Meg Whitman – WTF (part 2)

Politicians and Political Action Committee’s (PAC) are convinced that YOU are an IDIOT.

Meg WhitmanSince politics have existed, slogans aren’t used because they’re factual, but because they alter the view of the constituent.

Advocates for one issue/bill/candidate or another will beat you about the head and neck with slogans because they’ve learned that if you hear it enough, your subconscious will buy in.

Never mind the truth, never mind intelligent objectivity and reasonable debate, “WE WANT THE WORLD AND WE WANT IT NOW!”

If you are simply a mindless troll who garners the bulk of your information from half-read headlines and TV and suffer from the affliction of lop-sided opinions fed to you by a single partisan viewpoint, then bail.  This will not interest you.

Sure I’m picking on Meg Whitman in this post, but no one is beyond reproach. And the idea is to get YOU to think for yourself.  Don’t be an armrest.  You know what happens when a group of citizens sit around and complain about everything but don’t participate?

”   ”

(nothing, start learning chinese because you’re not even a blip)

Making it Harder to Create Jobs

Time to dissect a statement or two from the Whitman campaign attacking California Attorney General and Gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown.

In a recent TV commercial, Meg Whitman asserts that Brown makes it harder to create jobs and has “1,100 attorneys ready to sue over government regulations”.

First of all, on the face of it, what the hell does that mean?

There’s no context stated or implied.

The snippet in quotation marks was made at a Democratic convention in San Jose in 2008, and was in reference to companies who don’t comply with environmental standards (can you say BP or Massey?).  It had nothing to do with jobs.  But let’s not allow the facts to get in the way.

Record unemployment

Whitman’s ad touts 11% unemployment as “Record Unemployment”.  Really?  Today, under a republican governor, unemployment is at 12.3%.  During the great depression California’s unemployment went from 3% to 25% almost overnight.

So which record exactly is she referring to?

Jerry Brown, Bell and Oakland

In a direct mail piece, Whitman assimilates the payroll/pension scandal in Bell, California to Brown’s stint as mayor in Oakland.  The mailer asserts that when Brown was mayor the number of city workers who earned over $200k increased by 740% and that the number of city workers earning over $100k grew by 47.5%.

First, they don’t mention that California Attorney General Jerry Brown is currently investigating the Bell payroll/pension scandal.

Second, the  jump was attributed to a small pool of employees – most of them firefighters – who were chalking up more than $100,000 annually in overtime in the 2005-06 fiscal year. Two years before that, five Oakland city employees made more than $200,000. In 2005-06, that number jumped to 42. Of Oakland’s top 25 earners that year, all but four were firefighters. The others were police officers, an engineer and former city administrator Deborah Edgerly, who Jerry Brown hired.

Third, none of those came close to the 1.5 million dollars that ex-city manager Robert Rizzo made or the $450k salary of police chief Randy Adams.

BTW: the city of Bell is pissed that Whitman exploited them for her ad.

Look, if you’re not willing to at least consider insightful discourse or an exchange of ideas amongst those in your community who share your ultimate objectives (you know, a better place to live and raise your family), then why not just join the Taliban?  I’m sure you’ll find like minded individuals there.



Meg Whitman – WTF

Wait a minute…Meg Whitman

Just so I have this right,

A billionaire who hasn’t voted in 26 years suddenly decides she’s the most qualified to run California.

Immeasurable arrogance aside, let’s pretend for a moment there’s a moral preponderance for civic duty (which to date hasn’t been proven in any way).

Regardless of party affiliation, she’s spending too much of her own money.

Is that a precedent that needs to be set?

Does the state need  to be run by the person with the most money?

Imagine the possibilities.

Wow, another politician politically dodging questions and futilely attempting to divert the conversation.

How refreshing.


Political Common Sense and Morality

The art of modern politics is one part prestidigitation and two parts schmooze.

Question: What is the primary objective of a career politician?

Answer: A paycheck

The first taste of power is especially sweet and seductive.  One becomes aware of the potential for personal gain immediately.  So many with so much want to be your friend and give you things.  Isn’t that great?

While it is illegal for corporations to contribute directly to an individual political candidate, is there any doubt that an overwhelming corporate influence exists?  Billions of dollars are spent on lobbying.  Millions of dollars from a specific industry (or company sometimes) make their way to a candidates campaign.  Votes from candidates benefit the industries or companies who donated so generously.  True statements all.

The question is, how can a candidate connect in a substantial financial way with a specific industry or company and remain objective?

The idea behind democracy, as I understand it, is about people collectively deciding what’s best for their communities.

People care about the environment in which they and their families live.

What is the primary objective of a corporation?

If you answered anything other than profit, you’re wrong.

When Ford discovered in pre-production that the design of the gas tank in their “rush to market” Pinto model was flawed, they manufactured it anyway due to an internal “cost-benefit analysis”, which showed that retooling the assembly line would be more expensive than legal fees resulting from wrongful death lawsuits.

They put a price tag on human life, and it didn’t fair that well in their corporate collective wisdom.

I wonder how many of them or their families drove Pinto’s  after the report came out?

The example may be extreme, but it’s also true.  The bottom-line is the bottom-line for any for-profit corporation.  And these corporations have an incredible amount of influence over our political system.

The sad truth is that money is what determines an outcome of an election all too often and the motive behind the money does not always have the country’s best interest at heart.

(To Be Continued)