Monday, December 13, 2010

Leftist Busybodies and Meg Whitman's Wallet


These days we sometimes see a little nugget of Maggie Thatcher’s brilliance on a sign at a Tea Party event (or at a protest during one of Obama’s recent 92,538 campus visits). Mrs. Thatcher nailed it when she said, “The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

We all know that Leftists love to get their grubby little hands on our wallets – and when they can’t, they have all sorts of helpful suggestions on how we should be spending it. A local school in my area has banned cookies from school lunches. As in, PARENTS are not allowed to pack cookies in their kids’ lunchboxes. Spend your money on carrot sticks, stupid parents!


In fact, the Left is downright obsessed with other people’s money. ESPECIALLY those darn “rich people.” And nobody’s come in for a more of a whuppin’ on that issue than California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman.

The whole “maidgate” issue helped the Left position Whitman as one of those snooty elites. I mean, I can’t afford to pay someone to clean my house! That’s so unfair that people like HER do that, and then she’s not even NICE to them! Rich people are bad!

Never mind that a significant majority of Democrats in Sacramento are also paying someone (and probably a few illegal someones) to scrub their toilets. Never mind! The point is, Meg Whitman is rich!

Members of the California Nurses Association (that is to say, a UNION), are angry that Meg Whitman has more money than they do. They have criss-crossed the state protesting at her events, with one of their covetous bunch outfitted as “Queen Meg.” They are not particularly coherent about their policy differences with Whitman – they just don’t like her spending HER OWN MONEY.

The Los Angeles Times (surprise!) doesn’t like it either. After reporting that the election is all but over for Whitman (based on poll that nobody else agrees with), columnist Steve Lopez came up with a list of helpful suggestions on how she could have – or should have – spent her money. (Funny… I don’t recall Lopez offering spending suggestions to George Soros, who surely has a far greater political influence than little ol’ Meg…)

Anyway, Lopez and his fellow jealous Meg-haters apparently don’t realize that a great deal of that money (come to think of it, probably ALL of it) was pumped back into the California economy – and to media outlets (like the L.A. Times), in the form of advertising! The travel industry also benefits greatly from campaign spending. Those are all private sector jobs, are they not? (Well, the media is mostly private sector, NPR and its crazy CEO notwithstanding.)

So what exactly is the Left’s problem with Meg Whitman’s money? Their unions are spending more than anyone else, anyway. What is so evil about an individual spending her own money to try to change the state for the better? I’ll tell you what she could have done with the money – she could have bought herself a suite in the nicest hotel in Fiji or someplace and never had to put up with the likes of Queen Meg, Steve Lopez and Gloria Allred. But unfortunately for Meg Whitman, she apparently cares about what happens to the rest of us here in California. Go figure.

No comments:

Post a Comment