Arnold's unfit

Many conservatives and Republicans are rushing in to defend Arnold Schwarzenegger against attacks by women who say he abused them.

Some of them self-righteously point out that Democrats and liberals claimed Bill Clinton was still fit for office despite similar charges – some even worse – before and during his eight years in office.

TRENDING: Take heart, patriots! These 3 House members are the future of the GOP

Of course, they are right.

But let's be consistent. If it is wrong for men in power – either in power through politics or through the movie industry – to prey on women, then it's wrong. What's wrong is wrong. What's right is right.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is unfit for public office – any public office, and especially one as important as governor of California.

Now, admittedly, I didn't support Schwarzenegger before these charges came to light. But it wouldn't make any difference to me. If Tom McClintock were suddenly facing a barrage of charges by women that he was a serial abuser of women, I would withdraw my support from him.

Frankly, it doesn't matter what a politician's opinions are, if his character is deeply flawed, then it will show up in his policies in office.

Schwarzenegger has two strikes against him: He's wrong on most of the issues of the day and he's got a terrible reputation as a womanizer. This is a combination that will prove disastrous in the state Capitol. And, Republicans should be thinking seriously about whether this is the kind of legacy they want for their leader in the largest state in the union.

Some people say: "Well, Arnold apologized. That's more than Clinton did."

That may be true. Is that a high enough standard for us?

Some people say: "Well, Clinton faced much more serious charges – including rape."

That may be true. Is that a high enough standard for us?

Some people say: "Well, these women were just paraded out there at the last minute as part of a dirty-tricks campaign by Gray Davis."

There may be some truth in that. But many of these charges were substantiated in a Premiere magazine article three years ago. What on earth were California's Republicans thinking about putting forward a man of such questionable character?

I've never been one to get behind any politician because of his party affiliation. I've never been one to get behind a politician because he looks like a sure winner. I've never been one to get behind a politician just because he says some magic words. And I've never been one to get behind a politician just because his opponent is so bad.

But Californian's still have a choice today.

And the choice is crystal clear.

If millions of Californians do the right thing and vote for the best man running for governor in the state today, they will have themselves better government.

That man is not Arnold Schwarzenegger. It is Tom McClintock.

I've known Tom McClintock for 15 years. He doesn't have any skeletons in his closet. And he sure doesn't have a whole graveyard full of them as his opponents seem to have.

He's a good, decent, hardworking visionary, who, for some reason unknown to me still has hope for the late, great state of California. Admittedly, that's more than I have.

But if Californians choose to keep Davis, or replace him with Schwarzenegger or Cruz Bustamante, I wouldn't give you a plug nickel for the future of the state.

Truly, McClintock may be California's last great hope for honest, virtuous, righteous leadership.

I'll guarantee you he won't be groping any women in the state Capitol. Can any Schwarzenegger backer really make a similar statement with any confidence?