Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

OAW · May 17, 2011, 12:43 PM

Schwarzenegger acknowledges having child with staffer - CNN.com

So Arnold manages to keep this child under wraps and out of the press for nearly two full terms as the governor of California? And on top of that, keep the mother of this child gainfully employed and in his wife's face on a daily basis throughout this entire time as well? Woooooowwwwwww!!! That's true player sh*t right there! John Edwards could have learned a lot about game from old Arnold.

OAW

The Final Dakar · May 17, 2011, 12:45 PM

It doesn't speak well of Arnold's reign that I consider this more celebrity gossip than political material.

andi*pandi · May 17, 2011, 12:49 PM

Feel sorry for that woman's husband, who presumably thought the child was his.

OAW · May 17, 2011, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by andi*pandi

Feel sorry for that woman's husband, who presumably thought the child was his.

Indeed. And here's the kicker. Per the news story they are no longer married. So it's quite possible that he's hemmed up with child support payments. And he might find it exceedingly difficult to get out of them despite this development. A lot of states have laws that only give you so long to challenge paternity.

OAW

finboy · May 17, 2011, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by andi*pandi

Feel sorry for that woman's husband, who presumably thought the child was his.

Yeah, that stinks.

Shaddim · May 17, 2011, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar

It doesn't speak well of Arnold's reign that I consider this more celebrity gossip than political material.

Yeah, it's a snoozer.

"Politician has sex with staffer, fathers child. Other party is outraged!"

<snore>

SpaceMonkey · May 17, 2011, 01:16 PM

It was not a tumor.

The Final Dakar · May 17, 2011, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Yeah, it's a snoozer.

"Politician has sex with staffer, fathers child. Other party is outraged!"

<snore>

If people are outraged I slept through it.

Eug · May 17, 2011, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar

I slept through it.

That's what she said.

The Final Dakar · May 17, 2011, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

It was not a tumor.

"Is that tumor in your pants, or are you just happy to see me?"

Eug · May 17, 2011, 01:30 PM

Who is your daddy, and what does he do?

ShortcutToMoncton · May 17, 2011, 02:09 PM

‎"@sethmeyers Assuming Schwarzeneggar had to come clean b/c there was a 10 year old benching 350."

Shaddim · May 17, 2011, 02:49 PM

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar

If people are outraged I slept through it.

Seems like there's some in the OP. Yup.

The Final Dakar · May 17, 2011, 02:51 PM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Seems like there's some in the OP. Yup.

Oh, I thought you meant people of note.

Macrobat · May 17, 2011, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by OAW

Indeed. And here's the kicker. Per the news story they are no longer married. So it's quite possible that he's hemmed up with child support payments. And he might find it exceedingly difficult to get out of them despite this development. A lot of states have laws that only give you so long to challenge paternity.

OAW

From your own linked article:

Schwarzenegger fathered the child with a household staffer, the Times article said. He has provided support for the child since birth, the source told CNN.

Bother to read past the headline?

SpaceMonkey · May 17, 2011, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

From your own linked article:

Bother to read past the headline?

OAW's saying that the woman's ex-husband (not the Governator) might have already been on the hook for child support payments, too, even though it's not his kid.

OAW · May 17, 2011, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by Macrobat

Bother to read past the headline?

Yeah I read the entire article. And Arnold's financial support is beside the point with regard to what I was saying. Assuming Maria Shriver was in the dark about all of this ... it certainly isn't a leap to assume that the staffer's former husband was also in the dark. Even recently this staffer was still saying publicly that the child was from her former husband. IOW, Arnold was more than likely paying her in the form of hush money in order to keep this quiet for a decade. Such payments wouldn't likely come up in divorce proceedings.

In any event, that comment was obviously speculative. My only point was that it would really suck for the guy if he's stuck paying child support for a kid that's not his. It's not like it hasn't happened before ....

Court knew man jailed for a year for non-support was not child's father �| ajc.com

OAW

OAW · 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Seems like there's some in the OP. Yup.

No "outrage". More like "amazement" that he was actually able to pull it off for so long. It'll be interesting to see what prompted Arnold to come clean now. Especially in light of the fact that his former staffer was still covering for him when the LA Times first broke the story. Even after she was asked about it again after he admitted the truth publicly her answer was "No comment." So it doesn't appear that she was the one looking to blackmail him.

OAW

Athens · May 17, 2011, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by OAW

Schwarzenegger acknowledges having child with staffer - CNN.com

So Arnold manages to keep this child under wraps and out of the press for nearly two full terms as the governor of California? And on top of that, keep the mother of this child gainfully employed and in his wife's face on a daily basis throughout this entire time as well? Woooooowwwwwww!!! That's true player sh*t right there! John Edwards could have learned a lot about game from old Arnold.

OAW

God created Man with a penis (in His image). God did not tell Man were not to put it. He said, "Go forth and multiply."

Chongo · May 17, 2011, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by Athens

God created Man with a penis (in His image). God did not tell Man were not to put it. He said, "Go forth and multiply."

I think there was something mentioned about not placing it in a rectum. Kinda hard to make babies that way.

besson3c · May 17, 2011, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by Chongo

I think there was something mentioned about not placing it in a rectum. Kinda hard to make babies that way.

Are those that choose not to multiply sinners for disobeying God's word?

Athens · May 17, 2011, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Chongo

I think there was something mentioned about not placing it in a rectum. Kinda hard to make babies that way.

If I remember correctly the original bible didn't actually reference that at all.

screener · May 17, 2011, 05:44 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Are those that choose not to multiply sinners for disobeying God's word?

Homophobes think so, apparently.

The Final Dakar · May 17, 2011, 05:48 PM

screener · May 17, 2011, 05:54 PM

Homophobes can't help it, makes you wonder.

Atheist · May 17, 2011, 06:01 PM

Schwarzenegger's a homo? I always wondered about him!

Chongo · May 17, 2011, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by Athens

If I remember correctly the original bible didn't actually reference that at all.

Leviticus 18 covers a number of prohibitions (unless you mean another original bible)

Anyway, I did mean to take this too off topic, so back to the Ex Governator and his dalliances.

ebuddy · May 17, 2011, 07:53 PM

Originally Posted by Athens

God created Man with a penis (in His image).

This means non-believers are dicks too.

Eug · May 17, 2011, 08:45 PM

Speaking of the Governator and homosexuals...

Big Mac · May 17, 2011, 08:56 PM

Haha, George Takei has some great tweets. I'm not too sure he's the one actually writing them because they seem a little too culturally aware for a guy his age and personality type, but they're often quite clever.

Laminar · May 17, 2011, 09:09 PM

Originally Posted by Athens

If I remember correctly the original bible didn't actually reference that at all.

It's not like you'd ever get a fact wrong.

besson3c · May 17, 2011, 10:37 PM

Originally Posted by Athens

God created Man with a penis (in His image). God did not tell Man were not to put it. He said, "Go forth and multiply."

I gotta add, I really hate when people expect ideas and cultural values from decades and decades ago (in this case centuries and centuries ago) to hold up in today's day and age. Obviously some do, but this is far from a given. I'd argue that a more logical default would be to assume that the way things were yesteryear was *not* the best way, because we evolve and change and stuff.

Athens · May 17, 2011, 11:07 PM

Ok lets dissect this a bit

Leviticus 18:22 (New American Standard Bible)

22'(A)You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination

Ok this means that if you lay with a woman dont lay with men the same way. But what if you dont lay with woman just men, then your in the clear.

Or

Leviticus 18:22 (The Message)

22 "Don't have sex with a man as one does with a woman. That is abhorrent.

Since men don't have vagina's thats not a problem. If you only have vaginal sex with a woman and no anal sex, then any anal sex with a man is ok.

or

Leviticus 18:22 (King James Version)

22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Again its pretty clear, if you don't lie with womankind at all then your in the clear to lay with mankind

And Last

Leviticus 18:22 (GOD’S WORD Translation)

22Never have sexual intercourse with a man as with a woman. It is disgusting.

So I can still suck off men with this last one and be ok. I mean seriously 20 different versions of the same passage.... And only a few actually say homosexuality is wrong, while the rest are grey areas open to interpretation

turtle777 · May 17, 2011, 11:23 PM

Do you feel smart ?

-t

Athens · May 17, 2011, 11:39 PM

No buy my IQ test says I am.

turtle777 · May 17, 2011, 11:51 PM

Originally Posted by Athens

No buy my IQ test says I am.

*snicker*

-t

Wiskedjak · 12:47 AM

Originally Posted by Athens

Ok lets dissect this a bit

Leviticus 18:22 (New American Standard Bible)

22'(A)You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination

Ok this means that if you lay with a woman dont lay with men the same way. But what if you dont lay with woman just men, then your in the clear.

To be fair, it says "You shall not lie with a male as *one* lies with a female". It doesn't say "You shall not lie with a male as *you* lay with a female"

You're trying to split hairs here. It seems pretty clear to me, based only on the Bible, if the Christian god is real and it's opinions are accurately reflected in the Bible, then that god is probably not in favor of homosexuality.

What's more, this is way off topic from Arnie

Athens · May 18, 2011, 01:05 AM

Not correct again, let me split some more hair, because if man are bared from this activity woman are not so homosexuality is not frowned upon, god is just sexist towards males. God must be a female.

Eug · 01:31 AM

Eug's up to the minute gossip update...

Latest rumour: It was their housekeeper.

Mildred "Patty" Baena

Nausea inducing MySpace page. <-- Who the hell uses MySpace these days?

The flight attendant on their private jet sez she ain't the mom:

Tammy Baker Tousignant

ebuddy · May 18, 2011, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by Athens

No buy my IQ test says I am.

Seriously Athens, why are you going so far out of your way to offend those of faith in a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with religion?

Chongo · 07:17 AM

Maybe she got "mad skillz"

ShortcutToMoncton · May 18, 2011, 07:16 AM

Haha, poor Athens. Reading comprehension FTL!

The Final Dakar · May 18, 2011, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by Eug

My Eyes! The Goggles Do Nothing!

Athens · May 18, 2011, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by ebuddy

Seriously Athens, why are you going so far out of your way to offend those of faith in a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with religion?

Now thats offensive, I have not gone at any lengths to offend any ones faith. And for the record the homosexual nature of the topic was started by Chongo. Bitch at Chongo, besson3c, screener, Atheist, wiskedjak and even yourself for creating a subtopic in here. I just posted a joke that was on topic, they all made it into a different topic.

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

Haha, poor Athens. Reading comprehension FTL!

What in the world are you on about now....

The one thing I really don't get is why he came out with this now.

turtle777 · May 18, 2011, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by Athens

The one thing I really don't get is why he came out with this now.

Maybe so you can make a fool out of yourself.

You didn't let that opportunity go to waste...

-t

Athens · May 18, 2011, 01:21 PM

I mean the sperminator, why did he come out with this now.

turtle777 · May 18, 2011, 01:28 PM

Ok, you win, I give up.

(Do you even *READ* what other people post ?)

*facepalm*

-t

Athens · May 18, 2011, 04:28 PM

I'll see your *facepalm* and raise you by one *facepalm*

Yes I have read what people have said about it, all speculation. My statement stands, why would he come out with this now, what purpose does it serve. I guess bad publicity is as good as good publicity.

The Final Dakar · May 18, 2011, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by Athens

My statement stands, why would he come out with this now, what purpose does it serve. I guess bad publicity is as good as good publicity.

Well, MENSA, Arnold and his wife just recently announced their separation, without a very clear signal as to why, after all these years, they were doing it. This likely caused journalists to probe into his past and some probably uncovered instances of infidelity. Arnold likely caught wind of the ensuing shitstorm and cut them off at the pass.

This has been Logic 101

Eug · 06:42 PM

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar

My Eyes! The Goggles Do Nothing!

I guess she hasn't aged very well. Or at least I hope she hasn't aged very well.

Then again... Pix from a paparazzi rag