I won’t be voting for Diane Feinstein next time

[Room101]

I’m tired of her being quiet. I’m tired of calling her office and getting the same crap” well of course she supports Kennedy’s right to free speech”. OF course she says nothing publicly to defend him.

It is not just this one incident she should be more vocal on these issues. I call ever ounce and a while and say look buddy what the Democrats have been doing for the last two years has failed. Clinton said something like people rather follow a leader who is wrong and loud as opposed to right and quiet. Well she and the Democrats can do better they should be right and loud. “ Thank you for the call”

I’m not expecting an “I totally agree with you sir” from the person taking my call. I do expect my Senator to put up a fight. Every election she acts like she deserves to win as an opposed to acting like she wants to win. Next election I’m voting independent or green for the Senator election here.

I’m an Independent who will never register with these sellout Democrats. (Few democrats make me proud) All you Nader Green bashes this is the ROOT, point the finger at the Democrats for giving me a reason not to vote Democratic. (Although in 2004 presidential election I will vote for Dean or Clark)

To the people who say if you vote Independent or Green it is a vote for the Republicans, I’m sick and tired of the Democrats in power trying to use that over my head! It makes them work that much less because they use that fuzzy math as a scare tacit to make us vote for them. The two party installed dictatorship has dangled the carrot on the stick and will continue until we get out of this lesser than two evil cycle.

[Emboldened Chimp]

1. Me, too!

In fact, I didn't vote for her in '00. I voted for Media-Benjamin instead.

[ShaneGR]

2. Ummm, ok, whatever you say!

Telling people to do exactly what you say or else you'll vote independent is a scare tactic too. It worked so well that we got Bush in the White House. The truth is that you're creating the problem in your own head. Kennedy says something. You like what he says. In your own head you expect the entire party to say the same thing. Why don't you just support Kennedy instead of expecting the entire party to drop everything else and say exactly what Kennedy is saying? Kennedy is a leader in the Senate, if he says it then it is a part of the Democratic plan.

And oh yeah, doesn't Feinstein have the recall to worry about?

[Room101]

4. sgr2- did you bother to read my post?

I said it is not just this one incident. Voting Independent a scare tactic? IF two people show up for an interview and they both suck, why settle? No the fuzzy math of voting Indy or green, is a vote for a rethug is a scare tactic. It scares you into not looking for a better choice. why because they don't have to work harder, they rely on that safety net scare tactic.

When I proclaim that hey I will vote Indy or green if you don't give a fight, that makes them fight harder for their job. You make me sick saying Indy is a scare tactic, look at history buddy. The rethugs and Dems have been scaring us.

[library_max]

20. It's not a scare tactic

It's simply a fact - split the progressive vote enough and you end up with a Republican. How will swapping Feinstein for a Republican help the problem that you're concerned about (which I can't quite make out from your posts - something about Ted Kennedy)? If your changing your vote doesn't have that effect, it will have no effect whatsoever. Reality's no fun, is it?

[Room101]

25. Library_Max- you are on my ignore list

1- for not reading my whole post &/or
2- I said in my post that it is not just the Kennedy Incident.
Reality's no fun you say? If you keep voting for the lesser of two evils, they will continue the cycle to the end of time. It will only change by us changing our votes.

[HawkerHurricane]

3. Voting independent will solve the problem!

If you can get enough independents, you can put a Replutocan in office to replace Fienstien; that'll show her.

[wryter2000]

5. I know you're right, Hawker

But, dammit, I'm sick of Difi selling us out. I told her that if she voted for this war, I'd never vote for her again, and she did it, anyway. Then, she gets good on judicial appointments. Then she gets bad on school vouchers for DC. Then she becomes one of the "new democrats."

I'd vote for her if she was running against W. But she's not just a dem with flaws. She's really, really bad.

[xxqqqzme]

8. we need a good solid progressive 2

run in the primary cuz she has disappointed us 2 many times. I know she is not popular w/ my Democratic assembly district members.

[HawkerHurricane]

16. I understand

But the only person I agree with 100% of the time on politics is ME. And I'm not running this time. So I compromise: who would make the best candidate (of those running)? Who's the worst? Is it more important to vote for the best or defeat the worst? Currently, I feel things are so bad that it's more important to defeat the worst. After we force the Replutocans into minority party status (or better still, fringe party!) we can worry about the 'more liberal/less liberal' lines.

[library_max]

23. Exactly!

Well said, Hawker!

[MariMayans]

7. *shrug*

She is way, way, too conservative for her district and she should be taken out in a primary but even in the worst case it would be a wakeup call to the party not to run DLC slime there again if apathy or outright hostility gave it to the republicans.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

14. Her district is the entire state that re-elected her by a wide margin

when Tom Campbell a more liberal, libertarian leaning Republican ran against her.

I am not 100 percent happy with DI FI but I will give ONE REASON and one REASON only why anyone with any political sense should vote for her:

JUDGES

[HawkerHurricane]

15. Her 'district' being the state of California...

means she's got to run nearer the center than when she was Mayor of San Francisco.

Don't like her? Vote against her in the Primaries.

[Clete]

31. That's what I intend to do.

There are many Californians who would make a fine senator without DiFi's baggage. Of course if she gets the nomination again then I will have to vote for her in the general election because we can't let that seat go Republican. The only problem is, it almost seems like a Republican is occupying it at times when she has voted with the Republicans especially the Iraq war resolution. This latter one really turned me against her. It made me turn a very critical eye on her subsequent actions.

[HawkerHurricane]

32. Get someone else nominated,

And I'll vote for them. Until then, I'll vote for her. We can all be civilized about it. After we get the Replutocan turned into the minority party, then I'll worry about purity of cause.

[RichM]

6. She is a terrible sellout. This is why the "ABB" idea is so harmful --

it simply becomes an excuse for forcing you to support corporate-enabling Democrats.

PS - I notice you think Clark is OK. Holy moly. You have problems with DiFi, you see the merit of Nader & the Greens (or at least you see the absurdity of their being bashed here all the time), you see the built-in evil of the 2-party monopoly -- but you're prepared to support CLARK? Omigosh.

[Room101]

9. RichM- The main goal is to oust Bush

Look at this
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Bush is destroying the fabric of the country it needs to be stopped.
If it is Dean or Clark so be it.

[MariMayans]

10. you assume something magical would happen..

if he went away.

My main goal isn't to "oust Bush", it's to oppose his policies and this new attempt at expanding American hegemony to every inch of the planet. If someone supports that and say doesn't support Bush's tax cuts, I could really give a damn one way or another.

[library_max]

21. Nothing magical needs to happen

Compare eight years of Clinton with two years of Bush. That's not magic, that's just history.

[RichM]

17. Utterly wrong. The enemy is not Bush, it's the forces in society that he

represents. The 2-party system often winds up giving you a "choice" of TWO DIFFERENT representatives of these same social forces. Defeating Bush does not help at all, if the person who replaces him is not seriously opposed to the social forces that gave rise to Bush.

That is just where we're headed if Clark or Kerry is the nominee (with Dean being somewhat better, but not much better).

This "ABB" stuff is nonsense. It confuses people and diverts their attention from much that's important. Pretending that Bush himself is the enemy, but failing to see how necessary it is to extirpate the entire social milieu that he represents -- this approach cannot possibly succeed.

America is already dumbed-down enough. Hysterical screeching of the "ABB" slogan contributes to further dumbing-down; it does nothing to alleviate it.

[Room101]

18. RichM- Bush is a branch on the tree

You’re right that the ROOT of the problem is those same social forces, manifested in the form of the two party systems. Defeating Bush does help. Although if we don't attack(political/socially attack you FBI troll) at the ROOT another branch like him will grow.

[library_max]

22. LOL!

Reading Greens and one-percenters accusing us ABB folks of "hysterical screeching" is hilarious! I guess you folks don't read your own posts . . .

[Room101]

26. Library_max- you don't even read the posts

I'm a INDY

[knight_of_the_star]

11. It gives good way to unite though

By declaring ourselves to be ABB, that gives a kind of unity to what we want, because it is a LOT easier for large segments of the population to unite behind that than running someone who is a true liberal. It is the sad truth, but what we need is a common cause and a man/woman/transvestite/dog/cat/whathefuckever that will pursue investigation of the Bush family without relent and be able to get people to vote for him/her/heshe/it/etc.

ON EDIT: I wonder what it would be like if we elected a transvestite as president? I'm just curious and not trying to sound sexist or a homophobe or anything, I just wonder what that would be like. Would we address that president as a he or a she? Or both?

[Flying_Pig]

12. Me either!

She voted for the war, despite the fact 80% constituents were against it. She wholly supports the fascist-Likud Israeli government of Ariel Sharon, takes tons of AIPAC money, and either directly, or indirectly, through these activities, supports PNAC's objectives. She's a "Biden" type Dem, who could just as easily pass for a moderate Republican. Worst of all though, was her ignoring her constituents over Iraq, and voting with the PNAC crowd. Who in the hell does she think she is?? She works(ed) for us, not the other way around!

[Egnever]

13. I lived in california during the 80' and early 90's

and I have to say she never really impressed me then nor does she now. She is however somewhat of an institution in california. The woman has been involved in politics there for a long time now. She wont just go away.

[knight_of_the_star]

19. Maybe we should change that

Actively campaign to get someone who is actually a Democrat in her place. It might hurt in the short term, but in the long run it wouldn't be a bad idea.

[in_cog_ni_to]

24. We REALLY need

to keep Dems in the House and Senate. Won't you reconsider? PLEEEEEASE! We'll never get the shrub investigated.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

27. FineSwine is a DINO

Just another machine politician, who regularly funnels tax money to her husbands corporations.

[HawkerHurricane]

29. Gee, you sound just like my buddy 'Sparks'.

Calling her 'Fine Swine'. Of course, he wouldn't say she was a DINO, he'd say she's a 'Damn Liberal pretending to be a moderate'. Of course, Sparks is a lifelong Replutocan, and calls her the same things all the Replutocans in California do.

[IranianDemocrat]

28. I'm not voting for her either and I also have a personal reason...

because after 9-11 she proposed legislation to ban student visas from Iran, when NONE of the hijackers were Iranian. However 10 out of the 15 hijackers were Saudi Arabian and no restriction were put on them.

[sandnsea]

30. Check her record

This isn't in defense of Feinstein, I don't like her much myself. But before you go off on a tangent, you might want to spend a good week going through her record. Has she made California better or not? Has she gotten more accomplished than a less able politician would have? Do you find any reasons for compromises that you didn't know about? Is it so important that she support Kennedy when he says Bush made up a war in Texas? I mean, does she really HAVE to get behind that statement?

Being a reactionary doesn't always produce the desire results. If you don't want to vote for her, make your decision on her record, not that she isn't ranting and raving across the state.