Posted on 05/15/2010 11:09:29 PM PDT by South40
Front-running GOP governor candidate Meg Whitman goes on the defensive in her latest TV ad – an indication that Republican opponent Steve Poizner’s attacks on his rival are effective. His emphasis on the issue of illegal immigration is seeming timely – at least among Republicans – given Arizona’s new law and support for it among some Californians.
A look at Whitman’s ad (see video below) and the facts:
Poizner has attacked Whitman for being friendly with the enemy because she gave $8,000 in 2003 toward Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer’s reelection effort. In the new ad, Whitman says, “I strongly oppose Barbara Boxer and I’m working hard to defeat her.”
She defends herself against Poizner’s attack that she’s soft on illegal immigration and supports amnesty for illegal immigrants.
“I will secure our border, and I’ll send in the National Guard if necessary. I say no driver’s licenses, no sanctuary cities, and absolutely no amnesty. Period.”
(Excerpt) Read more at totalbuzz.freedomblogging.com ...
They say that during that 28 years of her not voting on these issues, that she would have, if only her driver had known where her polling place was.
Now shoo, and stop bugging me with your ads.
Another RINO making promises that they never meant.
The main issue is that Obama and the Dems are soft on crime.
0’s first move is to blame the police.
We need conservative leaders that will push the issue of crime on the rise due to unemployment, cuts in budgets for police, and lack of enforcement of laws on the books.
What you don’t understand is that, in California, the best we can hope for is a RINO. Who the heck is Steve Poisner? I have yet to see one Poisner ad or appearance on TV. I don’t even know what he looks like. He won’t win against Boxer, but Whitman just might.
Poizner is the type of rino that Tom McClintock is campaigning for, he is clearly a better choice than Meg Whitman.
The point is that if Tom McClintock is willing and even eager to do this for Poizner.. then that tells you how bad Whitman is.
Tom McClintock is not doing this because he loves Steve Poizner as a great conservative.
Whitman: Wow, I’m really against the Arizona law and I have always been for amnesty.
Campaign Advisor: But Meg, you are really getting beat up over the immigration issue. You have to come out and say you are tough on immigration. The polls say that is what voters want to hear.
Whitman: Well, if that is what the polls say, I’ll do it.
Because that is not hope.
Absentee voting has already started, and in three weeks it is over, when does the revolution start?
For instance is it Poizner, or Whitman?
I think you’re right.
California is imho at a crossroads.
Either the state as you say rises in a sort of Prop-13 style tax revolt. Or the worst happens: Democrats solidify control and Prop 13 is eventually repealed to fund cushy pensions and ever-bigger benefits for the millions of public sector union employees.
Ping!
LOL My husband is from CA and I don’t know who Poisner is either. Whitman is probably running because of power would be my guess. It’s too bad we have so many bad politicians but their line of work doesn’t seem to attract decent and honest people. Usually the bottom of the barrel scum such as Whitman who lying is their language.
VP CHENEY ENDORSES MEG WHITMAN!!
CUPERTINO -- Today, former Vice President of the United States Richard Cheney wrote an op-ed that was published in the Orange County Register discussing why he believes Meg Whitman is the right choice for California's next governor given her "conservative values, leadership skills and vision to reform state government and usher in an era of strong economic growth and prosperity." The former Vice President also examines why Steve Poizner is unfit to receive the Republican gubernatorial nomination. Read the op-ed below:
Orange County Register: Whitman Stronger Republican Candidate
By Dick Cheney
I am proud to endorse Meg Whitman to be the next governor of California. Meg has the conservative values, leadership skills and vision to reform state government and usher in an era of strong economic growth and prosperity.
There is a lot at stake in this election. What happens in California has a direct bearing on the health of the U.S. economy. America cannot afford to have its largest state teetering on the edge of financial collapse. California needs a proven executive who has the mettle to stand up to the entrenched special interests in Sacramento and cut spending.
Meg is a leader who will not shy away from confronting the public employee unions. She has put pension reform at the center of her agenda. She is a firm believer in the power of tax cuts to strengthen small businesses and create jobs. She knows that welfare must be a temporary hand-up and not a way of life. She is committed to local control of education, and she has a strong and practical approach to securing the border and addressing the problems associated with illegal immigration.
Meg's conservatism is rooted in the optimism that people can achieve great things if government doesn't stand in their way. As I have come to know her better, I have been reminded of another great leader from California. As a young congressman from Wyoming in the 1980s, I was an unabashed foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution. I saw an inspirational leader lift the nation out of the malaise left behind by Jimmy Carter's liberalism. I believe Meg Whitman can do for California what Ronald Reagan did for America.
While I am always mindful of President Reagan's 11th Commandment, there are issues of judgment that voters should consider before they cast their ballots in the Republican primary. I admire the success that Steve Poizner has had in the private sector and believe his commitment to public service is sincere. But I have concerns about whether he truly adheres to the conservative principles of our party.
In 2000, when I first ran on the national ticket with President George W. Bush, Mr. Poizner endorsed Vice President Al Gore. With the election hanging in the balance, he donated $10,000 to the Gore-Lieberman Recount Committee in Florida. In 2004, during the Bush-Cheney reelection campaign, Mr. Poizner, who was then a candidate for the state Assembly, opposed the tax cuts that were the centerpiece of our economic recovery plan.
He also broke ranks with our party on national security and the "war on terror." Mr. Poizner opposed the war in Iraq. To amplify his opposition to the national security policies of the Bush administration, he invited Richard Clarke to campaign for him in California.
At the time, Mr. Clarke, a former staff member of the National Security Council, was making the rounds on cable television to market a book that blamed the Bush administration for mismanaging the terrorist threat and enabling the Sept. 11 attacks against our nation. There was a clear purpose behind the Clarke campaign visit. Mr. Poizner was breaking from the Bush-Cheney ticket and our policy goals because he thought it helped his political ambitions.
The intervening years have proven that the resolve of the Bush administration and the courage of our soldiers on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan kept America safe at a perilous time in our nation's history.
While I have doubts about the authenticity of the conservative voice that Mr. Poizner now speaks in, there is no disputing that Meg Whitman is the Republican the Democrats fear the most in this election. The unions and the Democratic donors invested in Attorney General Jerry Brown's success have already started to run misleading ads attacking Meg Whitman. This is a clear admission on their part that Meg is the toughest Republican candidate for governor. The Democrats know that Meg can beat them in November, and, more importantly, they know she will put an end to the failed status quo in Sacramento as governor.
I encourage my fellow Republicans to vote for Meg Whitman. She is a woman of courage, a leader with conviction, a true fiscal conservative and champion of the values we hold dearest.
Read it at the Orange County Register Here: http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/california-248902-bush-poizner.html
“Making exception for VP Cheney, but the rest of you non-Californians need to just BUTT OUT! “
You’ve never made a statement about another states election?? Really?? These senators serve us ALL!
Of course Cheney endorses Whitman. Most OPEN border advocates do! Are you one? Cheney’s domestic policy advisor, Cesar Conda who left Cheney’s office and went to work for a Soros entity is one of the biggest Amnesty pushers around. We all need to admit the leanings of these pretend conservatives, instead of falling in line because there is an “R” behind the name. Don’t you get tired of being fooled?
Whitman: “.....and absolutely no amnesty. Period.”
None of the McCain sycophants call it ‘amnesty’. They prefer ‘path to legalization’. More than dishonest.
Conservative California Congressman Darrel Issa on Poizner:
U.S. REP DARRELL ISSA ON POIZNER'S FIRST VISIT TO THE U.S./MEXICO BORDER AS A CANDIDATE
Please see the following statement from Whitman Campaign Co-Chair and U.S. Representative Darrell Issa in response to Steve Poizner's first official visit to the U.S./Mexico border as a candidate:
"This is another example of Steve Poizner using an issue that he has no interest in addressing but for pure self-interest and political gain. His priority is not addressing illegal immigration, it's getting elected. Mr. Poizner has invested $19 million of his own money into telling Californians that he is the border security candidate, but until today, he's never even taken the time as a candidate to meet with border patrol agents and tour our border. Californians should be asking themselves: why has it taken 602 days since declaring his ambitions for governor for him to even show up to survey the problem as a candidate?
"As someone who has spent years working on border issues, I find it inconceivable that Mr. Poizner has run two political campaigns without even including the words 'illegal immigration' in his previous policy platforms. Not until the issue has surfaced in a larger national debate, 29 days before the GOP primary election, has he decided to engage on this issue. It's very evident that he is more pre-occupied with political pandering than with solving the problem. On the other hand, Meg Whitman made border security a priority for her campaign at the outset, and studied our border security challenges while touring the border with agents last year.
"As Republican voters consider their options in this election, I hope they won't be fooled by politicians like Steve Poizner who are looking to secure their own election more than they are looking to secure our border."
:-}
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.