What non-Californians don’t know about Carly Fiorina — but should

Occasionally I post an article appearing in a local newspaper or a magazine article that I view significant.  This is one of those times.  Michael Hiltzik is a regular columnist in the Los Angeles Times.  Although this is a long column it will be worth your while to read.

The most surprising takeaway from last week’s Republican presidential debate — next to the difficulty of puncturing Donald Trump’s helium-powered candidacy — was the mass anointing of Carly Fiorina as the Candidate to Watch.

Carly FiorinaPraise for the former Hewlett-Packard CEO’s performance at the introductory undercard debate spanned the full range of news outlets. The conservative National Review remarked on her “poise and her well-crafted answers,” and CNN paid homage to her “sharp knowledge of the issues.”

Fiorina told the latter that she went into the debate aware that “only 40% of Republicans even know who I am.”

She must be talking about people outside the state of California. Here in the Golden State, we know Carly Fiorina very well. We know her as the under-performing CEO of one of Silicon Valley’s marquee corporations, and even better for her losing campaign against Sen. Barbara Boxer in 2010.

So as a public service, let’s share with the rest of the country what we’ve learned about Carly Fiorina. We’ll start with her dismal political record.

Even before her 2010 campaign against Boxer could get off the ground, it was poleaxed by the revelation that she had failed to cast a ballot in 75% of the California elections for which she was an eligible voter. She missed presidential primaries in 2000 and 2004, and the primary and general elections in 2006, including a Senate reelection run by Democrat Dianne Feinstein. She skipped the primary and general elections in 2002, a gubernatorial election year, as well as the historic recall vote that brought Arnold Schwarzenegger to the governor’s seat.

In an Orange County Register op-ed announcing her Senate candidacy in 2009, she explained lamely: “I felt disconnected from the decisions made in Washington and, to be honest, really didn’t think my vote mattered because I didn’t have a direct line of sight from my vote to a result.”

State of the Union 2015

Barack Obama at 2015 State of the Union SpeechFor a president who has lost control of both houses of Congress, Barack Obama seems to be oblivious to his situation. That may be a good thing. After all he will hold office for another two years. He wants to be remembered for more than being the first Black president. His will defend his signature legislation, the Affordable Care Act, forever. Beyond that he wants to be remembered as a leader who cared about all the people.

His speech gave comfort to every group that makes up the Democratic Party. He made references to illegal immigrants, the LGBT community, the conservationists, those wanting more foreign trade, etc. It’s what good speech writers do. They recognize everyone in the hope of creating unity.

The president intentionally minmized every troubling foreign affairs issue from Ukraine to Iran and not word was spoken about the economic divide that separates the very wealthy from the rest of American society. A smart decision since that would only enflame his opponents.

So naturally his State of the Union address was a litany of all the legislation he wishes to sign into law in the next two years. Of course most of it won’t be approved by the congress but at least he had the opportunity to state his wishes. Those wishes are probably the basis for the next Democratic Party platform that will be part of the 2016 election.

Sadly opposition to Obama comes from both political parties. Our system of government has survived these kinds of divides in the past. As a nation the country will continue its dominant position in world affairs.