Fakeroversy In The Governor's Race

It must be tough when you're running for governor and you have no idea what you're doing, so you figure that, since every candidate needs to start some sort of a scandal against their opponent, you'll just do that and see how it goes. While I don't recommend that approach, if you're going to take that route, might I suggest coming up with a scandal that people would give a fat rat's ass about? Acting all indignant because someone referred to you as a whore is really not going to do much to help you. It will be great fun for those who enjoy mocking you, however.

See, Meg Whitman is running for governor of California. For some reason, her being at the helm when eBay kind of rode itself to its own success is supposed to give her some sort of credibility as the Republican candidate. Well, that and the $140 million of her own money that she has poured into her campaign to get the nomination. (Apparently, she thinks the governor's seat is some sort of Buy It Now dealio.) And lately, she's been rocked by allegations of a former housekeeper that she...um...well....it's not real clear to me exactly what it is that she's being accused of doing. It might be that she didn't treat the hired help all that well, but I'm not totally sure about this. The fact that her ex-housekeeper was in this country illegally, used a fake Social Security number while Meg employed her and was then fired when Meg found out somehow plays a part in all of this, but again, I'm not quite sure how. It's definitely a fakeroversy (fake controversy), but I still have trouble grasping all of the straws that it contains.

Now, after that became the hooplah du jour (complete with Gloria Allred, the world's most awful human being, at the housekeeper's helm), Meg's campaign needed to have someone on her opponent, Jerry Brown. What did they come up with? I guess they had a hard time coming up with anything of substance because apparently, one of his staffers referred to her as a whore, so that's what they went with. Wait. What?

Yep. According to ABC News, Jerry Brown "...left a phone message in early September for a union official whose endorsement he was seeking, but apparently forgot to hang up...And either Brown or a staffer -- there is some dispute -- uses the word "whore" to describe his Republican rival Meg Whitman." Hmm. How about a little context to go with all of that nothing-ness there?

OK. The first part of the conversation that Brown has with one of his staffers after he thought that he had hung up goes something along the lines of Brown saying: "Do we want to put an ad out? … That I have been warned if I crack down on pensions, I will be – that they'll go to Whitman, and that's where they'll go because they know Whitman will give 'em, will cut them a deal, but I won't." So what he's saying (behind closed doors and totally off the record, as he didn't know that he didn't hang up) is that he's not going to cut a deal with the unions, but Whitman is, despite her saying publicly that she's not beholden to any group.

It's after that question that the staffer (or someone else) says, "What about saying she's a whore?" That's quite the idea. Call your opponent a whore in your ads. I don't know that I think it's the most politically savvy move, but Jerry Brown seemed to love it, as he responded, "Well, I'm going to use that...It proves you've cut a secret deal to protect the pensions." I don't know if calling her a whore would prove that, per se. But it would show that you're not afraid to call someone a whore!

Once Whitman's side became aware of this colorful depiction of her, they immediately issued a pansy-ass response. "The use of the term 'whore' is an insult to both Meg Whitman and to the women of California. This is an appalling and unforgivable smear against Meg Whitman. At the very least Mr. Brown tacitly approved this despicable slur and he himself may have used the term at least once on this recording,"

Really? It's an insult to the women of California? How is that? I'm a woman of California and I'm not insulted by Jerry Brown's staffers calling Meg Whitman a whore. It's hard to say if I'd be insulted if they called me a whore. Then again, I don't get insulted easily. That's a weak response. You know what would have been a better response? To DENY that you're acting like a whore by being in bed with the unions and promising them deals in exchange for their endorsements. Now THAT would have been something!

Did she dispute the essence of why they were calling her a whore? Not that I can find. No, she just decided to take the "You hurt my feelings" angle on it. And that seems to be how this is being reported. Why is it that we're focusing on the alleged name calling instead of the fact that she seems to be cutting back room deals with unions? Why aren't we focusing on the fact that Jerry Brown said in private (or what he thought was private) that he wasn't going to make deals with the unions? For him to have said that in private seems to lend credibility to him really meaning that. After all, why would you say something like that if you didn't mean it? It's not like you knew the whole world was going to hear you. It seems pretty credible to me.

But no. Instead, Meg Whitman wants to us to be all up in arms that Jerry Brown's staffer called her a whore. Well, I'm putting down my arms, as they are not up. This is ridiculous. Her allegedly cutting deals with the unions in order to win their support is the real story here. But she's not mentioning that. She's just whining about being called a whore. And by the way, if she is cutting back room deals with the unions in exchange for their support, then she absolutely is a whore. A big, big whore. Whore.

You know, if she can't handle being called a name, I'm not real confident in her ability to lead this ridiculously corrupt state out of the s***hole that it has been in for years. And if she's being a sneaky weasel and saying one thing to the public, but doing another thing in private, I'm absolutely positive that she won't be able to get anything done. Please don't take this as an endorsement for Jerry Brown, however. While the real story might be whether or not she is actually cutting deals, I think that the secondary story might be that Jerry Brown can't figure out how to hang up his phone after leaving a message. It doesn't do much to distract folks from the fact that he's a little old.

The Other Women Want Apologies

Now, I expected that there would be a little bit of talk from folks after Tiger Woods's apology. Mostly I figured that it would be people discussing whether or not he was sincere or not. What I wanted to hear was people explaining why he chose that particular moment to "apologize" or whatever you want to call it. I mean, he wasn't announcing that he was returning to golf. There hadn't been any public developments that anyone was aware of. It was just out of the blue. But of course, since that's a legitimate question, most of the mainstream media didn't address that. Shocking, I know. Aside from that, while I did expect to hear stuff like I described above, what I did not expect to hear were complaints....from the women that he was sleeping with.

That's right. Tiger Woods's whores (I call 'em whores, some call them mistresses) are upset that he did not publicly apologize to THEM during his little speech on Friday. Wait. What now?

Correct. At least two of the mistress-y whores wanted an apology. First up we have Jamie Jungers. She went on E! Online and talked to some dude who I had never seen before and said that she felt that he should have addressed not her in particular, but all of the women that he slept with (I guess that would include his wife, but it's hard to say). According to the article over at The Huffington Post, since she claims to have slept with Tiger on the night that his father died, she "...did not hesitate to reference Earl Woods' passing. "I've seen his face and his emotions when his father died and this was different.... I'm not going to call him a liar but...he's playing that card." Well, she might be right, but she's not right in the way that she thinks that she's right.

See, one's emotions are going to be different on the night that someone, say their father, dies than they are going to be when they are standing behind a podium and blathering on about how sorry they are for something. I'm sure his emotions were different. So I don't know what card he could possibly be playing. That one is definitely a head scratcher.

The other head scratcher is her acting as if she has somehow been victimized by all of this. She claims in the E! clip "If it were up to me, I never would have done it to begin with, but I was young and stupid." Young and stupid aside, I'm pretty sure that it was always up to her. I'm pretty sure that no one forced her to sleep with the world's best golfer. Pretty sure of that.

The other disgruntled mistress is Veronica Siwik Daniels, also known as Jocelyn James. She has to go by a different name for all of the porn that she films. (Oh, that's right. That Tiger hooked up with the classy ones.) Ms. James has managed to get herself hooked up with the most despicable person on the planet, attorney Gloria Allred. Gloria Allred is like the queen of the publicity chasers. If there is an incident that is even the slightest bit in the public eye, mark my words that you will find Gloria Allred trying to weasel her way into it somehow. She's just a horrible, horrible human being. I'm pretty sure that she doesn't have a human soul.

Gloria Allred held her own little press conference after Tiger's. Again, over at The Huffington Post, we learn that Gloria Allred said that "I just watched Tiger Woods' apology on television, and he said that many people believed in him. He also said he wanted to make amends. He did not apologize by name to my client, Veronica, and I ask, why no apology?"

If you really have to ask "Why no apology?", then you're dumber than I thought. What is he going to apologize to these women for exactly? For lying to them? I'm sorry but if you're having an affair with someone who is married, can you really believe anything that they say? After all, they have no problem lying to and cheating on their spouse. Why would anyone expect that it would be any different with the person who is the cheatee? You wouldn't. Well, they did, so I guess I should have wrote that they shouldn't.

I find it amazing that these women want an apology from Tiger Woods. An apology for what now? For not being the only person that he was cheating on his wife with? That sounds like an odd apology to demand. Do they expect an apology because he told them that he loved them and only wanted to be with them? Please. What else was he going to say? "You're just one in a very long line of sluts."? I don't think that would have gone over very well.

People are amazing. So many people just expect that they should have people feel sorry for them when they're the ones who got themselves into whatever mess they're in. In the case of these women, the only difference between them and other women that sleep with married men is that the other women don't have a public platform to stand behind and cry about how hurt they are. Other than that, other than these women being able to let the whole world know that they feel that they were wronged, there's no difference.

Say, ladies? How do you think Tiger's wife would have felt about him apologizing to y'all? I'm guessing that wouldn't have gone over very well. And on top of that, he's never going to apologize to y'all because he never cared about you in the first place. Why apologize for something you don't care about? Harsh? Perhaps. But it seems like the truth. Get over it ladies. Go find some NBA player to sleep with.