Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Poizner Accuses Whitman of Intimidation

In a soap-operatic move aimed strictly at political insiders, California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner (R) held a press conference today to accuse a top adviser to former eBay CEO Meg Whitman of trying to intimidate him out of the governor's race.

"Instead of debating the issues with me or answering questions from the press, Meg Whitman chooses to hide behind threats and intimidation tactics to stop Republicans from having a choice in the primary," Poizner said.

As evidence, Poizner cited a phone call and follow-up email from Whitman consultant Mike Murphy to an unnamed person within the Poizner organization. The email, which was released by Poizner, said -- among other things:

"I hate the idea of each of us spending $20 million beating on the other in the primary, only to have a badly damaged nominee. And we can spend $40 million tearing up Steve if we must; bad for him, bad for us, and a crazy waste to tear up a guy with great future statewide potential -- really the only guy on the CA GOP bench for the future."

Murphy goes on to suggest that if Poizner dropped out of the race, Whitman and her team would immediately get behind him for a 2012 challenge to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D) who, as Murphy notes, will nearing 80 years old by that time.

Poizner's campaign said Monday that he has forwarded the email to the FBI, the U.S. Attorney's office and state Attorney General Jerry Brown who is the near-certain Democratic nominee for governor this fall.

"After reading the ridiculous charges made by Steve Poizner during today's strange press conference, all I can say is that I'm starting to worry about the Commissioner's mental condition," Murphy said in a statement released by the Whitman campaign this afternoon.

While Poizner's campaign is treating this incident like World War III, the simple fact is that this sort of horse-trading -- or attempted horse-trading -- happens every day in politics. (Remember John Edwards dispatching an aide to reach out to President Obama about an endorsement in exchange for a promise of the vice presidency?)

That said, it's clear that Whitman would prefer that this email -- and the sausage-making process it reveals -- not have been made public.

What's the practical effect of Poizner's allegation? Almost nothing. Average voters in any state -- and particularly one like California where voters pay little attention to politics -- are not typically interested in the jockeying that takes place between candidates (and their advisers) behind the scenes.

Will voters who are worried about the morass that is California's economy be deeply affected by the fact that one candidate tried to push the other out of a race? VERY doubtful.

The only effect that Murphy's email -- and the Poizner response -- is likely to have is to further the bad blood between the cavalcade of consultants working for the two candidates.

Expect an all-out war between Whitman and Poizner from now through the state's June 8 primary.

By Chris Cillizza  |  February 1, 2010; 4:41 PM ET
Categories:  Governors  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Should Charlie Crist run as an independent in Florida's Senate race?
Next: Illinois primary day: The year of the outsider (continued)?

Comments

Huh? Do you think people stopping having children after 1970 or something?!?

You really should get better acquainted with the world. Start thT process by getting A JOB

Posted by: Noacoler | February 2, 2010 12:25 AM | Report abuse


mark_in_austin


with all the baby-boomers, how could that be right - you mean that there are as many 18-40 year olds as people over 40 ? that makes no sense.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 2, 2010 12:15 AM | Report abuse

It looks to me as if the median population of persons above the age of 18 in CA is about 40. I doubt that the median age of voters is 60, as I have read elsewhere.

Why would Whitman try to buy off another rich person? Why did Poizner call the FBI?

And I thought TX politix was weird.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 2, 2010 12:13 AM | Report abuse

Noacoler


How old are you, and are you gay?

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 2, 2010 12:12 AM | Report abuse

"You are making a whole bunch of assertions, half of which I don't agree with. And I have to sit here and listen to them."


- Quote from Obama at a meeting in which Obama was attempting to demonstrate how bipartisan he is.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 2, 2010 12:09 AM | Report abuse

37th:

GET A JOB!!

Posted by: Noacoler | February 2, 2010 12:03 AM | Report abuse

OBAMA SMACK-DOWN


NEWS FLASH

RICHMOND - FROM THE WASHINGTON POST Virginia's Democratic-controlled state Senate passed measures Monday that would make it illegal to require individuals to purchase health insurance, a direct challenge to the party's efforts in Washington to reform health care.

___________________________________

IT APPEARS that Obama's individual mandate in his health care plan is going to be ILLEGAL IN VIRIGINIA

Not sure how that would work.


Last week was Robert E. Lee's Birthday - and Obama said he wasn't going to the Alfalfa Dinner.

However, Virginia could put out an arrest warrant for Obama (charge him with possession of an illegal health care plan)

It would be telling to see Obama try to defend his health care plan in Court - ummm there were a bunch of young people who, instead of going to bars, were actually crowding emergency rooms ......

AND something HAD to be done......


.

.


Posted by: 37thand0street | February 2, 2010 12:01 AM | Report abuse

Guy I see on weekends has a roomie devoted to Palin just like Jake. Even had the Deluxe numbered edition of her with-book.

When she resigned he was hyperventilating. It was funny.

Pretending to see potential in that idiot woman is THE closest thing in my lifetime to the marching naked emperor, everyone pretending to see the finery. Please GOP, please, let her steer you aground.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 2, 2010 12:00 AM | Report abuse

Yeah lurkers.

Like anyone is going to bother reading these comments with the two trolls clogging the place up with verbal diarrhea.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 11:55 PM | Report abuse

Excellent. Maybe her kiss of death support will finish off that doddering old jerk.

Rand Paul? Hahhahah Doug Hoffman parte deux

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 11:52 PM | Report abuse

37th:

Seriously, don't bother trying to convince them. Just refute the lies with the truth for any lurkers.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 11:52 PM | Report abuse

Even the GOP purity test didn't pass over the weekend either. Gov. Palin has endorsed Rand Paul for gawd's sake and will be campaigning for John McCain.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 11:46 PM | Report abuse

If Obama stood before Republicans and told them to go to hell there would be spontaneous parades of adulation all over America and his approval would go to 83% overnight.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 11:42 PM | Report abuse

Scott Brown wouldn't pass the GOP purity test.

Posted by: DDAWD | February 1, 2010 11:38 PM | Report abuse

"You are making a whole bunch of assertions, half of which I don't agree with. And I have to sit here and listen to them."


- Quote from Obama at a meeting in which Obama was attempting to demonstrate how bipartisan he is.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 11:22 PM | Report abuse

Senators Webb and Blanche Lincoln say that they will try to offer an amendment to cut off funding for the civilian Terror Trials.

Obama's policy is on the blocks.

We will have to see how it plays out....

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 11:18 PM | Report abuse

Mass. But I did read that he forced illegals to wear pink panties while being held in custody. I like that.

==

your sicko hero will do years in jail for that. Hope he gets
out of jail infected with HIV.

You republican types should be gassed

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 11:06 PM | Report abuse


► THIS SPACE FOR RENT ◄

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 10:11 PM | Report abuse

Goodnight everyone!

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 10:09 PM | Report abuse

@Suzy,

I hear that the Sheriff is VERY popular there in AZ. True or not? A lot of people in other parts of the country (not border states) have trouble really understanding someone like Joe A.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 1, 2010 9:57 PM

12BB, unfortunately, I don't live in Arizona. I'm in Mass. But I did read that he forced illegals to wear pink panties while being held in custody. I like that. He has a sense of humor.
Besides, my boyfriend says he'd like to see Sarah in pink panties also.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Suzy


I like you , I like you alot - but next time you see the same commercial on television, please call the company and tell them to stop double-airing their commercials.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 10:02 PM | Report abuse

SuzyCcup


I have a triple powerful drive here.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 10:00 PM | Report abuse

@Suzy,

I hear that the Sheriff is VERY popular there in AZ. True or not? A lot of people in other parts of the country (not border states) have trouble really understanding someone like Joe A.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 1, 2010 9:57 PM | Report abuse

37, I thought I told you about the double posting. Could you PLEASE trade in your dual core PC for a single core? I know that's the problem.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:53 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Arpaio/Palin 2012! I changed my mind about Palin.
Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:42 PM
-------------------------------------
You are in big trouble with Jake. Arpaio doesn't seem like the kind to take second place to anyone. He's a really macho guy (according to KFYI talk shows anyway).

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 1, 2010 9:45 PM


12BB, I asked JakeD if I could borrow his yacht. He said absolutely no, so I don't care what he thinks.

Arpaio/Palin 2012

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:50 PM | Report abuse

I think it is HIGHLY IMPROPER for Axelrod to go on TV and start to predict convictions in the terror trials.


TALK ABOUT TAINTING A JURY POOL.


Is Obama and his people PURPOSELY POISONING THE TERROR TRIALS ???


First Obama is trying to put some of the trials in New York, where it is practically impossible to seat an impartial jury - even if they did get a conviction - WHY WON'T AN APPEALS COURT OVERTURN THE CONVICTION BASED ON THE LACK OF AN IMPARTIAL JURY ???


Second, why wouldn't a motion for change of venue not succeed ??? AND AT THAT POINT, IS IT THE COURT'S JURISDICTION TO PLACE THE TRIAL, NOT THE ADMINISTRATION'S ???


We are getting into some wacky issues - issues in which Obama is losing control over the decisions - IT APPEARS THAT OBAMA HAS NOT THOUGHT ALL THIS OUT - AND OBAMA IS MAKING MOVES THAT ARE NOT THAT SMART.


NOW WE HAVE AXELROD - why is Axelrod "trying" the terrorists on Sunday morning talk shows - and tainting the jury pool ???


This says nothing about the intelligence issues involved with presenting evidence at the trials.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 9:47 PM | Report abuse

I think it is HIGHLY IMPROPER for Axelrod to go on TV and start to predict convictions in the terror trials.


TALK ABOUT TAINTING A JURY POOL.


Is Obama and his people PURPOSELY POISONING THE TERROR TRIALS ???


First Obama is trying to put some of the trials in New York, where it is practically impossible to seat an impartial jury - even if they did get a conviction - WHY WON'T AN APPEALS COURT OVERTURN THE CONVICTION BASED ON THE LACK OF AN IMPARTIAL JURY ???


Second, why wouldn't a motion for change of venue not succeed ??? AND AT THAT POINT, IS IT THE COURT'S JURISDICTION TO PLACE THE TRIAL, NOT THE ADMINISTRATION'S ???


We are getting into some wacky issues - issues in which Obama is losing control over the decisions - IT APPEARS THAT OBAMA HAS NOT THOUGHT ALL THIS OUT - AND OBAMA IS MAKING MOVES THAT ARE NOT THAT SMART.


NOW WE HAVE AXELROD - why is Axelrod "trying" the terrorists on Sunday morning talk shows - and tainting the jury pool ???


This says nothing about the intelligence issues involved with presenting evidence at the trials.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 9:47 PM | Report abuse

Arpaio can see Mexico. Palin can see Russia. We're covered!

Arpaio/Palin 2012

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Arpaio/Palin 2012! I changed my mind about Palin.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:42 PM
-------------------------------------
You are in big trouble with Jake. Arpaio doesn't seem like the kind to take second place to anyone. He's a really macho guy (according to KFYI talk shows anyway).

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 1, 2010 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Thank you, 12BB.
Forget Palin. Sheriff Arpaio for president in 2012!!

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:31 PM |
----------------------------------
I take it we have found your candidate?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 1, 2010 9:36 PM


Yes, Arpaio/Palin 2012! I changed my mind about Palin.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:42 PM | Report abuse

Broadwayjoe, you are going to love this one


HERE IS A SUMMARY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY GOVERNORS' RACE PLAYING OUT IN ILLINOIS THIS WEEK:

"You are a racist" -


"NO, You are the racist"


"NO, You father didn't like Harold Washington"


"NO, here is a tape of Harold Washington saying you are incompetent"


"NO, You are THE racist"


"NO, Harold Washington doesn't LIKE YOU"


"NO, your father was a racist"


"NO your father was THE racist"

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 9:40 PM | Report abuse

Thank you, 12BB.
Forget Palin. Sheriff Arpaio for president in 2012!!

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:31 PM |
----------------------------------
I take it we have found your candidate?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 1, 2010 9:36 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of wiretapping:

Update on Sheriff Arpaio's reign of terror...

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 1, 2010 9:26 PM


Thank you, 12BB.
Forget Palin. Sheriff Arpaio for president in 2012!!

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:31 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of wiretapping:

Update on Sheriff Arpaio's reign of terror:

The Arizona Republic is reporting interviews with county employees who describe the fear and paranoia that they say characterizes their day-to-day working environment with Sheriff Joe Arpaio including:

• In December 2008, the county spent $10,000 to sweep county offices, fearing that Arpaio might have implanted illegal wiretaps. None was found.

• One judge moved meetings to the chamber's restroom, thinking it would be less likely that Arpaio or his deputies might have hidden a listening device there.

• Many employees stopped using phone or email to communicate about sensitive matters -- even when using home computers.

• Supervisor Max Wilson, once an Arpaio backer, said that when Arpaio publicly warned that Wilson "better be careful on cutting my budget," he saw it as a threat and talked to a top aide about whether to resign. Later, the aide, worried that he himself would be targeted, called a criminal defense lawyer and asked how much it would cost to get him out of jail.

All this in connection with federal grand jury probe of Arpaio.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 1, 2010 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Noacoler/ Chris Fox / Gold and Tanzanite


Chris has asked everyone on this blog to ignore you.


Apparently you have been banned several times - yet you continue to come here and embarass yourself


I have a job - and I will exercise my Freedom of Speech.

If you are intolerate of Freedom of Speech, you are unAmerican.


In that case, I will have to ask you to leave the country, as well as the blog.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 9:24 PM | Report abuse

Funny how the media jumped to report O'Keefe's arrest - and claimed he was involved in a wire-tapping operation


BUT THEY HAD NO WIRE-TAPPING EQUIPMENT !


Funny how all the major papers would not report on the ACORN stories - a group that receives federal funds - but they jump at the other story.

What gives?


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 9:21 PM | Report abuse

Hey 37th/Suzy:

GET A JOB!!

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 9:14 PM


As soon as Obama creates some, we will.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:17 PM | Report abuse

BJ: shouldn't you be calling the next election for Democrats by now?

Posted by: drivl | February 1, 2010 7:22 PM


drivl, don't you know the answer by now?? Coakley by 15. It covers every election possible.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Hey 37th/Suzy:

GET A JOB!!

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

On "Yahoo Answers," the following was voted the best answer to the question: Is Sarah Palin an idiot? ..
The Internet has spoken. You betcha...Case closed.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 1, 2010 7:57 PM

On "Yahoo Answers," the following was voted the best answer to the question:
Do you think Obama is an idiot?

►Best answer: YES, he is an idiot and a puke.

The Internet has spoken again. You betcha...Case closed.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:12 PM | Report abuse

Sidarth done good, he singlehandedly took down that racist d|ckhead George Allen, an anointed Republican prince being groomed for one of the top slots.

So when does Levi Johnson spill his beans?

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 8:51 PM


Noacoler, I think you could use some Metamucil. See Drindl.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | February 1, 2010 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Sidarth done good, he singlehandedly took down that racist d|ckhead George Allen, an anointed Republican prince being groomed for one of the top slots.

So when does Levi Johnson spill his beans?

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 8:51 PM | Report abuse

Just ran across this about S.R. Sidarth, the young Indian American man who was the object of George Allen's infamous "macaca" slur.

"Sidarth was admitted to a class with Larry Sabato at the University of Virginia which requires an essay of potential students. There is one slot available for every four essayists. Sidarth's entire essay read "I am Macaca.""

How great is that? Sort of reminds you of how the "Wise Latina" slur against Justice Sotomayor was turned into a badge of honor which now adorns millions of Hispanic girls' T-shirts.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 1, 2010 8:35 PM | Report abuse

As for Whitman, if you don't vote yourself, you shouldn't ask others to vote for you. Ya think?

==

but she's a *corporate executive*

she isn't subject to the sane rules as the rest of us!

she's a leader of the PRYVIT SECTER

and CEOs are more divine than human

didn't you take ECON 101?!?

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 8:33 PM | Report abuse

People who don't believe in evolution are allowed to hold public office?!?

They shouldn't be allows to VOTE. Or drive. Or own land. Or go outside unsupervised. This is 2010, not 72 AD

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 8:20 PM | Report abuse

If we only talked about Poizner/Whitman there would be ZERO comments on this thread.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 1, 2010 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Hahahahahahah

JakeD is in *lurve* with Wasilla Barbie.

And he's the only uh "person" alive (?) who hasn't figured out she's not worth all his efforts defending her (?)

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 8:12 PM | Report abuse

Jake, YOU brought up Palin at 3:47pm, the very first post on the thread.

As for Whitman, if you don't vote yourself, you shouldn't ask others to vote for you. Ya think?

"The [Sacramento] Bee reported last month that Whitman regularly skipped elections in California and several other states where she lived and worked.

Her campaign declined to answer questions about her voting record or discuss why elections officials were unable to find registration records listing her prior to 2002.

Whitman has acknowledged that her voting registration and voting record was "atrocious" and apologized."

http://www.sacbee.com/capitolandcalifornia/story/2238891.html

BTW, I am still trying to find out what the deal is with "Gregory Charles Royal" and Mrs. Palin. What's the connection between these two? Developing...

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 1, 2010 8:12 PM | Report abuse

I'll bet that Poizner & Whitman really hate that no one is talking about either of them.

We've fallen so far as trying to figure out EXACTLY how many of her own books Mrs. Palin bought from Harper Collins.

It does say something about the interest Mrs. Palin holds for her supporters and opponents. Her supporters can't point the finger at the cult of personality surrounding Obama, when they've got a cult of personality around Mrs. Palin. Romney would wish to have half her allure.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 1, 2010 8:03 PM | Report abuse

broadwayjoe:

As I posted, below, this thread is about Poizner vs. Whitman (not Palin). I would be more than happy to refute each and every LIE you are posting about Palin on the next thread she is mentioned, but -- in the meantime -- the good folks over at TPMuckraker (you know them well, don't you, drindl?) de-bunked the "bulk sales" meme:

"NYT Book Review will put a dagger or some such icon next to a title whose sales have been influenced by bulk sales."

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/sarah-palins-rogue-hits-1-on-nyt-bestseller-list.php

Nice try though.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 8:01 PM | Report abuse

On "Yahoo Answers," the following was voted the best answer to the question: Is Sarah Palin an idiot? Seriously.

"Yes, she is.
Sarah Palin doesn't believe in evolution and thinks that creationism should be taught in every classroom. She has said she does not believe in global warming and wants to take polar bears off the endangered species list because she assumes that they are fine because the polar ice caps are, in her mind, not melting.
She is currently under investigation for abuse of power after trying to get her sisters ex husband fired after a bad divorce.
She was once asked if she was angered by the addition of "under god" to the pledge of allegiance and her response was "if its good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me", which might seem like a decent answer until you realize that the pledge of allegiance was written by a socialist named Bellamy about 100 years after the founding fathers founded anything and it wasn't until the cold war that "under god" was added.
she wants to drill for oil in alaska and stands for the aerial slaughter of wolves and bears in the wild.
prior to her candidacy she announced that she did not think the idea of her being the vice president is realistic.
after her candidacy was announced she announced she didn't know what a vice president does from day to day and also didn't know what john mccains stance on the war was because, as she said, she doesn't pay attention to iraq. (keep in mind her own son is being sent to iraq this september)"

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080902230701AAMFP57

The Internet has spoken. You betcha...Case closed.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 1, 2010 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 7:49 PM | Report abuse

DD, I agree. I think most of the "sales" are mass sales to rightwing groups. I go Barnes and Noble about once a week. I have never seen even one person look at, let alone buy, the Palin book. BTW, I have seen folks look at the Howard Zinn history book, which I highly recommend.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 1, 2010 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Q: what kind of loozer would wait all night in the freezing cold to buy a ghoat-written book with an airhead's name on the cover?

A: the kind of lose. The world is a better place without. Better dead of pneumonia than screaming paranoid rage at a "tea party."

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 7:46 PM | Report abuse

The exact amount paid to Harper Collins for books = $47,778.54

Feel free to add the numbers up yourself:

http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/dcdev/forms/C00458588/449901/

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Mr. drindl, if you insist: BHO over Scott Brown. Jerry Brown over Nutmeg. Kinda easy.

Btw, I saw an ad for BHO's watch the other day: impressive. Easily the equal of the Omega the new Bond wears. [Connery wore a Rolex.] The name is Obama. Barack Obama.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 1, 2010 7:31 PM | Report abuse

"Thousands of copies of "Going Rogue" were snatched up last year by Sarah PAC, the former GOP vice presidential nominee's PAC, for distribution to her supporters, according to records reviewed by ABC News."

Man, I always figured it was other conservative groups mass-purchasing her book. I never thought that she would be purchasing her own book. I wonder if Bill O' Reilly does this as well.

Posted by: DDAWD | February 1, 2010 7:30 PM | Report abuse

No, broadwayjoe. The FEC disclosure lists $63,000 for books, postage, bookmarks, etc. that were used to raise even more money from $100+ donors (getting an autographed copy rather than wait all night in the freezing cold). Even if she got all of those books AT COST that does not equal 2.8 million books.

Get your facts straight (or try a different source for your talking points).

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 7:27 PM | Report abuse

"Obama - Truman would never EVER have blamed anyone else."

Not true. Read a history book. Truman complained bitterly about the Republicans.

Posted by: DDAWD | February 1, 2010 7:26 PM | Report abuse

News flash:

Ped doesn't like chicks!

Posted by: drivl | February 1, 2010 7:25 PM | Report abuse

BJ: shouldn't you be calling the next election for Democrats by now?

Posted by: drivl | February 1, 2010 7:22 PM | Report abuse

the story of liberalism, short version:

a record $3.8 trillion budget that would boost the deficit beyond any in the nation's history while only slowly beginning to put Americans back to work.

Posted by: drivl | February 1, 2010 7:20 PM | Report abuse

We have always questioned the sales numbers for "Going Rogue" and similar rightwing tracts. Seems one way to boost sales is...to use your Political Action Committee to buy $63,000 worth of your own book!

"Sarah Palin has found a down-low way to stay atop the bestsellers' chart: she's quietly using her political action committee to buy up copies of her memoir.

Thousands of copies of "Going Rogue" were snatched up last year by Sarah PAC, the former GOP vice presidential nominee's PAC, for distribution to her supporters, according to records reviewed by ABC News.

The Federal Election Commission filings show that Sarah PAC sent $63,000 to Palin's publisher, Harper Collins, for "books for fundraising donor fulfillment.""

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/02/01/2010-02-01_sarah_palin_spent_63000_on_copies_of_going_rogue_for_supporters.html#ixzz0eKiL3aGo

Some say almost son-in-law Levi Johnston had her figured out from the get-go: $$$$$$.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 1, 2010 7:19 PM | Report abuse

This is, gulp, "political news and analysis." I had not heard any of this Whitman stuff and so I am glad the Fix filled us in. But isn't it a wee bit little early to say this doesn't mean anything? The story just broke today, right?

BTW, will ebay Meg pay me back for those five vintage automatic Timex watches that didn't work or those "great Rayban sunglasses" that were 35 years old and children's size?

Anyway, Jerry will wipe the floor with either one in the GE but this in-fighting is nice interim entertainment.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | February 1, 2010 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Obama has been doing nothing but blaming Bush for the budget deficit - IN OBAMA'S BUDGETS.


Obama has got to be kidding.

Now Obama is complaining about the Senior Prescription Drug program - but then Obama doesn't say the democrats wanted a program twice as big.


We can't look to Obama's drug vote - because he wasn't in Washington when they passed that - which shows Obama's inexperience, not anything else.

Obama has to take responsibility for his own budgets.


All Obama wants to do is blame the Republicans - he has majorities - and he is in office over a year now.


Obama - Truman would never EVER have blamed anyone else.

WUSS !!!


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse

Dumb thick-headed loser crying for help posting the same hysterical crap in every thread.

Get a job.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 6:41 PM | Report abuse

You guys are being silly about Palin

You have


Romney

Pawlenty

Scott Brown

McDonnell of Virginia

You have a great deal of candidates who can run.

Jake is a dandelion - that is hilarious.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse


I can't believe that Obama was talking tough to the Republicans today -


Obama said "If they are going to do alot of grandstanding while the television camera are rolling, I am going to reject it"


WELL, AT THAT MOMENT, WASN'T IT OBAMA DOING THE GRANSTANDING IN FRONT OF THE TELEVISION CAMERAS ???


HOW MUCH OF A HYPOCRITE CAN THE GUY BE ???


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

So Governor Moonbeam is going for a second chance at being Governor ?


Who would have known ???


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

He forwarded it to the FBI?!?

What a loser.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

What a joke. Is this guy some kind of a sissy or something?

Posted by: am1968 | February 1, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

All jokes stop being funny the millionth time.

Posted by: DDAWD | February 1, 2010 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Lighten up, DDAWD.  The topic is a NOP in the first place.  Republicans acting like children, wow, stop the presses.  There are only a few possible comments to make and all the rest are reruns.
 
Besides, Jake’s endless yearning for Palin is the stuff of high comedy.  Don’t begrudge us the laughs.  It’s not like he can be ignored away (you tried.  It almost worked.  Almost is as good as not working at all, since mark and BB still responded), and now he’s been banned.  I mean, come on, the idea that Romney would consent to throw away his career in politics to give a leg up to Jake’s object of desire IS a belly laugh.  So let’s laugh.
 
Wanna hear a good one?  Palin in 2012 (slaps knee).

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 6:01 PM | Report abuse

You know, you don't need to respond like a bunch of mindless idiots every time jaked wants to hijack the thread. Seriously, fu*king grow up.

As for the email, does anyone think an FBI agent would do anything but laugh at this email? There's no hint of a threat in there. A political threat, maybe, but no real threat. Perhaps the plan was to make her seem mean and vindictive. To me, it just makes him seem weak and petty.

Posted by: DDAWD | February 1, 2010 5:50 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

Whilst the obstreperous children--particularly JakeD2 who has, apparently, the survival ability of a dandelion--have at it, I should like to keep ON topic.

Yes, this backroom dealing and sausage-making IS how the game is played, but usually when there's a politically lethal secret to be uncovered.

It's typical of Meg Whitman's ham-handed way to run a campaign--as if she were still a corporate CEO calling the shots for the helpless 'little people' from her aerie--that this sort of thing should be put in writing.

As you know, that's a serious no-no to those who should know better--the venerable and much respected (by me and others) Mike Murphy, in particular. Rule nr. 1: NEVER put anything in writing (or on tape) you don't want to see as a headline in WaPo (or the LA Times, as the case may be)--Geo. Allen's infamous 'macacca moment' should be a warning to all.

Since Poizner has equally deep pockets, there's no way to intimidate him financially--Meg's favourite stratagem used to be to buy up competing companies; she's now trying to buy up competing candidates. How pathetic!

P.S. I once covered the CA political scene and on behalf of CA voters, I'd like to strongly disagree with your assertion that 'particularly one like California where voters pay little attention to politics...'

Posted by: sverigegrabb | February 1, 2010 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Anyone else?

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Anyone else?

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

===

awwwww I tink tumbuddy needa •hankey•

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

@Noacoler,

I think that Mrs. Palin has a shot at the nomination, but to say she has the BEST shot is questionable. Since when has the GOP EVER nominated the hottest, new thing. They are the party who nominates based on seniority. Now, of course, they could have a complete frontal lobotomy, and change their ways, but what are the odds of that?

In all fairness to our conservative friends here, it is the Democrats who go outside the box and nominate the "hot" candidate, for example Jack Kennedy, Barack Obama.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 1, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Anyone else?

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

The idea that Mittens would be S. Kitten's VP is truly hilarious.

Posted by: drindl | February 1, 2010 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Why stop now, "JakeD?". You hijacked the thread to talk about your pinup gurl in the very first post. You're madly in love with that dumb b|tch. It's FUNNY AS HELL how desperate you are to believe your beloved has a shot.

Keep the jokes coming!

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

This thread is not about Frank Luntz either. Does anyone else want to actually discuss Poizner vs. Whitman?

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Nearly every attack recommended by Luntz is not grounded in reality. For instance, he calls for opponents of reform to label a CFPA head an “unaccountable” “czar.” But the legislation clearly states that the CFPA’s Director would be appointed by the President, and then confirmed by the Senate. Luntz also charges that reform advocates are behind “lobbyist loopholes” in the bill. However, the most controversial loophole was inserted by Rep. John Campbell (R-CA), whose amendment allows an exemption for auto dealers. Of course, Campbell still tried to kill financial reform once it arrived on the House floor.

Confusing the public is the point of Luntz’s work. In an interview explaining his smears against health reform, Luntz told the New York Times last year that it did not matter what the actual policy offered — he would still call it a “Washington takeover.”

Posted by: drindl | February 1, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

I would have no problem seeing Palin sell an "establishment" VP for his financial background, to save the sinking economic ship (and, it doesn't hurt that he has a massive personal fortune he could spend on getting them both elected ; )
--------------------------------

Bwahahahahaha. Shhhhhhh...don't tell Romney that he will be "allowed" to spend his massive fortune getting Palin elected as President. Don't be a fool! Brigham Young, founder of the LDS Church in Utah, ran for President of the U.S. in 1844. This is one of the original goals of the LDS community. These people are not fools, they are not neophytes, and they are not going to settle for second fiddle either.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | February 1, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

What to expect next -- here's the script for the next round of obstruction, written by the financial industry for Republicans to parrot:

Last Saturday, at the lobbyist-organized GOP retreat, President Obama called out GOP strategist Frank Luntz for pursuing tactics meant to simply “box in Obama” rather than pursue substantive policy debate. True to form, Luntz has released a new memo — obtained by the Huffington Post — which lays out the arguments and language Republicans should use to kill financial reform. Luntz, who gained national recognition for his role in shaping the buzzword-heavy Contract for America with Newt Gingrich in 1994, has built a sizable business selling his messaging advice to both corporations and Republican campaigns.

The new memo instructs opponents of financial reform to simply lie about reform legislation, and to twist economic anxiety resulting from the recession into fear of any government effort to fix the underlying cause of the financial crisis. The most dishonest argument is that financial reform would “punish” taxpayers while rewarding “big banks and credit card companies.” In reality, top financial industry lobbyists are not only fighting proposed oversight regulations, but have said recently that they are opposed to “any regulation” at all.

Luntz, ever the publicity hound, leaks his memos out to the media to claim credit for the Republican charge against reforming Wall Street. While he is certainly a driving force behind much of the GOP misinformation, a closer look at his client list reveals that he is in fact being paid by the finance industry:

– Luntz client Ameriquest Mortgages: The proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) would eliminate predatory mortgages. Ameriquest, America’s “sub-prime leader,” has been prosecuted by Attorney General Richard Blumenthal for inflating property values so borrowers could get bigger loans, imposing upfront fees without reducing interest rates as promised, and intentionally deceiving lenders with hidden penalties and interest rates on final loan documents.

– Luntz clients Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns: Under proposed financial reform, big banks, like Luntz clients Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns, would face a new structure designed to police financial products, prohibit predatory ones, and require clear forms and disclosures. The CFPA would also help regulate hidden bank fees and other bank abuses.

– Luntz client American Express: The CFPA would regulate the credit card industry, preventing predatory interest rates and fees.'

Posted by: drindl | February 1, 2010 4:42 PM | Report abuse

I'm not going to further interrupt this thread, which is about Whitman, not Palin. If anyone else wants to debate why I think Palin will run and WIN (there's no other Republican as popular and in-touch with likely primary voters, and positioned to take advantage of growing discontent, like she is -- especially if 2010 is a coup for GOP in Congress -- so I'm glad that liberals are making the mistake of writing her off completely, not just given the makeup and mood of the Republican primary electorate, but the country as a whole), let me know via email: jaked832@gmail.com

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 4:36 PM | Report abuse

It wouldn't qualify for a full stooge quorem without you dribbl.

Posted by: drivl | February 1, 2010 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Fun to watch the rabid dogs ripping into each other.

Posted by: drindl | February 1, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

I do not see the campaign finance law violation in the email. But I am a long way from my stint as a prosecutor in 1968.

I have read that the median age of voters in CA is 60.
If this is so, it probably works in Moonbeam's favor, ultimately. I do not know if the median age that I have read is correct.

I would appreciate a comment from a criminal lawyer who knows the niceties of current federal campaign laws on the first point and a comment from someone who can cite CA median voter age on the second.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 1, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Looks like this thread has been chosen for the Ped, Sped and Stooge meeting place for today and tonight.

Tally ho!

Posted by: drivl | February 1, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960:

That's what you think.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Poor Jake and his Palin fantasies.

Romney as Palin's running mate is as good as it gets. Funny stuff.

There's no "sinking economic ship," Jake, and by 2012 things will be humming along just fine. If Palin somehow gets the GOP nomination her running mate will be someone even nuttier than she is. No Republican with even a scant hope of being elected president will go near a ticket that will lose 60-40 or worse.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | February 1, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe that Obama was talking tough to the Republicans today -


Obama said "If they are going to do alot of grandstanding while the television camera are rolling, I am going to reject it"


WELL, AT THAT MOMENT, WASN'T IT OBAMA DOING THE GRANSTANDING IN FRONT OF THE TELEVISION CAMERAS ???

HOW MUCH OF A HYPOCRITE CAN THE GUY BE ???

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 4:19 PM | Report abuse

Anyone else?

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

By 2012 nobody will remember Sarah Palin.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Jay20:

This may be the best shot Romney has, though, and he knows it. He wasn't able to "buy" the nomination last time around, so maybe doing a stint as VP would finally convince diehard conservatives that he's the real deal. I would have no problem seeing Palin sell an "establishment" VP for his financial background, to save the sinking economic ship (and, it doesn't hurt that he has a massive personal fortune he could spend on getting them both elected ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 4:13 PM | Report abuse

"You are making a whole bunch of assertions, half of which I don't agree with. And I have to sit here and listen to them."


- Quote from Obama at a meeting in which Obama was attempting to demonstrate how bipartisan he is.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Why would Romney take that deal? He's way too smart for that. Palin is dumb enough to make the offer, you're dumb (and devoted) enough to hope for it, but Romney wouldn't even hear it.

Neither would any of the other potential GOP nominees. Palin is electoral poison and you must be the only person too dumb and delusional to figure that out.

BẬC ON TOPIC winky winky winky:

watch the CA guber goobers attack each other!

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

"While Poizner's campaign is treating this incident like World War III, the simple fact is that this sort of horse-trading -- or attempted horse-trading -- happens every day in politics. (Remember John Edwards dispatching an aide to reach out to President Obama about an endorsement in exchange for a promise of the vice presidency?)

That said, it's clear that Whitman would prefer that this email -- and the sausage-making process it reveals -- not have been made public.

What's the practical effect of Poizner's allegation? Almost nothing. Average voters in any state -- and particularly one like California where voters pay little attention to politics -- are not typically interested in the jockeying that takes place between candidates (and their advisers) behind the scenes."

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

This looks like a bloody primary in California -- which is unfortuante.

JakeD2 - Yes, Palin could win the GOP nomination but Romney would only join the ticket if he believed she could be elected President.

If Romney accepted the nomination for VP under Palin and she lost in a landslide, his national aspirations would be mortally wounded.

If would be smarter for Romney to run for the Senate or Governor of Utah -- if any seats open up -- if he wasn't going to get the GOP nomination as opposed to running on a ticket with Palin.

Furthermore, Romney is the antithesis of a maverick, Palin probably wouldn't seriously consider him.

Posted by: Jay20 | February 1, 2010 4:09 PM | Report abuse

All over my country Tizathy the Republicans are tearing each other apart. Pass the p0pcorn

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Palin could easily couch the offer in terms of "Let's agree to not go negative on each other, and whomever gets the nomination fair and square agrees to name the other as VP". Don't use any specific rumor as an example of "going negative". So, that can't possibily be "blackmail" or "intimidation". Of course, the downside is if it gets out from Romney's camp.

What Whitman apparently tried to do sounds perfectly acceptable to me as well.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 4:05 PM | Report abuse

If Quitter Palin got the nomination it would mean that the GOP knows it has no chance of winning. She would be the Bob Dole of 2012.

Romney wouldn't even take a phone call from that airhead. He wants to win, not lose while making a futile gesture.

Every time a Republican name comes up you see a VP on a Palin ticket. It's freakishly obsessive. She's unfit for any public office and the whole country knows it.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 4:02 PM | Report abuse

Of course, it's just a hypothetical scenario. If Palin wants the nomination without Romney, she can definitely get it (Nate Silver gives her good odds on it too). If anyone else wants to discuss my alternative scenario, or whether Romney would have accepted the VP nod from McCain, let me know.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Crybabies.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | February 1, 2010 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Romney wants to be president, not play second fiddle to an idiot who will never get the nomination.

Face it, "JakeD," your adolescent crush on Palin translates to one (1) vote. More than 80% of voters regard her as UNFIT for the office. That isn't going to change no matter how many with-books she slaps her name on. Get used to it.

Posted by: Noacoler | February 1, 2010 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Well, I'm a California voter who pays more than just a "little attention" to politics. Seriously, though, I was wondering the same likely outcome if Palin would approach Romney about being her VP. Seems a little overblown to refer the matter to the FBI though.

Posted by: JakeD2 | February 1, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company