It's official: California Governor Schwarzenegger

Remove all ads!

Well, its official folks!

Arnold (Ahnold) Schwarzenegger was sworn in as the 38th Governor of California (Cali-forn-ya).

Here are two links to the story:

• CNN Coverage
• Sacramento Bee

As an American, Californian, and Sacramentan, I am curious what world opinion is.

 

Well, after having a professional wrestler as governor of Minnesota, nothing surprises me anymore. The problem I have is I just can't take him seriously. I think of the Terminator Movies, the Conan movies, and any of the umpteen other action movies he's done over the years, and I just cannot take the man seriously.

Reporter: Arnold, how are you going to deal with California's state debt?

Arnold: It must be terminated.

Reporter: What about possibly running for re-election to another term?

Arnold: I'll be back.

*sigh* I don't know. We have governor Ehrlich here in Maryland. The biggest debate we have going on is whether or not to allow horse racing tracks to get slot machines.

I'll wait to see how well or how poorly he performs before making any final judgements. He has the potential to be a refreshing change or comic relief.

 

charismatic leader who (according to himself) doesn't need the money. I have faith in the chap mostly due to this last statement!

 

This has been debated before in a similar thread. I just don't buy into the idea that his size makes him stupid -- that's overly simplistic and totally unfair. He may turn out to be a miserable politician, but it won't be correlated at all with his bodybuilding or acting career.

As was Aldeth's conclusion, I will wait and see how the man does before dropping the hammer or raising a pedestal.

 

Nothing special. In Poland, one Big Brother everyman is a member of parliament. Another one is a presenter after her hopes for political career proved void.

 

Part of the perception is that you have an actor whose ego is as pumped up as his body, and who is therefore living under the delusion that he will actually be able to do a good job, when in reality (perceived reality, not necessarily actual reality), he's in it because he's on a power trip. It doesn't help that he spouts off so many cliches that he comes across sounding phony. Who knows? If he's actually sincere, maybe he has a chance.

 

I say give him a chance. Let's talk about this subject in @18 months and see then.

I think the funniest soundbite that I've heard on this whole issue came from Jay Leno...

"The critics say 'Arnold can't balance the budget, he's an actor'.
The critics say 'Arnold can't deal with environmental issues, he's an actor.
The critics say 'Arnold can't handle the highest office in the State, he's an actor'.
Arnold's thrilled, it's the first time in his career the critics have called him an actor"

 

Never cared much about politics. As a single human, there's not much I could do even if I did. That is, without putting all of my time and life at stake for it. And I don't care enough to do that.

So, I think as many others do. It's something interesting to behold. I seriously doubt he can screw things up too badly, even if I don't think he'll do much good either. I'm more interested in the people's reaction when enough of either good or bad things happen. How soon will they forget that the "real" politicians didn't do much better, or much worse. How long till Arnold will really have it coming for doing nothing more miraculous anyone else did, but being an easily blamed actor.

 

/me buries head in arms and weeps.

I can't shake the feeling that some people only voted for him because he's a 'movie star'.

 

Is that what passes for the American Dream nowadays?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the American Dream getting rewarded for hard work? I don't see how getting elected governor is living the American Dream when people voted for him just because he is an actor.

Arnold Schwarzenegger worked hard to become a famous and successful bodybuilder - that was the American Dream. I respect him for his accomplishments in that arena. True, he did cheat and use steriods... but that's besides the point.

I fail to see how success as a bodybuilder and "actor" can somehow be equated with a qualification to run a state. It seems he has, at best, a cursory knowledge of politics and has been forced to resort to repeating cheesy one-liners from his movies when in political debates and speeches. Ideally, a candidate would get elected because of their knowledge and policy positions.

Furthermore, his past bothers me greatly. All these groping charges... Well, I'll put it this way, it makes me very sad and angry to picture a woman getting violated in such a demeaning fashion. How you could treat another human being with such disrespect and go on to completely destroy her sense of self-worth is beyond me.

The main point here is he got elected to a position that he is not qualified for. That doesn't sound like the American Dream to me. If the groping allegations turn out to be true (which is almost guarenteed seeing as how many of them there are) then Arnold probably should be serving time in prison, but instead he living life to the fullest as an "incarnation of the american dream." Oiy.

[ November 19, 2003, 09:27: Message edited by: InquisitorX ]

 

From down here in New Zealand we really can't see the problem. He's voted in because YOU guys voted for him. You can't blame him if he fails, you can only blame yourself.

The only thing I can see him doing is being 'too nice' as the gov. New Zealand has been suffering from this for a bit now, our 'female' (urgh, no offence, but ladies shouldn't be leaders) Prime-Minister has been 'buying' votes by doing nice things for people that get special mention by the media yet she doesn't look at the big picture.

Spending more and more money on things such as some poor murder victim's fund (notice that victim's is SINGULAR) or sending international aid to some 'other' country when we have our own problems to deal with (such as education and hospital waiting lists).

I can see Arnie doing something like this because his entire life up to this point has been mostly dedicated to himself, sure he gives money to a charity now and again but he's not actually ever doing something for somebody. His job has always been acting to earn himself money, not doing anything truely productive (entertainment won't feed starving children or educate people - especially not his kind of movies). Now he's got his chance, hopefully he won't try and be too much of a 'nice guy' and forget that sometimes as the boss sacrifices must be made.

 

Apparently you fail to understand how a pseudo-democracy like American works. I voted against him as did the majority of clear-thinking people. Truth be told, I'm not sure how I could blame myself.

Just stop and listen to yourself for a second:

"You can't blame him if he fails"

Elected politicans need to be held accountable for their failures, just like members of any other profession. I guess the whole fiasco you described with the female Prime Minister buying votes is your fault. After all, "you guys" voted her in.

That was possibly the most idiotic comment I've ever read.

[ November 19, 2003, 09:38: Message edited by: InquisitorX ]

 

Don't forget, Arnold has a long history in the political field. He has served under more than one President on the Council for Physical Fitness, and he is part of that whole Shriver/Kennedy clan. He has actually travelled in political circles for some time, so it is not a venue that he is ignorant of. I think his refusal to address the issues during the campaign was a deliberate and well chosen strategy. What his true stance is, time will only tell.

I should think that California Democrats would be happy that he has such a high profile, liberal wife...bound to have some influence on his politics.

 

Calm down inquisitor. Perhaps you should take a moment too and listen to yourself...

A: It is possible to understand that people voted for him because he stands for change. a man of change. not because he is a, debatable, cool actor. You bring no evidence other than accusations of how dumb the people who voted for him actually must be. Since it is apparently plain obvious, that he is unsuited for the job and chosen on useless skills.

B Pseudo-democracy? what on earth is that about. Arnold had the most votes. BY FAR. and you don't call it democratic?

C: Don't tell me that it is impossible for you to imagine, that the women wanted to be touched by him and are just after his money. A court will descide if he even did touch them and say dirty words(definition of flirting too), untill then you seem very agitated on a fragile argument. As if you want him to be guilty. Had I been your classroom teacher and you said that this argument is valid because it is *Quote;* almost guarenteed seeing as how many of them there are *End quote* I would have given you an assignment to write down 50 historical happenings, that prove this is absolutely wrong.

D: We could go on about that almost every sentence you write, is loaded with unwillingness to look rationally at the election. Or we could instead just say that it is quite valid to look at it this way; He came to the land of liberty seeking freedom and fortune and fought his way to fame and from then took the chance when times where bad to be the leader of the people, hoping to sheppard them to better times. Qualified or not that is the american dream. Now let time tell if reality lives up to the dream. Nontheless it *is* the dream.

***
There is one interesting tail to this. Had Arnie been choosing a democratic badge and been a democratic governor, would it have been the democrats defending him and republicans attacking him, with similar onesided versions of reality?

[ November 19, 2003, 17:47: Message edited by: Nobleman ]

 

Very good point. I heard yesterday that he pulled the entire California Legislation into an Emergency Session. We'll see if, as Arnold put it, there will be a "Miracle of Sacramento".

 

Not that I agree with a lot of what Inquisitor said, but I will give him this - we do live in a "pseudo-democracy" if you so wish to describe it that way. The technical term for a system of government is a republic, not a democracy. In a democracy Congress would consist of every citizen of voting age. We elect people who take care of running the country. Technically, that's a republic, not a democracy. In fact, truth be told the only true democracy that I ever heard to exist was in Ancient Greece. Granted, you had to be a male landowner to vote, so slaves, peasants and women were excluded, but every male landowner had a hand in government.

 

@aldeth

As far as I see it, this part of the debate was wheter people are responsible for those they choose to lead them. At least inquisitor used the term as part of an argument against the population beeing responsible. *scroll up and look* I might be wrong.


Voters are responsible if they have a democratic election or at least carry a part of the responsibility. In comparrison to what then? A monarchy, Tyranny or pseudo-democracy. So, Of course if three or more people are trying to get a share of the votes and none of them get above 50%, hence the majority, and win, it doesn't make the election pseudo-democratic. The votes are still counted and the one who gets the most votes win. That is not pseudo-democratic. People are still responsible for which leader they get, through their votes. And the leader is responsible to what he gives based on his promises. It is mutual. The leader is not chosen from bloodline, force, or gifts. Arnold won a free election. It is democracy.

Those who didn't vote for Arnold should have done a better job explaining at least to one Rep-voter, that Arnold apparently is obviously useless for the job... IF they did that, I will guarantee that more than 50% would have dizzed Arnold out of pure statistics. So, in a democracy, all the voters have influence, and hence responsibility. It cannot be disputed.

Wheter or not all elections in USA are democratic is open for debate though... And I do most certainly agree, that the way the government works, has little in common with the democratic ancient greece you mention Aldeth

[ November 19, 2003, 18:31: Message edited by: Nobleman ]

 

You sound like a sound-bite you'd hear on Fox News. He is "a man of change?" Could you come up with a more trite and meaningless expression? I know I couldn't.

And stop kidding yourself. He was voted for because he was an actor with name recoginition. Tom McClintock, Arianna Huffington, Peter Camejo, and Peter Ubberoth were all superior candidates - not only does every single one of those candidates demostrate actually knowledge of how the government is run, but they actually layed out policy platforms.

The only changes for Arnold I know anything about are repealing of the car tax and taxation of Indian Casinos. Perhaps it's not a coincidence that the only 2 issues Arnold talked about were 'sexy' issues that people get easily emotional about.

Lets get something straight here. The recall was an exploitation of a loophole. Some rich republicans decided they wanted to redo a close election and choose another candidate. All they needed was a minority of the voters signatures (was it 3%?). That is not democractic. Redoing an election because you lost the first time is not democratic. Understand?

PLEASE. He basically already admitted to it.

A)He never denied the charges.
B)"I've behaved badly in the past" and refused to elaborate.

How naive are you Nobleman?

Lord, "qualified or not that is the american dream"? Are you kidding me? That is the ANTITHESIS of the American Dream. The American Dream is working hard and achieving those goals based on his hard work. He did NOT work hard to be governor. He worked hard to be a bodybuilder, NOT governor. *Waits for fact to sink in.*

Maybe you could explain the correlation between bodybuilding and governing. I'd love to hear it.

He failed to demonstrate that he is qualified to run a state. Could he theoretically run the state? Yes. Has he given any indication that he actually can? No.

Yes, I believe in accountability. That is what elections are for - voters had the option to hold Davis accountable at the last election. They didn't.

My problem with the recall is that it was an exploitation of a loophole in the law. It's quite simple actually.