Friday, July 23, 2004

Girlie-Men Revisited

Ambivalent Imbroglio commented about my Ahh-nold girlie-men post, see below, basically saying that the Govenator's "Girlie-Men" statement was sexist (no argument here), and the Cali Democrats shouldn't let the obviousness of his sexism fade from the peoples memories.

Here's my thought on AmbImb's comment. I think the press should cover it because it was a statement made in public, and voters have a right to know how big of an ass Ahh-nold is. But, I don't think the democrats over there should do much more than say they think the comment is inappropriate.

First, I don't agree with going after a politician's character, be it sexism (Ahh-nold), womanizing (Clinton), or other forms of intolerance UNLESS it is so blatant that it actually affects the politicians ability to serve the public. I don't think Arnold' bravado qualifies. Also, I don't think there is much risk of the image of Arnold as sexist is going to fade too quickly... even if it does, he will make another comment that is just as bad to remind everyone.

Second, if all the Dems do is say "That was an inappropriate comment" and leave it at that, they haven't given Arnold any more press than he deserves. Plus, the Democrats give a classy, professional response to a classless and childish comment and end up looking like adults instead of dicks.

And finally, I don't really think attacking someone's character is effective UNLESS (and it is a big UNLESS) you can prove he is such a sexist prick, such a womanizer, or whatever, that he doesn't even do his or her job. You notice that Clinton made it through a whole bunch of shit over his character just fine (sure he was impeached, but he was still a very popular president among normal people).


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home