Ah-nold: A couple things

First off, a little tidbit from an interview he did with Sean “MY ASS!! PUT YOUR COCK INTO MY AAAAAASSSSSS” Hannity:

Arnold said he supported domestic partnership legislation but not gay marriage, contending, “I think that gay marriage [sic] is something that should be between a man and a woman.”


Second, an interview he did with Oui Magazine waaaay back in the day, you know, before becoming a political croney for a tired and defeated state party who is now just looking for anyone to win (you think if a real candidate said any of this stuff, they’d endorse him? har har har):

Arnold Schwarzenegger once told a magazine interviewer about participating in an orgy with other bodybuilders, noting that “everybody jumped on” the woman involved and “took her upstairs where we all got together.” The California Republican added that not every muscleman participated in the gang bang, “just the guys who can fuck in front of other guys. Not everybody can do that. Some think that they don’t have a big-enough cock, so they can’t get a hard-on.”

Now that I know that he can fuck in front of other guys, and is confident about the size of his cock, HIS ECONOMIC PLAN MUST BE SOLIDLY IN TOW. Let’s all vote for Arnie!

Finally, and probably best of all…Arnie nude:


Scroll all the way to the bottom if you, you know, aren’t at work or don’t hope to retain your soul.

Hooray for the corrupt parties that no longer care about the candidates in the running, but only care about winning. Not the best man for the job? BOLLOCKS ALL! Why do you think they nominated George W. Bush (or Al Gore)? You’re telling me there’s not a singe republican (or democrat) out there who’s more qualified to run a fucking nation than George W. Bush (or Al Gore)?


Not that I want to start a fight, but there most certainly is a better Republican for the job: Jeb.

I say if Arnold is qualified to run the state of California…so too is Gary Coleman, Gallagher, et. al.

And Jeb’s a pushover. He couldn’t even kill more prisoners than his brother. That’s a sign of weakness.

We’re at least agreed on that, then. Death to marijuana dealers! Also women who don’t cook.


Or are you too busy masturbating furiously in the corner to post?

Arnold’s skill as a politician matters not.

Having him run any state is too cool for words.

And it’s not like there’s anyone qualified who can get elected anyway.

I was under the impression that Bustamante was running just behind Arnold and was at least reasonably qualified to run the state of California.

Anyone with even an hour of political experience is more qualified than Arnie to run a superhuge economy like California.

If Arnie wants to get into political life…run for mayor, or state legislature.

But didn’t professional politicians get California in this mess to begin with?

I’m all for the PEOPLE ruling, and that’s why I believe that politicians should be from the people.

If you’re filling out a resume, politician should not be an option for occupation (i.e. I don’t believe that professional politicians are a good thing).

Hey, Jesse Ventura, the wrestler turned senator, was such a good politician that he didn’t run again, and actually said stuff about Mexico’s political system being superior to America’s. Professional politicians would never admit to their country being inferior to any country in any way. When it’s blatantly obvious, they’ll cop out with “We could learn a lot from their culture.”

What was my poi

That’s hooey(ieye). If people like your ideas and think you can act on them, then clearly you should be running. There’s more evidence for (or against) a politician’s ability to act on its ideas, and that should have some weight, just not all of it.

Ok, the Jesse Ventura thing I’ll give you, but he was running Minnesota, not California, and even he’s said that Gary Coleman makes just as much sense as governor as Arnie does.

And Arnold isn’t of the people. He’s of the upper crust of “the people,” and has no clue what the real problems with public schools are, doesn’t have to worry about paying for healthcare, and isn’t too terribly concerned with social welfare programs.

It’s not that professional politicians are a bad thing - it’s that politicians who are professional politicians for their own benefit are a bad thing. As far as I can tell, it would be correct to label Jefferson, Madison, or Lincoln as professional politicians… and I think they all did a fine, if not superior, job. In fact, the only non-professional politicians I can think of who have been truly valuable to the United States are Ronald Reagan (shut up, Aaron) and Rudy Giuliani.

Where I’m going with this is that the difference between, say, Jefferson and Gray Davis is (aside from a sheer discrepancy in intelligence) that Jefferson saw himself as bound to lead out of duty. He could afford to do it and was therefore compelled into the service of his country. Davis sees his own leadership as something approaching entitlement. This is not a problem of understanding politics as one’s job, but of understanding WHY it’s one’s job.

How does this make him a good politician?

and actually said stuff about Mexico’s political system being superior to America’s

Again, how does this make him a good politician? Really, have you seen Mexico lately? (By lately, I mean any time after membership in the Spanish Empire.)

Professional politicians would never admit to their country being inferior to any country in any way

This statement, like most other religions, could probably be combatted with a simple dose of common sense. The only point of reference you seem willing to accept is modern American politicians… and I’m not convinced that they’re wrong. The United States quite simply isn’t inferior to other countries at this point in time.

And you wonder why I call you a communist?

Truth, but then, through your argument, an experienced professional politician is thus not necessarily the best choice, depending on the situation, which is the point I wanted to make the the first place to argue against the people who claim that a lack of political experience makes for a bad politician. (If that were the case, there would be no new politicians!)

So yes, while knowledge of politics CERTAINLY helps (or to be more precise, a decent understanding of Federal/State/Community government), it certainly does not mean that a professional politician should be preferred over someone who has had no prior experience holding public office (provided that the someone provides valid reasons for being elected, such as reasonable policies that appeal to the majority of voters, etc.).

Then you should have said so! This is not “Guess What Pipian Means, the game show where arguments take place by inference”. What you said was that people who are currently politicians should never be allowed into political office again.

But you’re right that there are other factors. A newcomer may be more easily convinced that his duty is not to his party but to the people, but on the other hand a politician with a record of voicing his mind and then acting on it may have more confidence to follow through despite opposition, and I think that outweighs the freshness and enthusiasm. The place where I’d go with a newcomer is where the newcomer and a politician are saying the same thing, but the politician is a known liar/politically impotent (cough cough Wisconsin gubernatorial race lo these many months ago cough).

(of course, in that I don’t think Mr. Young was so much a newcomer as a small player)

I started choking when I read this. Seriously. Choking.

And the only thing Rudy did that was good for the UNITED STATES was…um…well, nothing yet, but I’m sure he pays taxes, so that’s probably the best thing he’s done for the UNITED STATES.

And about Reagan…we should ask the El Salvadorians what they think of good ol’ Ron.

Although I will agree he solved the homeless problem pretty well: he blinked every homeless person right out of existence. Genius.

I say: Arnold means well, which is a lot more than wat can be said of Greyound or whoever is governor now. And since he means well and has shown no reason as to why he would do a terrible job (except Junior), we should give him the benefit of the doubt.

Lastly, he will undoubtebly make many hilarious faux-pas if elected, and I’m always up for a laugh.

Oh, also, California = not in my country.

California = not a country