I just watched ABC's "This Week" and was sickened by Dianne Feinstein.

[stevedeshazer]

The entire disgusting transcript is here: http://www.abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/Politics/transcript-feinstein-chambliss-mcgovern-keane/Story?id=8794589&page=1

Here is the part that disturbed me:

STEPHANOPOULOS: It's going to take a while. It's going to take a lot of money. But -- and you -- you do have to put a cost-benefit analysis on any decision like this. And this is something raised internally by Vice President Biden.

There's a report in Newsweek this morning -- it's actually on the cover of Newsweek, where the vice president is pointing out that this year we're going to spend about $65 billion in Afghanistan, about $2.25 billion in Pakistan. And according to the report in Newsweek, this is what the vice president went on to say in the National Security Council meeting: "By my calculations, that's a 30-to-1 ratio in favor of Afghanistan. So I have a question: Al Qaida is almost all in Pakistan, and Pakistan has nuclear weapons. And yet for every dollar we're spending in Pakistan, we're spending $30 in Afghanistan. Does that make strategic sense?"

(now here I'm cheering Joe Biden and Stephanopoulous pauses and calls on Senator Feinstein. George has just served up a big fattie of a question, and I'm waiting for her to support her fellow Democrat, who after all is the freaking Vice President.)

Instead, she throws Joe under the bus with this little zinger:

"Well, this whole situation is a bit of a conundrum. I basically agree with Senator Chambliss in what he said."

Thanks for nothing, Dianne. Thanks a big freaking pile.


Please, please my Californian friends and neighbors, do something to get rid of this wicked Witch of the West.

California and Americans deserve a Senator who is not a war profiteer.

[amborin]

1. her comments on Afghanistan and heeding McChrystal sickened me

[babylonsister]

2. I would like to know just how much her family is making off of wars.

If nothing, I'd like to know that, too.

[asdjrocky]

3. Millions and millions.

It's sick. The whole damn Senate is sick.

[goclark]

9. Millions maybe?

Shouldn't they have to declare conflicts like this ~ ? :shruyg:

I have to live here in CA ~ we have Boxer, that's my favorite!!

[Cobalt-60]

24. Instead of their home state

we should start referring to their true masters.
The biggest bribe payer campaign contributor's name should go there.
I don't know if they own a majority share but I think Kaiser has a piece of Baccus.
It would go Baccus (Kaiser) instead of the current mislabel.
Once the illusion of representative government is discarded the behavior of the
senate may appear more rational.

[Neecy]

10. Her hubby is well known in San Francisco for being a war profiteer

They live in a huge mansion in Pacific Heights paid for by his blood money.

Google Feinstein+war profiteer and you can read about how her husband has his hands in a whole lot of companies that contracted heavily with the government in Iraq and Afghanistan - and they've made many, many millions off of our tax dollars. It's a disgrace.

[babylonsister]

12. I knew I'd read that. Why oh why is she allowed to be involved with

any decision-making? Why isn't there a law that would make her recuse herself?

This is such crap, and she's been pro-war for years.

[Neecy]

13. I totally agree.

She should have recused herself on several votes, including the ones that funded the war (as well as her personal bank account).

It's sickening. And that mansion just flaunts their ill-gotten wealth in the most appalling manner possible. This is one overlord we should have thrown out of office years ago.

[bertman]

14. Short answer, babylonsister: because this is America, where money determines power.

[G_j]

15. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband's firms

http://www.bohemian.com/metro/01.24.07/dianne-feinstein-0704.html

Senator Feinstein's Iraq Conflict

As a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband's firms
By Peter Byrne


IN THE November 2006 election, the voters demanded congressional ethics reform. And so, the newly appointed chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., is now duly in charge of regulating the ethical behavior of her colleagues. But for many years, Feinstein has been beset by her own ethical conflict of interest, say congressional ethics experts.

As chairperson and ranking member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee (MILCON) from 2001 through the end of 2005, Feinstein supervised the appropriation of billions of dollars a year for specific military construction projects. Two defense contractors whose interests were largely controlled by her husband, financier Richard C. Blum, benefited from decisions made by Feinstein as leader of this powerful subcommittee.

Each year, MILCON's members decide which military construction projects will be funded from a roster proposed by the Department of Defense. Contracts to build these specific projects are subsequently awarded to such major defense contractors as Halliburton, Fluor, Parsons, Louis Berger, URS Corporation and Perini Corporation. From 1997 through the end of 2005, with Feinstein's knowledge, Blum was a majority owner of both URS Corp. and Perini Corp.

While setting MILCON agendas for many years, Feinstein, 73, supervised her own staff of military construction experts as they carefully examined the details of each proposal. She lobbied Pentagon officials in public hearings to support defense projects that she favored, some of which already were or subsequently became URS or Perini contracts. From 2001 to 2005, URS earned $792 million from military construction and environmental cleanup projects approved by MILCON; Perini earned $759 million from such MILCON projects.

..more..

[babylonsister]

16. UGH. Thanks for the link. nt

[stevedeshazer]

17. Thanks for that link. I knew a lot of it already but to read it just makes me ill all over again.

Argh.

[Control-Z]

19. Oh, yeah.

Hubby is making the $$.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2969134

[SoCalNative]

4. And what should we do?

Her opponent will be a Republican. No way will I vote for one of them.

[stevedeshazer]

7. Why not a progressive challenger in the primary?

She's up for re-election in 2012.

I agree, if I were a Californian I still would have to vote for her in the general election over any Republican.

As your northern neighbor, I hope for the best.

We threw out our last right-wing senator this past November. Sometimes it's hard to tell DiFi from that guy.

[sam sarrha]

5. hey .. i've been thuow'n up for years..

[CreekDog]

6. If she was your Senator, you'd already be pissed by now

:eyes:

[stevedeshazer]

8. Yeah, well I was pissed before, just more now.

:hi:

[gwsuperfan]

20. She *is* my senator...

And I have been pissed for a while. All she seems to do is shill for the prison industry.

[midnight]

11. k&R

[stevedeshazer]

18. More from The Hill: McConnell, Feinstein agree on listening to McChrystal

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/62557-mcconnell-feinstein-agree-on-listening-to-mcchrystal

<snip>

Republicans would support a request to send more troops to Afghanistan, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Sunday.

McConnell said Obama should follow the recommendations of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who has reportedly asked for up to 40,000 more troops to execute a counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan.

"If he does, he'll have broad support," McConnell said on CBS's "Face the Nation."

The Democratic chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee also seemed to back a troop surge Sunday, saying it would be very difficult for the president to ignore the advice of his commanders.

"I don't know how you put somebody in, who is a cracker jack as Gen. McChrsytal, who makes very solid recommendations to the president, and not take those recommendations," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said on ABC's "This Week."

"I think the decision has to be made sooner rather than later," she added.

</snip>

----

So here she is again, this time lining up with Mitch Freaking McConnell.

I just wish she and Joe Lieberman would make the switch to the Republican Party official.

Sweet Jesus, whose side is she on?

Oh yeah. Her husband's company.

:grr:

[G_j]

23. grrr..

war profiteer

:mad:

[Left coast liberal]

21. She really does have to go. What an insult to the great state of CA. NT

[alp227]

22. I watched This Week and am shocked at her sucking up to the GOP. Who to vote for?

So who do we vote for a California Senator if not Feinstein or a true-blood Republican?