Feinstein to be Chairman of Senate Intelligence Committee

[ToddG]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090110/ap_on_go_co/feinstein_profile

Feinstein grabs spotlight, committee reins

By ERICA WERNER, Associated Press Writer – 57 mins ago

AP – In this June 5, 2008 file photo, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. talks to reporters on Capitol Hill in …
WASHINGTON – There's a new, yet familiar, face of female political power in Washington.
California Sen. Dianne Feinstein is the incoming chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee — the first woman to hold the job.
But Feinstein, a veteran of many skirmishes on Capitol Hill, didn't wait to take the gavel before asserting her prerogatives in the opening days of the 111th Congress.
Her public pronouncements on President-elect Barack Obama's pick to head the CIA and on the controversy surrounding his open Illinois Senate seat earned her an apology from Obama and tart words from her own party leader.
They also said plenty about the tenacious, strong-willed woman who will play a key role in shaping Obama's plans to restore credibility and morale to U.S. intelligence operations — presuming she doesn't run for governor of California instead, as many Democrats in her home state hope she will.
"I have reached a stage in my life where I'm going to speak out and I'm going to say what I think is right," Feinstein, 75, said in an interview with The Associated Press on Thursday.
"My view is 15 years into it I've got some fair judgment about what the law is."
Earlier in the week Feinstein, who's served in the Senate since 1992, had become the first Senate Democrat to say publicly that Roland Burris should be seated in the Senate despite the taint of corruption surrounding the man who appointed him, Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
Feinstein's position put her at odds with her party's leaders, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid publicly denounced her position as "not valid."
But Feinstein said she'd spoken twice with Reid before going public. She said the Burris appointment was valid under the Constitution, and the idea that the Constitution would be trumped by Senate rules relied on by Democratic leaders was "an impossible dream."
It was the second dustup starring Feinstein in as many days.
When Obama's choice of former White House chief of staff Leon Panetta to become CIA head became public at the beginning of the week, Feinstein said she hadn't been informed and expressed a preference for an intelligence professional to head the agency.
After Obama called her to apologize — "profusely," she said — and she also spoke with Panetta, Feinstein came around.
Both episodes dominated talk on Capitol Hill, cable news shows and blogs. Feinstein said she didn't set out to make news.
"I was asked a question and I answered it honestly, and that's what started it," she said.
To some longtime observers, it was vintage Feinstein.
"She says what she thinks," said Gale Kaufman, a veteran Democratic consultant in Sacramento. "And while 80 percent of the time that may be in sync with her party or other people's politics, there's 20 percent of the time where it just is her."
The former San Francisco mayor is repeatedly ranked as California's most popular politician, bested only a few times by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Democrats and Republicans avidly court her support on issues from the environment to gay rights.
Depending on who's talking, she's the mama bear of California politics, or the 800-pound-gorilla.
"She's a larger-than-life figure," said Garry South, a California Democratic strategist who has run unsuccessful campaigns against Feinstein. "She has a certain mystique about her."
Although Feinstein usually votes the same way as the state's more liberal junior senator, Barbara Boxer, she parts with her party's base often enough on key votes — including supporting the Iraq war, which she now regrets — to have earned the distrust of some liberals. She works frequently and effectively with the GOP, and they lavish praise on her.
"Sen. Feinstein was a delight," said Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah, who served as top Republican on the rules committee that Feinstein chairs. "I view her as a very reasonable, management-oriented Democrat who wants to do things that will work."
Conventional wisdom says that Feinstein would win handily if she runs for governor next year, when term limits will prevent Schwarzenegger from seeking re-election. Feinstein said she hasn't yet decided, but she's always wanted the job, which she came close to winning in 1990. She passed up the chance to run in the 2003 gubernatorial recall, when she was viewed as the only Democrat who could have beaten Schwarzenegger.
Now, her new chairmanship provides powerful incentive to stay in Washington — even though the prospect of being in a position to tame her unruly home state tugs her in the opposite direction, according to advisers.
Part of Feinstein's stature in California derives from her singular political history now being recounted by Hollywood. The film "Milk," starring Sean Penn, uses historical footage of Feinstein in its opening scenes.
Feinstein was president of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1978 when Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk were murdered at City Hall. She found Milk's body, later telling how her finger slipped into a bullet hole as she felt for a pulse.
As board president, she automatically succeeded Moscone to become mayor and led San Francisco during one of its most turbulent periods.
Feinstein said she hasn't seen the movie and doesn't know if she could stand to, because those events were so traumatic for her. But she said those searing days put in perspective the crosscurrents she's felt on Capitol Hill recently, and any that might tug at her in her new job.
"Let me tell you something. The worst pressure I've ever had was in San Francisco during very difficult times following the two assassinations," Feinstein said. "This is all a piece of cake in comparison."

[bkb0000]

isn't she a DREAM, todd? there's no way in hell the AP wants HER to run, and win, governor in the PRC

[Iraqgunz]

If she becomes the next Governor of California you can go ahead an nail the coffin shut.

[randyman_ar]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090110/ap_on_go_co/feinstein_profile

Feinstein grabs spotlight, committee reins

By ERICA WERNER, Associated Press Writer – 57 mins ago

[QUOTE]strong-willed woman who will play a key role in shaping Obama's plans to restore credibility and morale to U.S. intelligence operations —

I never thought I'd see those words linked to Feinstein in a serious context.

"
My view is 15 years into it I've got some fair judgment about what the law is."


She said the Burris appointment was valid under the Constitution, and the idea that the Constitution would be trumped by Senate rules relied on by Democratic leaders was "an impossible dream."

Apparently....... the 2nd amendment is exempt from this statement.


After Obama called her to apologize — "profusely,"

A glimpse of Obamas foreign policy? Maybe?

[bkb0000]

i hate that place so much. my father just moved back to northern california for work.. jefferson county. every store you walk into has signs that read some variation of the theme "Welcome to the STATE of Jefferson!"

i feel awful for those folks.

[bkb0000]

A glimpse of Obamas foreign policy? Maybe?

i caught that part too... WTF? since when does the president elect answer to bitch senators from california? what the hell was he apologizing for? that he realized what an idiot choice he'd made? i dont get it.

[ToddG]

i caught that part too... WTF? since when does the president elect answer to bitch senators from california? what the hell was he apologizing for? that he realized what an idiot choice he'd made? i dont get it.

He was apologizing for announcing his CIA choice without first consulting with the incoming chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Since Feinstein's committee will hold the hearings on his confirmation, it was a political faux pas. The accepted process is that the administration's people contact the Senate's people and make sure the nomination will succeed before risking an embarrassing defeat. In this case, Obama apparently felt that any choice he made would get rubber stamped, and Feinstein isn't exactly known for being a political wallflower.

[SeriousStudent]

Wow.....

Did you ever think you would see three contradictions for the price of one? Feinstein, Senate and Intelligence all in the same sentance.

It's a trifecta. :rolleyes:

[tango-papa]

i feel awful for those folks.

But, but, but... Why? She's the most popular piece of shit... er, I mean politician, in the state.
The people of California have exactly what they want, right?

It's no different than Obama's election win, right?
The American people now have exactly what they want right?

Well, don't we?

I suspect "they" will all figure out none too soon just how unqualified 'he' really isn't.

And for the record, I voted for Bush, Bush, Bush and McCain, in that order.

tp

[tango-papa]

Wow.....

Did you ever think you would see three contradictions for the price of one? Feinstein, Senate and Intelligence all in the same sentance.

It's a trifecta. :rolleyes:

Well said, and I couldn't agree more.

tp

[tango-papa]

He was apologizing for announcing his CIA choice without first consulting with the incoming chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Since Feinstein's committee will hold the hearings on his confirmation, it was a political faux pas. The accepted process is that the administration's people contact the Senate's people and make sure the nomination will succeed before risking an embarrassing defeat. In this case, Obama apparently felt that any choice he made would get rubber stamped, and Feinstein isn't exactly known for being a political wallflower.

Once again highlighting just how inexperienced and unqualified this guy is to be President.
I can't wait to see what happens when he starts making decisions that impact 'important stuff'... :rolleyes:
This entire administration is going to be one giant political faux pas.

tp

[5pins]

So I guess Arnold gets to replace her. I assume her replacement will be a republican. Of course we all know what assume means.

[ToddG]

Once again highlighting just how inexperienced and unqualified this guy is to be President.

He hasn't been sworn in yet and he's already butting heads with the House & Senate on a tax credit stimulus, sitting Burris as the junior IL Senator, this CIA Director thing, etc.

The progressive end of the party is unhappy with him for backpedaling on Iraq and various social programs he now says won't be possible until the economy gets better.

The conservative end of the party is furious at his trillion-dollar economic recovery plan.

If it was happening to another country, it would be pretty funny. But it's not. And it's not.

[tango-papa]

If it was happening to another country, it would be pretty funny. But it's not. And it's not.

Indeed.
And as disappointed as I am in the election results, it's certainly going to make the next four years rather interesting... and scary.

tp

[Bad Voodoo]

But, but, but... She's the most popular... politician in the state. The people of California have exactly what they want, right?

Ummm, no. Not exactly. Liberal state politicians rigged the various voting districts over time to consolidate the liberal hoards who mass in CA's urban areas into nice, neat, protected constituencies. Unfortunately for freedom loving Californians who live outside these constituencies, this has almost assured the safety of liberal incumbents and their various social experiments, err "propositions." Times are changing.

With Proposition 11, we recently won approval to begin redistricting in CA (http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/title-sum/prop11-title-sum.htm) which is a HUGE win for our freedoms. At the very least it will level the playing field in what has been an unfair fight against our liberal keepers.

Grassroots efforts to fight liberal gun control in this state are coming along quite nicely thanks to those who participate in California's gun owner's groups like calguns.net (http://www.calguns.net/) and The Calguns Foundation (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/), a California non-profit corporation whose goals are to support the California Firearms Community by promoting education for all stakeholders about California and Federal firearms laws, rights and privileges, defending and protecting the civil rights of California Gun Owners, and supporting the unique public discussion forum at Calguns.net. These people are on the front lines, not only protecting Californian's gun rights, but mitigating the chance that legislative "control" bleeds across our borders and into the rest of the country.

You don't do anyone any good sitting on the sidelines sniping Californians and their misguided politics. Get involved before it affects you and yours wherever you might currently reside. We're all in this together.

[Iraqgunz]

Bad Voodoo,

I was born and raised in California and did the best I could to vote when I was there. But, you know as well as I do that the demographics of the state have continually changed and until the recent Prop 11 passage trying to fix the system there would have been nearly impossible. And honestly even with its passage it may not happen.

Unfortunately I could no longer choke on the vomit of that state and got out while I could. Basically in addition to the crime and the illegals the reality is that the ridiculous gun laws in California will never be rolled back. Sure you guys might have some luck stopping the further erosion of your rights, but what has been lost will never be restored.


Ummm, no. Not exactly. Liberal state politicians rigged the various voting districts over time to consolidate the liberal hoards who mass in CA's urban areas into nice, neat, protected constituencies. Unfortunately for freedom loving Californians who live outside these constituencies, this has almost assured the safety of liberal incumbents and their various social experiments, err "propositions." Times are changing.

With Proposition 11, we recently won approval to begin redistricting in CA (http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/title-sum/prop11-title-sum.htm) which is a HUGE win for our freedoms. At the very least it will level the playing field in what has been an unfair fight against our liberal keepers.

Grassroots efforts to fight liberal gun control in this state are coming along quite nicely thanks to those who participate in California's gun owner's groups like calguns.net (http://www.calguns.net/) and The Calguns Foundation (http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/), a California non-profit corporation whose goals are to support the California Firearms Community by promoting education for all stakeholders about California and Federal firearms laws, rights and privileges, defending and protecting the civil rights of California Gun Owners, and supporting the unique public discussion forum at Calguns.net. These people are on the front lines, not only protecting Californian's gun rights, but mitigating the chance that legislative "control" bleeds across our borders and into the rest of the country.

You don't do anyone any good sitting on the sidelines sniping Californians and their misguided politics. Get involved before it affects you and yours wherever you might currently reside. We're all in this together.

[5pins]

I’m not sure how redistricting is going to make a difference is a senate race. A senator is elected by a total sate wide count. She may not be the most popular but she is wining the popular vote.

[Bad Voodoo]

...the reality is that the ridiculous gun laws in California will never be rolled back. Sure you guys might have some luck stopping the further erosion of your rights, but what has been lost will never be restored.

Ig,

I respectfully disagree. In fact, the moment of truth has arrived.


In 1999, Alameda County passed an ordinance banning guns on public property, including the location where the gun show was usually held. A challenge was filed in Federal district court, and the judge spontaneously raised the 2nd Amendment question, before ruling against the challenge. To be precise, he denied an injunction at the outset of the case. He didn't dismiss it.

It went to the 9th Circuit, which asked the California Supremes to clarify a state law question.

The 9th ruled in 2003 that plaintiff had no standing, following prior 9th Circuit rulings -- it was a state right and he wasn't a state. But the majority opinion suggests that, but for the prior rulings, the judges would have ruled differently, and one judge concurred to say he thought the prior rulings were dead wrong.

After that, the case went on in District Court (all that had been denied was an injunction at the outset). In 2007, the District Court ruled in favor of the County, and an appeal was filed with the 9th Circuit. After Heller, both sides have requested to brief the 2A issue. Good news is that the same three judge panel will hear it.
The argument will be held Thursday, January 15, 2009 in the James R. Browning federal courthouse, Courtroom 1. It's at 95 Seventh St. in San Francisco. If you're a Californian and can possibly attend, please do. This is important. With incorporation, we can finally begin chipping away at CA's infringement of our ridiculous gun control legislation.

Reference:
Want to attend in person? http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=137800
Background: http://www.reason.com/news/show/129309.html




.

[Iraqgunz]

I am familiar with the original case and some of the stuff afterwards. Unfortunately my lawyerly skills are sucking. I hope that it does work out, unfortunately I could no longer live like I was the criminal because of my passion.

[Bad Voodoo]

I’m not sure how redistricting is going to make a difference is a senate race. A senator is elected by a total sate wide count. She may not be the most popular but she is wining the popular vote.

pins,

It's about power and money in this state. If a party is able to control the manner in which representatives are elected, it has a better chance of dominating the legislature and protecting their incumbents. The more direct control the parties have over the drawing of district lines, the more they are able to manipulate these lines to produce the results they want. Legislative redistricting is the most likely to contravene the public interest. In extreme cases, it produces districts in which the politicians have chosen their constituents rather than the other way around, as has been the historical case in CA. Legislative power equals money, and in this state incumbents like Feinstein (and Boxer, and Pelosi, et al), generally run unchallenged because of the resources their party creates by sheer legislative domination.

With independent redistricting we at least have a fighting chance on the surface. Wins, even minor wins, are encouraging in this state.




.

[Bad Voodoo]

I am familiar with the original case and some of the stuff afterwards. Unfortunately my lawyerly skills are sucking. I hope that it does work out, unfortunately I could no longer live like I was the criminal because of my passion.

I don't blame you. At this point, it's become more about my kid's future and what level of exposure I want him to have to this mess more than anything else. Given a strong housing market, I'd be joining the expats in a free state. I'm thinking Idaho would be nice. :D

While I'm here though, I choose to fight.

[John_Wayne777]

i caught that part too... WTF? since when does the president elect answer to bitch senators from california? what the hell was he apologizing for? that he realized what an idiot choice he'd made? i dont get it.

Ah, grasshoppa....you must understand that the US Senate is populated largely by self-important pricks most of whom want Obama's job and whose egos are as easily bruised as a ripe peach. Fienstein's displeasure with this breach of protocol is about putting Obama's administration on notice that they don't run the show.

They're doing a similar thing to his economic package. They have no intention of quietly following Obama's marching orders. They are going to put him "in his place" and extract everything they possibly can from him while giving him as little as possible.

Welcome to the big chair, Mr. Obama..."and a man's enemies will be those of his own house."

[John_Wayne777]

He hasn't been sworn in yet and he's already butting heads with the House & Senate on a tax credit stimulus, sitting Burris as the junior IL Senator, this CIA Director thing, etc.

The progressive end of the party is unhappy with him for backpedaling on Iraq and various social programs he now says won't be possible until the economy gets better.

The conservative end of the party is furious at his trillion-dollar economic recovery plan.

If it was happening to another country, it would be pretty funny. But it's not. And it's not.

I would also introduce the idea that most politicians aren't "true believer" kool-aid drinkers like many of Obama's supporters were. They don't give a darn what he proposed during the campaign...they want what THEY want and it seems to me they are putting Obama on notice that he's going to have to play ball with them to get ANYTHING.

Obama was never a strong leader in the senate. Everybody knew that. Consequently I believe lots of D's in the congress think he's a milk sop and they can extract whatever their little heart desires from him. Methinks Mr. Obama is in for one hell of a rude awakening.

[bkb0000]

Ah, grasshoppa....you must understand that the US Senate is populated largely by self-important pricks most of whom want Obama's job and whose egos are as easily bruised as a ripe peach. Fienstein's displeasure with this breach of protocol is about putting Obama's administration on notice that they don't run the show.

They're doing a similar thing to his economic package. They have no intention of quietly following Obama's marching orders. They are going to put him "in his place" and extract everything they possibly can from him while giving him as little as possible.

Welcome to the big chair, Mr. Obama..."and a man's enemies will be those of his own house."

well thats ideal.. i guess we should be thankful for bitch senators from california right now.

[John_Wayne777]

well thats ideal.. i guess we should be thankful for bitch senators from california right now.

I wouldn't go that far....

Obama is an unknown quantity right now. He has almost zero experience and no record of exercising leadership. As much as I dislike Hillary Clinton, all of her criticisms about Obama were 100% accurate.

Now that Obama has been elected he's exhibiting some signs of beginning to grasp the responsibilities ahead of him. Notice how quiet he's been since winning the election and how he's stopped badmouthing Bush at every opportunity. Statements like "we only have one president at a time" demonstrate that he's starting to grasp the scope of what he's in for.

The office of POTUS has been severely damaged in the last several years largely as a result of the constant hammering the D's in Congress have been giving since the 2000 election. Congress is powerful...which makes individual members of congress powerful...and getting a politician to give up power is like trying to make a crackhead go cold turkey.

The campaign is over and now the governing begins...and the guy sitting in the big chair is some inexperienced schmoe who was never a leader on anything. He knows it. The people in Congress know it. He knows they know it. They know he knows that they know he knows it. The president and the presidency are weak...and that's just how legislators like it.

Obama's best friends may end up being...republicans. Why? Because they're demoralized and have some sort of innate need to appear "bipartisan" at precisely the wrong times. They'll probably fall all over themselves to work with Obama while people from his own party give him grief for not doing things their way.

The wildcard here is the media. They practically fellated Obama on a daily basis during the campaign, and the man's speeches made them feel all tingly in their nether regions during the campaign...will they still have such undying love for him, or will they side with the people in Congress? It'll be interesting to watch it develop.

We're well and truly screwed, but at least the ride to hell will have some entertainment.