Talk:Arnold Schwarzenegger

Missing image
Cscr-former.png
Former featured article candidate

This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates (where the individual nomination does not exist) please check the archive. Once the objections have been met you may resubmit the article for featured article status.

AB 1493

An act to amend Section 7052 of the Health and Safety Code, relating to human remains

I believe firmly that this has no place in the article and have therefore decided to remove it.

"On September 10, 2004, Schwarzenegger signed a bill into law that made the sexual abuse of a corpse a felony punishable by up to eight years in prison. This was in response to recent incidents of people found engaging in sexual acts with deceased persons, and that law enforcement was unable to charge them for that abuse because no law had been on California's books at the time. Prior to the bill being signed by Schwarzenegger, the most prosecutors could charge them with was breaking and entering. The signing of this law did however make Schwarzenegger the butt of several jokes by late night talk show hosts such as Jay Leno."

The article implies that Schwarzenegger must have contributed to the bill in some other way besides that of signing it. The bill was actually proposed as an amendment to a previous bill by California Assemblywoman Sharon Runner of the 36th district.[1] (http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03-04//bill/asm/ab_1451-1500/ab_1493_bill_20030221_introduced.html). I find no reason to include it and further consider it to be slander and partially biased. Therefore, I have erased it from the article as it has no merit or purpose.

honorary doctor

Schwarzenegger was awarded a "Doctor of Humanities" from Cleveland Chiropractic College in 1999. The honorary diploma was presented by Dr. Carl S. Cleveland III, president of Cleveland Chiropractic College, Kansas City and Los Angeles. The diploma recognizes Arnold's many humanitarian efforts and his support of fitness and health-related endeavors, such as the Inner City Kids program and the Special Olympics. -- Dr. Gohan

"I am very honored to get this honorary chiropractic degree, this is totally unexpected," Arnold commented. "I'm proud of this. It will get a special place in my office and I will be hanging it up so everyone can see." -- Arnold Schwarzenegger

Policeman

Saying his father was a "Gendarmerie-Kommandant" it's not really correctly translated to call him a "policeman", but rather the boss of a police-station. I know, that's quite a minor point, but nevertheless my first contribution.

Not all of us know what "Gendarmerie-Kommandant" means. Would you mind adding what that would mean in this article? Thanks. Revth 06:57, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)

True Lies Spoof?

True Lies was a spoof of the roles he had played before. I seem to remember that the critics actually liked it when it came out? --sodium

I recall a review describing it as misogynist rubbish

Are you thinking of Last Action Hero - as the spoof on roles played before.

True Lies a good flick

Although many people have accused True Lies of being somewhat misogynistic, there are many people, myself included, who think it's one of his best films. The film is clearly intended NOT to be taken seriously. --John Knouse

NPOV

The article had a number of epithets which really cannot be squared with the NeutralPointOfView. It is wholly within our purview, however, to have a section about reviewers' evaluation of his acting ability; it is also perfectly fair play to mention how various films were reviewed.

If you're referring to where the article refers to his "wooden acting style," I don't think that's a POV issue. Not that I'm trying to set up a slippery-slope arguement, but that is a fairly inoccuous piece of description... we shouldn't have to rely on third parties for every descriptive term we use. Would we call it a POV issue if somebody referred to the redwood as "these majestic trees?" A POV issue for Arnold would be if somebody characterized him as a dangerous radical, or a crusading right-winger, or something like that... loaded terms. It's a fine line, but let's err on the side of interesting prose rather than strict political correctness. Iroll 21:31, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Rumors

I didn't know what to do with the following: "A number of unsavoury rumours appear to have have kiboshed his nascent political ambitions which once seemed to reach as high as you could go." What nascent political ambitions? What rumors? --LMS

What nascent political ambitions? He was considering a run for Governor of California.

What rumors? That he was a womanizer and had emotionally abused his wife

Here's the story: http://www.FreeRepublic.com/forum/a3a9c08d556f1.htm

The rumors were scurrilous and politically motivated and have no place in an encyclopedia except possibly under the heading propaganda. --MemoryHole.com

I can't believe that anyone quotes the New republic and anything that it prints. The only people who don't likee Arnold are those who would love to see socialism here in the USA. The difference is that in Europe, the socialists have found ways to eliminate grass roots movements, such as abolishing referendums. Socialists are fascists in sheeps clothes. Go to europe and try voicing your opinion. They have it so great. Yeah right...--Tomtom 21:26, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Age

The bypass surgery comment may be fair but age? render unto us a break - the man is only 54! - clasqm

The point is that Schwarzenegger isn't the same physically/athletically as he was in the early days--age is definitely a factor. -- TheCunctator

Hercules in New York

For fans of big stupid fun movies, check out Hercules in New York. It comes on TBS periodically, and is emphatically bad. :-) --KQ

I added a link there if anyone wants to check. Ellsworth 21:14, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Image Copyrights

Zoe, are you sure all these celebrity images you are uploading are not copyrighted?

Yes. They're fair use from book jacket covers, as I've said on the upload and the Image page. -- Zoe

I think Zoe means "No. They're fair use from book jacket covers." If they were "not copyrighted" (i.e. public domain), then "fair use" wouldn't need to be invoked at all. I have indicated the distinction on Mr. Schwarzenegger's image description page. I think it would be best if people were careful to use the terms "public domain" or "copyrighted but considered fair use" on image description pages, in order to make it clear which they mean. -- Oliver P. 16:08 May 14, 2003 (UTC)

I don't understand how clearer I can be, I said they were fair use. I also said they were from book covers, so I figured that was sufficient for what I needed to say on the image page. -- Zoe

Well, I was just pedantically correcting your "Yes" to a "No", because it's not true to say that an image being used in "fair use" is "not copyrighted". And the image description page didn't contain the words "fair use". It does now, because I added the words. So everything's okay now. :) -- Oliver P. 09:17 May 15, 2003 (UTC)

Whither True Lies 2

Has True Lies 2 already been filmed? or will he have to film in it while he is govenor? dave 17:51, 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)

About Arnies first appearance

I know this is asking much, but does someone have Robert Altmans The Long Goodbye on convenient media. There is a bodyguard in the film (an unspeaking part) whom Elliott Gould as Philip Marlowe forces to undress (at gunpoint) with his mate. If I am not misremembering, he looked uncannily like the young Arnie. As always, there is a good chance I am talking through an undiscovered ventilation hole under my headware. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick

According to IMDb he was "One of Augustine's hoods " in The Long Goodbye(1973) although it was uncredited. M123 16:57, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Enron

Those of you working on this article might want to incorporate aspects of the following news item: [[2] (http://www.maconareaonline.com/news.asp?id=4149)]. 205.155.15.1 17:26, 6 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Hitler Fan

Recently the Sydney Morning Herald unearthed a quote from Mr Swarzenegger from 1975, in which he stated he admires Hitler, on the grounds that he was a little man who rose from nothing to be somebody. Political naivete of course, but in the light of the recent election, maybe worth mentioning in the article if the original source and quote can be found. GRAHAMUK 12:12, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Last I heard, the original quote couldn't be found, so it was relegated to a rumor to discredit Schwarzenegger. I guess it could be lumped into a section citing all the things that arose to discredit him at the last minute (such as the groping, the gang-bangs, etc.). —Frecklefoot 17:13, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I've seen a quote of his around in which he says something pretty close to: I was always admiring very powerful people, like dictators.--Nectarflowed 22:16, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This has been utterly debunked. The JDL or another pro-Jewish group has already noted his pro-Jewish personal efforts. He is not under any cloud regarding this. Please look into it more. [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 Missing image
Happyjoe.jpg
Image:Happyjoe.jpg

]] 22:23, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, I was saying that I think the hitler issue was mistaking what he said. Here's the quote I was referring to:

"I was always dreaming about very powerful people - dictators and things like that. I was just always impressed by people who could be remembered for hundreds of years, or even, like Jesus, be for thousands of years remembered." ?in the 1977 film "Pumping Iron." I don't think there's anything wrong with that statement. He's admiring personal power and being able to do huge things in the world. There are other quotes related to this discussion at this pageon (http://politicalhumor.about.com/cs/schwarzenegger/a/aa080703.htm) About.com.--Nectarflowed 08:29, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Austria not socialist!?

In the section where Schwarzenegger (hmm, I guess I should now say Governor Schwarzenegger 8^) explains why he joined the Republican Party, Adam Carr parenthetically added:

(In fact, at the time Schwarzenegger came to the United States, Austria was governed by conservatives, and had been since 1945. Austria did not have a socialist Chancellor until 1970.)

Now I know very little about Austrian modern history, so I await the opinions of others, but this is very much at odds with the Politics of Austria article. In that article, it states the Austrian government was a coalition between conservatives, socialists and communists from 1945 till 1947, and a coalition between the conservatives and socialists from 1947 until 1966, when the socialists held power in their own right, then variously socialists alone or conservative/socialist coalitions until 1983. (Schwarzenegger left Austria in 1968.) Furthermore, until 1955 a substantial part of the country - including Schwarzenegger's home - was occupied by the Soviets. Now Adam did refer to the Chancellor of Austria as well as the government, and that part seems to be true - but rather misleading as it seems that under the socialist/conservative coalition, they always had a conservative Chancellor but a socialist President. To cut a long story short, it seems that this remark is quite wrong. But I know very little about Austrian politics, so I'll leave it for comment for a while. -- Roger 10:11 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Roger is correct that the Austrian Socialist Party was a junior partner in Austrian governments from 1947 to 1966. However:

In 1966 the conservative People's Party won a majority in their own right, before being defeated by the Socialists in 1970. So Austria did not have a socialist government, in any sense, in 1968 when Schwarzenegger left for the US.

What I was objecting to was "governed by conservatives ... since 1945".

The presence of SPO ministers in the government did not make Austria a "socialist country." The 1947-66 governments pursued policies which in European terms would be considered centrist - I suppose to an American Republican they might seem "socialist."

OK, but a socialist/conservative (and sometimes communist) coalition over part of the country, and Soviet interference in the rest, is hardly "governed by conservatives ... since 1945", either. And the Austrian doctrine of Proporz means that the SPO always controlled at least a few ministerial positions, in particular the Minister for Labour and Social Affairs. (On a peripheral issue, the Schwarzenegger quote doesn't actually say "socialist country".)

The Presidency of Austria is a ceremonial post so the party background of its occupant is not really relevant.

The admittedly terse reference I read on the matter suggests that although he customarily does not use them, the Austrian President actually has immense powers, including the powers to dissolve the Nationalrat, sack the Chancellor, indefinitely delay Acts, pardon criminals, and, in a state of emergency, to rule by decree for up to four weeks. (See also Thomas Klestil.) In practice it seems that the only such power that has actually been used is dissolving the Nationalrat, which has been done twice, both times with the Chancellor's approval. In contrast, although the Chancellor's role is very similar to that of a Prime Minister, he actually has very few constitutional powers. For example, he cannot even sack one of his own cabinet ministers! As a practical matter, the SPO/OVP split of President and Chancellor probably guaranteed the continuation of the custom of Proporz, which meant the socialist party controlled industrial relations.

If Schwarzenegger's home was in the Graz area then he was in the British Zone of Occupation, not the Soviet Zone. In any case the occupation ended when he was seven.

OK, my map was rather small scale, so mea culpa. My point was that having a large chunk of your country occupied by the Soviets is not really compatible with "governed by conservatives".

Anyway, feel free to remove the paragraph if you feel it is misleading - it is a very minor point. Adam 11:46, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

OK, I've probably already given it far more time than it deserves, but, grrrr, it's taking me so long to save this edit the main page will have to wait. -- Roger 13:46 09 Oct 2003 (UTC)

The date 1968 is incorrect. Arnold left Austria in 1966 for Munich, then went to the USA in 1968. [3] (http://www.acntco.net/bodybuilding/bio.html) dcxf 11:12, 5 Sept 2004 (BST)

Nickname in title

Do we really need Arnold's nickname, "Arnie", in the first sentence of this page? George W. Bush's page doesn't say "George 'Dubya' W. Bush" the first time he is referred to. -- Mattworld 21:03, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

No. ThereIsNoSteve 21:06, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Request for qualifiers of "World's Largest Chest"

Surely Arnold is far behind, say, Dolly Parton, or at least behind silicon-enhanced-porn-stars in the chest department? Who certified him as "world's largest chest" and is it not at least sex-specific??? -- Someone else 03:14, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

This guy has him beat [4] (http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/index.asp?id=48481), and also if the award were "largest muscular chest" numerous others would also surpass him. Maximus Rex 03:21, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

OMG! Yes, it did seem somehow wrong, though I would not have thought of Robert Earl Hughes as a competitor!!!! I don't think Schwarzenegger was particularly noted for having a large chest among bodybuilders. -- Someone else 03:25, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

inauguration photos

Security at the event was extreme so I wasn't able to get any photos of Arnold, but these other ones may be useful. However, I'm at work right now and don't have the software needed to crop and resize these images. If somebody else can do this before I get home then that would be great. Otherwise I'll get to it latter tonight. Image:Newsvans at Schwarzenegger inauguration_.JPG, Image:Arnold Schwarzenegger inauguration-crowd.jpg, Image:Arnold Schwarzenegger sexual harassment protestors.JPG. --mav 21:31, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I'll crop them. rv if not correct. JDR

Cool, thanks! But somebody elese beat you to it. --mav 22:47, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Los Angeles Times links

I put back the links to the Los Angeles Times stories about allegations of sexual harassment, which were removed by another user. The LA Times is a leading newspaper, and the sexual harassment allegations were one of the most contentious issues in his campaign for governor. Many people have formed opinions about the Times' reporting on Schwarzenegger without having actually read it. I think including them is appropriate, and I don't know why they were deleted. If someone thinks they present a one-sided POV, the solution should be to offer a countering report, not to delete these.

The LA Times is only a leading newspaper in LA, no one else cares what they have to say. The hve become legends in their own minds. All have been debunked and since retracted. Check it out. Another Hail Mary by the left to stay in power. Sorry folks.--68.80.223.233 13:07, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Degree

The article states, "meanwhile, he earned a B.A. from the University of Wisconsin, Superior where he graduated with a major in international marketing of fitness and business administration in 1979." Is there really such a thing as a degree in international marketing of fitness and business administration? Or did he double major in "international marketing of fitness" and "business administration"? If that's the case, my question now becomes- is there really such a thing as a major in international marketing of fitness?

The only major I can think of that even comes close is Sports Management. His official biography (http://www.governor.ca.gov/state/govsite/gov_htmldisplay.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1676704204.1090473555@@@@&BV_EngineID=cccjadcmdhggldicfngcfkmdffidfog.0&sFilePath=%2fgovsite%2fbiography%2fbio_arnold_schwarzenegger.html&sTitle=Arnold+Schwarzenegger+Biography&sCatTitle=Biographies) contains no mention of a degree or college education whatsoever. IMDb says (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000216/bio) he got one in "international marketing of fitness and business administration", but IMDb's trivia bits are notoriously incorrect. This (http://www.calcaria.net/html/arnie_quiz.html) says he majored in "internal marketing of fitness and business administration". I'm guessing he received his degree in Business Administration, and he chose to focus on international fitness marketing while he was there.

I would recommend removing any degree titles until we can determine what it was for sure. Maybe say "...where he graduated in 1979 after studying business and marketing"? Even then, we don't have any really good sources available to verify that, though. Beginning 05:29, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

girlie men

I doubt the last added statement is NPOV. His comment WAS received well by many, and simply saying that it wasn't is not NPOV. I thought it was funny and many political correspondents shrugged it off as "so he has a sense of humor, so what?". -- Alterego

I removed the previous sentence because that one seemed NPOV to me. It seemed to have this "he's doomed" tone to it, and how do we know what's going to happen? However, even though personally I think the controversy is way overblown -- which should hopefully override your doubts about my own personal POV -- you can't possibly be denying that it didn't cause a major uproar if you've been following the coverage.

I'd be fine with changing it to "some", but you can't discuss the remark without discussing who it actually offended. That's why it's newsworthy to begin with --the number of people who got ticked. Gay advocacy groups, as well as women's groups and Democratic higher-ups in California, have gotten very worked up over this one. It was a lead story on most opinion programs this week, and most of the coverage I've come across (including on NPR (http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=3602003), in the AP (http://www.wpxi.com/politics/3545477/detail.html), and in the SFChronicle (http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/07/19/GUV.TMP)) used the word "many". I didn't feel that I was being NPOV; I felt (and feel) that I was reflecting the story itself. Beginning 19:27, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

Outside of CA, esp San Francisca, LA and Sacremento, and other places on the left coast, who really cared about his remark? Let the arrows fall. We laughed about it at the Convention. So what.--Tomtom 21:33, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

As a heterosexual, I thought the comment was amusing, but I did a straw poll at the time with several homosexual men I knew and none of them saw anything for them to be offended about. (Chicago). The last comment is definitely not NPOV and needs to be altered. I think the only people who really cared about it were a) the media b) the targets of the comment c) some advocacy groups. Using the SF Chronicle and AP as examples of NPOV is incorrect. The media is not NPOV; discussions of outright political bias aside, it is very difficult to have an NPOV news source. They go for what makes news and sells papers. -Joseph 15:10, 2004 Aug 21 (UTC)
- I'd like to second that the statement is simply not offensive. Schwarzenegger always uses the term humorously, mocking society's negative connotation of "girly men." He's also been quite receptive to expansion of gay rights. --Davidstrauss 09:53, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

When dealing with the "girlie men" statement, from a detractor's or a proponent's perspective, it's important to not take it out of context. He said it at a rally of supporters, assumedly in a humorous context with part of his intention being to rev up the crowd (as opposed to being intended as simply a slighting of legislators). Additionally, I think it should be considered that he used the term again in his speech at the republican national convention, saying voters shouldn't be "economic girlie men." I think most will find that to be a less questionable use of the term (it's a rhetoric device to encourage strong economic attitudes, and is not being directed at specific people), and that he used it a second time even when he knew the stakes surrounding use of the term were high (i.e. public reaction) could suggest that he does have specific goals when using the term (e.g. to rev up the crowd) as opposed to representing a simple insult or questionable views on woman or masculinity.--Nectarflowed 22:48, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

"There is another way you can tell you're a Republican," said Schwarzenegger at the 2004 Republican National Convention. "You have faith in free enterprise, faith in the resourcefulness of the American people, and faith in the U.S. economy. To those critics who are so pessimistic about our economy, I say: Don't be economic girlie men!"[5] (http://www.gop.com/news/read.aspx?ID=4593)

Schwarzenegger's comments were jarring because he had, in effect, made his entire recall campaign all about the (presumed) economic consequences of continuing with Democrat Gray Davis, whom he painted as a reckless overspender. Candidate Schwarzenegger campaigned, he claimed, because of the burden of state debt and its corrosive effects on all levels of society.

As someone also concerned about this debt, on both a state and federal level, what was I to make of Schwarzenegger's "girlie men" comment at the Convention? Are only "girlie men" concerned about the consequences of debt and government overspending? Why — having run the campaign against Davis the way he did — was Schwarzenegger now mocking people who take such fiscal matters seriously? He may have given his Republican audience a laugh, but face it: our country is an a huge mess thanks to its massive and unsustainable overspending. And instead of talking about solutions, we had Schwarzenegger, good Republican that he is, kicking sand in the faces of the sissies!

For what it's worth, that was my take the moment I heard the "girlie men" comment last year. Sandover 07:48, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

quotes

[6] (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Arnold_Schwarzenegger) I'd personally like to see more of his own words as well as some of his classic shoot-em movie one-liners...http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Terminator [anonymous, unattributed]

The entire "Quotes" section right now is from his 2004 RNC speech. It's too lengthy; a link to the speech (on wikisources, if folks saw it fitting there, or another static site) would be better. 64.229.39.247 20:44, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Socialism in Austria

The following was removed: "The alleged reason for his emigration was socialism in Austria, as Schwarzenegger later suggested in an election campaign for George W. Bush in 2004. Admittedly there were no socialistic governments until Schwarzegger left Austria. A first noteworthy left-wing movement began in the seventies." Why was this removed? It's all factual. Quadell (talk) 01:14, Sep 6, 2004 (UTC)

By saying "alleged" it implies Arnold had ulterior motive to come to USA other than what he has expressed. That makes it too POV. What is it you are trying to say, that Arnold gave a false reason, or that Austria was not Socialist at the time? Or both? And how do you define Socialistic Governments? I've read Arnold's spokespersons rebuttle about this and it makes sense - his view was that the policies and practices in Austria leaned towards Socialistic style and that is true -regardless of whether or not Austria was then controlled by a poltical party which called itself "Socialist" or not. You are splitting hairs, looking for a way to call Arnold a liar. [[User:Rex071404|Rex071404 Missing image
Happyjoe.jpg
Image:Happyjoe.jpg

]] 02:14, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hold up. "You" isn't me. I didn't write the text; I'm just wondering why it was removed. Also, it is accurately described as an "alleged" reason, since he alleged it. I don't want unnecessary doubt cast on his allegations, but I do want them reported accurately. Still, we don't have to use the word "alleged" if you don't like it. I think we should try to reword the sentence if it seems POV to you, instead of just deleting it. How about:

"Later, when campaigning for George W. Bush in 2004, Schwartzenegger claimed he had left Austria due the socialism in the government there. Critics have noted that there were no socialistic governments there until after Schwarzenegger left Austria, the first noteworthy left-wing movement beginning in the 1970s. But Schwarzenegger explains . . ." (You'd have to fill in Schwarzenegger's explanation here, since you seem to be more familiar with it than I am.)

Quadell (talk) 18:05, Sep 6, 2004 (UTC)

He can't have left due to something that didn't exist. --Tothebarricades.tk 19:07, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Schwarzenegger has said in other places (places outside of the political sphere) that he was always fascinated with America, even when young. He's said that when he was young and dreaming, he felt Austria was too small for him, and also that the soviet military presence was terrifying to him. He's mentioned a number of times his highly positive reaction to american republican politics when he emigrated (specifically fiscal conservatism, "get[ting] government off our backs," and a strong military (citing the soviet military presence in Austria).

I agree with Rex071404 that he probably mean't "policies and practices in Austria leaned towards Socialistic style" compared with the comparatively highly capitalistic republican culture he found in America, and it seems like the critics mentioned in the proposed excerpt offered above by Quadell may be finding false inconsistencies by taking his statement unnecessarily literally. So I think it can be left out. --Nectarflowed 23:30, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

You don't have to call yourself a socialist to be a socialist. Look at all the left wingers in my democratic Party. If they ran as they really were they wouldn't get anywhwere, because in the country, being pink is as bad as being red. So they have to hide in the mainstream. As also for the fascists in the republican Party. Neo conservatives and other double-speak aside. --68.80.223.233 13:13, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Austria is a socialist country as written in their constitution. It was a socialist country ever since the abolition of the monarchy in 1918. Even as part of the Third Reich it was socialist as the Germany was socialist. Nothing changed except for certain governmental policies. The Nazis were socialist of a different color. So the previous constitution was reinstated following WW2, until replaced with the new constitution which included much of the old one.--Numerousfalx 13:23, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You can find an English translation of the Austrian constitution here [7] (http://www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl/au__indx.html). This should demonstrate that your rambling has no factual basis. Martg76 04:02, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

There must be a lot of prejudice in the USA about European governments. It seems everything that doesn't fit their redneck view of the world and how great a relentless turbo-capitalism is which produces abject poverty, is called socialism. Europeans would in general probably view their rather socialdemocratic governments (centre-left or centre-right) with much more sympathy. But admittedly, that crazy neoliberalism has taken a strong foothold in Europe, driven by American financial interests and corrupt Euro-crats in Brussels. The more open-minded Americans are invited to visit our "brave new world" in Europe.

"Faked?"

"Schwarzenegger came to the attention of more people in the documentary Pumping Iron (1977), elements of which were faked to add drama."

What is meant by "faked" in this sentence? "Faked" has a very negative connotation and, without proper explanation, creates a very negative view of this film. Would "staged" be a NPOV equivalent? Even that suggests deception. --207.69.138.13 17:14, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"Scripted" is a term sometimes used for scenes with "augmented reality", even when the "script" is made up as they go along and there is little dialog.

steroid slang

a minor edit on the wording. the article implied 'arnolds' is a commonly used slang term. roids/gear/juice are by far and away more commonly used. also i dropped illicit from 'illicit steroid'. steroids are perfectly legal to posses/use in many countries in the european union and even available over the counter at pharmacies in some countries.

define illicit: Refers to drugs themselves. All illegal drugs are illicit, but alcohol and tobacco may be either licit or illicit, depending on whether they are used legally or illegally. Weightshead 18:14, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hummers and Tank

I believe his hummers should be mentioned because didn't he get the first civilian hummer? Also his tank with its cost should be mentioned. -Redwolf24 9:42, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, for a short time there when you saw the Hummer you knew it had to be Schwarzenegger inside. IIRC, around the time of his election he promised to convert one of his Hummers to use hydrogen fuel. Later, IIRC, he may have sought funding for a string of hydrogen stations leading out of Sacramento. There have been many L.A. Times articles that mentioned the vehicles. Cheers, -Willmcw 04:57, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

minor edit

I am adding that Schwarzenegger first used his infamous "economic girlie men" term in Ontario, California--a 3 word change. I added it earlier but someone felt like reverting that. I think it is important that the location of that be preserved.

Retrieved from "https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php/Talk:Arnold_Schwarzenegger"

Categories: Wikipedia featured article candidates (contested)