The Smoking Gun: Schwarzenegger's Sex Talk


August 29, 2003, 06:02 PM
Is this type of guy you want as governor? BTW, he's also anti-gun!

Warning! This contains graphic language

This is the link to the Smoking Gun website:

Here's the actual interview:

If you enjoyed reading about "The Smoking Gun: Schwarzenegger's Sex Talk" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
August 29, 2003, 06:09 PM
Oh please :rolleyes:

Oh no! Arnold got laid! I guess that means he would be a bad governor. :rolleyes:

I sense this thread will be closed very shortly.

August 30, 2003, 11:31 AM
All those straight-laced conservative Californians are going to be horrified that a candidate for governor had sex and smoked pot....



(I could care less who ends up running that sewer; I just think that the press attention on this interview is silly.)

rock jock
August 30, 2003, 11:53 AM
I think people will be pretty forgiving of what he did 20-30 yrs ago. They will not be if stories of extramarital affairs surface.

Sean Smith
August 30, 2003, 12:38 PM
So 30 years ago a bodybuilder got some? No kidding...?!?


P.S. IBTL. :evil:

August 30, 2003, 12:38 PM
I think it would be good to watch for inconsistancies, reversals etc. If caught in provable lies...good ammunition.


Futo Inu
August 30, 2003, 12:59 PM
"Hear me now, believe me later - I want to pump YOU up with my favorite muscle - my LOVE muscle. Who your daddy is?"

Meh. Embarrassing for his wife - that's about it - who is looking quite long in the tooth, BTW. Wouldn't be surprised if he was getting some extra-curricular activity - agreed, if such a thing came out, then it would hurt him, but probably not this. Go McClintock!

August 30, 2003, 02:21 PM
Anything to deflect Californians from the race war that is rumbling
like The Big One right under their feet. What Arnold's father was
or wasn't, what Arnold himself did 25 years ago pales besides
Bustamante's alliance, never disavowed, with MECHA. Arnold's not
my candidate--I favor McClintock--but the choice between Arnold and
Cruz Bustamante is easy enough for anyone who is not a socialist.

Gary H
August 30, 2003, 03:00 PM
I could care less about Arnolds sex life. In fact, the Republican's religious right's belief that they can dictate the morals of others is offensive. I say this, even though I agree with much of what they support. What I do care about is someone in a position to reveal security related information secondary to some form of activity that is used to blackmail the official.

Arnold turns me off because:

1. Out of the gate he was FIRST talking about all the new programs he wanted and not all the programs that needed to be eliminated.

2. He is taking a wrong-headed approach to issues near and dear to this board.

3. Top folks in his campaign are for unlimited immigration. .ie campaign manager.. I'm a libertarian, but break ranks on this one.

4. He seems to be trying to be everything for everyone. In short, a politician. I prefer someone who believes in something regardless of the way the wind blows. I even prefer such a person that may differ from myself in many of their beliefs.. a good example is one of my favorite presidents..Truman. My people rarely get elected, because they don't tell the foolish public what they want to hear.

Folks... This is a heavily Democratic state and the chances of a Republican getting into office is slim. The chances of a real Republican getting into office is zero. The chances of Arnold, should he get into office, doing what you want is slim. The legislature is not only Democratic, but from the left wing of the party. Californians are getting WHAT THEY DESERVE. Unfortunately, for the time being, I'm one of them.:banghead:

August 30, 2003, 03:11 PM
Then we have the arguement that, in the long run, replacing Davis with another Democrat could be a good thing.

Odds are that whoever is the replacement, they are not going to be able to stop the downward slide of the state singlehandedly.

So the next gov gets chastised, blamed etc and further besmirches his party.

Maby better that the Democrats get blamed for furthering the mess than having a RINO in there to besmirch the Republican party.

Just cogitating over possibilities.


Old Fuff
August 30, 2003, 03:20 PM
Ah ........

Sam is a wise man.

Gary H
August 30, 2003, 03:33 PM

I've been having this discussion with my father over the last week and have come to the same conclusion. So, I'll probably vote for Tom M.

The problem is this, the Booost is further to the left than Davis. He actually belonged to a group that believes that Mexico should take back the Western United States. So, this makes me wonder if I should vote against the recall and for McClintock.

August 30, 2003, 04:09 PM
Gettin some, even with an intern, is ok. Maria`s a Kennedy, she`s used to it. Sedition on the other hand...:cuss:

August 31, 2003, 08:36 AM
I remember the playboy interview. They brought up the saw that a lot of women don't like the pumped up look of body builders.
His answer was " Yah, 'n those are the very wons I end up in bed with."

August 31, 2003, 10:38 AM
I received this from a politically savy, pro-gun friend in California.

>>>>> The depressing truth is that none of these three are anti-gun! Cruz used to be a member of a pro-gun group in the Legislature. Gray has never been enthusiastic about gun control. He does not believe in it and thinks it is a pain in the butt. Arnold has been making pro-gun statements for years.

But neither Gray nor Cruz have the power to stop the run-away Legislature which is overwhelming Dem. Nor can either Gray nor Cruz afford to be perceived as pro-gun by the CA electorate. (PLEASE do not tell me that Gray has signed efvery anti-gun bill sent to him. Any Dem governor would have to do that. He has done everything he could do to get Dem legislators to stop passing these laws.)

By the same token, Arnold, who is far more pro-gun than the others who are just not anti-gun, has to portray himself as anti-gun. And if the Dems send him anti-gun legislation he is going to be under the gun to sign. Indeed, having him as governor might promote anti-gun laws which the Legislature might pass just to put him on the griddle -- as opposed to Cruz or Gray whom they would not want to put on the griddle. <<<<<

August 31, 2003, 11:29 AM
I don't buy the argument that Davis, Bustamante, and/or Schwarzenegger somehow are just being swept along by the California Legislature. The rabid anti-gun group in Sacramento is comprised of a relatively small contingent (Scott, Peralta, et al.). The Dem legislature is more concerned about paid family leave and alleged workplace discrimination against cross-dressers. There are sound ways to sell gun rights as policy. The need for self-defense in a deteriorating polity is a pretty effective argument--IF IT IS MADE. But we need statesmen, not political hacks, who are willing to make the right arguments and stand behind them and not treat the electorate as a pack of fear-driven morons.

Jim March
August 31, 2003, 11:58 PM
There is only a SMALL contingent of the Calif Dems who are hardcore grabbers. Until now, Davis has NOT been one. (He is now, God help us if he survives the recall.)

Basically, somebody has to approach moderate Dems and get across how much damage the "crazies" like Perata, Koretz and the like are causing to their party. It's screwing them with union gunnies, for starters. This approach works best with any Dem who has a hope of one day making the VP or Prez slots - the rise of shall-issue CCW in 35+ states has made it impossible for a really hardcore grabber to obtain the Prez slot :cool:. Such an approach CAN be made to Busta - while I'm real queasy about his fiscal policies, at least in terms of gun stuff he won't be anywhere NEAR the nightmare a post-recall Davis will be :eek:.

The problem so far is that the NRA lobbyists in Sacramento have a hard time presenting that case, because the NRA is seen as the "National Republican Association" - with some validity.

And yes, I've got the solution. Expect some fairly big news no later than Tuesday.

September 1, 2003, 02:00 AM
Expect some fairly big news no later than Tuesday.


Jim March
September 1, 2003, 02:30 AM

Sorry. Got multiple ducks to line up :).

Malone LaVeigh
September 1, 2003, 11:58 PM
Jim's right. The only high-profile Dem who has rallied to Davis' cause here has been Feinswine. He's going to have some big debts to pay if the recall loses, which I'd say is a toss-up at this point. If the AWB ban sunsets on the federal level, it won't affect California, but Feinswine is going to be looking for a bone to throw the anti-gun lobby.

I wish the people who start messes like this would think about the consequences of their actions before they act.

Gary H
September 2, 2003, 12:24 AM
Malone LaVeigh:

Good points, but I doubt that anyone really knows what the consequences will be. I think that the reasoning was something like this: "It can't get any worse", or "even electing an ape from the zoo would be better." I concur with the second thought. An ape would not be able to sign new laws, or can they? In my book, just about anything to remind politicians that they are suppose to represent the people and not special interests is of some use. Of course, we all have our favorite "special interest group."

Jim March
September 2, 2003, 12:51 AM
Basically, Davis will now repay Feinstein's support plus deliver "payback" for us, by turning Perata, Koretz and the rest of that small number of maniacs fully off-leash.

But most of the Democrats in Sacramento don't have a stake in this pissing contest! People like Vasconcellos will realize that somehow this "state of outright war" between the anti-gun crazies and the pro-freedom types will only spur more recalls. Recall attempts against Perata, Koretz and similar are now probably going to be a reality - the Internet has made spreading petition forms dead easy, compared to the effort Russ Howard and company went through against Roberti a decade ago.

So how do we end the war?

We have to get some Democrat legislator to launch an investigation into CCW misconduct via some other state police agency outside of DOJ.

If Vasconcellos or Burton or any of a few others ask, they'll do it. Esp. since there's evidence that the other bureacracy already involved (DOJ Firearms under Randy Rossi) has been taking pains to cover up the extent of the problems - for years. On behalf of a mostly-Republican band of pirate-sheriffs.

September 2, 2003, 01:35 AM
Do you have a legislator willing to do that, Jim?

September 2, 2003, 01:51 AM
I do NOT like Arnold and his anti-Second Amendment bigotry. However, I should say that we should not judge politicians by their personal life. What drugs they've done, who they've had sex with... It doesn't necessarily mean they will be bad in office.

Not to say that Arnold isn't a sleazy sexaholic with no moral values.

Jim March
September 2, 2003, 02:30 AM
Geech: ask me that in three days max, when I'm living in Sacramento and registered as an employee-lobbyist for CCRKBA (


Details coming. I'm busy packing and updating my wardrobe some. Man, is Ed Worley SO gonna be pissed :neener:. Jesus, the sheriffs are gonna freak out.

(Short answer: I have high hopes for Vasconcellos, a possible opening with a couple others, some other gambits to try.)

September 2, 2003, 02:34 AM
I'm in full agreement with Jim March regarding the illegal activity and misconduct on CCW matters in California. There is in my opinion a split in the democratic party within California, some politicians are realizing their support of CCW criminal activity by the California attorney general, Lockyer is in fact an endorsement of crime! This thing! is fast becoming public knowledge and there is no way to suppress it. The recall and censure of California politicians is not over, I think there is a possibility Lockyer could soon be wearing an orange jumpsuit and shackles.

California politicians such as; Vasconcellos and Burton will not hang with those members of the assembly who have pushed only for socialist programs, higher taxes and gun banning schemes above all else. Those in the assembly who have indeed been responsible for the meltdown of California will be pushed aside and given up to satisfy a public in search of revenge against those who caused loss of jobs, loss of health insurance, closing of business, both large and small, plus an exodus from California of people and business - the tax base is departing. The California recall syndrome is far from over!


September 2, 2003, 02:41 AM
Well, good luck to you, Jim.

September 2, 2003, 04:10 AM
Congratulations on your new job Jim. Nice to see your efforts are recognized and valued by the RKBA community. Your skills in digging out political facts and your honesty truly makes you a man of the people. A voice of reason in the wilderness. Jim, your job as a lobbyist may not always permit you to express your true political thoughts or feelings and remain above the rolling in the mud of politics. Not to worry about a possible poisoning of a well as it were, there are many in the RKBA community who would willingly act as a foil in delivering a message in contrast to your official position as a lobbyist. All of those RKBA folks who could serve as a foil know how to play a hand close to the chest and not reveal their misson or source of information.

You're going to be a great lobbyist Jim, your reputation for fair play and honesty will open many doors and serve the people of California well. There is no other person better suited for the position of RKBA lobbyist. You earned it and deserve it. Good on you!


If you enjoyed reading about "The Smoking Gun: Schwarzenegger's Sex Talk" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!