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.