Joan Walsh - "Meg Whitman's meltdown: Her hypocrisy is helping to hand office back to Jerry Brown"

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Monday, Oct 4, 2010 21:01 ET

Meg Whitman's meltdown

The GOP candidate's hypocrisy is helping to hand the California governor's office back to Jerry Brown

By Joan Walsh

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/2010_elections/index.html?story=/opinion/walsh/politics/2010/10/04/meg_whitman_meltdown



Like a lot of California Democrats, I've been waiting for Jerry Brown to start his campaign for governor. Sure, he began running ads last month -- terrible ads, in my opinion, featuring Brown as a talking head, that mostly serve to remind people he was already governor, a long, long time ago, whatever his accomplishments.

I've always assumed Brown would win anyway, though, because he's got one key asset: He's not Meg Whitman. And during Saturday's Univision debate, I spotted another Brown asset: He knows how to make a moral and emotional appeal to our sense of justice, that California used to be a better place, and can be one again.

Whoever is behind the sudden emergence of Whitman's former maid, Nicky Diaz -- the woman the former eBay CEO says deceived her about having legal immigration status, going so far as to steal a letter from the federal government notifying Whitman about her illegal status (that turned out not to be true), but whom Whitman fired immediately upon "learning" the truth -- it's a defining story for Whitman, and not in a good way. I am sensitive to all the ways women are held to a different and higher standard than men in politics, and I search for descriptors that capture Whitman that are not somehow stereotypical.

But her series of supposedly folksy television ads, in which she lectures California about its problems and promises simplistic CEO solutions, have not worn well. I have heard her called a "schoolmarm," a "nag" and a "shrew." All those words are gendered and unfair. The best phrase I can come up with to describe Whitman is that she is a wealthy, entitled, out-of-touch hypocrite, and her handling of the Diaz story crystallizes that for voters.

I'm sure it had to smart that the issue emerged on the eve of Whitman's debate with Brown on Univision, which gave both candidates a chance to reach the state's growing Latino population, now almost a third of California's population. But Whitman's tone-deaf handling of the issues of immigration and opportunity related to her employing an undocumented worker was breathtaking. From their opening statements, the contrast between Brown and Whitman was stark. Asked to describe their outreach to Latinos, Whitman said woodenly, "I have a significant team of Latinos working on my campaign. My entire website is translated into Spanish. I have published my jobs book on how to create more jobs for the Latino audience in Spanish, and, of course, we have been on Spanish-language radio and Spanish-language television." Brown pointed to his signing the California Agricultural Labor Relations act, which he said "empowered mostly undocumented people to be able to pick by a secret ballot the advocate of their choice, the union of their choice, and I'm not ashamed of the fact that people, particularly when they're poor and when they don't have power, and they don't even speak English, they need a strong lawyer advocate standing in their corner, and that's exactly what the farm labor bill did." He added a pledge " to be fair. I'm going to treat everybody, whether they're documented or not, as God's child, and my brothers and sisters."

[RandomThoughts]

1. An once again they have to get the woodenly comment in.

heh, funny that is.


Why do they feel they have to do that? What prompts such characterizations?

[truth2power]

2. I don't understand what you're saying. Could you clarify?...

I think Whitman's statement, as quoted, is wooden. Sounds like a 3rd grader reciting where they went on their summer vacation.

[RandomThoughts]

3. heh, there is humor in that.

I been explaining it for years. Although also with stories and ideas, not all correct, not all wrong. But interesting.

[truth2power]

4. I have a feeling this is hopeless, but I'll ask one more time...

It sounds like you're saying that "wooden" is not descriptive of Whitman's statement, or that you're taking issue with the use of that term at all. Are you supporting Whitman in some way? just asking...

[RandomThoughts]

8. It is a question for the poster.

I would be curious of the writers view on the use of that comment, since it would be, if she used it with other intents, that would have some meaning.

So the comment was more to the poster then as an explanation. If the poster understood the comment, then it would have value in a conversation, if not, then it would not need to be understood by her.

[Hawkowl]

13. ?

Do you have a learning disability? Or maybe a communicative disorder? Perhaps you are off your meds? I can not recall a single one of your posts making the least bit of sense.

[RandomThoughts]

14. I understand that.

Most of them require other components. That does not mean they are better or worse, but many require a key to unlock, or seeing every element of the combination.

In some discussions only part of a conversation is in the text, the other is in the person hearing it, and that combination forms the key. Although sometimes kicking a door can be done where all the information is sent in a comment.


If you have not understand any of my posts, you probably are just skimming them, and not spending time really thinking on them. Or some past correlating info is not known.

It is not a disorder, it makes sense for different people to see different things in different ways, I see it as a larger order.


If you pick a post I made that you did not understand, I can explain it if you want. Although the post in this thread was more of a question then an explanation, so not much to explain on that post.




For instance do you understand how the post here makes sense. Listen to the song, look at the OP topic, and think on the comment made in the post itself. They are all correlated.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9256632

There is a form of thought cloud thinking, where you think in a bigger context of connectivity, and create connections between what seems to be unrelated to find the flows in many things.

Or look at the post made in this thread (post 19), and its following replies, can you see the correlations.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x9514387

The thread title has 'carved in stone' as its comment, note that Moses wrote the commandments in stone. And also stone is what spirits of the past are called, while wood is living, in many cultures. And there have been posts about the best ways to vote is to carve in stone. So in the movie Red Dawn, where they talk about putting the names of the partisans giving up their lives in stone, they speak about a form of honor, and also in that story are a few little pieces of some bigger tales, story of mercy for the sick and weak, and story of mercy for the righteous and faithful, even when they were in occupied territory.

And the idea of loving thy brother and sister, or being a brothers keeper.

And that relates to the song, ride across the river to the other side, also in those same years, speaking of the noble partisans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hHfCMh-G-s

The same story also in stone from years ago.

See how it all makes sense.

There is much more to it, King Arthur pounds the stone in some other clips, and other posts speak about those that think it is a killing game, and other post speak about how love not judgment can overcome the suffering, even while having justice. And how horses are like symbols of angels since they are servants to man, and night mares can be beautiful horses, a dream to some, a night mare to others. It is all connected, but does it mean it is perfect? not in my view, since bias is also there, but you can find the glimpses of perfection. And they are wonderful, but even that does not say they are correct, since there are also verses that say some wonders will be shown that are bad. So it is still for each person to figure what is best for how they choose to live. In all things it seems to be a riddle saying power is there, but each person still has to choose, and in that people become part also, depending how they choose to think and feel.

Although I could be wrong also, maybe it about something else. If I claimed to know for sure, then I would be in the same trap of thinking I could know the difference, but instead choose what I want to feel and think, and from that find power that gives comfort with those thoughts.

[bemildred]

5. It's easier than thinking up your own way of putting it, is my guess.

But yeah, it is annoying, and a handy way to put someone down while pretending to be "objective". Like what they did to Al Gore.

[RandomThoughts]

9. Not annoying as much as showing something.

Although if the poster did not know what it meant, then could not have a conversation on the topic.

There are really long conversations on that topic, I was curious if it was a use of a label to try and create linkage.

[bemildred]

10. Well, I am skeptical that much thought went into it.

So I think it shows the writer is a tool. But who can say for sure?

[emulatorloo]

11. Joan Walsh is a good writer

[bemildred]

12. Anyone can have a bad day. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

6. Jerry was governor long ago...

the last time California had decent leadership, the era in which California made changes that lead the nation, that was the Brown era.

[bemildred]

7. Yep, all downhill from there.

Defense gone, manufacturing gone, education system gone, show business gone, all gone, and what we got in exchange was housing bubbles.