?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

It's hard to keep up with all the nuttery that comes out of Lee Whitnum's mouth. I'd just written a column about her that was published in the Greenwich Time/Stamford Advocate today and then I read the article about her in today's Connecticut Post. There, Lee offers her usual rants about how immigrants ruined her life etc, etc, and then moved on to this astonishing piece of foreign policy "wisdom":

"The United States made a major mistake by invading Afghanistan, failing to work with the Taliban to improve to life of its citizens."


Say what?! If she'd said we'd made a major mistake by invading Iraq, I might have actually found myself agreeing with her for once. But it's the second part of her sentence that had me laughing out loud until I remembered that this person was actually attempting to run for Congress. Cause I'd have loved to see Lee Whitnum sashaying up to the Taliban with her unique set of people skills and telling them how to improve the life of the citizens of Afghanistan. Particularly the women. That's if they didn't stone her to death for not wearing a burqua first.

As I said in my post on CT Local Politics, Lee Whitnum is proof that the truth is WAY stranger than fiction.

Meanwhile, here's today's GT/Advocate column:

I don't respect those who complain about what is happening in the country yet make no effort to get involved in order to change it. When so many are apathetic about the political process, I have to hand it to Lee Whitnum, a woman who has such a fervent belief in causes such as the need to restrict the availability of H1-B visas that she is willing to attempt a run for Congress. On some level one has to admire her dogged tenacity: When having failed to muster a single delegate at the Democratic convention for the Fourth Congressional District, she managed to round up the requisite 2,459 signatures, or two percent of the registered party members in the district, to force a primary against the Democratic nominee, Jim Himes.

But that's where any respect I might have for Ms. Whitnum ends. Whereas Mr. Himes worked hard to raise grassroots support, gaining the attention of the national Democratic Party and Time Magazine, who rated his race against Chris Shays one of the top 15 races in the country to watch, not to mention raising over $2 million in campaign contributions, his putative opponent seems to be working hard to alienate as many people as possible.

I planned to ignore Ms. Whitnum until I received her recent press release about Mr. Himes' trip to Israel. At that point I knew I could no longer remain silent.

Readers of this column will know that I have never supported the war in Iraq. I am about as far from a NeoCon as you could possibly find. Friends of mine will know that I've had my disagreements with AIPAC. But I know that Israel is the one true democracy in the Middle East, and is our greatest ally there.

So it incensed me to read the following drivel from Ms. Whitnum's campaign:

"(Israeli Prime Minister Ariel) Sharon walked into the Vatican of mosques and declared 'I am a Jew I am here to pray' for the sole purpose of inciting a riot. He did it to get himself elected prime minister. His action marked the beginning of an eight-year wave of violence. A wave of violence that resulted in our own 9-11 losses."

First of all, Sharon didn't go to into the Dome of the Rock mosque, he went to the Temple Mount, what Ms. Whitnum might call "the Vatican of Jewish temples" located nearby. Secondly, to say that this action caused 9-11 is outrageous hate speak. Being outrageous is nothing new to Lee Whitnum, who first gained notoriety when she exploited her brief relationship with U.S. Sen. John Kerry to promote her self-published book "Hedge Fund Mistress." A police officer was on hand when she accosted noted Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz at Temple Sholom in May. She has conducted a vitriolic war of words in the blogosphere, a real lesson in how not to win friends and influence people.

Despite Ms. Whitnum's persistent attempts to paint Mr. Himes as an out-of touch Wall Streeter, it hasn't worked, because it's not the truth. He was raised middle class by a single mother and his campaign fundraising shows his grassroots appeal: 68 percent of his contributions in the second quarter were $100 or less.

Ms. Whitnum hasn't filed her mandatory FEC report, alternatively claiming "lack of campaign apparatus" and that she "intentionally withheld her reports because she didn't want to fuel Internet blogs that have questioned her candidacy," according to reports in this paper. I don't envy Mr. Himes this debate, but letting the primary voters hear Lee Whitnum speak will be his surest path to victory.



I've already had one e-mail from a reader saying: I have paid relatively little attention to Ms. Whitnum whom I have thought was a sideshow. I now know that even if she is a sideshow, she is a dangerous sideshow. I had no idea she held such insidious views. Thank you for enlightening me!

I consider alerting the general public to Ms. Whitnum's extreme views a matter of public service.

Comments

( 27 comments — Add your 2 cents )
(Anonymous)
Jul. 22nd, 2008 10:23 pm (UTC)
Supurb article
CT Bob here. Lee's words are being picked up finally by the local media.

The Afghanistan thing in the CT Post today really blew my mind. It's good to see this kind of nonsense being exposed for the voters to see.

The more you know...

saramerica
Jul. 23rd, 2008 01:55 am (UTC)
Re: Supurb article
Yeah, the more you read about her, the scarier she gets.
(Anonymous)
Jul. 22nd, 2008 10:51 pm (UTC)
Tea with the Taliban?
Remember that horrible attack mailer that Shays sent about Diane Farrell in 2006, saying that she wanted "Coffee Talk With the Taliban"??

Sounds like this Whitnim woman really wants to do that!!!!

Thanks for spreading the word...
saramerica
Jul. 23rd, 2008 01:55 am (UTC)
Re: Tea with the Taliban?
That's right.

If Jim Himes weren't such a classy guy, he could really make something Rovian using Lee's own words.
(Anonymous)
Jul. 23rd, 2008 12:38 pm (UTC)
Fireworks wackiness (from homenuncool)
Saw Her Wackness at the July 5 Binney Park fireworks. Her and a guy were walking around, carrying her LW for Congress banner, and she was mumbling quitely as she went thru the crowd. "Imleewhitnumandimrunningforcongressinthefourthdistrictblahblah" Whisper campaign for herself?
saramerica
Jul. 23rd, 2008 01:45 pm (UTC)
Re: Fireworks wackiness (from homenuncool)
Roll on August 13th, when Jim Himes demolishes her at the polls and we don't have to read about her any more except in the Police Blotter.
alcyone94
Jul. 23rd, 2008 07:44 pm (UTC)
Keep the truth coming
Thank you, Saramerica, for getting the truth out about Lee Whitnum. And exposing the anti-semitic stream of thinking that seems very comfortable in Greenwich.
ext_112370
Jul. 24th, 2008 08:46 pm (UTC)
Unbelievable
As someone who recently move to Connecticut and new very little of the local politics, let me say thanks for bringing this to the light of day. The beauty of democracy is not that anyone can participate, but that anyone who does participate can be publicly and fairly scrutinized. This will get me to donate to the Himes campaign!
saramerica
Jul. 24th, 2008 09:27 pm (UTC)
Re: Unbelievable
That's also the beauty of the blogosphere. Whereas the MSM seems to have portrayed a rather whitewashed version of Ms. Whitnum for some unfathomable reason, here in the blogosphere we are willing to call an anti-semitic, bigoted crackpot by name.

BTW, if you're a registered Dem, don't forget to vote in the primary on August 12th.

Edited at 2008-07-24 09:29 pm (UTC)
(Anonymous)
Jul. 26th, 2008 01:05 am (UTC)
If it is true?
Did they really fire you over writing this opinion piece? I don't know what to say that could help if it is true? I didn't think I could have a lower opinion of the Greenwich times. If they try and say it is over disclosure because of a party, one that was so well publicized on so many political Blogs (ones with more readership than the Greenwich Times), than I think it would be impossible for them to claim not know about it. Not if they follow politics like political opinion journalists and their editors are supposed to.

Sounds more like retribution for telling the truth about Lee Whitnum.
saramerica
Jul. 26th, 2008 01:15 am (UTC)
Re: If it is true?
Yes, that's the reason they told me. The reason they gave is that writing this piece while having held a meet and greet for Jim Himes "compromised" the newspaper.

Meanwhile, there was nothing about this in my contract and no one at the paper ever said that this was a problem in the 5 years I wrote for them. It's not the first political event I've been to or held and I've made contributions to candidates that are a matter of public record.
I could understand if I were a reporter who was supposed to have a neutral and unbiased perspective. But they were paying me (a pittance) to have AN OPINION. And it was extremely clear from my writing which candidates I supported. I don't think it would come as a shock to anyone that I support Jim Himes. Heck, I have his bumper sticker on my car - it's not like I keep it a secret!

I think they are just using this as an excuse.

(Anonymous)
Jul. 26th, 2008 04:40 am (UTC)
Re: If it is true?
You should look into suing the Greenwich Time -- firing you is clearly discriminatory. Nothing like a lawsuit to get to the bottom of something like this.
(Anonymous)
Jul. 26th, 2008 12:17 pm (UTC)
Re: If it is true?
This is horrendous - unbelievable. And I find it hard to believe that Greenwich doesn't have any Democrats.

Is there a lawyer in the house?
Sue
(Anonymous)
Jul. 26th, 2008 02:04 pm (UTC)
Re: If it is true?
Thanks for replying to my question Sara. I am pretty certain every Blog in Connecticut will be talking about this. MLN already has a post on it.

Connecticut Man1
(Anonymous)
Jul. 24th, 2008 09:28 pm (UTC)
Re: Unbelievable
BTW, if you're a registered Dem, don't forget to vote in the primary on August 12th!
(Anonymous)
Jul. 26th, 2008 04:41 pm (UTC)
Hang in there, Sarah!! You're a great writer and a truly important voice for our community!!

Keep fighting!!
(Anonymous)
Jul. 31st, 2008 06:55 pm (UTC)
Loony Lee Whitnum
Sarah,

I am shocked at the Greenwich Times. You told the truth about Loony Lee Whitnum and I will back you up 100%. I live in the same building as this whacy moron, inconsiderate,cunning,bazaar, spiteful woman, she diffinately needs to get professional help. If the Greenwich Times would like to interview me on the truth about the Diva Ms Whitnum I would like to give them my two cents worth how crazy this woman is. There is none so blind as those that cannot see the truth.

Good Luck!
Sarah
(Anonymous)
Jan. 2nd, 2009 02:36 am (UTC)
Hey look what you get when you google old girlfriends. I dated Lee Whitnum in the late 80's. She was 26 and I was maybe 32, and I remember some things. She was Lisa and planned to use the name Lee as a pen name when she wrote her first book, which was supposed to be a romance novel. Her logic was, women get no respect and if she used a gender-ambiguous name like Lee, people might think she was a man a respect her. But since women mainly read and write romance novels, I wondered about the logic behind all this. She was hell-bent on finding a husband when she was still young and pretty, and terrified about losing her looks as she aged (she was quite attractive at 26). She was quite delusional, but I thought her delusions were harmless. For example, she said she went to Harvard, which I never believed at all. She was always talking about going to Kennedy parties. I asked her which Kennedys she actually knew, and she had no answer. She didn't know any, she just wanted to belong to that clique, but obviously did not. Harmless stuff like that. The main reason I kept dating her even though she was nuts was, I thought that maybe, SOME day, I'd be able to serve her sausage and meatballs for dinner, but she always left me with a handful of pulled pork in the morning. I asked her to marry me once and she got all excited and thrilled, but that all fizzled out when we sobered up in the morning. Imagine, dating somebody for 6 months and never actually consummating it. That was a first for me, and it's never happened since. I thought she was either a nun or a reformed hooker who hated the idea of sex with men. She had a problem with men, even though she liked them. I guess that's sort of common anyway since men can be real jerks and she was jaded big time. Beautiful women often are. Has she lost her looks yet? I can't tell by the photos. She was pretty hot back then. -Morgan Wright
(Anonymous)
Jan. 11th, 2009 11:00 pm (UTC)
Morgan Wright
Morgan Wright, you were my optometrist in 1985-86. We never dated. I frequently attend political fundraisers and I did so when I studied at Harvard.

(Anonymous)
Jan. 11th, 2009 11:01 pm (UTC)
Morgan Wright
Morgan Wright, you were my optometrist in 1985-86. We never dated. I frequently attend political fundraisers and I did so when I studied at Harvard. Lee Whitnum

(Anonymous)
Feb. 9th, 2010 08:01 am (UTC)
Re: Morgan Wright
You are a liar. I was never your optometrist. I was your boyfriend. We dated for 6 months and I never gave you an eye exam. You came to my optical store many times but never for an eye exam, it was always to meet me for a dinner date or before going to your place to hang out. You never went to Harvard. Your whole life in an insane lie. You probably never even dated John Kerry and if you did who cares? I don't believe a word that comes out of your mouth because you are a compulsive liar. Your name is Lisa not Lee. You are from Virginia not Greenwich. Not only are you a liar but you are too stupid to have gone to Harvard. Show us your transcript. What year did you attend? Your book shows that you are illiterate. Please stop running for public office, please get a job you are qualified for.....shopping all day on a man's credit card and never paying him back.
(Anonymous)
Jan. 11th, 2009 11:22 pm (UTC)
There was never any “sobered up in the morning.” Stupid me for being chatty with you. All I remember is telling my co-worker that you were the most annoying doctor because you kept calling me and you had a continuous post-nasal drip and snorted constantly. She laughed so hard she fell off her chair. You’re still annoying.
(Anonymous)
Jan. 11th, 2009 11:34 pm (UTC)
Morgan Wright
Her response was "a drip with a drip" and then it was my turn to laugh. That is all I can recall about you. Well thanks for the memory - now please go away. Lee Whitnum
(Anonymous)
Jan. 8th, 2009 05:48 pm (UTC)
todays post aritcle
did you read today's ed. piece by whitnum about Israel made me want to vomit onto newspaper there are people with differing view and there are people like whitnum check it out if you havent read it yet is there a website for her i can write to to tell her how i feel> pjk034@yahoo.com
(Anonymous)
Jun. 20th, 2009 02:35 am (UTC)
Morgan Wright
I was never your eye doctor, but thanks for remembering my occupation. I never gave you an eye exam although you did show up at my optical store several times for dates. We never dated? That's nice. I think you never dated John Kerry, just like you never knew any Kennedies, and you nevr went to Harvard. Its a web of lies. If we never dated then why did we wake up together with hangovers so many times, and the only reason we never had sex is you couldn't find the key to your chastity belt. Its the same reason John Kerry dumped you...he couldn't find the key either. Face it, you're a lesbian. ---Morgan your old BOYFRIEND
(Anonymous)
Feb. 25th, 2012 09:18 pm (UTC)
leewhitnum.com
leewhitnum.com

I'm selling crowbars so folks who support Lee Whitnum's campaign against AIPAC and ZIONISM can open their wallets and donate. I got one for my dad at Christmastime one year and a bountiful tree was had by all.

The metaphorical "crowbars" are 20 bucks a piece and can be purchased at leewhitnum.com ...consider all the money we spend and never get a descent return. If you want bang for your buck, you know what to do.

This is America. Support Lee and you support America. It's not hyperbole.
saramerica
Feb. 26th, 2012 01:23 pm (UTC)
Re: leewhitnum.com
Oh it appears to be a Lee Whitnum sock puppet! Hello "Lee!"
( 27 comments — Add your 2 cents )