California Insider

A Weblog by
Sacramento Bee Columnist Daniel Weintraub

Back to California Insider home page

« The real smoking guns | | More Arnold ads »

September 03, 2003

On playing favorites

A funny thing has happened in the past couple of days. After posting item after item ripping Schwarzenegger for his refusal to answer questions, for his refusal to debate, for his lack of specifics and for specifics that don’t add up, for breaking his promises on negative campaigning and on accepting special interest money, I posted a few items critical of Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante. Suddenly readers (some Democratic officials, some not) are questioning my “objectivity.” One said the “relish” with which I attacked Cruz while giving Arnold a “free pass” was unbecoming of a political journalist in my position.

So let me clarify: I am an opinion writer. I express my opinions. Ideologically, from what I can tell, Schwarzenegger is closer to my view of the world than Cruz. When I am weighing in on public policy, about taxes and spending and regulation and government mandates on employers, my takes are going to tend to be closer to Arnold’s than to Bustamante’s. But when I am talking about integrity, honesty, claims, campaign tactics and the like, I play no favorites, and never have.

Fortunately, all of my posts are archived under the button to the right side of this page. But here's a helpful cheat-sheet for those keeping score at home:

On September 1, after Arnold’s appearance at the state fair, I criticized him for ducking questions, and said his campaign tactics were creating an impression that he is “unwilling or unable to answer tough questions. By extension, the message is that he is unprepared to govern.”

On August 27, I criticized Arnold for taking special interest money after saying he wouldn’t, suggesting his flip-flop made him look “like a hypocrite or a liar.”

On August 26, I criticized Arnold for taking a personal swipe at Cruz after promising to refrain from negative campaigning. The attack, I said, “makes him look small.”

On August 25, in my first post on Arnold taking special interest money, I said his flip-flop presented a “mixed message, to put it mildly, and an outright distortion or lie, if you want to place it in the worst light.”

On August 22, when Arnold’s campaign said he wouldn’t join in the first debate, I said the decision “made him look like the calculating pols he is supposedly trying to sweep out of the Capitol.”

And on Aug. 20, I said Arnold’s declaration that he could repeal the car tax, raise no other taxes and still balance the budget while leaving education off the table was “not a reasonable proposition.”