Meg Whitman vs. Jerry Brown Debate, And The Winner Is ...

• The so called debaters should be ashamed of themselves because in their stupid commercials all they did was say bad things about each other instead of the good things that they will do.if their was one mote candidate people would've probably chosen him/her

• Jerry Brown & Barbara Boxer! SAVE THE ENVIRONMENT+ECONOMY NOW! Don't listen to Bs Billionares who just want to get senate.!! Think about the future Whitman just plans to Extinguish little jobs and produce big companies, think about the billions of middle class people who will be in jobs and the more later green jobs that will save the air we breathe. my dad so happens to be a Documented immigrant who pays taxes and gets NO Tax Cut!! My dad makes decent money to keep a roof over my head and just about enough to provide food on the table. Whitman is an evil woman who just cares about the higher class people! dont listen to her lies she just wants to remain on top, while in the other hand Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer have plans and organized ways to produce clean efficient air and money instead of use money to find more money to put in HER Pocket! Mind the Devil eyes of her smile, Jerry Brown, save California. -Hypiesz was here.

• I think both dont deserve to run for governor

• i think jerry brown got thi8s battle because he has done this before and meg whitman is suck bad. she is no good for pomona. so vote for jerry brown for governor

• To ANONYMOUS: you are illiterate and don't even know it. First get your GED for English and learn to analyze. You are commenting on the things you have no clue about (pensions and unions.) How upsetting is to see illiterate uneducated bloggers who are so delusional that they dare to comment on stuff they have no idea about. Meg is NOT qualified, plain and simple. State is not a corporation. CA state pension got in trouble due to the CORPORATE greed - they invested in Enron, for example... Jerry is the only qualified candidate right now. If you want CA totally stripped of anything public, vote for unqualified corporate shark. You and your state will be eaten alive before you know it.

• okayy this election need to come to an end because all they are doinqq is personal attackss what about the good in people i understand they want the best for us as america but puttinqq people down and tell us there a bad choice for our america will get us no where so as result of that this election needs major help. isnt this switchinq to new governers suppose to be a smooth switch i guess not meg whitman nor jerry brown is good for us as far as i see through commercials there need to be positive thinqqs about them to if the good out ways the bad we have a good future for america and i pray we do!

• jerry brown sat on his backside for two years, accepting union gratuities, and only in the past couple of months has he gotten off his but,(bell scandel), has he done anything for the state. he is a loser in the past, present and in the future. if you think things are bad now, and moonbeam is elected, grab your savings, and head for the hills.

• I think meg whitman sucks!!! VOTE FOR JERRY BROWN!! :)

• How about Laura Wells or Chelene Nightingale?!!

• 1) Pete Wilson, Meg Whitman's fellow Republican was the one who first used the term WHORE referring to our country's congress. Not saying that it was ok for someone in Jerry's camp to do the same, however the term in this particular context regardless of which party used it is gender neutral. Some people seem to think his camp worker was talking about her specifically. Meg Whitman was not offended with Pete but is capitalizing on the fact that some women's groups find the word offensive. 2) I'm neither Repblcn nor Demcrt. I believe any citizen can make a difference which is why I served on my town's neighborhood council beginning with my last year in college. During my tenure, the council made a lot of difference: we helped a local farmer save his organic free range chicken farm, put pressure on the Dept of Trans to widen a major street to include a left turn lane which greatly reduced accidents, etc. I have to agree with Jerry Brown's suggestion to bring power to the local level. Locals know and understand their issues better than anyone else so should be empowered to make a difference for themselves. 3) I hope either candidate is certain they can create jobs. Brown says green jobs but how quickly can those jobs be created. Hopefully soon but what is certain is that at least he is concerned about our environment. Meg says give incentives for the creation of small businesses. I hope people are motivated to start new businesses despite the looming despair from many failed small businesses in recent years whose owners have lost soo much including their homes in some cases.

• I agree with a previous poster: Is that the brightest we have in California? However, I believe Arnold took the gig with all good intentions. Not being a career politician, he had no idea of what jungle he was facing in Sacramento. Same here. Even if Whitman has good intentions, Brown can handle life in the jungle better. And possibly get something done.

• Meg Whitman won that debate hands down. She got to Jerry he was fumbling for words and I think at one point he almost said I got the police chiefs in my back pocket before he corrected himself. I havent voted in any election so why am I going to fault her for not voting and her spending all that money. I look at it like this if she spends her own money she owes no favors to any unions and coperations. Her hiring an illegal she went through an agency and paid her 23$ an hour and fired her when she found out she was illegal I will clean her house any day for 23$ an hour. People that complain about giving herself bonuses I would too if I could I cant fault her for that she didnt do anything illegal so whats the problem

• I think the situation with meg Whitman could happen to anyone or any business. I also feel that there are people working in California without green cards, that go through atgents with fake social security numbers. It happens all of the time. Someone dies and they use their social scurity number. The timing was riehg for Gloria and the housekeeper. Just a slap in Meg Whitmans face before the election. Brown is a loud mouth that has nothing to bring to the table to help California. At least Meg Whitman (I feel) can bring jobs to California. And like she said, if there are jobs people are paying social security and then California gets out of the red. When there are no jobs people are not paying into the system. We need our truck drivers as Meg said. many of the owner operators that use to come into California do not now because of the restrictions. So California has all of these restrictions! Which stops jobs! Which stops creating jobs! Prices get higher when there are not drivers to haul our freight. Groceries, clothing etc... California needs to look at the whole picture and not a piece of the pie. What is important? Meg and the housekeeper or California and JOBS? WE NEED JOBS. People are sitting at home and loosing everything they have and it is not because of the housekeeper.

• During Jerry Brown's final term as Governor, the unemployment rate in California nearly doubled to a record of 11 percent. When Brown left office in January of 1983, more than 1.3 million Californians were out of work. And you clowns want to re elect him? Thats it...I'm moving.

• OMG. A lot of people are blowing whistles at politicians' and union pensions. I agree that there needs to be a cap on how much they can collect, especially in a recession. That does not mean that many of them don't deserve to be well compensated. Their jobs should be regarded as reputably as with doctors, lawyers and other highly skilled professions that require intense education and preparation. If it is wrong for a good politician to earn $100 thousand a year, shouldn't there be caps on CEO salaries? Some of these CEO's make millions and millions of dollars in just a single year, all the while laying off their hardworking employees who make only a few thousands of dollars a year.

• Hundreds of Billions in imposable to pay state union pensions. A teacher, fireman, police, DMV, or thousands of staffers as well as politicians that retires at 55 gets an average around $100,000 a year for life. If that union worker lives to an average 85 that is 30 years times $100,000 that my friends is 3 million in benefits to EACH. With the senseless explosion in the number of state workers, anyone can see it is unsustainable and guaranteed to bankrupt the state. That is where all the tax money goes and why nothing is left for public needs. Before brown�s first term it was illegal for state workers to unionize, Benefits, days off, and pensions were reasonable back then. It was brown that pushed for public service unions to be allowed which grew in power and greed. they used forced by law union dues from members to reward and threaten candidates. Now tall the politicians work to please the unions not us1 Thank you so much jerry brown!. The high taxes on employers and your hate for business drove countless companies either out of the state or out of business. Thanks for making California the worse of all 50 states as an business environment and the loss of millions of jobs here, but brown�s source of donations, the big all powerful unions he created has grown huge that is where browns campaign money comes from.. Brown is the source of California�s fall from best to worst. If you hate business, jobs and California, then vote for the king of smears and flush the sate the rest of the way down the toilet. If you want a state with people employed and paying parole taxes to pay for the needs of the non-state employee population . send brown to pasture to collect his pension,

• Meg Whitman answered only 2 or 3 questions directly. She started every answer with why (in her opinion which didn't always make sense) Jerry Brown was wrong for the job. With the remaining few seconds of her time left, she repeated "I have a plan." She was never explicit about what any of those plans were? We get it Meg, you have a plan for everything, but can you please draw us voters a picture of said plans?

• Commenters, do you have any knowledge of punctuation, capitalization or syntax? Your opinions don't sound very intelligent when it seems like you typed them while drunk. It is especially funny to read comments about the candidate's lack of qualifications from people who can't be bothered to write correctly. If there's time to do it, there's time to do it right.

• "Cheshire cat?" John you are so funny and on point with all your comments. Nardia too.

• "Cheshire cat?" John you are so funny and on point with all your comments. Nardia too.

• There is a time and place for fighting to make this world how it ought to be... but right now we need to focus on how it actually is. Stop wasteful spending. Cut strangling regulations against businesses that are forcing jobs oversees. Don't rehire failed politicians! Put real leaders in office who know how to accomplish!

• Billionaires create jobs. I'm sick and tired of listening to opinions of people who don't understand a damn thing about business or how to truly, effectively manage anything for that matter. We owe the power and prosperity of this entire nation to entrepreneurs and the free market. Give the state to a professional who is a proven innovator. The political rhetoric on the other side is nauseating. Let's listen to the answers, and we'll know who has a plan. Ideology doesn't work in politics. Vote for commonsense!

• Wil any employer will trust and hire or help any illegal immigrant, from now on? I do not think so! All thanks to Nicki Diaz. I never have voted, I do not believe in politics. If, I want to make an exeption. I would vote for Ms. Whitman.

• Wow, you libs really are something else. You can sob (boo hoo), all you want about the poor public sector employees and how mean old Republicans like Meg Whitman will hurt them but the fact is that you guys are in a huge hole because of them. It's such a nice thought to think you can make the impossible happen, but you can't. If you tax more, even more companies will leave. Read Laffer - it's a law of diminishing returns (eventually negative returns). You can't get blood from a turnip, especially when there are so many illegals in the state, many of whom are low wage workers and others who don't even pay taxes! THERE IS NO MORE TO SQUEEZE OUT. If schools and firemen are important, why don't they get the funding first? It's because if you wrote an initiative up to increase taxes to expand City Hall or increase benefits for state workers, it would get voted down. So it's always got to be about safety - those mean Republicans don't want you to vote for schools (or), they want to cut fire service! When in reality it's "unions and state employees are pigs and bully their way to the trough first and essential services are last!". As someone else said, I thought it was public SERVICE, not having the public serve YOU. If these vaunted things were really so important to libs, (rather than just a political stick), they (the programmes) would get the funding ahead of the Cadillac pensions and benefits for state employees. Yet you're impressed the Brown would know how to manoeuvre through Sacramento better than Whitman. Is that REALLY the most important thing? Being on the 'inside'? Isn't cronyism one of the things that got you into trouble in the first place?

• Why would we vote for Brown for governor again?? He ruined California once before and I do not think that he has learned much more since then. He promised lower taxes back in the 80s and instead raised them. Sorry, I'm voting Meg Whitmen. Let's try something new rather then go for something that we tried once and went bad. I'm tired of Democrats saying they know how to run the country and then failing miserably. I'm not saying that Arnold is any better but I'm pretty sure the Democrats will not do any better at this point.

• I am amazed that the thought process of a to b to c seems to have been lost on some. Whitman hired the lying illegal from an employment agency, who checked her credentials - the illegal provided a false drivers license, false social security card, fraudulently signed a Federal I-9 form! When she told the employer she was an illegal - she got fired. So for all those years she kept that letter??? Interesting - and where else has she been working illegally? And why hasn't the AG of California, along with ICE - deported her??????? Don't let Jerry Brown or one of his sleezy supporters win - Meg Whitman can create jobs and that is what California needs!!!!

• How do you bring everyone to the table when you make the remarks like Whitman does about those same people? Together with no political experience, I don't think she can get anything done. Even though I like many of the things she says she wants to do. Being a hypocrite isn't going to enhance her chances neither.

• Mr Reason, If you want "credible" Don't use inteligence and Oboma in the same posting.A Muslim lying socialist Traitor he is!.And thats all from the mouths of the Obomas. If California leads the Nation were all Screwed,so All you liberals pull your head out you need to see the names on the ballot,and political hacks unlike a drunken sailor continue spending when they run out of money,Brown will spend and spend,& We still have the asses in sacramento to deal with.....The Cancer grows and Mexifornia is dying a slow death! Have a Grand Day.

• Mr Reason, If you want "credible" Don't use inteligence and Oboma in the same posting.A Muslim lying socialist Traitor he is!.And thats all from the mouths of the Obomas. If California leads the Nation were all Screwed,so All you liberals pull your head out you need to see the names on the ballot,and political hacks unlike a drunken sailor continue spending when they run out of money,Brown will spend and spend,& We still have the asses in sacramento to deal with.....The Cancer grows and Mexifornia is dying a slow death! Have a Grand Day.

• Tom, If you want to represent the Republican party better i strongly suggest formulating more educated opinions what is and isn't conservative. DON'T rattle off STATISTICS and then have no credible backround for them. If you want to show any bit of inteligence refer to our president as President Obama, have at least a little respect for our country's past, present, and future. You have a lot of educating to do... for YOURSELF, before you should be voicing your ignorant opinion

• I would rather sip tea than smoke it April. As a public saftey employee, and a Republican, I find it difficult to vote for Meg, my grandfather always said " don't bite the hand that feeds you!"

• The choice is deplorable but still clear: Brown- for everyone who wants to add to the state's staggering debt with more union pensions and health plans the rest of us pay for; Brown-if you want another fiasco like his recalled appintee, Rose Bird; Brown if you want more employers forced from the state by higher taxes, and still more regulations. Whitman, if you want someone to whom the above does not sound like a great idea.

• In North Korea, we have one ruler and one party. In USA, we have two. Rep and Demon. how sad?

• We have the best of both worlds, Wow! Only in Mexifornia we have the choise of two losers,Both bent on the feeding of over size egos and pocket books as we the people get hosed, Mexifornia,Pull your head out liberals you will need to read the names on the ballot. and the slow death of our state continues....Sacramento needs overhauled from the top down, No EPA,NO CARB,NO ILLEGALS,NO STATE UNIONS to feed the beast. the people need to take it all back. as the proof has allready been seen,The political leaches need to be killed, Look at the city of Bell, The same is at the state level...I feel Meg has less conections to the beast.People against the political beast.

• We have the best of both worlds, Wow! Only in Mexifornia we have the choise of two losers,Both bent on the feeding of over size egos and pocket books as we the people get hosed, Mexifornia,Pull your head out liberals you will need to read the names on the ballot. and the slow death of our state continues....Sacramento needs overhauled from the top down, No EPA,NO CARB,NO ILLEGALS,NO STATE UNIONS to feed the beast. the people need to take it all back. as the proof has allready been seen,The political leaches need to be killed, Look at the city of Bell, The same is at the state level...I feel Meg has less conections to the beast.People against the political beast.

• Many are saying that Whitman is politically inexperienced. That's a given. Aren't we all tired with seasoned politicians like Brown who spent his lifetime in public office but has not brought anything significant to California that i could think of. California now is the result of the aggregate of all the services of past public officials and Brown was and still a part of that. (He showed no devotion to his governor tenures spending his time running for president.) Where did all this public service bring us? - To a bangcrupt California! We need a new face. If Whitman gets elected and fails, what do we have to lose. Brown already failed us. All we need to do is look for another new face again and keep on trying until we find a successful one. The government system needs a complete overhaul. Our public officials don't work for us THE PEOPLE. They work their own interests and the other SPECIAL INTERESTS>

• The type of jobs Meg will give us are of the minimum wage no benefits variety. She is also planning to reinstitute a guest worker program to fill them. Import the workers from Mexico and send them back, no muss or fuss for the employers. If you think she is going to sponsor jobs that will provide for a decent life, I've got a bridge in San Francisco I can sell you cheap.

• Jerry sounded like an old man grumbling on a park bench. Supporters of Brown need to revisit his tenure as governor. He was/is a big union guy. He unionizeed the State workers, which is a significant reason the state is imploding today. He also opposed prop 13 and then claimed to be a supporter after it overwhelmingly passed. He is a career politician, we have had far too many of those!

• 1st off...why is anyone attacking labor?? Stop blaming the unions. No one works for free...Do you people realize that you get stuff for your tax dollars?? You get services, roads, schools ,etc. So many people are workers...STOP FIGHTING about labor. We're all mostly working class...

• Gloria Allred??? Like all the other slezz bags she represented for free,just to get her name in the news, this housekeeper will be sorry she was used by Goria just smear Meg for Jerry Brown SHAME ON JERRY BROWN

• Yeah tell me about it - really great to read what other people think

• I just wish there was a like button for these comments

• So glad to see that most of the others had the same impression I did. Brown had been pretty quiet, and to be honest, I had been leery, both because of his age and because he hadn't convinced me that he really wanted the job. But in the debate he came across as firm, knowledgeable, experienced, honest, and deeply committed to his principles. He has no agenda except to serve California to the best of his ability. I think he's the man California needs in these difficult times. Meg, on the other hand, keeps digging her own grave. Even if I believed in everything she stands for, I wouldn't trust her enough to vote for her.

• Cindy, I won't call Meg's smile as a smirk. It is the same smile Miss.USA pageants have on their face when they strut in their swim suits in front of Donald Trump. One is supposed to slightly tilt the head to a side while having a constant smile without closing the lips. They also put glycerine on their teeth to make them sparkly. It is expected to give them extra browny points from Trump as he looks into their eyes thinking "is that my potential next wife strutting in front of me?". Whitman has definitely honed her skills in the Miss.USA swimsuit strut smile. It will definitely give her some edge in votes from people similar to Donald Trump who live in California.

• Cindy you talk about Meg Whitman's constant smirk. I looked up the definition of "smirk" in wikipedia. This is what it says: A smirk refers to a smile evoking insolence, scorn, or offensive smugness. "A constant smirk upon the face, and a whifling activity of the body, are strong indications of futility," the Earl of Chesterfield once wrote in a letter to his son.

• Jayne you are right. Only time when people can't get a smirk off their face is when they have something to hide. It is like a magician trying to divert you to concentrate on his right hand while his left hand tries to hide the object. Whitman wants you to concentrate on her smile to avoid you from reading anything else from her facial expressions.A smile is a good thing, but a constant smirk is bad. Her Phoniness Queen Whitman has her eyes on the throne in Sacramento. So far she has valued the throne to have a price tag higher than $120 million. Just like at eBay we do not know how much more she is willing to bid for that throne. At eBay the buyer pays through PayPal. But for the Sacramento throne she will make the people of California pay.

• I couldn't help but notice Meg smiled uneasily throughout the hwole talk last night, no matter who was talking. Jerry took everything seriously and I'll be glad to listen to him for several more years.

• These corporate billionaires hire undocumented guest wrokers to avoid paying healthcare benefits and pensions and guess who picks up the tab for all the undocumented workers in our country? You and me the tax payer. So what do you want? Stop demonsizing the unions at least they are legal workers fighting for a decnet wage againstthese cockroach billionaires

• DoveAB said Meg Whitman is going to do something about employers who hire illegal aliens. Of course DoveAB said this today before the whole Gloria Alred spectacle with the illegal alien who worked for Meg Whitman came in the news. I find it hard to believe that Meg Whitman has decided not to file a lawsuit against the employment agency where she hired her live in maid from. How do we expect her to do anything about illegal immigration if she becomes governor?

• It is abundantly clear to anyone that has been watching this campaign since before the primary that Whitman wants to be Governor so that she can run for President. She cares about California for the sole purpose of padding her resume. Brown does not have Presidential ambitions because he has been there and not done that. I distinctly remember the last incredibly rich candidate that said he claimed that no special interest groups will be able to obstruct him from changing politics as usual in Sacramento. We have to remember that the Governor is an executive office with the power to say no. The legislature is the branch with the power to propose and say yes. This gubernatorial election will not correct the problem on Capitol hill so we might think about electing the candidate that can most assuredly navigate the legislative waters.

• WAKE UP!, I don't understand your logic of business erosion. If the people of California are the ones who start businesses, then they are going to start their mom and pop stores in California. They are not going to set up a mom and pop shop somewhere else so that they can live in California. Other states are not waiting at our borders with a fishhook and a bait to grab all the business from here. Isn't Meg Whitman saying the same things Arnold Schwarzeneger said while running for governor. I don't like the term "career politician" being used to dispel some fear in people as if it is a bad thing. If a career in politics is not good, then Meg Whitman should not get into it. So how many years do you have to be a politician before it starts to mean from something good to something bad? People who have cared for other people have always gotten into politics at a young age. They don't wait until they make their millions or billions to start to serve other people and they don't always start at the top like a governor post.

• I'll take Whitman ANYDAY over Brown. And based on her performance, I'll take substance of Whitman's direct answers, her detailed plan, and her experience at running a company. If you want a comedian, watch Comedy Central... Brown IS a joke. Please- more "green jobs" BS? (We know how that turns out..'yes we can!) Decrease in pay for the Gov position? - Arnold has already been doing that- he works for $1/yr. Brown is a career politician who has failed in every attempt. If people are stupid enough to elect him, watch California erode even further, and wave good-bye to the businesses that will leave the state in droves...

• Now Meg Whitman is in the middle of an immigration bruhaha. Her nanny claims Meg treated her badly by employing her for nine years knowing she was here illegally and firing her only when she started her campaign for governor. Meg's response is she did not know that her maid was illegal. Could Meg Whitman be telling the truth? I don't know. It is pretty hard to have someone employed and living in your house as a maid for 9 years without knowing whether they are in this country illegally. Why couldn't Meg hire a Caucasian lady from Texas? Why do all these rich people need maids who speak Spanish?

• Sam42, I think you are right about Whitman. She seems to have a too polarized view about what is good for California. She has not seen life outside the corporate board room, and definitely not outside the wooded hills of Atherton. Her view of California is through the crystal chandliers and tinted windows of multimillion dollar homes and the view is obstructed by the heavy woods surrounding the home. California is not Atherton and she will feel out of place in Sacramento.

• Here's the dilemma. We in California can not and should not look at Texas for answers to our problems. If business is picking up in Texas there can be a lot of different reasons for it. One being its central location. Transporting goods from California to the east coast is going to be twice as expensive as transporting them from Texas to the east coast. Therefore naturally Texas will be more suitable for certain types of businesses where logistics is involved. In the past decade China has shown tremendous growth in business while California has gone the opposite way. China will claim that Communism has to be credited for that. Does it mean that California should try to emulate the Communist principles of China to bring jobs back here? The problems in California may not be business related at all. It is bad governance. People who are too principled at the top who find it hard to negotiate or find compromises to pass a budget. Is Whitman going to change that. I don't think so. She has not shown any credentials showing how she has dealt with unions in the past. There are more things involved in the life in California than running businesses. From all her sound bites, we have seen Whitman feels comfortable in a business setting but nowhere outside the corporate gates. We have never seen her at any charity events, fund raisers or anything or anywhere where it benefits the common man. Corporations work for the sake of the share holders and most shareholders of any major California corporation is outside California and in Wall street. When it comes to bottom lines in the corporate ledger there is nothing which says "That is good for California". I won't trust Whitman to touch our state budget.

• I heard Whitman say that people from Texas come to California on hunting trips basically looking for businesses that they can take away from California. I searched the whole internet looking for such information and didn't find any. Also there are no numbers to back up her claim that California business taxes drive business out of California. I would like Whitman or anybody supporting Whitman to show some numbers from the department of commerce or even from private studies where this trend is quantified. There are businesses that have gone out of business because of the overall economic downturn, and also big businesses often shift jobs out of the country for obvious reasons of cheap labor. But taxation is not to be blamed for such action. All these sound bites like "I met a man from Texas coming here on a hunting trip" etc are just scare tactics. In reality it is not Texans who come here on such hunting trips, it is the Chinese, Indians and every other country out there. Whitman folks please show some numbers or point to some location on the internet where such information can be found. If you can't find it on the internet it probably does not exist other than in her imagination. Any takers out there who can research about the number of businesses California has lost to Texas?

• Jerry by a long shot!

• The winner will be whoever is capable of getting out the vote. Shame on us if we don't vote in Nov. But even more so if we elect someone that truly does not care for the hardworking middle class. Don't waste your vote. If we really want to get California back on track the right person for that job will be Jerry Brown. Ms Whitman hasn't spent a dime of her own money. Of the millions that she has spent supposedly of her own, that has been just the interest of the billions she has. A billionaire knows nothing of the struggles of the working class! Or cares.

• John (et al): Perhaps it is insanity to vote in (as I say) �a third term of Schwarzenegger,� but it won�t be the first time that the voters did something �insane,� nor will it be the last. Perhaps Brown can be (re) elected at age 72, but I don�t think so, and I don�t think anyone else really thinks so either, including Brown himself� �Brown, enigmatic as usual, refused to talk to reporters after the debate. Instead, he led a strange parade of newsies out of Mondavi Center on the UC Davis campus, then abruptly changed course, went back inside the building and disappeared behind a set of doors.One reporter tried to question him about his performance and he replied, "I will leave that to you guys." So was he unhappy that he didn't score more points on Whitman? Who knows? It was vintage Brown � unpredictable, sometimes infuriating � and proving that fundamentally, he hasn't changed much in the 28 years since leaving the Governor's Office.� --from Dan Walters dwalters@sacbee.com Published: Wednesday, Sep. 29, 2010 - 12:00 am | Page 17A Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/09/29/3064323/dan-walters-no-knockout-punches.html#Scene_1#ixzz10waH8Otr

• Well Whitman herself said it right when she quoted Albert Einstein on insanity. We elected a wealthy business dude The Terminator for running our government. It will be insanity to do the same thing again by electing another super wealthy business woman and expect a different result. People like Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman dont care about government through out their lives and is evidenced by their lack of willingness to get off their comfy leather chairs to go to the polling booths. Then all of a sudden they find that they are sitting at home with nothing else to do other than count their stash of money, and decide that being a governor is better than sitting at home counting the money. Well I hope the California governor's post doesn't end up as a musical chair for the wealthy. As Whitman pointed out it will be insanity to expect something different from Whitman that we haven't already seen from Schwartzeneger.

• I watched the debate with an open mind! I listened to both speakers and have determined that Meg Whitless is not the person I want running my state. All she talked about was cutting state government, cutting education, and cutting welfare. Do all of these entities need revamping; explictly yes, I'm a state worker agreeing with that! But, the real is that it's not cool to cut jobs and then turn around and contract those same jobs out to your corporate buddies. As a employee who handles and develops consultant contracts, an Administrative Assistant (consultant) position makes around $190 dollars an hour vs. an Executive Assistant who makes $20 an hour or less due to the 15% cut. Should we cut education when California as one of the largest states has some of the poorest schools. I believe that all public schools should be replace with Charter schools. My child attends one for the past 4 years and is now one of the highest STAR testing pupils in the State and nation (so they work). Jerry Brown is a believer in Charter schools and has created two so he definitely knows what he's talking about on that issue. Lastly, I know welfare is frowned upon because most people think that a bunch of loser drug addicts are on welfare, but you have to remember that those loser drug addicts have babies that unfortunately didn't get to pick their parents and will be the ones who suffer if their assistance is cut or eliminated. I am a true testiment that welfare helps those like myself get a leg up and not all welfare recipients are sitting on the butts and doing drugs. If it wasn't for the assistance I got from welfare, I wouldn't have been able to go to vocational school to get the training I needed to obtain a job and not just a job, but a career as I have been with the State for 24 years.

• Peter, I think age matters less in politics and governance than actual skill in the present. Obama made his case before the people, and proved he had a better command of the facts as well as policies. All that remained was McCain's "experience" argument - which was undermined by McCain's adherence to disproven conservative polices, and his selection of an inexperienced running mate who would be an obvious disaster. If Whitman had made a case that she a) genuinely cares about California, and b) has a better command of policies and facts, she'd be a shoe-in. But because she did not, the trend is she will lose. Which I think speaks well for the judgement of the people.

• Liz and John: Look, I am old, so I am certainly a person that believes wisdom and experience are both good and often come with age. That said; don�t kid yourself about age being a determining factor. McCain had significantly more experience than Obama. In fact, it could well be argued that much of Obama�s current failings are (in part) due to his lack of experience. Nonetheless, did McCain beat Obama? Did you vote for McCain, the more �experienced� guy? (: No; Obama won (in large part) because he represented youth, vigor, and the future. Brown � despite his experience � is old, feeble, and represents the past; not good attributes to take into an election. And frankly, his answers last night, while often good, were also often rambling at times, which plays into the stereotypes in peoples� (i.e., voters) minds about...old people! Plus, did you really think a man who will be 72-80 during his two terms is up to the task? Maybe he is -- and indeed maybe he should be elected -- but don�t kid yourself; he isn�t going to get elected (just like McCain didn�t get elected), so you/we had better prepare ourselves for �a third term of Schwarzenegger(!)� (:

• Actually Tom I think it was a great response. I think your response is poor. So, nyah nyah. Now that we're past that - you just stated that if Brown loses it's good news for conservatives, and if brown wins it's not good news for liberals. You do realize that the ovewhelming majority of California governors have been Republican, right? If not, review the history. It's interesting. On another note, I think a great exercise for those that are emotionally driven in their political views is to look at facts with logic. GWB's "pro-business policies" and "business experience" was supposed to be great for America. Result? Disaster. Schwarzenegger's "pro-business policies" and "business experience" for California? Disaster. Now inexperienced empress Whitman's pro-business policies and business experience, combined with a complete lack of experience is supposed to result in - non-disaster? Please explain how that follows, with facts and logic.

• What a bunch of hogwash. Comments about Moonbeam or Obummer or lies about going into the debate undecided! Name calling or pretending to be impartial are not productive. The things that concern me are Whitman failing to accept the findings that Fact Check .Org found fault with in the accuracy of her ads; her inability to explain her lack of a voting record; and her not responding at all to her planned tax cut for the wealthy. The Republicans want you to forget that we have a Republican governor in office now who also ran as an outsider and a non career politician. If doing the same thing over is insanity, how is Whitman so different. When did having a career or belonging to a union become such an evil thing?

• Could it be that these two republican women are falling in the polls because they look better on paper than in real life or are people finding out who they real are? Lets face it Carly Fiorina was basically fired from HP, but not before she sent HP USA jobs overseas. California has already tried a so-called outsider Independent Republican, his name Arnold Schwarzenegger, we all know how that turned out. Meg Whitman, thinks she can buy the election, but what puzzles many is if she real cared and loved California then why not do your civic duty and vote, seems she is more rhetoric than anything (in good times we would give her a try but not in our disaster mode that we are in). She is finding out that California is not for sale and that you can�t buy everything! What a waste of money!

• Peter commented about Jerry Brown's age. Here is my take on age in politics. We have many senators in Washington who get reelected even when they have one foot in the grave. So people do not use look at age when they go to the polling booth. Another thing about age is people unfortunately equate age with wisdom. Meg Whitman comes out as a novice or in other words a newbie and however smart she is, she is trying to learn politics on the job. Maybe she should run for mayor of Atherton before trying her hand governing California. I don't have a problem with Whitman running a city with far fewer problems and show that she can get all the business she was talking about from Texas to that city. But we gave Arnold a chance hoping that a savvy business man like Schwarzeneger can bring the same savvyness to Sacramento, but that didn't happen. We are in a deeper mess because of that. Why is Whitman keeping a distance from our current governor, and never bring up his name. Because they are two peas from the same pod. Two wealthy business people with no track record in government, thinking that they can govern California using principles used in their business practice.

• As an independent, I really worry about our state legislator overspending and inability to reign in unions. Before yesterdays debate, I was casting a vote against our state legislator and for Meg Whitman. Today I am now voting for Jerry Brown as I now believe Whitman is a phony and will crumble like every governor before her. She truly has embraced being a politician a little too easy. Jerry Brown is a career politician and while likeable he has always been pro-union and pro-state government. That being said, at this point in his life and career, he has nothing to lose by making tough choices which is what California needs right now.

• to Peter: Wow, when I get old I don't think I want you defending me in an age discrimination case! Age can also equate experience and knowledge in a person's field. Don't discrimate because of one's look or age...not important here.

• Poor..poor response metajim. Let's stay on point shall we. Moonbeam is an old-hat politician (the polar opposite you libs claimed Obummer to be) and if he can't win in Cal., I think this would be the ammunition for my "conservative" comment. If he wins by just a few point...in Ca?, it will still re-inforce my opinion. A great exercise for those that are emotionally driven in their political views is to take a close look at the Carter years....remember them??

• As an attorney-ltigator, I thought Brown won the debate, but you know what my entire (pretty liberal) family took away from the dabte? That Brown looked and sounded (very) OLD. And everyone knows it; at 72 years old, he looks and sounds too old to be govenor. Just like the age factor worked very much against McCain (and Dole before him.) Brown looked (and is) old and washed-up, and (deep down) everyone knows that. Regardless of the fact that Whitman is (in many ways) a female version of Schwarzenegger, she is still going to win.

• Hi Tom, I like you too. The idea that we should trust someone that has billions of dollars to waste on a campaign just so she can feed her ego and create billions more to put back in her own pocket and the pockets of her capitalist friends is just ridiculous. When is it a good idea to vote for a candidate that has no respect for hardworking people like police officers, firefighters,teachers or nurses!!! Can't change my vote, it goes to someone who care about the above people. Jerry Brown.

• Tom, Sorry if you voted for Shrub or McCain in the Membrane. On Nov. 3rd, voters will wake up to the fact that they're going to work again. Somehow I think your claim that Obama has been anti-business when he has SAVED business with his policies, won't cut much ice with them. But I almost hope you get your wish and conservatives do take over - so maybe another 4 years of screwing over the working families will wake you up. But if the disaster of the previous know-nothing Republican Governor, and the last 8 years of a disastrous know-nothing President, both of whom were supposed to be *better* because they had "business experience"....if that doesn't wake you up to the fact that more is needed to run a state like California or a country, I don't know what will.

• Tom, It's hard to see how voting for another Republican with absolutely no political experience is a vote against the "status quo". But this sentence of yours is a masterpiece of unintended irony: "These types of statements from Liz prove the libs are narrow-minded and divisive." How narrow-minded and divisive is that statement? You have just: a) misinterpreted a stranger's words b) used that misinterpretation to generalize about an entire group of people you've also never met c) demonized them with that generalization Way to go.

• Liz, Sorry that you voted for Obummer and on Nov 3rd, Americans will awaken to the fact that the country IS more conservative than you might think, and if you're as intelligent as I think you may be...it will be your poltical ephiphany....I hope. As a small business owner with friends that run billion dollar businesses, Obummer and his buddies, in less than two years, have destroyed any semblance of business confidence in our society. Jerry Brown, his father, Gray Davis...and yes, Aunold, have doen their best to ruin the engine that runs this great country....absolutely ruined it, and until we vote for "real change" (not phony baloney, good time rock-n-roller Obummer style change), our economy will continue to plummet. You may re-consider your vote and give someone who has actually run a business have a shot!

• Are kidding ??? When asked why is different than the last time he was Governor he responded " he won't be closing down the bars in Sacremento like he did last time he was Governor !

• Tom, obviously we may have differnent viewpoints in regards to what we feel is important in a candidate. I did vote for President Obama and proud of that fact. What we need now is getting someone in office with experience to lead us down a difficult path. But also someone who cares more about people than money! Just something to consider.

• I didn't hear Meg say anything different from what George Bush said in 2000 or Schwartzenegger said in 2001. Heck, she even said that Texas was a better state than California! Her "specifics" amounted to billions in tax cuts, a billion to UC regents, and take the money out of the pockets of teachers, janitors, firemen, policemen and all the other "small people." As a result, I thought it ironic that she twice said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result (aside: that's a myth that Einstein said that, Meg).

• The fact that Whitman throughout her adult life never bothered to vote in any of the elections and now wants everybody to vote for her bothers me. I will make a correction, she is very calculated, she wants just enough votes to win the election not a single vote more from any of us. Otherwise she will feel end up feeling that she "owes us" something. When she says she is spending her own money and therefore she doesn't owe anybody when she gets to Sacramento, tells us that she has an agenda for herself and she is not going to listen to anybody else once she gets to the throne. She can't fix California if she is always going to be in a grid lock situation. My advice to her would be to first go to an election booth and practice her civic duties before stepping into a leadership position in government. IF WHITMAN CAN'T VOTE FOR OTHERS IN CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS, SHE CAN'T EXPECT OTHERS TO VOTE FOR HER EITHER. She had over 30 years to at least step into a polling booth in an election. She just didn't care electing the right people. She always felt she can go and lobby for business in Sacramento by paying from her deep pockets. In a way it is people with deep pockets like her who feed career politicians. Now she is aiming for the throne.

• responding to Tom, Here's a fact you might not want to believe: not all American's are conservative. Some of us care about what happens to the "average joe" that's just trying to take care of his/her family. Alot of us care for the environment, obviously not a high priority for Meg Whitman! Meg is not for the middle class, hardworking Californian. Things don't change overnight, but our best bet to get us back on the right road is Jerry Brown leading us there.

• Liz, Did you say that about Obummer when you voted for him...eh? I think not. These types of statements from Liz prove the libs are narrow-minded and divisive.

• After reading all the posts, it's clear that the liberals are for the status quo. THAT"S THE PROBLEM WITH AMERICA...IDIOTS!!! The real change needed will come from people/politicians that have the desire to return America to our conservative roots. All polls show Americans are overwhelmingly conservative (at least fiscally) and the only way to achieve this re-birth, is to reduce entitlement programs, reduce public employee payrolls below the private sector average (I always thought public sector employment was supposed to be a noble gesture...not for personal wealth), cut capital gains taxes so business owners keep more of what they earn.....hear me....EARN!!!! Those of us Californians that know of Moonbeam's history, believe we'd be returning to the status quo, and although Meg has no political experience, I'd give her a shot over a guy that received an allowance from his parents until he was fifty years old.....that's a fact!!

• The question we need to pose is who do we trust? A person with qualifications and vast experience who has proven himself over his years of dedicated service to Californian's, or a billionaire who has not voted in most past elections and has shipped jobs overseas to profit herself and other billionaires? I think we need to think about that when we cast our vote in November. My vote goes to Jerry Brown.

• To bob s., Nothing you cited has anything to do with the debate. Clearly you didn't go there with an open mind. Whom do you think you are fooling? Did you like Brown's joke?

• California's situation is no laughing matter and Brown continues to joke. Whitman answered every question in a serious and intelligent manner and clearly won the debate.

• I went into the debates without my mind made up either way. I came out with Jerry Brown cleaning the floor with Meg Whitman. Whitman came across as shallow and unexperienced. The mere fact that she didn't bother to vote irks me...now she thinks she can enter and solve all the problems! What an over-sized ego. How hard is it not to screw up EBAY? That's not a hard company to run btw... You think Arnold was ineffective, just vote in Whitman and you'll get Sarah Palin type results and that aint good.

• I didn't see the debate, but I know Jerry Brown lost when biased liberal journalists claiming he is victorious can only cite a joke he made but not any points he actually made in the debate. Romero cites a lame joke at which the liberal journalists who were cheering for Brown laughed. These liberal journalists know that most Californians didn't watch the debate, so they are trying to put it in their minds that Brown won.

• Only Meg Whitman had specific answers to every single question asked. She is keen, quantitative, specific. Brown used mere rhetoric, and the same old "I have been here done that", with little to no substance. And his job creation strategy---hogwash. What garbage. Make new green jobs, only green jobs will save the economy! (which only makes only 3% of all job types in CA). Is this the best he can pull out of his hat? California needs jobs, and fast. CA needs to be competitive, and business friendly. These are what we primarily what we need right now. Am I supposed to stop what I am doing, go back to school, pick up the green trade, and stumble back up for this "green job" opportunity after 8 yrs of college bachelors and masters combined in an entirely different field ? How about being real..Work on the 97% of other job types that currently contribute to the state's economy. Green development is positive, but it is a long term plan. We need to get out and firm now. Why not leverage what we have at the same time as creating new job types? Meg Whitman for Governor 100% She is specific and practical, no nonsense. you guys voting on rhetoric must really not be following this debate nor reading anything of substance about the issues.

• Brown won hands down. Go Jerry!

• The Libs -or paid drones- on this comments section are not being truthful. (((First thing -- Clearly Jerry Brown LOSTt the debate tonight. Meg Whitman is one sharp candidate---refreshing ideas that resemble running a business which IS what CA needs right now. Screw the filthy overpaid UNION THUGS whoring for many-times failed politician, Jerry Brown. But Nice try, libs. The journalist for this article should be fired for untruthful, poor and biased delivery. The bar has been lowered.

• Meg woin the debate tonight, Jerry Brown was horrible -- not focused. I am voting for Meg Whitmans....we need a fresh face and Californians demand less illegal aliens abd she is going to do something about employers who hire them.

• It is not surprising that biased partisan journalists keep giving the debate to Jerry Brown. What is surprising is how superficial their analysis is. For example, Brown won because he made a joke that made biased journalists who wanted to see him do well laugh.

• What is seldom addressed in this "Meg Whitman saved eBay" argument is that the way she changed eBay was to drastically increase seller fees, therefore cutting out the vast majority of casual sellers. Those who wanted to sell off a few unused items, or who thought they'd test the market value of grandma's old cookie jar, were priced out of the market. Most of eBay today is businesses that sell things for below retail, but hope that bidding will drive up a price to provide them with decent profit after seller fees. For the consumer, eBay has been dramatically, and horrifically, changed. No more are the $.99 auctions that just might finish at $.99. Sellers are, in general, people who need to feed their families from this--not those who simply want to clean out their closets and put away a few bucks in the process. Before Meg, I purchased many of the supplies I needed for my wedding on eBay at less than it would cost to rent them. I checked several items I then bought today, and the prices offered are significantly higher. What she did was drive up prices by forcing out the "little guy" and increasing the paid workforce of the company. Is this what we want for California??

• So what kind of jobs did Meg Whitman create with her $120 million dollars? TV Time to put on her negative ads. Why, she could have been a venture capitalist providing seed money to new ventures and supporting our young people in creating new companies, but oh, no she wants to be governor! The only jobs governors can create are State Jobs, but Meg Whitman wants to cut state jobs. So, she would be a job destroyer, not a job creator. A poor use of $120 million dollars!

• When we are faced with 2 poor choices for the governor of California, we have to look at who can swim better in the currents of Sacremento than who is more business savvy. Arnold Schwartzenegar has proved that with all the business connections and fame he couldn't turn California around. Whitman's claim that she managed eBay from a startup to a multibillion dollar company and so can do the same to California is like saying that a pilot who flies a jumbo jet can stear a ship in the ocean better than a fisherman who goes on fishing trips on a daily basis on his boat. In this case Jerry Brown seems to have the advantage since he knows the players in Sacramento. Meg Whitman will of course bring a bunch of management gurus from Silicon Valley to Sacramento and they will all be out of place when it comes to politics. Though Whitman can claim credit for some of the success of eBay, most of the success of eBay has to do with the timing of the technology and the lack of competition for similar websites and largely due to the customer base and vendors who really wanted to make some money on the internet. She definitely can not take credit for the technology since there were other people at eBay who made it happen. I want to know what she has done since leaving eBay.

• I don't see a transcript yet. When one appears, I'll be happy to post the specifics he mentioned, and contrast them to Whitman's. I think Jerry Brown's record actually speaks very well of him. And certainly better than the last Republican who bought his way into office, Schwarzenegger. Since Whitman's only policy differences with Ahnuld are that she's even more right-wing, I don't see how that will work well in any way. But one way or the other, voters will make the call and we will find out whose vision California will follow.

• The only candidate that had real ideas on 'how to fix the problems of California' was Whitman. I'm not sure which debate some of the commentators were watching but Brown had no specifics at all. His only real pitch was "I was governor once and I can do it again". And the only way to judge that pitch is "how did he do when he was Governor?" History has proven that he did not do very well at all.

• AND UNIONEE, I THINK YOUR CAPS LOCK IS STUCK. YOU SHOULD LOOK INTO THAT.

• To Realist complaining about my statement re: Whitman: What's wrong with that is, a state is not a corporation. When you try to run it like one, you end up with disaster that doesn't even work well for corporations. But I was mainly discussing how she was coming across. She seemed to me as if this whole debate was an imposition beneath her station. And the notion that she'd actually have to discuss and justify her plans and positions to the peasantry? Impudence! And no, I don't recall Linda Ronstadt dating Jerry Brown. I hardly see that as being a mark against him. What I'm more concerned with is having a governor who understands policy and gives a crap about the State - and isn't just trying to buy it. So again, I think Brown made his case, and Whitman didn't make hers. But, that's just me.

• Clearly Brown outclassed Whitman in their first debate in a number of ways. Brown's previous experience as Governor made it more than obvious who was the most qualified person to run the state and fix it's problems. With the mess our current Governor has left the California in, we don't need a new Governor who'll do more "on the job training," or test her personal "theories" on how to fix the problems of California. Brown made it obvious that he had an overwhelming knowledge (compared to Whitman) on how State Government works and how to get things done...Whitman seemed much more interested in trying to find as many ways to attack Brown as she could think of rather than offer solid reasons why she could do a better job in fixing the problems in California with her untested ideas, experience, and theories on a state level...

TotalComments: 100