Earlier this week, Senator Boxer released a hard-hitting ad slamming failed CEO Carly Fiorina's record at HP. Pretty damning stuff:
Fiorina's response? Boxer is engaging in "class warfare." I'll let Robert Cruickshank at Calitics take it from here:
The ad is devastating because it shows that instead of being someone concerned about creating jobs for Californians, Fiorina is just out to make herself richer at everyone else's expense. The 30,000+ workers who lost their jobs during Fiorina's failed tenure as HP's CEO are testament to this, including those who saw their jobs sent overseas.
In short, Boxer is pointing out to Californians that Fiorina has been conducting class warfare against us for years - leading the charge of the wealthy against the jobs and basic economic security the rest of us are barely clinging to.
So how does Fiorina react? By claiming Boxer is engaged in "class warfare":
The Republican candidate, speaking to The Chronicle's editorial board, added: "Given that (Boxer) is choosing to play class warfare, I think it is wholly relevant that she is, in fact, a millionaire, and that she chooses to scapegoat."
In other words, it's perfectly normal and acceptable to destroy the middle class by laying them off and sending their jobs overseas so you can buy a yacht and run for the US Senate, but when someone like Boxer stands up for working people and fights to create good jobs here in California, well suddenly it's class warfare.
This is the typical reaction of the wealthy whenever anyone points out that their policies are little more than piracy, raiding our prosperity and economic security for their benefit: they react by saying we're engaging in "class warfare" merely by pointing out what is going on. It's instructive of the vision held by members the CEO elite like Fiorina and Meg Whitman, that workers exist merely to make them rich and should welcome being tossed aside whenever it's convenient for the rich.
In a measure of how defensive Fiorina is feeling about this potent attack from Boxer, she lashed out at the San Jose Mercury News for asking a question about Fiorina's right-wing positions. Fiorina also tried to defend herself on the yacht, but merely showed how out of touch she was with California:
Asked about her purchase of a $1 million yacht, highlighted in Boxer's latest TV ad, Fiorina called the ad a great example of Boxer's desire to change the subject.
"My husband and I have been boating together for our 30 years together. We started out in a 16-foot boat," she said. "It's not germane. What's germane is we have to create the conditions for people to work and for people to succeed."
In other words, she wants people to work at low wages - or even sacrifice their jobs - so she and her husband can enjoy their yacht. At a time when many Californians are losing their homes, struggling to pay their bills, and having difficulty putting food on the table, it's incredulous that Fiorina thinks anyone is going to see her "mass layoffs so I can get a bigger boat" policy as being something they want to vote for.
California has been engaged in class warfare for the last 30 years - and the upper class is winning. It's time to fight back hard, and deny these wealthy CEOs the political power they are seeking only in order to further enrich themselves at our expense.
Robert's points are all well-taken, of course, but notice something interesting about Fiorina's defense: she says simply that Boxer is a millionaire too. What Fiorina--along with the rest of the conservative plutocracy in DC--doesn't seem to understand is that wealth is not objectionable in and of itself. What is objectionable is the sense of entitlement that views it as acceptable--desirable, even--to ruin the lives of regular people for a few million dollars more, and another yacht.
It's the same sense of rapacious entitlement that leads conservatives like Newt Gingrich to believe that "anti-colonialist" is somehow a negative. Or the same type of aristocratic class concern that led Karl Rove to question O'Donnell--not on her fringe policy positions, but on her income source and financial difficulties. It's all about the money when all is said and done.
