Whitman Accused, Attacked (but Still Very Rich)

I’m curious, Mr. Crowley — did the Chronicle offer any evidence to undercut the nanny’s story, or did they call it a smear without supporting the charge?

I don’t expect much from the usual talking heads, but from a newspaper I expect evidentiary support for a given position, and your post didn’t include any. Was there any there?

An illegal gets paid $23 an hour, and then appears with Gloria sniveling.

Even the SF Chronicle smells the Brown rat behind this story.

Asking Crowley for more than musings?
.
I wish you well Mr White.

Well, I suppose the Chronicle could have reported the charges straight, with no note of skepticism. But then they surely (and probably rightly) would have been attacked as stenographers. If you read the article — to which I conveniently linked! — you will see that the Chron did contact the Social Security Administration trying to verify the existence of a letter that would shed some light on things, but got a no-comment. Otherwise I’m not sure what more they can do, particularly within the first 24 hours.

Lessee… $23/hr… health benefits? Yes? No? Was she considered Meg’s employee or an “independent contractor”, so does she have to pay her own SS?
.
And this is CA…
.
I worked for $20/hr. with no bennies and no SS back in the ’80s. By the time all was said and done, I took home a LOT less than $20/hr. More like $12.
.
Another thing, meltdown, so Brown MAY have released the story… does that make it by definition untrue?
.
Quite a stretch there…

Michael, nice response.

If you had found an article that was skeptical towards and biased against Whitmann, you would be a hero.

What I find somewhat amazing is that the Chronicle is skeptical and jumping on the hang Meg bandwagon.

Where were you working illegally?

Otherwise I’m not sure what more they can do, particularly within the first 24 hours.
.
Silly man! They can report the horse race aspect and insinuate that someone’s lying about something!
.
Now that’s news!

I appreciate the response, Mr. Crowley. Thanks for your time!

I tried twice to post a link to an LA Times blog post and it disappeared. Wasn’t even told it went into moderation. What’s up? Only SF papers allowed?

That should have been:

What I find somewhat amazing is that the Chronicle is skeptical and NOT jumping on the hang Meg bandwagon.

When TN was building the Saturn plant in Spring Hill, TN. Worked as a technical writer.
.
GM didn’t want ANY possibility of our claiming to be “employees” so we were paid a straight $20/hr.
.
Social Security and other taxes were our own responsibility. They paid us nada.

Well, Mr. Crowley, they could try to actually get the facts before printing speculation.

Whitman employed this woman for 9 years and didn’t get her immigration status cleared up?
.
Well, to prove the “rich are different”, Linda McMahon, CT canidate for Senate, would consider lowering minimum wage, doesn’t know if any of her employees worked for minimum wage and doesn’t know what the minimum wage is in CT.
.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/30/linda-mcmahon-we-ought-to_n_745639.html

A serial criminal, illegal alien and enemy of the United States of America named “Nicky Diaz Santillan” commits multiple federal felonies and submits a fraudulent social security card and a fraudulent drivers license to Meg Whitman, and Time magazine is worried about Meg Whitman spending her own freakin’ money to communicate her message, while leftist political advocacy and lobbying groups like Time magazine, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, A-Mess-NBC, et al., spend billions of dollars to communicate their own message (i.e., fundamentalist leftism) and to promote their own candidates (i.e., Democrats)! http://www.cis.org/mortensen/whitman-maid-document-fraud

This woman was hired through an employment agency, they were responsible to check her immigration status. When Whitman found out she was illegal she let her go.

So who’s in the wrong? Whitman for letting her go once she found out she was illegal; the lawyer for prancing her out in front of cameras for a story; the woman who produced false papers to gain employment, or the feds for allowing her to continue to live in this county knowing she is illegal?

hmmm, i count 3 wrongs out of 4.

What the real story should be is the amount of money that Whitman and people like her are spending to get elected . It is shameful that there are no laws restricting this type of spending.

Tennessee is a “right to work” state, afguy, which means unions have zero power. Not really a great state to work in, unless you’re management.

So… a couple of weeks ago, Time reported this, without skepticism:

http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/09/14/election-road-trip-day-9-8-buffalo-meat/

Now you praise the SF Chronicle for being skeptical about a similar sounding tale from the other side? Stinks of a double standard to me.

Its ok. Brown and Boxer are going to win!

gwbc — There was a law against this type of spending. The Supreme Court declared it unconstitional as a restriction on free speech. (Of course, most of that speech was anything but free. It costs plenty to put all those commercials on the air.) The name of the case is Buckley v. Valeo. The Citizens United case extended this “freedom of speech’”to corporations. But even though the Court’s staunchest originalists voted in the majority in Citizens United, I suspect that the Founders would have been appalled by the decision.

GM and the UAW came in “hand-in-hand” promising to do wonderful things for the citizentry of Tennessee, including half the jobs at the plant. The state paid for all of the training of the employees, supposedly in exchange for half the jobs.
.
Funny thing, though… NOTHING was put in writing. The college had videos of the presentations and all of the promises made.
.
The locals did things with a handshake – the lawyers were only all to happy to shake hands – and NOTHING ELSE. It was a “war” to them.
.
When the time came to actually start to hire, the “guarantees” became “goals”, then “future goals”, then “working goals”. We “contractors” were allowed to sit in the UAW meetings, where the reps bragged about how they had first shift locked up for the UAW and were working on the other shifts.
.
Watching the UAW and GM management in action down there is where I got my cynical “a pox on both their houses” outlook toward large, arrogant unions and companies.
.
That said, unlike some here, I am NOT knee-jerk “unions are EVIL BY DEFINITION”. I see their need and how they came to be – but, like any other entitiy, some of the more powerful ones over-reach, just like managment does with too much power and too little oversight or checks-and-balances.

“The name of the case is Buckley v. Valeo. The Citizens United case extended this “freedom of speech’”to corporations. But even though the Court’s staunchest originalists voted in the majority in Citizens United, I suspect that the Founders would have been appalled by the decision.”
.
The Founders were pretty darned careful about they did and did not put in The Constitution. The word “corporation” doesn’t appear for a reason. No one who believes in corporate personhood can also credibly call themselves an originalist.

“I hope we shall crush… in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country.”
.
–Thomas Jefferson</blockquotehttp://www.thenation.com/blog/37038/thomas-jefferson-feared-aristocracy-corporations