Posted on 05/14/2010 8:43:59 AM PDT by South40
SAN DIEGO Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman on Thursday offered a lengthy explanation of her past support for Democratic U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer something opponent Steve Poizner has repeatedly attacked her over.
During a town hall meeting at the Hilton San Diego Bayfront, the former eBay CEO said that she and other Silicon Valley entrepreneurs endorsed Boxer and donated to her campaign for re-election in 2004 because of the California Democrats opposition to taxing Internet sales.
She said Internet taxation was the most important issue to eBay sellers and to technology in the Silicon Valley.
Sometimes when youre in business, you have to support someone that you disagree with on almost every issue except the one thats most important to your customers, Whitman said.
Poizners campaign on Thursday circulated an article in the Fresno Bee that Boxers Republican opponent in 2004, former Secretary of State Bill Jones, also opposed the proposed Internet tax.
Poizner, the state insurance commissioner, criticized Whitman over supporting Boxer in Poway Wednesday night, citing a comment she made in last weeks debate.
She said the reason why she voted and campaigned so hard for Barbara Boxer is that Barbara Boxer agreed with her on one particular issue that had to do with the Internet, Poizner said at his own town hall meeting at Stoneridge Country Club. And I asked her, What about that? You mean you would sell out the whole country and vote for Barbara Boxer over one issue? And she said yes.
Poizner has his own baggage when it comes to contributions to Democrats a $10,000 donation to 2000 Democratic presidential nominee Al Gores Florida recount drive in 2000.
Poizner acknowledged that some family money has gone to Democrats because his wife, Carol, is a Democrat.
Heres the confession: Ive been married to a Democrat for 22 years, he said.
The Boxer issue was raised at the Whitman town hall by Dianne Scott, a Carlsbad commercial real estate broker who said, Ive never agreed with Barbara Boxer on anything.
I dont agree with Barbara Boxer on anything either, Whitman replied. She and I are not friends. She is certainly not supporting my run for governor and I am not supporting her run for the Senate. I hope one of our great Republican candidates will take her out in November.
After the meeting, Scott said she was satisfied with Whitmans explanation.
I accept her answer, she said. She said there was one Internet problem, or whatever, that had to do with Boxer and Barbara was for something right for once. Its the only time Ive ever heard Barbara Boxers right.
This week, the Whitman campaign began airing a television ad branding Poizner as just another liberal Sacramento politician for, among other reasons, supporting taxpayer-funded abortions.
Wrong, Poizner said in Poway.
Im opposed to abortions, he said. My views on this have crystallized over time as I have dealt with a lot of people who are very passionate about their views on abortion. I think as governor there are things I could do to reduce the number of abortions. Number one, I want to stop all government funding of abortions all of it.
My opponent, Meg Whitman and me, we just differ on this one, he added. Meg Whitman supports government funding of abortion; I dont. Its a major difference.
While Poizner told a questioner Wednesday night hes opposed to abortions, in a March interview he characterized his position as pro choice and acknowledged he favored publicly financed abortions when he first ran for office in 2004 and has since changed his mind.
Whitman also refers to herself as pro choice, but her stand on government-funded abortions is more complicated.
She opposes abortions funded by the federal government, but favors them at the state level.
At her town hall, a questioner raised the issue and demanded, Id like to know how you can take two different positions on one issue?
Whitman called it a states rights issue.
The state of California year after year has made this decision, Whitman replied. So my feeling is thats a decision that Californians have made and it needs to stand. When I think about federal funding of abortions, thats quite a different issue and thats why Ive said Im not in favor of taxpayer-funded abortions.
Poizner is almost tied with her in the polls. It’s desperation time. She’s spent a lot of her own money, and there’s a real danger now that it will have been for nothing.
Her commercials about Poizner not being a Conservative annoy me. She’s not one either.
Abortion is bad so the federal government should
not pay for it.
Abortion is a matter of personal choice so the
state should finance abortions for those who
cannot afford to pay.
That’s the kind of sound simple logic that
conservatives always appreciate.
Both these two are Arnold lite and will just be walked on the Rat legislators.
The only possible salvation for CA is for it to reach the end of it’s financial rope and face reality..just like every other socialist state.
I’m going to vote for Brown to insure the state goes broke..sooner rather than later.
One of the reasons we end up with such lousy candidates in California is because the California Republican Party hacks will only back RINOs and not real conservatives.
This is the reality of how CEOs and others in high places operate. I’ve been shocked myself at who some of my closest allies have donated to. It IS a business decision, and judging from her batting average here, she made excellent calls.
CEOs and other high ranking people may (or may not) have the same strong principles we do, but it’s not unusual for them to feel an obligation to put the interests of their companies first. So they support the key legislators that serve on committees important to their companies.
I cant read much into this. It’s just the way the game is played.
Do you know, did she donate to ANY republican? Is this ALL her donations?
I was told she’s never voted in an election before, is this true?
Actually, the vast majority of her donations have been to Republicans. In 1999 for instance she gave to GW Bush for President, and John Kerry for the Senate.
She has voted a few times but this new Poizner ad says that Whitman did not vote for 28 years.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=63490
It is my observation that when any business owner/CEO makes the short sighted decission to support liberal politicians in order to curry short term benefits, they are foolishly ignoring the business destroying long term policies of these liberal politicians.
I watched this happen when I was working in the defense aircraft industry in southern California during the 90’s and what did these companies get in the end from these liberal politicians? Their contracts were cut and they were regulated out the state.
Hundreds of thousands of jobs were lost as a direct result of liberal policies that the CEO’s of these companies should have vigerously opposed.
Instead they lined their pockets with short term gains and screwed the american people and thier employees.
Sorry, didn’t read that far. Got to her explanation and decided the article wasn’t worth the pixels it was wasting on my monitor.
Thanks.
Couldnt agree more with your analysis. But I doubt it will change how this folks think. Look at these usually diehard GOP casino people in Vegas doing their best to re-elect Harry Reid!!
It’s very frustrating.
I assume she donated to McCain. She spent a lot of time on the road for him.
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.