Dear Meg Whitman: SHAME ON YOU - SHAME! SHAME! SHAME!!

[LynneSin]

Do you have so little value of California and it's citizens that you think you can buy yourself a job and no one will notice how you wasted away $150million of your own dollars to get that position? What's really sad is you have spent all that money and yet you're still down 5pts in the poll, which goes to show that Californians might be crazy enough to vote an actor for the governor but not dumb enough to allow their votes to be bought by you.

In this economy, $150million is alot of money and btw, I do respect the fact that California is not a cheap state to win an election. But if you actually had values and a message that appealled to the voters you could have won this election with far less money you've spent.

But the real shame is what you could have done with $100million instead of line the money of a few campaigners and airtime to run your bad commericials. ANd perhaps if you had used your $100million in these other ways, you wouldn't have to had spent so much money to buy an election.

For $100million you could have done such things as:

*Better pay your staff so they don't embarass you at critical times in your campaign
*Feed alot of homeless people
*Help families keep their homes
*Provide scholarships to deserving students who might not make college during the finanical hard times
*Start a new business that would provide good jobs to unemployeed Californians
*Help provide low-cost heating fuel
*Help provide health insurance to families who have none.
*Hire an administrative assistant that would have remembered to get you to an election place for the last 28 elections

You should hold your head in shame! There are real people in your state whose vote can't be bought no matter how much you toss out there. I can't WAIT to see you lose big time. You will be the poster child of proof that we Americans can't be glamoured by the idle rich who somehow feel entired that they can just buy an election.

Shame on you - SHAME SHAME SHAME!!!

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/governor/ca/california_governor_whitman_vs_brown-1113.html

[xchrom]

1. hear! hear! nt

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. Right on, my dear LynneSin! nt

[AtomicKitten]

3. Loved it when Brown slammed Whitman for not providing an attorney to her housekeeper to help her.

His insinuation was that after 9 long years of employment, she threw her to the wolves. Priceless. :)

[LynneSin]

4. I would have cost Whitman what, about $50k to clear up that mess

Make the maid legal and perhaps pay her staff just a bit better.

So it seems Whitman has no problem dumping $150mil on an election but gets cheap in the one area that will ultimately tank her race.

[AtomicKitten]

6. The elite greedy have a track record of being particularly awful to "the help."

It is of some consolation knowing Ms. Whitman is spending upwards of $150 million of her own money for second place. Ha!

[JuniperLea]

8. I said that day one!

And none of her handlers thought to push it? Jeez...

She would have been St. Margarita to the Latino community... shrines would have been built!

I feel for Ms. Diaz, but this is the better outcome for us all. I hope Gloria A. gets a tidy sum out of NutMeg, and Ms. Diaz is compensated for the abuse.

[AtomicKitten]

9. Good point. Glad her elitism precluded that strategy! nt

[Flubadubya]

5. Check out what Rachel Maddow says about Republicans and shame...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x501152

They have none, of course!

[butterfly77]

7. Exactly!

Kicked!:kick: