Posted on 10/02/2009 2:58:50 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Former eBay executive Meg Whitman, the 2010 gubernatorial candidate who has recently portrayed herself as a "darned good" conservative Republican, endorsed Democratic U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer in 2003, records show.
"Whitman contributed $4,000 to Boxer in the 2004 reelection campaign -- and endorsed Boxer as a part of Technology Leaders for Boxer,'' confirmed Boxer aide Rose Kapolczynski today.
And, she signed an "open letter" appealing for support from the California technology executives, touting Boxer as a "dynamic and courageous leader" on the tech front.
Whitman's name was included in a "Friends of Boxer" release when the committee of a dozen technology leaders was formed in 2003 to assist the California Democrat in her 2004 re-election effort, which pitted her against GOP former Secretary of State Bill Jones.
The move by Whitman to back the Democratic junior Senator came about because "in the spring of 2003, some technology leaders were interested in announcing their support for Boxer, so our campaign went out and talked to a wide range of leaders. And Meg Whitman was among them,'' Kapolcyznski said.
"She agreed to endorse the Senator...there was a fundraising event in Silicon Valley later in the year and Whitman maxed out to the campaign,'' she said.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
I think that's Carly Fiorina. Just as Kerry was in 'Nam, Whitman will tell you that eBay had only 30 employees when she came aboard.
I heard Whitman give a talk to our local GOP. To this crowd she was sooooo conservative. Endorsing Boxer? Yikes.
Isn't Tom Campbell like the CA proto-RINO? He set the mold for being a RINO in CA.
We knew that Romney only gave money to Democrats from 1989 until 1993 and that he only became a Republican again in 1993 after changing his registration in protest of Reagan's conservatism.
What is new is that this year we learned that Romney was actually doing fund raising for Democrats.
I read his platform and it’s all geared to limited government. He’s also the only candidate among the 3 running (Whitman, Poizner, Campbell) who is open to drilling and nuclear energy. That, to me as a Californian, is a huge plus. He’s for lowering taxes, cutting spending, and anti-illegal immigration.
Plus, his faculty adviser and mentor was Milton Friedman. Again, another plus in my book.
Considering my 3 choices, I’m sticking with Campbell.
Reminds me of typical neighbors to serial killers. “He was a nice and polite man, a quiet neighbor that kept to himself, yet he seemed so willing to help others.”
She should be flushed.
There are so many phony Republicans being foisted upon us lately.
The guy in Kentucky is another one like this...he was a Clinton supporter.
Meg isn’t even the lesser of two evils.... she is the evil, and the Dem might just be the lesser of the two. At this point I’d vote the Dem over Meg if I were in California. Scratch that, I’d vote third party. Screw the R’s and the D’s.
PIRC Progressive In Republican Clothing.
“Good” Republicans, as a general rule, don’t donate $4,000 to “Bad” Democrats.
I’ll bet that these politic nut cases wish that the internet would dry up and disappear. They can run...but they can’t hide now.
Just another Global Warming Republican.
If you’ll run your teenaged boy for congress I’ll vote for him. Pick someone at random from the phone book and they’ll probably be better than this jaybird.
thats supposed to be “governor”, having trouble with those “word” things today.
She sounds like one of these new “McCain Republicans” that the RNC is pushing to save the party.
I’ve also heard she thought highly of Van Jones. Anyone have the definitive word on this?
Can't she just be excommunicated? Or exorcised...whatever?
Well, he's certainly the perpetual amiable loser. I think he's lost every race he's ever run for higher office against Democrats with a tenth of his brainpower.
I personally like Tom Campbell, and in the past I’d’ve agreed with you. But since his first days in Congress, he’s moved far left. During the CA budget crisis’s worst days, he was advocating a big fat hike in the state’s gasoline tax. Used to oppose public funding for ab ortions, no longer opposes. Friedmanesque, Campbell no longer is.
Better than Jerry Brown, but no longer the libertarian conservative he was when he converted me to the GOP in the late 80s as a young law professor at Stanford. We can do better, I am sad to say, than Tom Campbell.
To me the only answer to the stream of neo-liberals being sanctioned by the California Republican Party is to get involved. Attend a local Central Committee meeting and speak your piece. Less than 1K vocal critics regularly attending these meetings across the state would persuade.
Of course we can do better! I wish we had 50 Sarah Palin’s to run in each state. :)
I’m saying, of the 3 Republicans, my choice is Campbell. Does he stand a chance? No. Meg will probably be the nominee and there is no way in heck I’m voting for her, a Romney protege. Both she and Jerry Brown are progressives, just in different parties.
Epic fail liberal RINO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.