Asked by reporters if she fired Diaz Santillan because she worried it might damage her campaign, Whitman said, "I didn't think it would be a problem." Really? You sure were prepared with a double-barreled press conference and response the minute the story broke.
You say you didn't report Diaz Santillan to authorities because you cared for her like a member of the family and you didn't want to make an example of her.
Well, are you tough on illegal immigration or not? Yes, you were legally required to fire Diaz Santillan once you learned she was here illegally, but can you campaign for crackdowns on employers while not turning in your own illegal employee to authorities? Forget the legal obligation; that's a moral one.
You knew the story was out there; you told consultants about Diaz Santillan in 2009. So why did you play dumb about the Social Security Administration letter and then, after one was produced, claim you and your husband never saw it, or that Diaz Santillan hid it from you? Funny how someone goes from dear family member you wouldn't turn in to a liar and a thief engaged in smear tactics.
You could've brought up the matter yourself, preemptively, and used it to reinforce your campaign message by explaining how easily one can be fooled by false documents and how inconsistencies in the law handcuff honest employers who'd like to enforce immigration policy.
Instead, your consultants told you to say nothing, or you decided to say nothing, and rather than admitting you used bad judgment by saying nothing, you blamed everybody else when someone else finally said something.
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
Bruce Maiman has a perceptive article in today's Bee: