Bill Oliver wrote:
I love this
"Schwarzenegger lied!!! There were no tanks in his home town. He's a
lying right-wing fanatic, and this is the proof!!!"
"That's not what he said."
"Oh. Well. Schwarzenegger lied!!!! The Soviets left Austria in
1945!!!"
He's a lying right-wing fanatic, and this is the proof!!!"
"No, they left in 1955. There were 40,000 troops in Austria
in 1955."
"Oh. Well. Schwarzenegger lied!!!! The Soviets didn't use tanks!!!!"
He's a lying right-wing fanatic, and this is the proof!!!"
"It was doctrine that they did. If there were 40,000 Soviet
troops, then there were tanks."
"Oh. Well. Schwarzenegger lied!!!! There's a guy from UNC who wrote a
one-page memoir of a visit, and *he* didn't mention a tank. They must
have been hiding the tanks so *nobody* could see them. Ever!!! He's
a
lying right-wing fanatic, and here's the proof!!!"
Get a grip. You're beginning to sound as stupid as Kerry.
Oh, and if you look at that CONSERVATIVE Austrian government,
it fits exactly the statements Schwarzenegger made. By American
standards, Christian Socialists and their ilk, including the
Austrian government at the time fit the Socialist definition
well -- state-owned media, state-owned industry, etc.
You Dems are merely sounding strident and silly at this point.
I think you need to get a grip. Doctrine that there were tanks? Talk
about reaching.
The man was telling a story. He was using hyperbole. Literary license.
It wasn't meant to be an historical account. It was meant to illustrate
a point. Details were left out to make it short enough for the typical
Republican's attention span, and to simplify it enough for Republicans
to understand.
It wasn't a lie. It was just a story.
Now did it really have that affect on him at the time? Who knows. Things
he said early in his career would tend to suggest that he has
reinterpreted his feelings at the time. If that's true, he's just lying
to himself. Or he could have been making stuff up, creating a different
persona when he was an actor. That's what actors do.
Anyone who is trying to take his speech at the RNC as an historical
account of Austria in the '50s one way or the other needs to get a grip.
Or perhaps a liberal arts education so they can start to better
understand literary license, such as hyperbole.
Personally I believe that the early Arnold was just saying whatever he
thought would get a rise out of people. I don't believe he had one bit
of interest in politics until recently, and he's relating his memories
through the filter of his new-found political position. Does that make
it lying? Heck no. It just means he's still a boasting SOB who enjoys
getting a rise out of people. It's who he is. He's not a liar. He just
likes being in the spotlight.
--
Warren H.
==========
Disclaimer: My views reflect those of myself, and not my
employer, my friends, nor (as she often tells me) my wife.
Any resemblance to the views of anybody living or dead is
coincidental. No animals were hurt in the writing of this
response -- unless you count my dog who desperately wants
to go outside now.
Blatant Plug: Cooking with Intense Heat
http://www.holzemville.com/community...eat/index.html