Was Jerry Brown's campaign strategy to call Meg Whitman a whore a step too far?

[nismaratwork]

Apparently illegal aliens (or undocumented workers... whichever) are only an issue when they're not cleaning your house.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/10/01/whitman.housekeeper.charges/index.html?hpt=T2

The husband of Meg Whitman, California's Republican nominee for governor, said "it was possible" he saw a 2003 letter that questioned his housekeeper's Social Security number, but he insisted it did not make him suspect she was an undocumented worker.

Dr. Griffith Harsh's acknowledgment came several hours after he stood next to Whitman as she told reporters neither of them saw the letter.

The reversal followed lawyer Gloria Allred's release of a letter with a note to the housekeeper, which she said was Harsh's handwriting.

Really... not the brightest fellow is he?

 

[BobG]

Really... not the brightest fellow is he?

He's a Rhodes Scholar and a highly respected neuroscientist.

He's obviously never worked in the HR department, though.

 

[nismaratwork]

He's a Rhodes Scholar and a highly respected neuroscientist.

He's obviously never worked in the HR department, though.

OK, "not bright" is unfair, but what do you call denying something when you know that a document contradicting you in your own handwriting is out there? Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, and he had his, "did not have sexual relations..." moment. I can't tell if it's a kind of sociopathic belief in invincibility, or deep denial.

 

[BobG]

The mistake is in how he initially handled it. It was obviously something he didn't understand the significance of; some trivial BS that he didn't want to be bothered with; and so he scratched a quick note telling someone else to take care of this. Mission accomplished as far as he was concerned.

I can believe that 7 years later, he would have completely forgotten about that particular 30 seconds of his life.

I don't think he had any experience in managing employees nor had much desire to ever learn anything about employees. In fact, he never had that much interest in his wife's political career. His life was pretty much being a career neurosurgeon.

He's the type that would have two possibilities of a successful marriage: a trophy wife that would just be happy to live a rather well-to-do life or a wife tied up enough in her own career that she didn't need a lovey-dovey type of relationship.

You might run into a few people on this forum that could identify with his disdain for having to deal with the more mundane aspects of running a household. Yeah, it was a mistake that has come back to bite him, but it's one that I could see making myself. (In fact, thanks to automatic bill pay, I've occasionally gotten the shut-off notice warning with the reaction, "What do you mean you raised your rates 7 months ago?!" You never read my post about how would people know if I died? Thanks to so much being done electronically, I could be dead for months, maybe over a year before anyone started complaining about me not paying my bills.)

 

[Gokul43201]

I think I could easily forget having written such a note, but I imagine I might remember that there was a letter of some kind. In any case, this looks more to me like politicking than like there is a genuine underlying grievance (probably some of the latter and a lot of the former).

 

[lisab]

Seems the "illegal domestic help" issue dogs politicians on a regular basis. It's not exactly an issue that the common man can sympathize with.

And clearly, the criteria for Rhodes Scholar are sufficiently narrow that being one, and also being a Bozo, are not mutually exclusive.

 

[BobG]

And clearly, the criteria for Rhodes Scholar are sufficiently narrow that being one, and also being a Bozo, are not mutually exclusive.

Okay, granted there are at least 50 actors that have played Bozo the Clown and I only researched 6 of them before deciding this would be a lame way to spend my morning, but the closest association I've found between Rhodes Scholars and Bozo the Clowns is that both Tom Harmon (Bozo the Clown) and Pat Haden (Rhodes Scholar & NFL quarterback) graduated from USC.

 

[nismaratwork]

Seems the "illegal domestic help" issue dogs politicians on a regular basis. It's not exactly an issue that the common man can sympathize with.

And clearly, the criteria for Rhodes Scholar are sufficiently narrow that being one, and also being a Bozo, are not mutually exclusive.

I'm also fairly sure that illegal domestic help hurts someone who's in the party of "build a wall across our southern border"... a bit like Ted Haggard being a homophobe in his preaching. People don't relate, AND they don't appreciate that the people who are screaming for illegals to be dealt with are having them mop their mess... literally.

BobG: Let me give you a speck of insight into the life of a doctor: you have to manage people constantly, fill out paperwork, and more. He wasn't born a neurosurgeon, he had to go through internship, and residency on his way to this career. I actually get the concept of not paying close attention to the running of his household... knowing a few neurosurgeons I'm amazed he bothered to write a note! I'm not saying the guy did something morally reprehensible, but it was still a dumb move to come out with the statement they made, only to have someone contradict them a day later.

This is how politics has been played for a while (remember the Clinton appointee who was nixed for a similar issue?) so the slack you'd cut your friends or even a co-worker doesn't fly in an election year.

The irony here is that the people who engineered this kind of issue into a major political stumbling block decades ago were... republicans. If you're a politician talking about amnesty for illegal workers, and this happens, you're going to take a hit, but not like this! The Republican base is supposed to hate the "intellectual elites", and I don't think, "Sorry folks, but my Rhodes Scholar husband was too busy performing neurosurgery to pay attention to our hired help."

 

[lisab]

Okay, granted there are at least 50 actors that have played Bozo the Clown and I only researched 6 of them before deciding this would be a lame way to spend my morning, but the closest association I've found between Rhodes Scholars and Bozo the Clowns is that both Tom Harmon (Bozo the Clown) and Pat Haden (Rhodes Scholar & NFL quarterback) graduated from USC.

That made me laugh...:rofl:

 

[nismaratwork]

Okay, granted there are at least 50 actors that have played Bozo the Clown and I only researched 6 of them before deciding this would be a lame way to spend my morning, but the closest association I've found between Rhodes Scholars and Bozo the Clowns is that both Tom Harmon (Bozo the Clown) and Pat Haden (Rhodes Scholar & NFL quarterback) graduated from USC.

You're joking right? It's hard to tell online, but you realize she meant that you can be a bozo (the term), and a RS, not literally Bozo The Clown? Sarcasm is a **** in text form.

 

[BobG]

You're joking right? It's hard to tell online, but you realize she meant that you can be a bozo (the term), and a RS, not literally Bozo The Clown? Sarcasm is a **** in text form.

Yes, I was joking, although including Pat Haden in my example might not have been the greatest choice. His law license was once suspended for forgetting to pay his dues for two years. :rofl:

And I'm proud to note that none of the graduates of my alma mater have been Bozos.

 

[nismaratwork]

Yes, I was joking, although including Pat Haden in my example might not have been the greatest choice. His law license was once suspended for forgetting to pay his dues for two years. :rofl:

And I'm proud to note that none of the graduates of my alma mater have been Bozos.

Hmmm... a graduate of my high school was Bozo In Chief for 8 years... I'm not so proud. :tongue2: No real screw-ups from the old alma mater however... thank god. Of course, now that I think of it, there was this one young fellow who looked like Howdy Doody... :

 

[Proton Soup]

I can believe that 7 years later, he would have completely forgotten about that particular 30 seconds of his life.

i like this. we can call it the Statue of Mental Limitations defense.

 

[skeptic2]

It seems that Meg Whitman has also made a few gaffes. She said she checked the housekeeper's social security card and driver's license for legal residence. But in 2000, illegals were still allowed to get driver's licenses and Whitman should have known that. Why, if she were concerned about her legal status, didn't she ask for her green card instead of the driver's license?

Why also, if the husband saw the letter from social security, would he give it to the person whose SSN was in question to take care of?

 

[Jasongreat]

It seems that Meg Whitman has also made a few gaffes. She said she checked the housekeeper's social security card and driver's license for legal residence. But in 2000, illegals were still allowed to get driver's licenses and Whitman should have known that. Why, if she were concerned about her legal status, didn't she ask for her green card instead of the driver's license?

Why also, if the husband saw the letter from social security, would he give it to the person whose SSN was in question to take care of?

IMO, I don't think she was concerned about Nikki being illegal. Why would anyone doubt the legality of someone with a social security card? Are not SS cards only given to US citizens? I don't understand how Meg can be held responsible for the employee commiting fraud, since she gave false governmental papers, or why this illegal, and the million others like her have not been charged with fraud, possession of counterfiet documents, and probably a few other charges that they are all guilty of? I am all for charging employers, but how can they be responible, when they are being given fake documents.

It kills me when I read or watch stories about illegal imigrants that complain that these poor people are paying SS, even though they will never be able to receive payments. Why are they paying SS, could it be they have a fake SS card? When I worked in SoCal, the laborers were pretty open about having a person in their union that helps them get fake documents, then sends them out to jobs, certifying that they are legal to be working. Since the california democrats are so outraged about Meg and her one employee, will they get behind audits of all California unions, or is this just a political stunt to sabotage the competition? I will go with the later, since it did start with Gloria Allred, who has been a big supporter of Brown.

I figure that the husbands actions might have had something to do with the clause in the letter from the SSA that pretty much states, if an employer uses this information to dismiss an employee it could open them up to state and/or federal charges.

 

[nismaratwork]

IMO, I don't think she was concerned about Nikki being illegal. Why would anyone doubt the legality of someone with a social security card? Are not SS cards only given to US citizens? I don't understand how Meg can be held responsible for the employee commiting fraud, since she gave false governmental papers, or why this illegal, and the million others like her have not been charged with fraud, possession of counterfiet documents, and probably a few other charges that they are all guilty of? I am all for charging employers, but how can they be responible, when they are being given fake documents.

It kills me when I read or watch stories about illegal imigrants that complain that these poor people are paying SS, even though they will never be able to receive payments. Why are they paying SS, could it be they have a fake SS card? When I worked in SoCal, the laborers were pretty open about having a person in their union that helps them get fake documents, then sends them out to jobs, certifying that they are legal to be working. Since the california democrats are so outraged about Meg and her one employee, will they get behind audits of all California unions, or is this just a political stunt to sabotage the competition? I will go with the later, since it did start with Gloria Allred, who has been a big supporter of Brown.

I figure that the husbands actions might have had something to do with the clause in the letter from the SSA that pretty much states, if an employer uses this information to dismiss an employee it could open them up to state and/or federal charges.

...And if Whitman were not in the party of "no amnesty, close the borders", you might have a point. She isn't, you don't.

 

[skeptic2]

IMO, I don't think she was concerned about Nikki being illegal. Why would anyone doubt the legality of someone with a social security card? Are not SS cards only given to US citizens?

No, that is not true. Check the SSA's own site.
http://ssa.gov/pubs/10096.html#1

I don't understand how Meg can be held responsible for the employee commiting fraud, since she gave false governmental papers, or why this illegal, and the million others like her have not been charged with fraud, possession of counterfiet documents, and probably a few other charges that they are all guilty of? I am all for charging employers, but how can they be responible, when they are being given fake documents.

She is not being held responsible for the employee committing fraud. She is being held responsible for not doing due diligence, especially because she is campaigning on cracking down on employers.

From Meg Whitman's campaign site:
http://www.megwhitman.com/platform_topic.php?type=immigration&page=1

Meg will oppose any attempt by the Legislature to weaken employer verification requirements. In addition to putting more resources at the border, Meg believes the federal government and California need to work together to establish a system that allows employers to better verify the immigration status of their workers. The “Economic Fence,” an enhanced e-verification system, will be a major deterrent to illegal immigration.

Modeled after drug seizure raids, Meg will institute a system where state and local law enforcement agencies conduct inspections of workplaces suspected of employing undocumented workers. First-time offenders will be required to pay a fine and have their business license suspended for 10 days. Second-time offenders will pay an additional fine and have their business license suspended for 30 days. Third-time offenders will have their business license permanently suspended and pay a substantial fine and other penalties.

By taking such a position, she has set the bar higher for her own behavior.

Since you are well aware of social security fraud, as was I long before 2000, why wasn't Whitman? Why didn't she ask for a green card or other immigration documents? Certainly someone who is arguing for tougher standards for employers for hiring illegals should not have taken her documents at face value. Would she exonerate employers who were discovered to be hiring illegals and did no more than she to verify their status?

By no means am I excusing the housekeeper. Yes she did commit fraud, but she is not running for office, Whitman is. What would be her position if an employer received a letter from the SSA saying that an employee's number didn't match her name and the employer gave the letter to the employee and said, "Look into this."?

 

[nismaratwork]

No, that is not true. Check the SSA's own site.
http://ssa.gov/pubs/10096.html#1




She is not being held responsible for the employee committing fraud. She is being held responsible for not doing due diligence, especially because she is campaigning on cracking down on employers.

From Meg Whitman's campaign site:
http://www.megwhitman.com/platform_topic.php?type=immigration&page=1

Meg will oppose any attempt by the Legislature to weaken employer verification requirements. In addition to putting more resources at the border, Meg believes the federal government and California need to work together to establish a system that allows employers to better verify the immigration status of their workers. The “Economic Fence,” an enhanced e-verification system, will be a major deterrent to illegal immigration.

Modeled after drug seizure raids, Meg will institute a system where state and local law enforcement agencies conduct inspections of workplaces suspected of employing undocumented workers. First-time offenders will be required to pay a fine and have their business license suspended for 10 days. Second-time offenders will pay an additional fine and have their business license suspended for 30 days. Third-time offenders will have their business license permanently suspended and pay a substantial fine and other penalties.

By taking such a position, she has set the bar higher for her own behavior.

Since you are well aware of social security fraud, as was I long before 2000, why wasn't Whitman? Why didn't she ask for a green card or other immigration documents? Certainly someone who is arguing for tougher standards for employers for hiring illegals should not have taken her documents at face value. Would she exonerate employers who were discovered to be hiring illegals and did no more than she to verify their status?

By no means am I excusing the housekeeper. Yes she did commit fraud, but she is not running for office, Whitman is. What would be her position if an employer received a letter from the SSA saying that an employee's number didn't match her name and the employer gave the letter to the employee and said, "Look into this."?

Or to put it simply... when you rail against something, try not to be guilty of it yourself. See: Ted Haggard.

 

[Gokul43201]

Or to put it simply... when you rail against something, try not to be guilty of it yourself.

I actually don't see a problem with this, so long as you admit guilt and accept the same punishment as you've expected anyone else to undergo for the same thing.

 

[nismaratwork]

I actually don't see a problem with this, so long as you admit guilt and accept the same punishment as you've expected anyone else to undergo for the same thing.

Sure, but Whitman just denied her guilt, and Ted Haggard is still a gay-bashing *** who says he's been "cured". In theory however, I believe strongly in rehabilitation, and sometimes the best advocates for a given agenda are those who've had their limited vision challenged to the point of breaking. That seems rare however...

 

[BobG]

By taking such a position, she has set the bar higher for her own behavior.

Since you are well aware of social security fraud, as was I long before 2000, why wasn't Whitman? Why didn't she ask for a green card or other immigration documents? Certainly someone who is arguing for tougher standards for employers for hiring illegals should not have taken her documents at face value. Would she exonerate employers who were discovered to be hiring illegals and did no more than she to verify their status?

By no means am I excusing the housekeeper. Yes she did commit fraud, but she is not running for office, Whitman is. What would be her position if an employer received a letter from the SSA saying that an employee's number didn't match her name and the employer gave the letter to the employee and said, "Look into this."?

Well, perhaps.

One would hope she'd look at this and realize how much harder her policy would make things for employers. It's easy to get tripped up.

I doubt that would happen, though.

 

[Jasongreat]

=skeptic2;2911151]No, that is not true. Check the SSA's own site.
http://ssa.gov/pubs/10096.html#1

Thanks for the link, I was not aware that SS cards were given to non-citizens, however according to the site, they are only given to immigrants who are legally in country and eligible to work. "noncitizens authorized to work in the United States by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can get a Social Security number" So according to that, if someone has a SS card they supposedly have been checked by DHS and are eligible to work in the US.

She is not being held responsible for the employee committing fraud. She is being held responsible for not doing due diligence, especially because she is campaigning on cracking down on employers.

Yes she is, imo if the employee wouldn't have committed fraud meg probably wouldn't have hired her, since the employment agency wouldn't have sent her out. But we will never know since nikki did commit fraud, and Meg hired a employee that she believed, due to the documents provided, was legal to work.

From Meg Whitman's campaign site:
http://www.megwhitman.com/platform_topic.php?type=immigration&page=1

Meg will oppose any attempt by the Legislature to weaken employer verification requirements. In addition to putting more resources at the border, Meg believes the federal government and California need to work together to establish a system that allows employers to better verify the immigration status of their workers. The “Economic Fence,” an enhanced e-verification system, will be a major deterrent to illegal immigration.

Modeled after drug seizure raids, Meg will institute a system where state and local law enforcement agencies conduct inspections of workplaces suspected of employing undocumented workers. First-time offenders will be required to pay a fine and have their business license suspended for 10 days. Second-time offenders will pay an additional fine and have their business license suspended for 30 days. Third-time offenders will have their business license permanently suspended and pay a substantial fine and other penalties.

Sounds like she is for making it easier for employers to verify employment status of employees through an e-verify process. If she could of ran a check on her own instead of relying on the SSA, which makes it clear in the the letter that she received that she couldn't use the information they gave her to discharge the employee, she wouldn't be in the situation she is.

By taking such a position, she has set the bar higher for her own behavior.

I don't think so, she is taking the position that we need to make it easier for buisinesses to verify employment status, then after that if they dont, the raids and punishment will start. There is no possible way to secure the border to keep everyone out, but if they can't find employment, or housing what would be the reason to try to enter the US illegally?

Since you are well aware of social security fraud, as was I long before 2000, why wasn't Whitman? Why didn't she ask for a green card or other immigration documents? Certainly someone who is arguing for tougher standards for employers for hiring illegals should not have taken her documents at face value. Would she exonerate employers who were discovered to be hiring illegals and did no more than she to verify their status?

Of course your not saying that everyone that looks like they are mexican, is here illegally. There are plenty of hispanics who are legal residents and would not have a green card or other immigration papers, but would have a DL and SS card just like Nikki did.
She probably would not exonerate employers who did no more than she did, but that is because she wants to make it easier for the employers to verify than it was for her.

By no means am I excusing the housekeeper. Yes she did commit fraud, but she is not running for office, Whitman is. What would be her position if an employer received a letter from the SSA saying that an employee's number didn't match her name and the employer gave the letter to the employee and said, "Look into this."?

What would you of had her do differently than she did, first there is no proof as of yet that she ever saw the letter, or that her husband mentioned anything to her about it. The letter makes it clear she shouldn't use the info to fire the employee, unless she wants to face fed and or state charges. I would imagine that if the letter from the SSA said the numbers don't match and if you keep the employee employed you will be opening yourself up to fed and or state charges thing would have been far different. And that would go for the thousands of similar letters that the SSA sends to employers everyday.

I am no fan of Whitman, and am glad I no longer live in CA, but this is no more than a small story being blown way out of proportion in order to try kill her campaign, imo. Why is it Dems only care about illegals being employed when the employer is a republican. This story would have more a ring of truth if it was a right wing group(against illegal employment) had brought it up, the way it is, it seems like feigned outrage to me. What Meg did, she did as a private citizen, years ago. Why hasnt anyone asked the currentCA AG Brown why no charges have been filed against Nikki, it is his job. Or why hasnt Gloria Allred been sanctioned by the bar for giving up the evidence that may get her client incarcerated, her handling of this sure doesn't seem like she is being a good advocate for her client. With a lawyer like that, who needs a prosecutor.

 

[skippy1729]

OK, "not bright" is unfair, but what do you call denying something when you know that a document contradicting you in your own handwriting is out there? Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, and he had his, "did not have sexual relations..." moment. I can't tell if it's a kind of sociopathic belief in invincibility, or deep denial.

While most people can remember the girls they have had in the past few months, many of us will not remember every form letter that we have received in the past seven years.

 

[skeptic2]

Why is it Dems only care about illegals being employed when the employer is a republican. This story would have more a ring of truth if it was a right wing group(against illegal employment) had brought it up, the way it is, it seems like feigned outrage to me.

The issue here isn't what Democrats would do or favor it is that her own behavior does not measure up to the standards she is advocating for other employers. One wonders why no right wing group(against illegal employment) has brought it up? Is it perhaps that they are willing to look the other way when it is one of their own? Would they react the same way if she were a Democrat?

What Meg did, she did as a private citizen, years ago. Why hasnt anyone asked the currentCA AG Brown why no charges have been filed against Nikki, it is his job. Or why hasnt Gloria Allred been sanctioned by the bar for giving up the evidence that may get her client incarcerated, her handling of this sure doesn't seem like she is being a good advocate for her client. With a lawyer like that, who needs a prosecutor.

Statute of limitations?

 

[nismaratwork]

While most people can remember the girls they have had in the past few months, many of us will not remember every form letter that we have received in the past seven years.

"...The girls they have had..." Wow. OK, well, some of us would remember these details when it comes to your own political future, and in addition we don't call women girls or talk about "having them". Damn Skippy, there are female members of this forum who probably wouldn't appreciate being talked about like notches on a bedpost.

Oh, and an inquiry into the legal status of your worker is not a form letter, it's just what it sounds like.

 

[BobG]

"...The girls they have had..." Wow. OK, well, some of us would remember these details when it comes to your own political future, and in addition we don't call women girls or talk about "having them". Damn Skippy, there are female members of this forum who probably wouldn't appreciate being talked about like notches on a bedpost.

Oh, and an inquiry into the legal status of your worker is not a form letter, it's just what it sounds like.

I think that comment was intended as a reference to Clinton (I had to read it twice, too).

 

[nismaratwork]

I think that comment was intended as a reference to Clinton (I had to read it twice, too).

Ahhh, OK, now that does make more sense.

 

[loseyourname]

It seems that Meg Whitman has also made a few gaffes. She said she checked the housekeeper's social security card and driver's license for legal residence. But in 2000, illegals were still allowed to get driver's licenses and Whitman should have known that. Why, if she were concerned about her legal status, didn't she ask for her green card instead of the driver's license?

A state driver's license and social security card are sufficient proof of US work eligibility per USCIS Form I-9. The employer is only required to "inspect the documents." Unless you're skilled at detecting forgeries, you're not going to detect it. Plus, SSNs are issued to work-eligible aliens who keep them long after their visas expire. That's probably why workers who outstayed their visas represent more of the illegal population than persons who simply walked across the border without asking for permission.

 

[Gokul43201]

And such workers do not have Green Cards.

In related news, Brown is making things easier for Whitman:

The California governor's race generated yet another controversy Friday after the Los Angeles Times reported a private conversation, inadvertently captured on voice mail, in which the Democratic candidate and his aides discussed the possibility of portraying his billionaire GOP opponent, Meg Whitman, as a "whore."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/08/AR2010100806914.html