Sarah Palin an example of a self-actualized person?
Unless you’ve been living under a rock these past several years you’ve probably heard the name Sarah Palin. Palin burst onto the national scene and into our national consciousness as John McCain’s choice as a running mate in his bid for office of the president in the 2010 Presidential election. Almost immediately people seemed to either like her or dislike her, with few expression of a neutral opinion about this polarizing figure.
During the 2010 Presidential election pundits, commentators, reporters, opinion makers, actors, pretty much everyone under the sun had an opinion on or about Palin. The more vociferous or negative opinions were sought out and giving leave to voice these opinions on any network or print media outlet that would have them. The same was done for those who held a positive viewpoint, but their opinions and voice seemed drowned out by the negative cacophony being broadcasted.
One would have thought that with President Obama’s election victory “Palin-haters” would have moved on to other “tastier” targets, but that was not the case. Nearly a day doesn’t go by that Palin’s name isn’t mentioned in print or over the airwaves. Negativity, which seems to have reached a crescendo this summer when Palin launched her “One Nation Tour” and with the subsequent release of more than 24,000 pages of her emails during her time as Governor of Alaska.
As I sat, read, and listen to the pundits chatter about Palin, insulting her intelligence, knowledge and even her child-rearing techniques I began to ponder where the roots of this almost pathological hatred emanated from? As a student of sociology it struck me that so much of the anger seemed – well visceral. People that I asked to explain the rationale for such a dislike often seemed at a loss for a substantial rationalization for their dislike of Palin, instead choosing to fall back on such reasons as she has no real world experience, she went to multiple colleges, and one of my favorites “she was a beauty pageant contestant after all” and so forth. But these were but shallow excuses used to describe a “je ne c’est quoi”. However, I think I may have finally begun to put my finger, sort of to speak, on the real issue why so many feel this undefined and unreasonable hate or love for Sarah Palin. In short, I think she evokes such passion and dispassion because Sarah Palin has reached the pinnacle of Maslow Hierarchy of Needs and has become what so many of us hope to but rarely attain – becoming fully self-actualized.
Maslow described self-actualization as "what a man can be, he must be. This need we may call self-actualization…It refers to the desire for self-fulfillment, namely, to the tendency for him to become actualized in what he is potentially. This tendency might be phrased as the desire to become more and more what one is, to become everything that one is capable of becoming." He went on to identify what he believed to be some key characteristics of the self-actualized individual. They are:
- Acceptance and Realism: Self-actualized people have realistic perceptions of themselves, others and the world around them.
- Problem-centering: Self-actualized individuals are concerned with solving problems outside of themselves, including helping others and finding solutions to problems in the external world. These people are often motivated by a sense of personal responsibility and ethics.
- Spontaneity: Self-actualized people are spontaneous in their internal thoughts and outward behavior. While they can conform to rules and social expectations, they also tend to be open and unconventional.
- Autonomy and Solitude: Another characteristics of self-actualized people is the need for independence and privacy. While they enjoy the company of others, these individuals need time to focus on developing their own individual potential.
- Continued Freshness of Appreciation: Self-actualized people tend to view the world with a continual sense of appreciation, wonder and awe. Even simple experiences continue to be a source of inspiration and pleasure.
- Peak Experiences: Individuals who are self-actualized often have what Maslow termed peak experiences, or moments of intense joy, wonder, awe and ecstasy. After these experiences, people feel inspired, strengthened, renewed or transformed.
I think that it’s this perception that Palin is self-actualized and thus not subject to the capricious whims of public opinion that evokes such unrestrained anger from her detractors and passion from her supporters. The public recognizes this self-actualization at an unconscious level and responds to it. Her supporters respond with unrestrained enthusiasm, while her detractors stew over how someone so plebeian can evoke such passion. Self-actualization is not conferred on an individual through the education as our wonderful country is filled with many well-educated individuals that have yet to attain self-actualization. Self-actualization is not the sole domain of the intelligent; one need not be a member of Mensa to be self-actualized. And as the saying goes money can’t buy you self-actualization either, because it shows no particular preference for rich or poor, beauty queen or not.
In an average person’s lifetime they may be lucky to encounter a handful of individuals that have reached the pinnacle of Maslow Hierarchy of Needs, these self-actualized individuals indeed make an impact on our lives. One need only look at Palin to see what emotions and passions a fully self-actualized person can evoke in others. All the slings and arrows her detractors may throw at Palin will do little to disabuse her passions and goals because a self-actualized person doesn’t seek nor need approval from external forces. Hopefully, her more rabid detractors will simply be seen as individuals on some self-fueled vendetta, harpies screeching from their perches at a force they cannot possible comprehend because they’ve yet to attain full self-actualization themselves.
The California GOP Convention where Dissent wasn’t the Rule.
Now come the dissenters that want to insist that Whitman alter some of her positions to better match their viewpoint, especially as it relates to immigration reform. Local papers report that these dissenters plan to make things “hot” and “uncomfortable” for Whitman, and they even plan to present a resolution (which would ultimately fail for a lack of a second) to be voted on by the delegates at the convention. The irony is sweet to this writer since so many Republican pundits like to remind everyone that Republicans are not a monolithic group and trying to get them to all agree is like herding cats. Yet, there are those in the party that want Whitman to hew to their point of view in order to glean their support, forgetting that their candidate of choice (Poizner) lost to Whitman by a 38% margin. The outcome of that primary is what should give Whitman and the party faithful their marching orders and let’s not forget that California as a closed primary system so when Whitman gets over 68% of the Republican vote there should be no ambiguity over what message the majority of Republican want their candidate to represent.
Illegal immigration and immigration reform are important issues for many Californians, and Republicans in particular, but I think that most voters realize that there are other issues (the California Budget or lack thereof, the economy, an unemployment rate of 12.3%) that when ranked might eclipse the illegal immigration issue at this point in time. And for voters like me Whitman was a better choice to address those issues than Poizner. So it would appear that individuals such as Poizner and Campbell have decided to withhold their nomination as if this might somehow bend Whitman to their political position and groups such as the CRA seem to think that if they raise enough of a ruckus Whitman will move further to the right in order to secure their votes and thus beat Brown in the general election. What I find interesting about this particular tactic is that members of the CRA often refer to themselves as the conscious of the Republican Party (a label accorded to them by President Ronald Reagan) – and yet in their current endeavor they seem to have forgotten the 11th commandment (a phrase used frequently by Reagan) which is “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican." Of course adherence to this dictum may have damaged the party, since for too many it means putting “one’s head in the sand” when confronted by a truly reprehensible or incompetent Republican.
I can only hope that all Republicans and many Independents and Democrats as possible get behind Whitman since I truly believe that she’s in the best position to help put California back on the path to financial health and fiscal responsibility. She seems to have mastered the art of knowing when to stand her ground and when to give in. Having lived in California the last time Brown was governor I’ve seen the results of his stewardship and I am not impressed. Especially as it relates to his ham fisted handling of SB 666 (Project Iatrogensis) a brainchild of his to “solve the nursing shortage” which he had then State Senator Watson carry. This bill would have devastated the nursing profession and it was so heinous that nurses from all walks of life, union and non-union, bedside and administration rallied in the thousands to defeat this bill – which luckily we did because who knows what would have happened to nursing in California if all one needed to do was work long enough as a C.N.A., L.V.N., R.N. or even as a physician, no additional education required, take and pass a test and voilà move up the career ladder to the next level of nursing or ultimately become a physician. California can ill afford this “out of this world thinking”, but if Republicans don’t get behind their candidate we could very well have four or more years of this creative Jerry Brown thinking.
Did C.N.A.’s Demonstration at Whitman Home Result in a Federal Offense?
In this nurse’s opinion the California Nurses Association (C.N.A.) membership hit an all time low this afternoon in Atherton, California. You may wonder what could be worse than threatening opposition nurses, their children, and pets, or stalking opposition nurses, showing up at their relatives homes and calling family members at all hours of the night and day under the pretext of “convincing” the recalcitrant nurse that the C.N.A. is a great organization to join is low -- you weren’t in Atherton. Today, low behavior was when hundreds of C.N.A. members and supporters descended on this quiet neighborhood so they could hold a demonstration at the private residence of California gubernatorial candidate, Meg Whitman.
Of course this demonstration was accompanied by all the usual hyperbole and misrepresentations that are part of the C.N.A.’s usual arsenal. But to come to a person’s private home is truly above the pale. I’m sure Ms. DeMoro, Nurse Burger and company wouldn’t appreciate say the S.E.I.U. coming to their private homes and demonstrating to illustrate how the C.N.A. has engaged in raiding their nursing unions. But common decency, and socially appropriate behavior seems to be lacking in the C.N.A. leadership DNA.
But what this nurse liked best was that in the C.N.A.’s attempt to garner media attention a nurse delivered a letter to Ms. Whitman by placing said letter in Whitman’s residential mailbox. In doing so this nurse may have engaged in a federal offense. What federal offense, why the law that states only authorized letter carriers may insert mail into a residential mailbox. Oh my! The rule making and rule toting C.N.A. broke a rule themselves – color me surprised! …. More to come.
Worst U.S. Senate Office – EVER!
A little while back some of you may remember a little things called the Health care reform discussions, and if you don’t it might be time that you moved out of that cave you’ve been living in. Anyway after a hiatus of many years from my ever now and then legislative visits to our Nation’s Capitol I was well enough to endure a flight out to DC, and thanks to my electric scooter (for which my daughter had to personally shell out nearly $2,000 to buy so I might have a modicum of freedom – thank you Adventist Health) I was able to scurry around the halls of our Nation’s Capitol and meet with various legislators and their aides and provide them with this nurse’s point of view on the health care discussions that were ongoing at that time.
Since I’m a California resident I always make a point to visit my representative who translates into Senators Boxer and Feinstein and Congressman Schiff, but since health care reform isn’t an issue limited to California, or just to Democrats or Republicans I also made a point to visit other Senators and Congressmen/women. Over the years I found that even though Senator Feinstein is a Democrat, she and by extension her staff make a concerted effort to at least provide the appearance of listening to the opinions of the non-Democrats that comprise our fine State, the same unfortunately cannot be said for Senator Boxer or her staff. There has been an ugly trend in her office for her staff to present an attitude of condescension to those who are of a different political persuasion then their boss. This was never more apparent than my visit to her Hart Office.
I arrived on my scooter to follow-up on the appointment request that I had faxed several weeks early to her DC office. The receptionist declared that no such request had been received, but when I presented her a copy of the request (received receipt an all) she amended her statement of denial to include that it had been received by the wrong fax machine in their office to which I responded and no one had the ability to put it in the correct person’s inbox? Shamed by my assertion and at her obvious dereliction of duty she finally acquiesced to my request that I speak with someone from the Senator’s health care team, she hastily picked up the phone, called someone and shortly afterwards a young woman came out to meet with me in the reception area. I introduced myself and asked the young woman to take a seat on the couch so I wouldn’t have to crane my neck upward to speak with her, but lacking all understanding of socially appropriate behavior she insisted on standing, thus towering above me and forcing me to look up for the duration of our conversation. She paid little attention to what I had to say and after she interrupted for a second time to demand that I simply give her a one-line statement on my position since of course she was a very busy person. I took a breath, gathered my thoughts and politely told her that as a RN and a healthcare expert I would not boil it down to “one-liner” for her, but since it was apparent that she didn’t give a damn I would end the conversation. She tried to collect herself and continue the discussion, but for me there was no reason to continue why should I waste my time and energy on a person who had such obvious disdain for a constituent who held a differing opinion from her “illustrious” leader, Boxer.
So off we went to meet with other Congresspeople, including Senator Feinstein, whose office at least attempted to present to their constituents that they cared about their opinions even if those opinions diverged from their own.
Thus after spending several days wandering the halls, thanks to my electric scooter, and meeting with numerous elected representatives I concluded that Boxer’s office staff by far was the rudest and least hospitable to people and they win the award for “the worse office on the HILL”
The California Democratic Party (CDP) and sour grapes.
June 8th was our California Primary, both major parties had of course put up their candidates from which voters of their respective parties could vote for; except in the case of Governor and US Senate where Democrat Brown who had all but scared off any possible contenders and Senator Boxer being an incumbent didn’t have any real competition which left the Republicans with some very interesting races. Which brings me to why I think the CDP and their operatives are exhibiting nothing more than sour grapes. I can understand members, supporters, operatives and so forth of either party going full throttle after the other side’s candidate of choice, once that choice is clear, but in recent years party machinations have tried to influence the outcomes of primary elections, and in the case of the Republicans this usually translates into an unelectable candidate to face off against the Democratic hopeful. However many Republicans decided that this year would be different and we’d let Republicans decide the outcomes of our own primary election.
Of course the CDP couldn’t help itself launching early and nasty attacks against both Meg Whitman (Republican Gubernatorial candidate hopeful) and Carly Fiorina (Republican Senatorial candidate hopeful). So for the first time in recent memory the Republican party faithful seemed to successfully tune out the CDP propaganda and hit pieces, went to the polls and picked their candidates. Which brings me to the evening of the 8th, when CDP operatives were aggressively handing out little pink half sheets “slamming” Carly. I’m the last one that would attempt to censor someone, but I thought how tacky and how desperate the CDP was to pass out such misleading information during our day to celebrate. Leave it to the CDP to try and rain on our parade, and why couldn’t they wait until the next morning to launch their first salvo in the General Election. They just couldn’t help themselves so they tried to use the celebration at our venue to pass out their sorry attempt to smear our candidate – tacky -- tacky -- tacky.
So as my daughter drove me home I contemplated the motive of these “tiny” people and concluded that the only reason they chose to try and rain on our “parade” was fear! You see they wanted deVore to get the Republican nomination and they did their best to nudge him into the winners slot, because by their calculations he didn’t stand a snowball’s chance in the general election; but Carly, well she’s an impressive leader who has proven she can and will make the tough decisions and could unseat Boxer, and for the CDP and Friends of Boxer this is a very scary thought!
Showdown in Searchlight
You may’ve read that this past Saturday a bunch of folks showed up in Searchlight, NV. Some news sources (CNN, for example) reported that hundreds came out while others (LA Times, Fox News and so forth) reported closer to ten thousand turned out for the event. My daughters and I didn't do a head count but the line of cars extended for miles on both sides of the Highway 93 heading into Searchlight.
There were signs aplenty, mostly hand made, being carried into the event by the long lines of people, some who hiked many miles, to attend the rally. We arrived at about 12:30, just in time to hear Gov. Palin’s speech. The place was crowded with a jovial air in the crowd. Since the event was being held in a large open lot riding my electric scooter was a bit of a challenge but there were plenty of gentlemen who stopped to help me each time my scooter got stuck in the dirt.
I spoke to people who came from around the local area, and many from California, including a gentleman from San Francisco also Palin’s supporters from Alaska. And though the Tea Party movement has been characterized as “malcontents”, “astroturfers”, “uniformed”; just pick the pejorative word of your choice, I found most to be good, honest, civic-minded folk out to participate in a little old fashion peaceful demonstration. This was my first Tea Party event and you could’ve easily confused it for a large 4th of July party instead of a political rally – everyone was just having fun out in the beautiful desert with the wind blowing the numerous flags.
There are those who seem to fear the Tea Party movement or have attempted to marginalize those who participate in Tea Party events. The sociologist in me says that the more people marginalize the Tea Partiers the stronger the likelihood that that strategy will “bite” those marginalizing the movement in the proverbial derrière. As I pursued various comments made about the recent Searchlight Rally many commenter’s seemed to take issue that there were not the usually quota of identifiable groups, comments such as nothing but a bunch of angry white people was a common thread throughout. I think this is what mystifies those who oppose the Tea Party movement the most, namely that no one seems to go out of their way to ensure that there are quota of people to represent interest groups. All who wish to participate in a peaceful manner and believe in limited (smaller) government are welcomed; there are also those who wish to show their displeasure with the Obama administration -- the broken promises, the lack of transparency and of course the coup de grace which was the health care bill being pushed down our throats using misinformation and the apparent quid pro quo that it took to get enough votes to pass it.
I was with ACT-UP at its nascent beginnings in Los Angeles and I see many parallels between these two movements. The first is that they both have a very real grassroots and organic feel to them, and second like ACT-UP the Tea Party movement needs to evolve from its loosely knit organization to one that has a better defined “command” structure. To make this transition doesn’t mean that the Tea Party movement must lose its identity, but it can only have “fly by its seat of the pants” leadership for so long before the group will begin to disintegrate. Showdown at Searchlight was one such event that though marked by an air of peaceful enjoyment there was also a undercurrent of disorganization that if not addressed can lead to bitterness and frustration – this needs to be avoided. Examples of this are 38 “Andy Gumps” for an estimated crowd of thousands, and though many who attended came in campers folks who came in their cars had to in some cases walk 2 or more miles to find the nearest restroom. The Searchlight merchants handled this with great aplomb, but after awhile everyone gets a bit annoyed when creature comfort is lacking. And finally, how they handled the press. The press doesn’t need to have the red carpet treatment, but members of the press generally have an expectation that they can easily identify and find the event press contact – before, during and after the event. Tea Party movement organizers should keep this in mind.
What seems to frustrate many of those who have chosen to ignore, marginalize, deny, etc., the Tea Party is that they can’t seem to understand what draws people to the movement. After all so much of their media lap dogs have been good at demonizing the movement, and yet still people seem to flock to the events. The mainstream media has done its best to fail to exercise journalist integrity and fairness by purposefully underreporting the numbers of people that have turned out at some of these events. Imagine my surprise when I learned that CNN had used the phrase hundreds turn out at Searchlight, hundreds? The aerial photographs as well as eyes on the ground know full well and good that if there were well more than hundreds. I think the movement is growing in part as push back to the elitist attitude of politicians who want to “pooh-pooh” the movement (remember Pelosi’s astroturf comment) and the mainstream media rabid attempts to paint the Tea Party as some come of aberrant, un-American activity only seems to ignite even more passion for the Tea Party movement.
So in the meantime enjoy the photographs of Showdown in Searchlight.
I’ve had the chance to snap numerous photos, a few of which are attached to this post. I’ve also added several aerial shots (courtesy of Hack Wilson’s blog - http://hackwilson.blogspot.com/2010/03/pictures-from-showdown-in-searchlight.html).
“Qui vole un oeuf, vole un boeuf”
This is the season of endorsements, and I hear Assemblyman DeVore is expecting to receive the endorsement of the Tea Party Express when it holds it’s big rally in Searchlight, NV this weekend. This endorsement is said to be the first of its kind for the November 2010 elections season. I’m not a member of any Tea Party group, but as a former member of ACT-UP Los Angeles I applaud and commend their activism and willingness to stand up for their beliefs. That said, their endorsement of Assemblyman DeVore will not and does not convince me to give my money, support or vote for him. Why you may ask, simple I’m just sick and tired of politicians that run for a new political office simultaneously while still in their duly elected post. So why pick on DeVore, because he’s the last straw – especially when his purportedly running on a platform of being a conservative and of bring change to D.C.
A recent article in the Orange County Register (March 24th article Should legislative staffers be allowed to volunteer for their bosses’ political campaigns? ) highlights what appears to be an all too frequent practice of some of our elected officials’ staff in Sacramento of pulling double duty. That is “by day” they work in one of the elected officials’ offices and “by night” they work on said elected officials’ campaign. I can only describe this as an ethically challenged mindset that is apparently endemic in our state capitol. The article details several officials, including Assemblyman DeVore, use of office staff as campaign staff. Albeit they claim that they do so only under the strictest adherence to the law, but is California with an estimated 12% (some say 18%) unemployment rate that devoid of qualified help that our State Senators and Assemblymen/women must “double-dip” with their staff. Assemblyman DeVore is not alone in what many voters’ would describe as questionable behavior, however the following as reported in the OC Register is what should cast doubt in any voters’ mind about whether Assemblyman DeVore is any better than Senator Boxer (whom he and two other Republicans are competing against for the Republican nomination).
Trevino left DeVore’s Assembly office the next month, but returned in March 2009 as a “senior consultant” earning $5,000 a month on a 60 percent schedule. At the same time, Trevino wrote on his Facebook page that he joined the DeVore for Senate campaign in March 2009.
According to campaign finance records, Trevino, who also runs a firm called Trevino Strategies and Media, Inc., was paid $1,500 by DeVore’s Senate campaign in 2009.
In August, Trevino sent out an e-mail explaining his relationship with DeVore.
It has become clear to me that I need to be explicit about my involvement with the Chuck DeVore for U.S. Senate campaign out here in California. You’ve heard a lot about him from me, and you will probably continue to — at minimum through June 2010, and hopefully through January 2017. Don’t worry, the time will fly.
Here’s the deal:
1) Yep, I work for the campaign: as a volunteer. Everything campaign-related that I do is 100% unpaid.
2) HOWEVER, I also put in 20 hours a week at DeVore’s Sacramento office. A few points on that:
a) It’s the minimum allowed by CA Assembly Rules.
b) It’s so I can get face time with Chuck. (Of course, I also serve invaluable office- and Assembly-related functions….)
c) It doesn’t pay the bills. (You former staffers know what I’m talking about.)
d) No campaign work whatsoever goes on there. It’s illegal, and Chuck is scrupulously conscientious about it.
So:
— Is Chuck DeVore and/or his campaign a client of Trevino Strategies and Media, Inc.? No.
— Do I work for the Chuck DeVore for U.S. Senate campaign? Yes, as a volunteer.
— Do I work for the Office of Assemblyman Chuck DeVore? Yes.
Bottom line is that I’m not making meaningful money off DeVore — especially not compared to what I’d make with a similar commitment to a TSM client. I do what I do because I sincerely believe in him and his chances.
The Freudian slip that is 2b in Mr. Trevino’s email shows me that Mr. Trevino and Assemblyman DeVore themselves have blurred the proverbial “Chinese Wall”. Mr. Trevino states that he works 20 hours a week in the Assemblyman’s Sacramento office and that this is so he can get “face time with Chuck”, he then adds in parenthesis that “Off course, I also serve invaluable office-and Assembly-related functions…” I would argue that Trevino’s invaluable office and Assembly-related functions should provide him with ample face time and for him to separate the two would lead me to believe that some of that face time in the Sacramento office may indeed be related to campaign business otherwise there would be no reason to construct 2b the way he did.
This is Sacramento and Congress’ dirty little secret and when we as endorsers and voters give a candidate a pass on this then we can expect to continue seeing business as usual in both our State house and in the halls of Congress.
If Assemblyman DeVore was truly the Conservative he portrays himself to be then, one he shouldn’t be seeking another elective office while holding a current elective office, especially in light of the fact there are at least two other people (Carly Fiorina and Tom Campbell) who have thrown their hat into the ring, and two he would quickly end the practice of office/campaign staff. I thought the Tea Party movement was all about bringing change to Congress and various State houses, but Assemblyman DeVore is no different than so many of those the electorate is disillusioned in and disappointed with these days.
The saying goes, be the change you want to see. Assemblyman DeVore, in this voter’s opinion, has fallen far short of this goal; and if “We the People” are ever going to get these career politicians to change we need to hold their feet to the fire on these key issues. For it’s these are core ethical principals that separate the career politician from the citizen legislators that our Country was founded upon. The French have a saying that describes such ethical lapses “qui vole un oeuf, vole un boeuf” which translates, “if one can steal an egg, one can steal a cow” I know is sounds better in French. People, politicians included, are far from perfect but there should be some things that are non-negotiable, one of them should be that no current office holder (expect perhaps in the case where no one steps up to volunteer) should leapfrog from elected office to elected office during their term, and if the candidate claims that they are there to bring change then they shouldn’t be engaged in the very behavior or activity that they are promising to change.
Now is the time to choose a candidate that can go to Washington and really be a change agent bringing back the business acumen and someone who actually can make a difference. You may have surmised that I’m not a DeVore supporter, you’d be correct. I’m a Carly Fiorina supporter and I make no bones about it.
But in the end -- Actions speak louder than words!
What happens when the candidate is married to a practicing Democrat … you get a “Poizenegger”.
I took a little trip down to Buena Park this weekend to attend the California Republican Assembly (CRA), the reason for my trip was to listen to the Gubernatorial and Senatorial candidates speak and present their reasons for seeking these elective offices. The candidates and their teams were out in force canvassing the conference on a mission to seek endorsements, sign-up supporters, and when possible recruit converts to their campaign and cause.
Granted, the CRA is known for being more conservative, and candidates had come seeking the endorsement of this politically powerful group; but their endorsement is no guarantee that California Republicans will fall in lock step behind a CRA endorsed candidate. I had the opportunity to catch Whitman’s speech at noon, and found that she didn’t stray far from the candidate she has presented herself as at prior events and speaking engagements. Whereas Poizner seemed to have move even further right, which I think is an attempt to garner support from the more conservative arm of the party. I can understand a candidate wanting to craft their message to “suit” their audience, as a lecturer I’ve done this frequently; however there’s is crafting your message and there’s turning in a whole new message – which it what Poizner appears to have done just that to curry favor with the CRA delegates.
So desperate to curry favor that he ratchet up his negative campaign against his opponent, Whitman, to an almost frenetic level reminiscent of the now infamous Howard Dean yell. The attacks against Whitman began with Michael Shroeder’s introduction of Poizner and Poizner continued those attacks with repeated charges that Whitman had good things to say about Van Jones, accusations of Whitman giving donations to Democratic candidates and so forth – charges that have already been answered by Whitman. Yet Poizner meet the criticism of the disclosure that he had also donated personal monies to at least one Democratic candidate with “my wife the Democrat did that.” Poizner’s marionette-like performance at the CRA left me with little doubt that he would receive the CRA’s endorsement. While the CRA endorsement may be significant to some Republican voters, but for a voter such as myself an endorsement from a group such as Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association PAC holds much more significance.
I recall reading, probably from one of the many Poizner for Governor propaganda pieces that continually fill my email inbox, that the CRA did not endorse Arnold Schwarzenegger for Governor and how that turned out; I’d counter with that’s what you get for electing a Governor whose wife’s a practicing Democrat!
Poor-sport Poizner
Just the other day I received a nearly two-page letter, from Poizner, announcing his petition “California Republicans Deserve a Debate”. The goal of this petition is to “force” Whitman to agree to a debate at the upcoming California GOP Convention. This missive rambles on with many of the same and tired complaints Poizner has been lobbing at Whitman at each and every speaking engagement he attends and, well, at pretty much any opportunity that he can – and now he’s jut beginning to sound desperate and a mite peevish to this grassroots activist and voter.
He seems to forget that Whitman and he agreed to a debate; unfortunately it wasn’t at the California GOP Convention (I don’t think that the convention organizers had even thought to extend such an invitation). As a grassroots activist, having cut my teeth on such activism as changing a state law to allow resident aliens to get their LVN license in one state, then getting a corrupt and unscrupulous Southern judge removed from the bench in another state, and later in the fight against HIV/AIDS, my involvement in ACT-UP LA and most recently on all things healthcare related – I know what grass-roots activism looks like and unfortunately I don’t think the California GOP convention qualifies. I’ve come to this conclusion after attending quite a number of these conventions, and though I keep hoping the next one will be more grass-roots than the previous one, at the end of the day I usually go home disappointed. This is not to say that grass-roots Republicans don’t attend, they do but the convention focus is generally not on growing the grass-roots. Maybe this one will be different.
But I digress, Poizner’s email attempts to paint Whitman as a woman on the “run” (I guess he read Dan Walter’s column in the SacBee), or someone who’s too afraid of him to agree on a debate, which of course is not true, since there is a debate scheduled – it’s just not at the convention and now he has buyer’s remorse for agreeing to debate at a venue other then the convention. Poizner’s email is riddle with innuendoes and prevarications, which are unseemly in a man that aspires to our Governor’s office. His email makes a point to rehash old stories, such as Whitman endorsed Boxer (not accurate but as so many CEO of large corporations she attended and donated to fundraising events for both Republican and Democrats alike). I wonder if Poziner ever attended a fundraiser for one of our duly-elected Democratic representative; but we do know that he gave a sizable donation to “the other-side”, oh that’s right he blamed his wife saying that it was her donation written on a joint account, which of course makes it alright in his book. Then he reminds everyone that Whitman spoke in glowing terms about now disgraced Obama appointee, Van Jones, for which she has admitted, was a mistake, stating that she had made such statements after a initial meeting in which he had left a strong impression. She has also made it clear that she took this as a lesson learned and will not speak of an individual that she meets for the first time in such glowing terms until she has had an opportunity to do some research on that individual; and until she repeats the above mistake I’ll take Whitman on her word because I think she’s that smart.
He concludes his appeal with accusing Whitman of “wanting our party’s nomination for Governor without giving you a voice.” I thought that’s what we did when we cast our vote at the primary and then later during the general election? Perhaps instead of trying to browbeat Whitman into a debate at the convention he should make good on the previous agreement and have faith that Californians will make a sound and wise choice for Governor – but then again maybe that’s what he’s afraid will happen.
Steve Poizner for Governor – NOT!
I think a candidate for governor, especially in this state, needs to have a strong backbone, and possessed of the ability not to turn tail when they think they have done something to incur someone displeasure. Several years ago I had the opportunity to speak with Poizner on several occasions about the issue of Workers Compensation reform, he was after all the Insurance Commissioner, and it seemed to me that Workers Compensation Insurance was under his department, or at least under his purview; and as someone who was currently going through the labyrinth that is our state’s Workers Compensation system I thought it appropriate to share with him my personal experiences and frustrations.
I gave him a brief synopsis of the problem and he asked that I forward to him a letter providing greater details and he’d have someone from his staff see how his department could aid me in getting answers to my questions and perhaps assistance in resolving some outstanding issues; nothing special but using our government resources as they are meant to when a citizen encounters roadblocks when navigating the “government services” that are meant to help, but all too often impede us. Weeks passed and then months and still no one from his office responded to my citizen’s request for assistance. Later I’d meet Poizner at another event and I mentioned to him how my letter had remained unanswered. He expressed concern and asked me to resend my correspondence and assured me that someone would respond. And true to his word a response followed in the form of a “form letter” that was non-responsive to my query and concerns; but that wasn’t all because this form letter also explained that Workers Compensation Insurance was not in the purview of the Department of Insurance – silly me and here I thought that our Department of Insurance had some influence over all things insurance. Needless to say I shared this with Poizner at the next event that we both attended, and also in my “take no prisoner style” that I’ve become famous for, told him quite bluntly that I was surprised that Workers Compensation wasn’t under his purview and that I truly thought his department, and he personally might want to do some additional work on Workers Compensation reform; and that his excuse left me greatly disappointed.
Since that day, Poizner has done his best to avoid me. Whenever we’re attending the same meeting he makes sure to cut a wide swath from where I’m at just to make sure he doesn’t have to make eye contact or say hello. At two recent meetings, one of which was a candidate forum he still couldn’t meet my gaze, leaving me to conclude that he may lack the “intestinal fortitude” to be an effective governor. Why? You may ask. Well ask yourself this if he can hardly stand to make eye contact with a little old lady from Pasadena who has to use crutches or an electric scooter to move around just because he felt his answer displeased or disappointed her; than how can he stand up to our fractious, recalcitrant, often hostile State Legislature. We’re already constrained by a governor so concerned with being liked that he almost always wilts when the legislature pushes back, and I don’t think we need another milk toast in our Governor’s Office.