The once and perhaps future governor of California Jerry Brown is the latest public figure to become entangled in a Loose Lips imbroglio. As reported in The Los Angeles Times, candidate Brown or one of his associates can be heard speaking in a private conversation inadvertently captured by voicemail, calling his Republican opponent Meg Whitman as a “whore.” The comment came after Brown called the Los Angeles Police Protective League in early September to ask for its endorsement. Months earlier, Whitman agreed to exempt public safety workers from part of her pension reform plan that would have government workers give up their pensions in favor of 401(k)-style plans instead of pensions. Brown felt Whitman had made that promise in exchange for the union’s endorsement. Speaking to aides, a frustrated Brown discussed the pressure he was under from police unions to pledge not to reduce public safety pensions.
Says Brown, “Do we want to put an ad out? … That I have been warned if I crack down on pensions, I will be — that they’ll go to Whitman, and that’s where they’ll go because they know Whitman will give ’em, will cut them a deal, but I won’t.”
At that point, a voice — either that of Brown or a second person — can be heard saying: “What about saying she’s a whore?”
“Well, I’m going to use that,” Brown says. “It proves you’ve cut a secret deal to protect the pensions.”
In response, Whitman spokeswoman Sarah Pompei said “The use of the term ‘whore’ is an insult to both Meg Whitman and to the women of California. This is an appalling and unforgivable smear against Meg Whitman. At the very least Mr. Brown tacitly approved this despicable slur and he himself may have used the term at least once on this recording.” The L.A. Police Protective League did endorse Whitmen in September, and has donated more than $400,000 to her campaign. In his apology, Brown said “This was a jumbled and often inaudible recording of a private conversation. At times our language was salty. We apologize to Ms. Whitman and anyone who may have been offended.”
To hear the tape, click here.
Just two weeks ago, Susan Page had an interesting article in USA Today about a new study by Women’s Media Center, the WCF Foundation and Political Parity that shows sexist language like “ice queen”, “mean girl” and “prostitute” significantly undercuts a female candidate’s standing , “doing more harm than gender-neutral criticism based solely on her policy positions and actions. . . . “I was stunned at the magnitude of the effect of even “I was stunned at the magnitude of the effect of even mild sexism,” says Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster who conducted the survey. “Right now campaigns tend to be silent and try to tough it out, and this really opens up a whole new strategy of responding.” The article note that “during this year’s campaign, an opponent of Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska sent a tweet that called her “a member of the world’s oldest profession”; that a talk-show host referred to Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana as a “high-class prostitute”; and that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada called New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand “the hottest member” of the Senate. Presumably he meant that as a compliment.
So what do you think, salty or sexist? I wonder if Whitman ever heard language like that when she was running eBay.
Griff Harsh, the husband of California gubernatorial candidate Nutmeg Whitman, acknowledged in a statement on Thursday that “it is possible” he received and wrote notes on a letter from the Social Security Administration back in 2003, regarding the former Housekeeper/Maid. The Whitman/ Harsh household then fired their housekeeper in June 2009 (after nine years of service), when Nutmeg handlers decided that she was an election liability.
And now the Jill Armstrong, a former full-time nanny of the Harsh/ Whitman dungeon, came to the defense of the Housekeeper/Maid and told the San Francisco Chronicle that she believes Diaz’s claim because she “know[s] the family” and “what it was like.”
Meg, Meg, Meg, where do I start, you have reportedly spent $140 million of your own money to get elected Governor but you couldn’t use some of it to get your housekeeper (after nine years of service) some legal help to get her papers, and worse you lied about it. Wow, what a WITCH, of course I meant it with a “B”.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#39450925
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGRrNs8-s5w
But your comments on holding employers accountable for hiring undocumented workers real takes the cake, I assume you exempt yourself and your husband, or will you be turning yourself in.
Meg on holding employers accountable:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4fWLHiw8zA
Meg you think you can buy the election, but what puzzles many is if you real cared and loved California then why not do your civic duty and vote, seems more rhetoric than anything else.
In good times we might give you a try but not in our disaster mode that we find ourselves in after that so-called outsider Independent Republican, named Arnold Schwarzenegger (sold to us by radio personalities John and Ken), ruined our state, yah we will trust another one of you liars, think not. And another thing nine years this maid was in your house, in your house and you failed to learned this major thing about her, come on this sounds like a huge lie that no one can believe in.
Ebay paid out $200,000 because Nutmeg assaulted an employee, so it’s not the first time she has mistreated an employee. Good luck winning Nutmeg, money will buy you admiration from the majority just from the Gay Old Party (GOP), but not from all of California.