Archive for Meg Whitman

Quickie- Meg Whitman Spent $178 Million On Campaign

Share

I'm sorry, but this woman should be involuntarily committed for this kind of crazy. Via Taegan-

The Sacramento Bee reports failed California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman's (R) spent a record-breaking $178.5 million spent on her campaign -- $43.25 for each of her votes in the general election -- which she lost to Jerry Brown (D) by 13 percentage points

Share

"...Opportunistic yet unelectable, ineffective, uninformed about basic economics or finance & ideologically rigid- your basic Sarah Palin"

Share

Today’s L.A. Times letters to the editor, Part 2:

In California, it's one party

Re "For GOP, state is a deep blue hole," Nov. 19

When I saw in your poll results that many Republicans favor "true conservatives," I briefly imagined you meant a fiscal conservative who is socially liberal. After a moment I realized you meant someone who is opportunistic yet unelectable, ineffective, uninformed about basic economics or finance and ideologically rigid — your basic Sarah Palin.

Jerry Brown will do more to straighten out California's financial problems than Meg Whitman could ever have done. I will consider voting Republican again when I trust a GOP candidate's ability to lead rather than posture.

My post about the original article is here.

Share

California GOP is "not just wounded, it's in a coma"

Share

I'm sitting at my computer right here in California, where we may be in a heap-o'-messy-trouble, but there's a big fat silver lining that keeps me going: I live in a blue state. That's at least some comfort in today's toxic, tea baggy, corporate-run political climate:

How alive could the state GOP be after suffering the pounding it took on Nov. 2, a day of historic party triumph elsewhere across America?

"It's not just wounded, it's in a coma," says Republican Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado.

That was my morning CPR, courtesy of columnist George Skelton.

And yes, Democrats are corporate, too, but the U.S. Chamber of Commerce clearly donated heavily to Republicans, specifically eMeg Whitman.

The icing on the Dem cake was that, if Kamala Harris beats Steve Cooley in the race for attorney general, which it appears she will, then "the entire GOP statewide ticket will be swept by Democrats."

"Swept by Democrats." Mmmm, yum. I love that sentence.

Jon Fleischman, a conservative blogger at Flash Report and Southern California vice chairman of the Republican Party:

"Political parties are defined by office-holders and candidates... We have been defined by Arnold Schwarzenegger and Meg Whitman. And I don't know that anyone could tell you what the California Republican Party stands for anymore...."

I guess that's better than being defined by Karl Rove, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Sharron Angle, or Christine O'Donnell. However, California has its own losers, and Ahnold and eMeg are among them.

Oh, and Jon? I could tell you what the CA-GOP party stands for: It rhymes with honey and looks like this: $$$$$. That and failure, apparently.

And one more thing...  They're monochromatic:

"The Republican Party is now a regional party, not a statewide party, mainly because Republicans no longer are capable of getting people of color to vote for them," says Allan Hoffenblum, a former GOP consultant who publishes the Target Book, which handicaps legislative races.

And then Skelton goes on to make a few suggestions that might help the GOP survive here in the sunshine state. I'm betting, and hoping, they'll ignore him.

Share

"It takes the work of being a citizen."

Share

There's an editorial in today's L.A. Times that makes some interesting points. One that struck me was how eMeg plunked down $140 million of her own money to spend, spend, spend wildly on her campaign, on herself, while hypocritically bragging about what a fiscal conservative she is. And after all that spreading of wealth (What a socialist!), it didn't work. She failed:

Whitman renounced the idea of throwing money at the state's problems; she was the fiscal conservative who insisted that cannier, leaner spending would still deliver the services that Californians want and need. Yet Whitman was the one who threw money at the campaign process, not always effectively...

But that was money we could see, that we could attribute to a person with a name and a face. As scary and lopsided as that was, this is the real reason we should all have a case of the chills:

But more amorphous and less visible were the business people who spent money to defeat the measure and who were acting in their own best financial interests.

And then there's the obscene amount of money spent, by everyone, but mostly by GOP donors. Think hard about what this money could have bought: Health care, food, shelter, bridges, green transportation, etc. etc. etc.....

Total spending by candidates, parties, corporations, unions and other outside groups in the 2010 midterm elections is expected to reach a final tally of $4 billion. In the absence of workable public financing systems, meaningful contribution limits or strict disclosure rules, the job of resisting undue influence is left mostly to individual voters, who will not learn the deeper truths about candidates or issues from 30-second TV or radio spots. It takes reading the news, watching debates, asking questions and demanding answers. It takes the work of being a citizen.

That's the bottom line, right there. My standard talking point: An uneducated electorate continues to chip away at our democracy. Dumbed down voters tend to believe short bursts of propaganda, depend on sound bites, devour headlines but not details, and they cast their ballots accordingly.

Share