Meg Whitman Will Spin Gay Marriage Right Round, Like a Record Baby
Meg Whitman, hoping to reside in California’s Governor’s Mansion next year, hasn’t officially announced her candidacy (she’s only “formed an exploratory committee,” uh huh), but already she’s entered that mysterious place of politico hopefuls: Making grandiose promises (create 2 million private-sector jobs; eliminate $15 billion in “wasteful” spending within five years) while offering few to zero details on how she’ll actually do it, beyond relying on her “business experience” — all the while California is facing a $42 billion budget deficit while Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is about to slash 20,000 state government jobs. Such was her presser yesterday in Silicon Valley, which is friendly turf for an Internet pioneer, which amounts to the official unofficial kick-off for Whitman’s gubernatorial campaign. It was also where she reiterated her support for Prop 8.
Whitman supports civil unions, and not gay marriage — thus, her support for Prop 8, which would keep the word “marriage” reserved only for heteros like Whitman. And like many opponents of gay rights, Whitman, a Presbyterian, says she relied on her “faith and conscience” to make that call. (“Faith and conscience” were also excuses once used to keep women like Whitman from voting and men and women of different races from marrying.)
But wait!
Before you go calling Whitman a homophobe, first listen to how she contradicts herself: “I want you to know I am all about equal rights and I want to make sure that gay and lesbian people are treated equally under the eyes of the law.” It’s a very convenient explanation, since Whitman’s “eyes of the law” includes keeping Prop 8 alive. Which isn’t so much supporting “equal rights” as it is supporting “separate but equal.”
Is this the woman you want governing 36 million residents?
“I’m all about equal rights, except when the term ‘equal’ is hijacked by the gays to imply that they have some dubious claim to the word the way us normal people do. You know what I mean, don’t you, normal California voters? Besides, I use my faith to guide me the way decent normal citizen should do when intending to lead all people of all or no faiths! Are you with me? Of course you are!”
Hell No! Let’s hang this cunt! We must not have a religious zealot running the state of California!
If you don’t support marriage equality, you don’t support equal rights. Period. Doesn’t matter how many gay friends you have or how nice you are to your hairdresser.
What the hell is with all the people in power who say they love gays so much and still treat them like crap?!?!?! ARGH!! Go back to the 1850s!
She is just another example of failed cultural enrichment.
She is a typical mainstream American that believes in her ideal of family values. She is willing to undermine and undercut all those that stand in her way whilst trying to maintain a “balance” among societies members.
It is people like her that need our utmost attention in regards to education. We need to teach her, and others, the value of true equality for all persons no matter what the terms and/or conditions.
It is quite obvious the passage of Proposition 8 still resides in all those affected but we cannot let that get us down. NOW is the time when we need to come together as a community to help younger generations grow without the ungodly ideals of bigotry and hatred.
BREAK DOWN THE BARRIER!!!
Too bad that “created equal” does not mean something. A person’s religious views and opinions are theirs, and not necessarily those of every one else; therefore, it they are negative or hurtful to someone else, they are discriminatory. That means illegal according to our Constitution.
Meg Whitman is dangerous. She must be stopped head first from entering the political arena.
She doesn’t stand a prayer of winning the governorship in CA with that attitude.
I’m a Libertarian, so I don’t understand how Democrats or Republicans think.
Could some Democrat explain to me how Whitman, a politician who opposes marriage equality but supports civil unions, is a noxious hate-filled homophobe… but Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden — all of whom oppose marriage equality but support civil unions, two of whom voted for DOMA, are Goddess’s Gift To Queerdom?
While you’re doing that, perhaps GOPers can explain how their new leader, who opposes adoption and marriage equality, represents the new “open” GOP?
What doesn’t make sense is that her life long personal assistant Anita Gaeta is a lesbian with a partner (belinda) and they have a son named David who was born last year. Anitas job is to schedule the Ebay jet for world travel, etc..NOW having a lesbian who is trying to maintain a family, wouldn’t Meg have paid some attention to the crap her own assistant has had to put up with as far as getting insurance for her partner, benefit issues, childcare issues…I mean this PROVES that Meg isn’t paying attention to the problems of those who save her ass on a daily basis, WHY should she go to bat for the rest of us? She is a selfish, greedy billionaire who only got where she is at because 2 guys had a great idea for a website and she was luckily hired on to help run the business side of things and after they left she stayed and took all the credit for making Ebay what it is.
Meg Whitman can officially suck my dick.
@Brian Miller – because we know they are only saying that to get elected, that’s how, it’s blatantly obvious to anyone with a brain. As far as the GOP, keep going right right right baby!!
Are we sure Whitman is not a bulldyke? Look at that outfit, tragic for a woman from California? Who’s stylist does she use, Hillary Clinton’s?
As I’m sure many of you know, Whitman was a “spokesperson” for the McCain campaign. And she was so horrible that McCain more-or-less curtailed her appearances as the election approached. Hopefully, that’s a sign that she’ll self-destruct before her own campaign gets off the ground.
@D.B. – exactly – maybe she can hire Tucker Bounds to be her spokesman, LOL.
@RDM: Thank you, hon! What’s the difference between Meg Whitman & Sarah Palin? Hair color?
@Sebbe: Not fair! Didn’t you see our SecState’s ab-fab technicolor dreamcoat?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/c.....ambassador
I bet Meg Whitman could NEVER pull off that motherf**kin’ fabulousness! :-D
@atdleft – haha, I’m actually banning the daily beast, I don’t like the “lady” (t. brown?). But, I did see this (likely on Maddow or wonkette? can’t remember) and let me add I’m in love with Hillary, always have been, always will be, although I sometimes feel like I’m in an abusive relationship with her admittedly. I think Hillz style has / is improving. And that coat, loved it and sooo appropriate for the occasion landing in Japan.
@Sebbe: because we know they are only saying that to get elected, that’s how, it’s blatantly obvious to anyone with a brain
And they also implemented anti-gay laws, like Biden’s vote with DOMA; signed anti-gay laws, like Clinton did with DOMA and the anti-gay military ban; and campaigned on those anti-gay laws.
Heck, Biden and Clinton were responsible for the two biggest federal anti-gay laws in history getting on the books.
So yeah, they do anti-gay stuff to get elected.
But again — why are they the greatest thing since sliced bread, according to gay Democrats, when they pass the same anti-gay laws that Republicans also happily pass?
Meg has already said that she supports Social Services benefits (as in Welfare, Food Stamps, access to medical care, in state tuition rates) for Illegal Aliens…that position right there is enough to keep her out of the Governor’s Mansion.
@Brian Miller – I think your point is valid and made by many, and I recently (finally) stopped my regular contributions to the Clinton Foundation.
But, I will say, that for me at least, gay rights are not the only issue I use to consider the success/failure of a president. Unfortunately, only so much political capital can be expended on certain issues at certain times.
While I am sure I am going to get an onslaught of comments. DADT was actually a compromise Clinton was forced to make at the time, IMO and he actually expended a significant amount of political capital early in his presidency working on it. Prior to that, things were even worse. At that time less than 40 percent of the public supported gays being allowed to serve openly in the military, now the numbers are about 70% (according to a recent CBS gallop poll). I was only a child at the time, but as someone who already knew they were gay, I saw that as some progress at the time.
As far as my political ideology and identity, again I only consider my sexuality one part of myself. I actually consider myself a socialist democrat (see the Nordic Model). Which you as a libertarian are probably even more against. So no, are Clinton, Biden, Obama my ideal political leaders? No. Are they better than we would have been with a second Bush term in 1992 a Bob Dole tern in 1996 a McCain/Palin ticket in 2008? ABSOLUTLY
Do I think we would have been better with Al Gore in 2000 and John Kerry in 2004 than George Bush? Absolutely
As far as DOMA, again political capital. There’s no telling what would have happened with the goodrich decision and Mass marriage laws without it. But, the time is here to repeal it now.
What she couldn’t do for Ebay, she won’t somehow miraculously be able to do for California. She left her own firm in financial ruin, and now she thinks she’s competent to run a state??? What is it with these Republicans??? Do they really think voters won’t notice their records???
“I want you to know I am all about equal rights and I want to make sure that gay and lesbian people are treated equally under the eyes of the law.”
To state the obvious: Of course, if one group (gays) can’t get the same rights (marriage) that others can, then it’s not really equal, is it?
Sounds like she’s in favor of “partial equality”, heh…
@Kenster999 – Is there any hypothetical polling being done yet that’s been release? I can’t believe Whitman could win, but these are the people and the state that brought the governator??
Here’s the difference: locally in California, you already have strong domestic partnerships. I doubt anyone wanting to revoke them would have a chance, so it’s a choice between DPs/civil unions or marriage. Nationally, we have nothing. No one would have much chance at the presidency if they said we should have full marriage, so it’s a choice between no recognition at all or civil unions. In short, what sounds like the exact same position is, in context, completely opposite.
If you think you might want to elect Meg as your Governor, just look at what she has done to eBay!
Once a cool site with auctions and a lot of great stuff, she turned it into a flea market and a dumping ground for corporate castoffs. The coolness is gone!
If you elect her, GOOD LUCK!
Jeff
Let the idiot raise millions and lose the election. Her track record on running ebay and backing Romney and McCain should sink her campaign.
Defeat the bigot at all costs. First of all, religious beliefs are “chosen” and as such are a type of “lifestyle”. Nobody comes into this world religious, it is essentially learned behavior, unlike sexual orientation. We should form a national movement with our straight allies to remove tax exempt status from all cults, faith based nonprofits that meddle in politics and make sure that religion is barred from politics, permanently. The government should not be issuing marriage licenses to people who opt for a religious marriage, let their own cults issue them. As I said earlier, religion is a choice and as such should be confined to the home where it belongs, not in the public arena of politics and election ballots.
@Eminent Victorian: define “normal”
@Flex:
I went to school with her son, who has some rare form of racist terrets. He was expelled for calling a black girl a Ni&&er.
It’s time to start the destroy Meg Whitman campaign. Equal rights for all, not just for some. Separate but equal never worked in the past, and it will not work in the future. Those who want California to thrive and prosper will not vote for this horrible woman. What’s it to her (and those like her) if gay people get married? How does a gay marriage affect her life? She’s still able to have her beliefs and her prejudices and go to her church and live her life as she sees fit. Denying gay people the choice to be married is denying gay people the same rights everyone else enjoys. So according to this horrible Meg Whitman, everyone is to live by her set of rules, her religion’s set of rules, even though we do not all practice her religion or believe what she believes. She seeks to control others with her beliefs. Gay people just seek to have equal rights, while at the same time allowing others to believe and practice what they like. Gays are the true Americans in this equasion. Gays do not seek to control others or tell others how to live. Meg Whitman and her ilk seek to control others and deny others equal rights simply because she does not believe others should enjoy the same rights as she does. How in the world does this horrible woman think she has the right skills to run this state and represent all of its people when she seeks to deny equal rights to 10% of California’s population? The time is now to say NO to Meg Whitman and say NO to discrimination. The time for equal rights for everyone is now. After all, this is the United States, isn’t it? Or is Meg Whitman seeking to turn this state and this country into the Middle East. Feel like living in Iraq? Vote for Meg Whitman and she’ll turn the State of California into just another third world toilet. Destroy Meg Whitman now.
Meg Whitman is wrong for California and wrong for America! Hate mongers like her need to be shown to the rest world as the segregationists that they are.
I could care less if her beliefs come from her crazy ass God or a box of cereal. She cannot possibly represent the people of California, as her California is only for white, entitled, privileged, socialites.
IT’S JERRY BROWN ALL THE WAY!
@chris: Why am I not surprised in the least? It sounds like the entire Whitman klan is filled racism and hate.