SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (176069)10/5/2003 7:21:49 PM
From: Jim McMannis  Respond to of 1578137
 
Since Davis is advocating breaking federal immigration law does this make him a Traitor?



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (176069)10/5/2003 9:37:04 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1578137
 
alternet.org

Arnold's Enron Secret

By Greg Palast, AlterNet
October 5, 2003

It's not what Arnold Schwarzenegger did to the girls a decade back that should raise an eyebrow. According to a series of memoranda our office obtained today, it's his dalliance with the boys in a hotel room just two years ago that's the real scandal.

The wannabe governor has yet to deny that on May 17, 2001, at the Peninsula Hotel in Los Angeles, he had consensual political intercourse with Enron chieftain Kenneth Lay. Also frolicking with Arnold and Ken was convicted stock swindler Mike Milken.

Now, 34 pages of internal Enron memoranda have just come through this reporter's fax machine tell all about the tryst between Maria's husband and the corporate con men. It turns out that Schwarzenegger knowingly joined the hush-hush encounter as part of a campaign to sabotage a Davis-Bustamante plan to make Enron and other power pirates then ravaging California pay back the $9 billion in illicit profits they carried off.

Here's the story Arnold doesn't want you to hear. The biggest single threat to Ken Lay and the electricity lords is a private lawsuit filed last year under California's unique Civil Code provision 17200, the "Unfair Business Practices Act." This litigation, heading to trial now in Los Angeles, would make the power companies return the $9 billion they filched from California electricity and gas customers.

It takes real cojones to bring such a suit. Who's the plaintiff taking on the bad guys? Cruz Bustamante, Lieutenant Governor and reluctant leading candidate against Schwarzenegger.

Now follow the action. One month after Cruz brings suit, Enron's Lay calls an emergency secret meeting in L.A. of his political buck-buddies, including Arnold. Their plan, to undercut Davis (according to Enron memos) and "solve" the energy crisis – that is, make the Bustamante legal threat go away.

How can that be done? Follow the trail with me.

While Bustamante's kicking Enron butt in court, the Davis Administration is simultaneously demanding that George Bush's energy regulators order the $9 billion refund. Don't hold your breath: Bush's Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is headed by a guy proposed by ... Ken Lay.

But Bush's boys on the commission have a problem. The evidence against the electricity barons is rock solid: fraudulent reporting of sales transactions, megawatt "laundering," fake power delivery scheduling and straight out conspiracy (including meetings in hotel rooms). So the Bush commissioners cook up a terrific scheme: charge the companies with conspiracy but offer them, behind closed doors, deals in which they have to pay only 2 cents on each dollar they filched.

Problem: the slap-on-the-wrist refunds won't sail if the governor of California won't play along. Solution: Recall the Governor.

New Problem: the guy most likely to replace Davis is not Mr. Musclehead, but Cruz Bustamante, even a bigger threat to the power companies than Davis. Solution: smear Cruz because – heaven forbid! – he took donations from Injuns (instead of Ken Lay).

The pay-off? Once Arnold is governor, he blesses the sweetheart settlements with the power companies. When that happens, Bustamante's court cases are probably lost. There aren't many judges who will let a case go to trial to protect a state if that a governor has already allowed the matter to be "settled" by a regulatory agency.

So think about this. The state of California is in the hole by $8 billion for the coming year. That's chump change next to the $8 TRILLION in deficits and surplus losses planned and incurred by George Bush. Nevertheless, the $8 billion deficit is the hanging rope California's rightwing is using to lynch Governor Davis.

Yet only Davis and Bustamante are taking direct action to get back the $9 billion that was vacuumed out of the state by Enron, Reliant, Dynegy, Williams Company and the other Texas bandits who squeezed the state by the bulbs.

But if Arnold is selected, it's hasta la vista to the $9 billion. When the electricity emperors whistle, Arnold comes – to the Peninsula Hotel or the Governor's mansion. The he-man turns pussycat and curls up in their lap.

I asked Mr. Muscle's PR people to comment on the new Enron memos – and his strange silence on Bustamante's suit or Davis' petition. But Arnold was too busy shaving off his Hitlerian mustache to respond.

The Enron memos were discovered by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, Los Angeles, www.ConsumerWatchdog.org.



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (176069)10/6/2003 12:34:12 AM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1578137
 
latimes.com

THE RECALL CAMPAIGN

Readers Angry at The Times for Schwarzenegger Stories




By Steve Hymon, Cara Mia DiMassa and Mitchell Landsberg, Times Staff Writers

Kathy McIver is a Democrat from La Habra and a longtime subscriber to The Times. Today's paper, she says, will be the last that will be delivered to her door.

Like many readers, McIver is angry. She is angry about The Times' coverage of the California recall campaign, and especially angry about the stories that the newspaper has run in recent days detailing allegations that Arnold Schwarzenegger touched women inappropriately.

"I was disappointed that The Times was being used to be the messenger," she said in an interview Saturday, "and that they would do that type of investigation and not balance it out by having something negative about [Gov. Gray] Davis because, as we all know, he's done some negative things."

Since publishing an article Thursday that described allegations by six women that Schwarzenegger groped them or made inappropriate comments, The Times has come under attack on talk-radio stations and television, and has been the target of vociferous complaints by the Schwarzenegger campaign.

Schwarzenegger complained Saturday that The Times was taking part in an effort "to derail my campaign, and I think that it's part of the puke campaign that Davis launched now."

But the greatest volume of outrage has come from readers, who have flooded the paper with calls, e-mails and letters.

"To me this is a fairness issue," said Debbie Mahoney, a 52-year-old Northern California resident who said she has read the paper periodically for the last five years. She said The Times has demonstrated "true bias" in its coverage of Schwarzenegger.

"You don't even call him by his name," she said. "Whenever I see coverage of Schwarzenegger, I see 'actor.' He's not running as an actor. He's running as a businessman."

As of Saturday evening, about 1,000 readers had canceled their subscriptions to protest the handling of the Schwarzenegger story. In addition, the newspaper had received as many as 400 phone calls critical of its coverage — many angry, some profane.

About 800 people had written to praise the newspaper's coverage, many apparently motivated by a liberal Web site that urged readers to register their support.

Jamie Gold, who has served as The Times' readers' representative since August 2001 and is responsible for responding to complaints, said she was aware of few events that have ever triggered such anger by the newspaper's readers.

Most of the criticism revolves around a belief that the newspaper has intentionally targeted Schwarzenegger as part of a partisan agenda, and a concern that the stories about him were published too close to Tuesday's election to allow his campaign to respond.

The Times has laid "this stuff out like stink bombs at the last moment to ruin the momentum he's got," said Bill Agee, a 64-year-old Capistrano Beach resident.

He identified himself as a political moderate who is registered as an independent. He said he canceled his 20-year subscription to the paper last year. "I just got tired of the slant, to be honest with you," he said.

Agee, who works as a photographer, said the revelations have not swayed him from his plans to vote for Schwarzenegger on Tuesday.

But they "absolutely didn't make it easier to vote for him," he said. "On the other hand, I have been around for awhile, and I know how people are. Everybody has a couple of incidents in their lives they wish they could take back."

Some readers said they had decided to vote for Schwarzenegger as a reaction to The Times stories.

"You've pushed me over to hold my nose and vote for him," said Kenneth Sesley, a pastor in Lake Elsinore. "Because I just don't think it was fair. And that's the backlash. A lot of Californians don't think it was fair."

Lewis Garrigus, 55, a retired financial analyst who described himself as a longtime Times reader, was among those saying he would cancel his subscription.

"It's not just me saying the L.A. Times is prejudiced," said Garrigus, who lives in the Orange County town of Stanton. "It's everyone. I finally got absolutely sick of it. There is never anything positive about Schwarzenegger on the front page of the paper."

Garrigus said that he hasn't voted in 20 years, but plans to vote Tuesday — because he is so upset by The Times' coverage. "I swear, I can't stand it anymore," he said. "There are never two sides of something on the front page. Who does your editor think he's kidding?"

Editor John Carroll responded that he believed The Times has provided balanced coverage, and that it has published critical stories about several candidates in the recall race.

"Early in the campaign, we reported that Arianna Huffington had paid no state income taxes, which was devastating to her campaign," he said. "In the case of Davis, we did, three or four weeks ago, a huge front-page story on our biggest circulation day, Sunday, on the case against him. It was the most comprehensive account of all of his shortcomings that I've read in any publication."

Carroll said the newspaper has also written numerous other stories that were critical of the governor, "about his fund-raising, his use of attack advertising, his links with special interests — I can't count the stories we've done on that." He also pointed to stories about Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, focusing on his acceptance of campaign funds from Indian casino interests and his legal problems with an investment property.

He defended the timing of the Schwarzenegger stories, and noted that the short schedule of the recall campaign made the task more difficult than it might otherwise have been.

"We didn't have a story until the day we ran it," Carroll said. "We were working for seven weeks, seeking women, trying to persuade the women we found to talk with us Investigative reporting of this sort takes a lot of time."

Some readers have responded to allegations made on television by a former Times staffer, Jill Stewart, that the newspaper had finished the Schwarzenegger story two weeks before it was published, and that reporters were unhappy that the story had been held up.

Carla Hall, one of the principal reporters who worked on the story, said that was not true. She said the story wasn't finished until the day before it appeared in the newspaper.

"We knew the election was coming up," she said. "We were working intensely to get it done as quickly as possible and as accurately as possible Nothing makes me angrier than people who say we held the story."

Numerous readers have asked where Hall and the other reporters who worked on the story found the women who were interviewed. A common theme is that the Davis campaign played a role.

"I just think it's a recurring pattern that the Democrats use the press with last-minute smear tactics in tight races or when the race is going against them, and I can quote history on this," said Robert Rosenquist, 50, an ophthalmologist in Yucaipa.

Carroll said the reporters had, for the most part, made "cold calls" to people in the film industry after hearing that Schwarzenegger had a reputation for mistreating women. For instance, he said, they had called women listed in the credits of movies starring Schwarzenegger.

"None of these women came to us; none of these women was suggested to us by anyone connected to any of the campaigns as far as we know," he said.

If the articles have reduced Schwarzenegger's popularity, it was not evident on the campaign trail Saturday, where crowds expressed anger at The Times, and the news media in general, and heartfelt support for the candidate.

"Nothing is going to change my mind," said Cathy Dassah Nygren, 46, who was among the thousands of people crowding the Alameda County Fairgrounds to see Schwarzenegger late Saturday afternoon. "He's got a lot of strength, he loves children," she said. "We need a powerhouse who's going to make a difference."

Before a Schwarzenegger rally in Modesto, a warmup speaker, Rob Johnson, a radio host on local station KFIV-AM, said jokingly:

"You notice the media is right back behind you there. How about a nice wave to the media. Hi, media. Except for the guy Who's the guy with the L.A. Times? Find him and beat him up, would you?"

*

Times staff writers Daren Briscoe, Peter Nicholas and Carol Pogash contributed to this report.



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (176069)10/6/2003 12:46:07 AM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1578137
 
OP-ED COLUMNIST

Arnold's Biggest Fan
By BOB HERBERT

Published: October 6, 2003



He may once have admired Hitler for whatever reasons, but I'm sure if you asked Arnold Schwarzenegger whom he admires most, the honest answer would be, "Ah-nold!"

Welcome to the world of undiluted narcissism. The man who is now the betting favorite to become the next governor of the crazy state of California has spent a lifetime pirouetting in front of cameras and mirrors, contemplating his navel and every other part of his once-buff bod.

If there's a voter anywhere in the state who thinks this character will spend even a hot minute wrestling with the realities of budgets and such, that person should seek immediate counseling. There's a reason Mr. Schwarzenegger announced his candidacy on "The Tonight Show With Jay Leno." He doesn't want to govern. He just wants to be adored.

An article in The Times on Friday quoted the following telling passage attributed to Mr. Schwarzenegger in a book proposal:

"The feeling like Kennedy had, you know, to speak to maybe 50,000 people at one time and having them cheer, or like Hitler in the Nuremberg stadium. And have all those people scream at you and just being in total agreement with whatever you say."


The adoration is the thing. In the mad, mad world of Hollywood stardom the undiluted narcissist doesn't have to worry about what to say. The image is everything. The words come in a script. It's a splendid system. The mind — undisturbed by original thoughts — can remain focused on the most important matter, which is always the self.

Mr. Schwarzenegger has given us several striking examples of the danger inherent in a character speaking without a script. When a farmer asked him why California needed a state Environmental Protection Agency when there is also a federal E.P.A., Mr. Schwarzenegger ad-libbed as follows: "What you just talked about is the waste — overlapping agencies. They cost a fortune. We have to strip that down and get rid of some of those agencies."

Oops. Arnold's handlers — scriptwriters by any other name — were quick to say he didn't really want to eliminate the state agency, Cal/E.P.A. No, no, no. He definitely didn't want to abolish the agency, which just happened to have been founded by the co-chairman of Mr. Schwarzenegger's campaign, Pete Wilson, the former California governor.


The man hasn't a clue. He's a real candidate, but he campaigns as if he's playing one on TV.

In another unscripted moment, this one relating to his behavior with women, the candidate said, "I don't remember so many of the things that I was accused of having done."

I believe him. For one thing, he's apparently been acting boorishly — or worse — for several decades. If you reach out and touch as many people as Arnold's supposed to have touched, it would be impossible to remember them all.

Narcissism in its purist form is all-consuming. It leaves little or no room for the consideration of others. Life is all about that special individual: me.

In the quote attributed to him in the book proposal, Mr. Schwarzenegger was unconcerned about the profound differences between a Kennedy and a Hitler. He was interested only in the wild applause, the unrestrained adulation — and how he might get a taste of that for himself.

Narcisissm is about seduction, manipulation and the quest for power and control. There is no better breeding ground for it than Hollywood. But even in Hollywood, Arnold is an extraordinary case.

He just grabs whatever he wants. In this case, if he wins tomorrow, it will be the governorship of the biggest state in the union.

He can do this because the public allows him to do it. After all, he's a movie star. The Terminator. Why should anyone demand that he come up with some kind of program for a Schwarzenegger administration? Or even demonstrate a minimal understanding of the state's problems, or how its government works?

Mr. Schwarzenegger is the favorite in California because, incredibly, he's perceived as a strong leader by many voters. In reality, he seems little more than an aging but still frisky goof-artist, a fun-loving egomaniac with a winning smile and very little understanding of what is appropriate behavior.


But he's played spectacularly strong leaders in one cartoonish movie after another. As scary as it seems, for a lot of voters in California, that's reason enough to hand him the reins of their government.