?

Difficult to believe she is claiming there isn’t any opposition to this odious nomination.

Let’s prove her wrong, shall we? To the faxes!

DOH! I just finished a ‘brilliant’ (If I do say so myself ;-) post downstairs, and I was EPU’d before I was even finished.

But we haven’t shifted gears too much, just gone from religious hypocrisy to political hypocrisy. Let’s keep their feet to the fire!

#3?

Good Morning, pups!

Thanks for staying on top of this, Christy.

So…if the Repugnant party treats voters like they’re stupid, how long does it take before the Blue Dogs start believing their premise and doing the same?

Rhetorical question…
FunnyDiva

Hey SufiLizard,

I’ll go read your post, ‘K? I’m sure it was faboo!

FunnyD

Greenwald:

By very stark contrast, most (though certainly not all) Democrats in Congress — particularly the most influential and longest-serving ones in the Senate like Feinstein — have contempt for their base and share virtually none of their values.

good luck, base. my bold.

hypothetically if committed citizens finally get over their co-dependence on the unfaithful (D) team and work to create a 3rd party that did share their values, they wouldn’t have to be beseeching the pompous paladins who hold them in contempt.

see http://www.salon.com/opinion/g…..index.html

SufiLizard EPU’d

Well with the IRS cracking down on political activities by entities with non-profit status, I think this raises some interesting questions.

If these religious leaders are threatening to “leave” the Republican Party, then aren’t they admitting that they currently are a part of the Republican Party?

Therefore donations to the groups headed by these “leaders” should not be tax deductible.

(I realize in practice, they’re only looking at political activities that help Democrats, but let’s argue what they say, not what they do).

They could claim to be focusing on the issue of abortion, but why don’t they make a similar threat to the Democratic Party? There certainly are anti-choice Democrats out there, and I’m willing to bet these religious leaders don’t support them — illuminating the fact that they are not actually focused on their supposed single-interest.

Somebody needs to ask DiFi on video what it is that 1) Lott negotiated with her, or 2) what Lott’s got on her.

Something stinks, the kind of thing she doesn’t even want to share with her staff.

Ack, Ack…who is “I hate all Iranians”, Debra Cagan???? Another Ann Coulter is in the WH…

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pag…..ge_id=1770

~~~ModNote: Edited for content – We don’t disparage folks here this way – it’s an insult to the many transgender folks we care about. Please refer to this comment and others like it.~~~

This post should be “Spotlighted” too.

LS @ 10

This post should be “Spotlighted” too.

you’re right!
Spotlight!

Christy -

I do luvs the way your mind works…..said it before and it bears repeating, thank Dog you’re on the side of the light. *g*

Note to difi: it ain’t smart to p!ss off CHS!

Ok the threads are moving way faster than I am today:

RockPaperScizzors @ 39

Here’s a question, do federal government workers including the pres, vp, senators, congresscritters, supreme court justices pay into social security, medicare, and a pension? Or do they get a free ride off the taxpayers when they retire?

No, we don’t get a “free ride.” (And as a Federal employee, I’m damned insulted by that statement.)

We pay into Social Security, Medicare, and our pension fund in addition to our own version of a 401(k), the Thrift Savings Plan. We also pay taxes, Federal, State and Local. We also have to pay our share towards our health insurance, and most of these plans have co-pays.

Where in Ghu’s name do you get the idea that anything a civil servant gets is “free?”

sporkovat @ 6

hypothetically if committed citizens finally get over their co-dependence on the unfaithful (D) team and work to create a 3rd party that did share their values, they wouldn’t have to be beseeching the pompous paladins who hold them in contempt.

i don’t think creating a third party would solve everything… no matter what party we work with, we do need to organize effectively to get our values taken seriously.

both the D and the R leaders have plenty of respect for their base – if, by base, we mean the people with the $$$ and the power and not the little people who provide the votes.

Thanks Elliot and Diva. My post at #3 was really just faux outrage, but I appreciate your concern.

I don’t want to detract from the important issue brought up in this post though.

She’s full of cr*p. I e-mailed her before she voted Southwick out of committee, urging her to vote against.

Her e-mail form says that all of them are read, and constituent opinions are carefully considered, but she’s just demonstrated that that is not actually true in any more than the literal sense: yes, they’re read and yes, opinions are considered, but they’ll have no effect on her: she ignores them.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein – the Democratic Party’s version of Sen. Ted Stevens. Too bad she’s not up for election next year.

selise @ 13

sporkovat @ 6

hypothetically if committed citizens finally get over their co-dependence on the unfaithful (D) team and work to create a 3rd party that did share their values, they wouldn’t have to be beseeching the pompous paladins who hold them in contempt.

i don’t think creating a third party would solve everything… no matter what party we work with, we do need to organize effectively to get our values taken seriously.

both the D and the R leaders have plenty of respect for their base – if, by base, we mean the people with the $$$ and the power and not the little people who provide the votes.

Digby, in her post approvingly linked from here earlier this morning, said of threats to bolt to a 3rd party by right-wing christianoid leaders:

I actually think they are applying political power in a pretty effective way.

I’m not saying it would solve everything, or is easy, but it would give some leverage to the little people where today there is none.

I set Feinstein another scorcher- hope it does some good. I suspect that she’s past caring.

Snakehandlers threaten to form their own party- in other words- they’re telling the primary voters that if they vote for Rudy- the christian right will make sure that the dem candidate beats him. Interesting to see if threatening other VOTERS is an effective tool.

Freddie ahead (barely) of Rudy according to Rasmussen.

sporkovat @ 17

Digby, in her post approvingly linked from here earlier this morning, said of threats to bolt to a 3rd party by right-wing christianoid leaders:

I actually think they are applying political power in a pretty effective way.

I’m not saying it would solve everything, or is easy, but it would give some leverage to the little people where today there is none.

that’s a very different strategy that the long term work needed to build a third party.

i’m ok with specific threats for a specific goal. (for example – we’ll vote green in a specific race if candidate x is nominated or unless the occupation of iraq ends)

but those kind of actions need to be very well organized… like a threat from moveon and associated allies. no one is going to listen to you or i.

as for a generic threat to go third party without a specific demand? i’m not for that.

that doesn’t mean i pretend that most of the dems in congress are something other than what they are… i’m all for shining the bright light of truth and oversight and accountability.

Just some extra information on Southwick. Via wiki, from Leslie H. Southwick time on the Mississippi Court of Appeals:

Richmond v. Mississippi Department of Human Services, Southwick joined the majority opinion upholding the decision of the Mississippi Employee Appeals Board to reinstate a white state employee (Richmond) who was fired for a single incident of referring to a black co-worker as a “good ole n****r” outside of the co-worker’s presence. When the black co-worker was informed of Richmond’s comment, Richmond immediately apologized, and her apology apparently was accepted. Bound by law to affirm a decision of the Appeals Board supported by substantial factual evidence, the court held it had no authority to set aside the findings in this case, even though Richmond’s remark was “undoubtedly ill-advised and indicative of a rather remarkable insensitivity.”

On writ of certiorari, the Mississippi Supreme Court agreed that “the unique circumstances of this case do not warrant imposition of the ultimate penalty of dismissal.” However, the court found the record was insufficient to uphold the Employee Appeals Board’s decision that Richmond effectively receive no penalty whatsoever. It decided to remand the case “in order for the board to impose an appropriate penalty less than dismissal, or to make detailed findings as to why no penalty should be imposed.”

Basically, in this case the court was supposed to follow the findings of the Board decision but chose not to. Now you might wonder why anyone would think they could make such a blantantly racist remark like that nowadays or that it could ever be perceived as anything other than malign. Southwick and the Mississippi Court of Appeals in their decisio, however, thought that it was no big deal, which says a lot about him and them.

The second case often cited by Southwick’s critics is S.B. v. L.W., an 8-2 decision upholding a chancellor’s decision to grant sole custody of an eight year old girl to her father, in part because the mother was a lesbian who had lived with several different partners during the child’s life. Southwick joined the majority opinion as well as a concurrence written by Judge Payne which states, in part:

33. I do recognize that any adult may choose any activity in which to engage; however, I also am aware that such person is not thereby relieved of the consequences of his or her choice. It is a basic tenet that an individual’s exercise of freedom will not also provide an escape of the consequences flowing from the free exercise of such a choice. As with the present situation, the mother may view her decision to participate in a homosexual relationship as an exertion of her perceived right to do so. However, her choice is of significant consequence, as described before in the discussion of our State’s policies, in that her rights to custody of her child may be significantly impacted.

This one is fairly self-explanatory. If the husband had a series of girlfriends, that would not be considered an issue, but that the mother had a series of girlfriends was seen to adversely affect her child. Real forward thinking there.

When you take the two decisions together, you see how a judge can wrap his prejudice up in legal reasoning: a white employee can engage in racist behavior (which they knew to be racist) but not be subject to the sanction prescribed because that would be harsh and a gay mother can have her gayness used against her (for the good of the child).

These decisions are clear evidence of Southwick’s own prejudice and his willingness to let that prejudice enter into his judgments.

~~~ModNote: Edited for content to clear filters. Hurtful words need some smoothing, even if in quotes.~~~

rwcole @ 19

Snakehandlers threaten to form their own party- in other words- they’re telling the primary voters that if they vote for Rudy- the christian right will make sure that the dem candidate beats him.

they can afford to think long term… since they are trying to change the supreme court.

we’re trying to prevent that change, so it’s harder for us to think long term. we’re always in a panic about losing what we have.

Debra Cagan, TRex fodder if I ever saw any. At first, I thought I’d discovered a new picture of Rudeeee in drag. Gotta love that Iron Cross, eh? Our Deputy Assistant Secretary for Coalition Affairs to Defence Secretary Robert Gates hates all Iranians.

Can my #23 be let out of moderation?

I wrote my Senator Mark “Lieberlovin’” Pryor who sits on the committee with Di Fi, but never could figure out how the members of the committee voted. If anyone knows or has a link to the committee members vote I would appreciate a helping hand. Thanks.

Copy of my letter:

I have emailed you before about my strong opposition to the Southwick nomination. I have since heard that you claim to not have heard of any such opposition from your constituents, which is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. Even your staff was surprised to hear this claim of yours.

I am reiterating my opposition to this vote. I am in addition copying this message to Senators Reid, Durbin, Schumer, and Leahy. I am ALSO copying the Los Angeles Times newspaper. Hopefully this will assist your memory.

rwcole @ 19

Snakehandlers threaten to form their own party- in other words- they’re telling the primary voters that if they vote for Rudy- the christian right will make sure that the dem candidate beats him. Interesting to see if threatening other VOTERS is an effective tool.

no, they are just following their principles to a logical conclusion.
To the snakehandlers (great phrase!) abortion = murder, and one does not in any way support a candidate who is wishy washy or triangulates on an issue like murder.

to someone who is sincerely anti-war, rather than someone who is just using the slaughter in Iraq as a wedge issue against the (R)’s, state murder of another nations civilians is also murder.

If only more on the left had the courage of their convictions, and could bring themselves to oppose advocates of state murder, like the leading (D) presidential candidates, who couldn’t commit to ending the immoral, illegal, and failed occupation by the end of their first terms!!!

“Will you pledge that by January 2013, the end of your first term more than five years from now, there will be no U.S. troops in Iraq?” – moderator Tim Russert’s question was posed to one and all, and the Clinton-Obama-Edwards axis of frontrunners all refused to take the pledge, albeit each in their own way.

On Friday 5/30/03 Debra Cagan met with Libby, see his calendar:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pag…..ge_id=1770

Here is what she was heavily involved in: Project Vinca and frequently dealt with Armitage.

http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/npr/v…..3bleek.pdf

Why the f*ck is Feinstein backing Southwick to begin with? Doesn’t she know this will upset her base constituents? Or is it truly the case that she has contempt for those constituents–per the comment @ 6 above? Then lying about response on top of that to media as well? Amazing.

I’ve faxed and emailed Feinstein and all the senators on the list above. I’ve also emailed the CA media listed. I have tons of friends in he LA area, whom I’ve bcc’ed in my email, who will be sending out similar emails, and so on.

LS @ 30

On Friday 5/30/03 Debra Cagan met with Libby, see his calendar:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pag…..ge_id=1770

Here is what she was heavily involved in: Project Vinca and frequently dealt with Armitage.

http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/npr/v…..3bleek.pdf

Correction, this is the link to Libby’s calendar:

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/…..X00601.PDF

Ed*ard Teller @ 23

Debra Cagan, TRex fodder if I ever saw any. At first, I thought I’d discovered a new picture of Rudeeee in drag. Gotta love that Iron Cross, eh? Our Deputy Assistant Secretary for Coalition Affairs to Defence Secretary Robert Gates hates all Iranians.

707! Yikes!

Did you see the uber freaky terrorismawareness.org with their Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week. At first glance I thought it was a parody.

selise…

short term scaremongering, hectoring to support the Least Worst in each successive election cycle, is what has brought us to this point today.

If the (D)’s nominate Clinton, the message control machine will be at high revs with this.

my angle is just to try to question some axiomatic notions that are holding us back, before the conventional wisdom comes down heavy during the electioneering of 08.

I wrote to Feinstien about this months ago and NEVER received a reply.
I have done my part again.

DiFi is my senator. I have voted for her, each time she has run for election or reelection. Having admitted that, my take on her on this time is that she is in her own world. The internet does not exist. Anyone except wealthy contributor might as well be a fly on the wall.
Its 1950, all over again.

LS @ 9

Ack, Ack…who is “I hate all Iranians”, Debra Cagan???? Another Ann Coulter is in the WH…

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pag…..ge_id=1770

~~~ModNote: Edited for content – We don’t disparage folks here this way – it’s an insult to the many transgender folks we care about. Please refer to this comment and others like it.~~~

Woops, you are so right. My apologies.

Ed*ard Teller @ 17

Sen. Dianne Feinstein – the Democratic Party’s version of Sen. Ted Stevens. Too bad she’s not up for election next year.

I’ve always thought of her as the Lieberman of the West. A vote on Southwick should not be scheduled rather it should be put up for debate where it can be filibustered.

Good morning, Christy and all you good people here on FDL -

OT – (and by some strange way very related) The peace in Burma is because the monks are either dead or imprisoned. Reports say thousands slaughtered. UN representative has been unable to get a meeting with the junta leaders. We need to remain the eyes, ears and voices of those who have been shut up. Contact the Chinese Consulate near you and Chinese Embassy in Washington D.C.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pag…..ge_id=1811

any firepups in the area available to do a meeting this week at di fi’s l.a. office?

i got a response from one of her district managers a while back (on a different matter) stating his willingness to speak to me on any future matters. provided he’s willing and available, i’ll try to set something up if someone else will come with me.

e-mail me at ma50 at earthlink dot net.

Joe D. @ 36

DiFi is my senator. I have voted for her, each time she has run for election or reelection. Having admitted that, my take on her on this time is that she is in her own world. The internet does not exist. Anyone except wealthy contributor might as well be a fly on the wall.
Its 1950, all over again.

You have to keep voting for her because Senate power derives primarily through longevity. CA benefits from her seniority, all of which would be lost by electing someone else.

Does anyone have a list of zip codes from the DiFi area? Her office, among others, asks for zip code and I am willing to tell her office as much truth as her office tells us

Despite my handle I’m a constituent of DiFi and email has been sent with copy to Reid. WTF are they thinking?

She has really gone to the dark side – like with FEC nominee (name escapes me and too lazy to Google.) Next cycle we need a primary fight.

nomolos @ 42

Does anyone have a list of zip codes from the DiFi area? Her office, among others, asks for zip code and I am willing to tell her office as much truth as her office tells us

try 941xx San Francisco
949xx Marin and Sonoma Counties
900xx LA

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01423.html

this-is-fro_-a-’k’ristie’s-pre_ios-southwi_k-post-li_ked-up-top

has-good-talki_g-poi_ts-to-help-with-_alls-&-letters

nomolos @ 41

Does anyone have a list of zip codes from the DiFi area? Her office, among others, asks for zip code and I am willing to tell her office as much truth as her office tells us

Try this.

Christy – I will get those letters out today as well as put in a call to each of them so they can never say they heard nothing. This may be a good time to take out an ad in a D.C. paper so it is really in her face. I don’t know if she reads hometown papers other than the financial section.

Thanks for the reminder.

Badwater @ 39

Joe D. @ 36

DiFi is my senator. I have voted for her, each time she has run for election or reelection. Having admitted that, my take on her on this time is that she is in her own world. The internet does not exist. Anyone except wealthy contributor might as well be a fly on the wall.
Its 1950, all over again.

You have to keep voting for her because Senate power derives primarily through longevity. CA benefits from her seniority, all of which would be lost by electing someone else.

Not if she’s using it for these purposes, though.

It’s academic anyway — she’s not up until 2012 and at that point she’ll be 80, I believe.

twȝk @ 33

Ed*ard Teller @ 23

Debra Cagan, TRex fodder if I ever saw any. At first, I thought I’d discovered a new picture of Rudeeee in drag. Gotta love that Iron Cross, eh? Our Deputy Assistant Secretary for Coalition Affairs to Defence Secretary Robert Gates hates all Iranians.

707! Yikes!

Did you see the uber freaky terrorismawareness.org with their Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week. At first glance I thought it was a parody.

She is really scaring me.

ccmask @ 47

twȝk @ 33

707! Yikes!

Did you see the uber freaky terrorismawareness.org with their Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week. At first glance I thought it was a parody.

She is really scaring me.

Talk about a nuevo gestapo look!

Or is it what is coming out of the mouth!?!

ccmask @ 49

twȝk @ 33

707! Yikes!

Did you see the uber freaky terrorismawareness.org with their Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week. At first glance I thought it was a parody.

She is really scaring me.

Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes clean to the bone.

pb @ 48

There are rumors that Ahnold might want to run for the Senate, since he’ll be finished as governor by then (I hope). Not sure I want him as senator, but he can’t be much worse than DiFi is now.

Give the goopers a california senate seat? I don’t think so.

P J Evans @ 52

pb @ 48

There are rumors that Ahnold might want to run for the Senate, since he’ll be finished as governor by then (I hope). Not sure I want him as senator, but he can’t be much worse than DiFi is now.

I wish he’d just go back to making dull, formulaic action movies. It makes him much easier to ignore.

Maybe Feinstein has been bought.

Or is being strong-armed over something.

Someone with contacts on the hill should snoop around, hard.

Christy – My email to Feinstein came back with a “we can only respond to email that includes a California postal address.” Well, that’s one way to make sure you don’t have to deal with anyone else…

Badwater @ 41

Joe D. @ 36

DiFi is my senator. I have voted for her, each time she has run for election or reelection. Having admitted that, my take on her on this time is that she is in her own world. The internet does not exist. Anyone except wealthy contributor might as well be a fly on the wall.
Its 1950, all over again.

You have to keep voting for her because Senate power derives primarily through longevity. CA benefits from her seniority, all of which would be lost by electing someone else.

These are her committee assignments:

U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration (Chairman)

U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security (Chairman)
Administrative Oversight and the Courts
Crime and Drugs
Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship
The Constitution, Civil Rights, and Property Rights

U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations
Interior and Related Agencies (Chairman)
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies
Defense
Energy and Water Development
Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related agencies

U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence

The committee of which she is chairman is not that powerful. The other 3 are but she’s not chairman. Of these, only Appropriations has real potential to deliver benefits to California.

Seniority is the primary criterion on the Republican side. On the Democratic side, it is one factor among others.

Toby Wollin @ 56

Christy – My email to Feinstein came back with a “we can only respond to email that includes a California postal address.” Well, that’s one way to make sure you don’t have to deal with anyone else…

This despite the fact that her actions in office affect everybody in this country. Nice attitude, Senator.

Toby Wollin @ 56

Christy – My email to Feinstein came back with a “we can only respond to email that includes a California postal address.” Well, that’s one way to make sure you don’t have to deal with anyone else…

That’s why a fax is better, IMHO.

Our continuing mistake is to think that the Democratic leadership feels the same way about things that we do.

It is asolutely clear, at this time, that we are wrong, completely and utterly, with that line of thought.

We can no longer pretend that they simply don’t ‘get’ it.

WE are the ones who do not ‘get’ it!

We naively assume that we just have not adequately communicated to the leadership what our concerns are.

Our greatest failure is that we have not been reaching out to the general public wuth compelling, COMPREHENSIBLE narratives about ‘what’ is going on and what a just, humane, and sustainable future should look like.

Even when we do so, for it must come to that;
the leadership of BOTH Parties will come down hard on any mass demonstration of frustration, disgust, or explicitly delineated hopes for the future.

Make no mistake. We have few courageous and stalwart friends in Congress.

Let us support any we may have and elect others whom we may trust, but let us also soberly assess our collective political dilemma.

There are no easy answers, henceforth. Things are grim and look to become even more grim.

‘Least Worst’ will not be much ‘better’. As I said at the tail-end of the Savage thread, HRC wants power – and we have no reason, now, to ‘believe’ that the Democrats will use the power of the ‘unitary executive’ with significantly wiser compassion or more honest pragmatism. It is not OUR interests they hold dear.

Toby Wollin @ 56

Christy – My email to Feinstein came back with a “we can only respond to email that includes a California postal address.” Well, that’s one way to make sure you don’t have to deal with anyone else…

Well, you know there was this TV show: Beverly Hills 90210 if you are looking for inspiration. *g*

I vant more powah!

-The Gropernator

EvilDrPuma @ 52

P J Evans @ 52

pb @ 48

There are rumors that Ahnold might want to run for the Senate, since he’ll be finished as governor by then (I hope). Not sure I want him as senator, but he can’t be much worse than DiFi is now.

I wish he’d just go back to making dull, formulaic action movies. It makes him much easier to ignore.

And the said movies are much more interesting to watch than his political hackery :-/

EvilDrPuma @ 56

Toby Wollin @ 56

Christy – My email to Feinstein came back with a “we can only respond to email that includes a California postal address.” Well, that’s one way to make sure you don’t have to deal with anyone else…

This despite the fact that her actions in office affect everybody in this country. Nice attitude, Senator.

While I agree, she’s not the only one. Reid keeps punting my stuff too, and he’s even MORE of a figure that affects everyone!

GSD @ 62

I vant more powah!

-The Gropernator

Personally, I don’t think Ahnold would want to move to Washington from Kalifornya.

Joe D. @ 36

DiFi is my senator. I have voted for her, each time she has run for election or reelection. Having admitted that, my take on her on this time is that she is in her own world. The internet does not exist. Anyone except wealthy contributor might as well be a fly on the wall.
Its 1950, all over again.

Is there any chance of her being replaced in a Dem primary? How do many CA constituents feel about her these days?

Okay, done and off to Feinstein, Reid and Leahy. Feels good!

Lurker in California here. Wrote them all! Thanks for the heads-up, Christy.

Bit NOLA @ 53

Maybe Feinstein has been bought.

Or is being strong-armed over something.

Someone with contacts on the hill should snoop around, hard.

I tried to encourage the LA Times to investigate this story further, but who knows.

A & R Davis @ 68

Lurker in California here. Wrote them all!Thanks for the heads-up, Christy.

Welcome A & R Davis and thanks for pitching in! Hope we hear more from you.

peanutbutter @ 64

EvilDrPuma @ 56

This despite the fact that her actions in office affect everybody in this country. Nice attitude, Senator.

While I agree, she’s not the only one. Reid keeps punting my stuff too, and he’s even MORE of a figure that affects everyone!

Ridiculous. It’s not as if anybody believes their senators are taking the time to craft personalized email replies that carefully consider the issues raised by each writer. What is served by pretending that only constituents are entitled to the bare minimal consideration one of their form replies actually give?

Feinstein was just re-elected in 06 doesn’t run again until 2012…She’ll be about 90 years old by then!

difi and liebervurst will probably give it up at the same time–2012.

anne @ 65

Joe D. @ 36

DiFi is my senator. I have voted for her, each time she has run for election or reelection. Having admitted that, my take on her on this time is that she is in her own world. The internet does not exist. Anyone except wealthy contributor might as well be a fly on the wall.
Its 1950, all over again.

Is there any chance of her being replaced in a Dem primary? How do many CA constituents feel about her these days?

She was re-elected last year for a six year term. There are no provisions for recall of Federal level offices, such as Senators.

rwcole @ 73

difi and liebervurst will probably give it up at the same time–2012.

I believe CT used to have a real AG (Blumenthal) and a real US Attorney. Now what we have is an AG (Blumenthal) who is obsessed with myspace pornokiddieexploitation–whereas formerly it was insurance co and carveouts and that sort of thing–AND an absentee US attorney who lauds the kiddiepornofine thread combing of myspace AND ignores allgeations of missing petty cash (election 2006), false charges of website hacking, and vote buying (most seriously in the Hartford area.) I hope that will change before 2012. And Lieberthug will be history before then.

rwcole @ 72

Feinstein was just re-elected in 06 doesn’t run again until 2012…She’ll be about 90 years old by then!

Well, there’s your problem: Y’all are fighting senility!

Serious question, though, can’t Reid just shelf the vote on this guy? Does he have to schedule a vote?

rwcole @ 72

Feinstein was just re-elected in 06 doesn’t run again until 2012…She’ll be about 90 years old by then!

Born in 1933, she’ll be 79 in 2012 and still young by Senate standards.

Toby Wollin @ 56

Christy – My email to Feinstein came back with a “we can only respond to email that includes a California postal address.” Well, that’s one way to make sure you don’t have to deal with anyone else…

Toby – I also received the same notice but I called her office and sent a letter that I cc to others on the list. It was short and brief. She knows others were cc on it. Nasty lady.

Over at Crooks and Liars there is a vigorous defense of slavery by the blithering sociopath, Michael Medved.

-GSD

http://www.antiwar.com/frank/?articleid=8609

The wishy-washy senator now claims Bush misled her prior to the invasion of Iraq. I don’t think she’s being honest with us, though. There may have been other reasons she helped sell Bush’s lies. According to the Center for Public Integrity, Feinstein’s husband Richard Blum has racked in millions of dollars from Perini, a civil infrastructure construction company, of which the billionaire investor wields a 75 percent voting share.

In April 2003, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers gave $500 million to Perini to provide services for Iraq’s Central Command. A month earlier in March 2003, Perini was awarded $25 million to design and construct a facility to support the Afghan National Army near Kabul. And in March 2004, Perini was awarded a hefty contract worth up to $500 million for “electrical power distribution and transmission” in southern Iraq.

Feinstein, who sits on the Senate Appropriations Committee as well as the Select Committee on Intelligence, is reaping the benefits of her husband’s investments. The Democratic royal family recently purchased a $16.5 million mansion in the flush Pacific Heights neighborhood of San Francisco. It’s a disgusting display of war profiteering, and just like Cheney, the leading Democrat should be called out for her offense.

And that’s exactly why the Bush administration is so darn bulletproof. The Democratic leadership in Washington is just as crooked and just as callous.

QuakerGirl @ 78

Toby Wollin @ 56

Christy – My email to Feinstein came back with a “we can only respond to email that includes a California postal address.” Well, that’s one way to make sure you don’t have to deal with anyone else…

Toby – I also received the same notice but I called her office and sent a letter that I cc to others on the list. It was short and brief. She knows others were cc on it. Nasty lady.

Yep, I did all of that also – I had some issues with a couple of the newspaper emails addys though…
But it seems to me that if you are someone in Congress with a committee assignment..and if you sign your responses with United States Senator (not California Senator – US Senator), then you have an obligation to accept emails from people who are NOT your constituents. When people are on committees, they are acting for all of us, not just their state constituents.

Of course Feinstein’s been bought. See No. 80 above.

Iceland pulls out of Iraq:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk4rBQDxOEE

Look for mailbox places in CA and use one of those street addresses. I doubt they’d go so far as to check against boxholders – and if you make it look like an apartment address, they’d have a harder time. Shopping-mall street addresses might also work: most people don’t even realise they have addresses.

GSD @ 79

Over at Crooks and Liars there is a vigorous defense of slavery by the blithering sociopath, Michael Medved.

-GSD

On the basis of what? Theory of Competitive Advantage??

GSD @ 79

Over at Crooks and Liars there is a vigorous defense of slavery by the blithering sociopath, Michael Medved.

-GSD

I must go read it. While we call it slavery, like it exists in a vacuum, it was/is laissez-faire capitalism. So, if this person is a die-hard capitalist, he will defend slavery. You piqued my interest.

Christy’s now upstairs…

Toby Wollin @ 81

QuakerGirl @ 78

Toby – I also received the same notice but I called her office and sent a letter that I cc to others on the list. It was short and brief. She knows others were cc on it. Nasty lady.

Yep, I did all of that also – I had some issues with a couple of the newspaper emails addys though…
But it seems to me that if you are someone in Congress with a committee assignment..and if you sign your responses with United States Senator (not California Senator – US Senator), then you have an obligation to accept emails from people who are NOT your constituents. When people are on committees, they are acting for all of us, not just their state constituents.

Even if we aren’t direct constituents, with our mobile society, most of us have family or friends who are constituents. And we talk to our families and friends who reside in California (or NY, or FL, or…)

ccmask @ 83

Iceland pulls out of Iraq:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk4rBQDxOEE

Is that one or two persons? I thought one. Educate me.

peanutbutter @ 74

She was re-elected last year for a six year term. There are no provisions for recall of Federal level offices, such as Senators.

(Snark on) Right — you have to get the Republican party to consider the Senator in question a threat. Then the GOP arranges a plane crash…(Snark off)

Christy, the e-mail for Richard Schmitt bounces back.

So late to this party, since I’m suddenly home due to a film mistakenly delivered to my house rather than place o’ business for restoration analysis. I’m making good use of the home time by faxing & emailing all those above.

DiFi’s office 1/2 the time ignores my faxes or sends a form response. Her cohorts in the Senate & the newspapers will be getting that bit of info as well.

Haven’t seen our Diane really awake in a hearing since the SJC USAs’ testimony in March, for chrissakes. Wake up, or give your seat there to someone else!

My latest e-mail to Sen. Feinstein:

Ms. Feintstein-Lieberman,

You carry out national responsibilities for the US Senate, but refuse comments from those outside your jurisdiction. An odd if convenient choice. I do not require a response, but I expect my comment to be included in the pro-or-con tally by your staff when they respectfully address an issue for which you are directly responsible.

I’ll say my piece again anyway. Your amnesia regarding not having heard sharp criticism about allowing the nomination of Leslie Southwick to the Senate floor needs professional attention. Alternatively, your staff have been woefully inadequate in summarizing your no doubt voluminous e-mail.

I have personally sent you at least two e-mails critical of your non-support of your Democratic colleagues by allowing Mr. Southwick’s name onto the floor. It is hard to imagine that mine were the only ones. I have been so concerned at your choices that I have hyphenated your name, attaching to it that of Mr. Lieberman, the Senate colleague your efforts seem most closely to mirror.

If you need more talented staff, you live in a state where they are abundant. If you need professional help with your amnesia, the same applies and I wish you well. In the event that you are just making stuff up – or lying – stop it. Please. Mr. Bush does not deserve your support, Mr. Southwick does not deserve an appellate court judgeship, and I surmise that California does not deserve your current behavior. Many thanks to your long suffering staff.

I wrote — but let me tell you — it annoys the HELL out of me to NOT be able to email Feinstein, Reid, Schumer, and Durbin. I don’t want to fill in all the blanks on their crappy websites. Yes, yes, I realize they do this to discourage us from writing. So be it. That speaks volumes to me.

Marie Roget @ 92

So late to this party, since I’m suddenly home due to a film mistakenly delivered to my house rather than place o’ business for restoration analysis. I’m making good use of the home time by faxing & emailing all those above.

DiFi’s office 1/2 the time ignores my faxes or sends a form response. Her cohorts in the Senate & the newspapers will be getting that bit of info as well.

Haven’t seen our Diane really awake in a hearing since the SJC USAs’ testimony in March, for chrissakes. Wake up, or give your seat there to someone else!

speaking of film restoration, are you familiar with Hedy Lamarr’s ‘Ecstacy?’ (Gustav Machaty, Czech director/ Austrian film (?) 1932.
I recently rented a ‘version’ (don’t know when or what censor board it was aimed at) and a friend in Germany tells me he is having a hard time finding any copy of it whatsover!

oh and if this subject is OT………hey, 9/11 changed everything.

QuakerGirl @ 89

ccmask @ 83

Iceland pulls out of Iraq:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk4rBQDxOEE

Is that one or two persons? I thought one. Educate me.

my mind must be in the gutter.

This is the response I received from her a few days ago ragarding my complaint about her decision to nominate Southwick:

Thank you for writing to me regarding the nomination of Judge Leslie H. Southwick to be a United States Circuit Judge for the Fifth Circuit. I appreciate your taking the time to share your views, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.

The Constitution requires the President to nominate Federal judges by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. As a member of the Senate who also serves on the Judiciary Committee, I take my position with regard to reviewing judicial nominations very seriously.

When I review a nominee, I look to find candidates who have the necessary intellect, analytical skills, and legal experience. In addition, the candidate should be able to demonstrate a commitment to applying the law fairly and impartially. You can be assured that I perform my due diligence with regard to any nominee that comes before the Judiciary Committee.

As you may already know, on August 2, Judge Southwick was voted out of the Judiciary Committee favorably by a vote of 10-9. I voted in favor of sending his nomination to the full Senate. Please know that I carefully considered the concerns you raised. However, after thorough review of Judge Southwick’s record and after a lengthy meeting with him, I decided that he has the qualifications that I mentioned above to be a judge. While he is not the nominee that I would have chosen for this seat, I concluded that his views were not outside the judicial mainstream. He also has an exemplary record of service to our nation, including a one-year tour of combat duty in Iraq, which he volunteered for even though he was already over 50 years of age.

Once again, thank you for your letter. I hope you will continue to keep me informed on matters of importance to you. Best regards.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

I e-mailed her, and it felt good!

Sen. Feinstein has a curiously limited view of her obligations as a senior Democratic senator. She claims that her review of a president’s judicial nominees should be limited to whether they went to a suitably elite school, practiced law for twenty years without being disbarred, and have the president’s confidence.

By that standard, if a nominee passses the laugh test, confirm ‘em. Among other considerations the Senate should consider are a judicial nominee’s political views, especially when a nomination, like Leslie Southwick’s, is for an appellate court.

Contrary to high school and traditional media pablum, courts do not just “interpret” the law. Questions so complex that they rise to federal appeals court level require political and social judgments in addition to fine legal analysis. Consequently, a nominee’s views on major constitutional issues are vital. For example, how do they understand the relationships among the executive, legislative and judicial branches? How do they balance power among government and corporate interests, on the one hand, and private citizens, who have far less power and who are, therefore, more dependent on the courts for enforcing their rights? This comes up in making fine judgments among the rights of state vs. federal governments, employees vs. employer rights, and the limits of free speech and religious expression.

Ms. Feinstein’s position is that the Senate should confirm whomever the president nominates so long as the nominee meets very minimal standards. She thereby limits her function to a clerical one, and abdicates her responsibility as a senior Democratic politician. Perhaps that’s the whole point. Ms. Feinstein-Lieberman is exactly right.