West Wing.)

Even if he were to become Speaker, Arnold can never be President of the U.S. no matter what happens to the President and the VP. Thank heaven for THAT!

Well it's offical, Davis is out and Arnold is in.

I just want to say that I'm happy to not be a Californian. Arnold winning just proves how dumb people can be and shows what a role image and superficial popularity means in this country...Oh well...at least one good thing came out of this...no more movies from him.

since when is A S a conservative??? He's a "moderate" republican... which is really just "liberal"

Click to expand...

Would that mean a moderate liberal is really a conservative?

LOL, VIETgrl! Arnold a moderate Republican aka liberal? Have people ever heard the guy talk about his politics? I'd describe him as slightly to the left of Ronald Reagan only because he's so far to the right he wraps around. Seriously, I don't think he's on the religious right, I know Arnold is your basic "more free-enterprise capitalist than thou" conservative.

Actually, I got a kick out of Arnold movies in the '80s, but got kind of sick of them once the initial fun wore off. His most interesting role IMO is still as himself in "Pumping Iron" in which he psychologically torments Lou Ferrigno, makes the infamous "pumping up feels like ***ing" line, and smokes dope.

As I say on my other thread (hadn't seen your post yet), Senator Orrin Hatch is sponsoring a bill that would amend the consitution so that you wouldn't have to be born in the US to be elected President, you would just have to be a US citizen, which AS is.

No matter what happens with his term as governor, I have no doubt that in terms of politics and AS, he'll be back.
Rgirl

Can't wait to see Arnold make his first really big gaffe and then realize that there's no "take two"...

In all seriousness, this recall has just made California look more superficial and celebrity obsessed than previously (no offense to its fine citizen's on this board). While I sympathize on the taxes and economic issues, there was NO REAL REASON to recall Davis. A recall should be used in cases of last resort--where the public servant in charge has shown signs of criminal activity or serious abuses of power, and sorry, raising taxes and ticking people off isn't enough. This was simply a power grab engineered by a rich Republican to steal the Governorship back, partially, I believe, to help re-elect the current President and keep the party in power Nationally--I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, but I believe its true. The worst part about this is that this is likely to ricochet and be used in other states. In my state, our Governor is doing pretty darn good and the people have no complaints, but the House, which is dominated by the other party is already making noises about passing a bill permitting recalls to try and boot him out. My concern is that we're going to end up with the wealthy abusing the recall system to remove people from the opposite party in power grabs like that seen in California.

Was Gray Davis a good Governor? No, absolutely not; However, he still did nothing to deserve such drastic action, and in his place will be an egotistical, grandstanding showboat with no experience whatsoever who appears to think that he can run the state based on his charm. (Heck, even Jesse Ventura was small town Mayor first). He has grand plans, but where is the money going to come from, considering what was spent on the recall? Personally, I wish him well and I hope he does do a good job for you, but I can already picture the Democrats sharpening their knives just waiting for the first opportunity to pounce on him in revenge for the recall, and then here we go, gridlock, partisanship and infighting until the next election. The most pathetic thing was hearing cheery newsbits on the radio of Californians saying, well if Arnold doesn't do a good job, we'll just recall him!!! Sorry to sound like a downer, but I think a Pandora's box has been opened and the sad part is it could hurt the rest of the country.

Yazmeen, I agree completely. I voted against the recall because I fell that it sets a bad precedent. However, as to other states doing the same, I believe that there was something written in to the California constitution that allowed the recall to happen. I'm guessing that if there's no such wording in your constitution, you are safe.

BTW, do we need to worry about Arnold becoming President (following in the footsteps of actor and former CA governor Ronald Reagan)? I don't think it can happen since he's wasn't born American, but is naturalized. Of course, that was true for the 1st several presidents, too. Anyone else got more clarity on this?

Click to expand...

According to the US Constitution you have to be either a natural-born citizen OR have been a US citizen when the constitution was ratified. That's how the first presidents got in (and it doesn't apply to Arnie).

If Arnold were to become speaker of the house and the president and vice president were assasinated, would he [as the speaker of the house] become president regardless of his citizenship?

Click to expand...

That's an interesting question. According to the current law, probably not. The current law says that from president will be appointed as the highest officer from the list of succession who has "no disability", meaning nothing disqualifying him (president has to be born in the US, be 35 years old, reside in the US for the past 14 years, and not be from the same state as the former president). Having said that, this is a part of the law, NOT of consitution. The constitution only says that if both president and vice-president are unable to serve, the congress may pass laws to determine what to do. My guess is that if majority leader of the Senate or Secretary of State were eligible, the presidency would pass to them. However, I think Congress would pass a law allowing a "disabled" individual to serve as president rather than passing it down to one of the many other secretaries in succession line.

heyang said:

If Arnold were to become speaker of the house and the president and vice president were assasinated, would he [as the speaker of the house] become president regardless of his citizenship?

Click to expand...

I would think the ability to speak would be necessary to obtain the position of Speaker of the House.

tharrtell: That's the problem, our legislature is now making noises about passing legislation to allow recalls. Good grief, what a mess!

Whether or not one thinks it was prudent to recall the governor, I for one am glad that we have that option. To be tied in with a political leader for three more years who is out of step with the people he is governing is deplorable. When he took office five years ago, California was in the "black", now, under Davis' rule, we are mired in a sink hole. One may not like the fact that our new governor makes movies or was a past "womanizer", but what most of us care about is whether or not he is enough of a businessman to help our state!!! 42

Womanizing is deplorable, but is doesn't mean you can't run a state or a country for that matter (Look at FDR and JFK....big time womanizers)............we need to wait and see. If he's got good financial advisors, and I think he probably does, he might make a positive difference. If he doesn't, it's three more years until the next election (or until the next recall...:\ )................42

show 42 said:

Womanizing is deplorable, but is doesn't mean you can't run a state or a country for that matter (Look at FDR and JFK....big time womanizers)

Click to expand...

Were they doing those things against those women's will, too? Because that's the difference (and a crucial one, at that).

If Arnold slept around with every willing woman he could find (and his heart take), that would be one thing. But if he thinks he can (or could in the past) grab every woman he finds attractive enough, or even just say things like "Have you ever had a man stick his tongue in your ass?" -- that's something completely different. And what I find most disgusting is that he has taken advantage of those women (OK, allegedly) because of his higher status and power over them. It's beyond disgusting, it's WRONG.

I believe I heard mention on the news that 5 states have the ability to recall, but the requirements are much more difficult than California.

With regards to the allegations against AS, I haven't really been following the news. There's womanizing vs sexual haraasment/assault.

My guess it that he was probably a womanizer before his marriage and perhaps after his marriage. I only recall one headline in the tabloids regarding allegations of infidelity during AS's marriage and that was at least a couple of years back. So, either the women were willing partners or were paid off - take your pick.

Now, if these women were assaulted or harassed, I can view their allegations from 2 different viewpoints depending on how cynical I'm feeling. 1 - Why did these women come forward so late in the election process? It seems as though they could've come forward much earlier in the campaign. 2 - On the other hand, I realize that some women may have felt ashamed and had a hard time coming forward. Sometimes, just seeing one person stand up can give others the courage to step forward, too.

Since I'm sure Arnold has good advisers and that AS was witness to the treatment of Clinton's affairs, I find it difficult to believe that he would not be aware that allegations would come to light.

Anyway, I don't really have an opinion on the allegations against AS since I haven't listened to any of the details.

Heyang, many of those women did not come forward on their own -- LA Times did some research, and found a number of women who told their close friends about the incidents at the time they occured. I, too, do not know that all allegations are true, but many of them are exremely distrubing: groping a waitress's breast, spanking a co-worker, etc.