Thank you for your reply, Neven.
It's going to be hard, and probably counter-productive for me to reply to each of these issues individually.
So let me instead address a good number of them.
Overall, I really need you to understand that California is for US standards very liberal, but not like some Scandinavian countries.
Also, remember that Bernie obtained 45% of the Democratic vote here, and Hillary 55%.
And that's not even counting the Republican voters here (which are no unsubstantial).
So there is your framework for the "will of the people".
And note that we were the last ones to vote, so Bernie was well-known, so you can't use the excuse that Bernie was loosing because he was so little-know.
OK. That said, here is my take on the issues :
Which brings us back to evidence-based reasoning and the voting record. Please provide some evidence of Feinstein's voting record that she is clearly a 'corporate' Democrat and votes against the people.
Sure, let's do it. Here are some quotes from articles about Feinstein (that give me an idea what to look for):
LA Times
The state has clearly moved to the left in the ensuing decades. And while on some issues, Feinstein has embraced the new progressivism, she can’t be said to have led the way on such signature liberal causes as universal healthcare, the $15 minimum wage, campaign finance reform, tuition-free higher education, battling climate change or reining in Wall Street.
Regarding "universal healthcare", Feinstein suggests she is "not there yet" that we should fix the flaws in Obamacare instead. As much as I like the idea of Medicare-For-All, I think Feinstein better reflects the will of the people of Califonia than my opinion does. And please remember that even Bernie Sanders suggested that we "work towards" a single payer system, not that would immediately swap over.
Regarding a $15 minimum wage, I understand that Feinstein DID embrace that with the Democratic Party Platform.
Regarding tuition-free higher education, I am not sure what Feinstein's position is, and neither do I know how Californians feel about that (and the cost this would impose on tax payers). Do you know ?
Regarding battling climate change or reining in Wall Street, Feinstein has a perfect voting record AFAIK.
Paste MagazineLook up her record. She scoffs at single-payer. She voted to confirm nine of Trump’s squad of rapacious plunderers.
Already talked about single-payer.
Regarding "squad of rapacious plunderers. " be specific.
Feinstein supports capital punishment,
The majority in California time and again voted to uphold the death penalty in ballot provisions.
So Feinstein simply reflects the will of the people here, regardless of how much I disagree with that opinion.
and has been a long-time encourager of the drug war.
More information please...
In 2006, she publicly backed a cynical and shabby amendment to ban flag “desecration,” which the Seattle Times described as an “interesting word, given its connotations of religious devotion.”
Wasn't this a smear ?
She consistently supports the most draconian DRM tech protections—that means the heavy hand of IP lawyers on the Internet, on cable and satellite channels. And then there’s her affection for National Security.
I'm not sure what this is all about.
In the recent attacks on Net Neutrality, she sided with the people (and lost).
Here are snippets from Wikipedia that IMO don't look all that great for a Democrat:
- On October 1, 2008, Feinstein voted in favor of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act.
OK. That was an Obama action, and it saved the US from total economic collapse, after the Bush administration caused the banking system to go into cardiac arrest.
Feinstein voting in favor of this was just common sense.
Without this, we would be dead in the water.
And in hindsight, US tax payers made a couple of billion dollars in the process.
- Feinstein is a supporter of capital punishment.
Yes. Just like the average Californian voter is.
- Iraq war
Feinstein supported the Iraq war resolution in the vote of October 11, 2002; she has claimed that she was misled by President Bush on the reasons for going to war.
Yes.
However, former UN Weapons Inspector in Iraq Scott Ritter has stated that Feinstein in summer 2002 acknowledged to him that she knew the Bush administration had not provided any convincing intelligence to back up its claims about the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
Sounds like an attempt to rub the Iraq vote into Feinstein's face by smearing. Reference please.
In February 2007, Feinstein warned Republicans not to block consideration of a measure opposing President Bush's troop increase in Iraq, saying it would be a "terrible mistake" to prevent debate on the top issue in America.
Sounds like a smearing attempt. More information needed.
In May 2007, Feinstein voted for an Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill, which continued to fund the Iraq occupation without a firm timetable for withdrawal. The Senator said, "I am deeply disappointed that this bill fails to hold the President accountable for his Administration's flawed Iraq War policy. The American people have made their voices clear that there must be an exit strategy for Iraq. Yet this President continues to stubbornly adhere to more of the same."
Her words sound reasonable to me.
- Free speech
She was the main Democratic sponsor of the failed 2006 constitutional Flag Desecration Amendment.
Wasn't this a smear ?
In 2007, Feinstein was asked in a Fox News interview whether she would revive the Fairness Doctrine, and she replied that she was looking at it.
More information needed.
In 2010, Feinstein voted in favor of unilateral US censorship of the Internet by voting in favor of COICA. Also in 2010, Feinstein said in reference to Cablegate, "Whoever released this information should be punished severely."
Huh ? What is this all about ?
Do you have more information ?
In 2013, Feinstein called for the immediate extradition and arrest of Edward Snowden, the whistleblower who leaked information about the PRISM surveillance program.
I do not disagree with her on that.
If Snowden did nothing wrong, he should not fear going to court in the US.
- Health care
In an April 2017 town hall meeting in San Francisco, Feinstein stated that "If single-payer health care is going to mean the complete takeover by the government of all health care, I am not there."
edit Neven: It's impossible that she doesn't knows that this is not what single-payer health care means.
She is right. Isn't it true that single payer health care IS a complete takeover by the government of all health care ?
I think it is, and it's not a bad thing. After all, the profits the insurers and health care providers are currently incurring would, under a single-payer system, go back to the tax payer.
I think that is one of the reasons we want single-payer in the first place.
-Intelligence programs and NSA programs
After the 2013 mass surveillance disclosures involving operated by the National Security Agency (NSA), Feinstein took measures to continue the collection programs. Foreign Policy wrote that she had a "reputation as a staunch defender of NSA practices and the White House's refusal to stand by collection activities targeting foreign leaders".In November 2013, she promoted the Fisa Improvements Act bill, which included a "backdoor search provision" that allows intelligence agencies to continue certain warrantless searches as long as they are logged and "available for review" to various agencies.
One thing people often fail to understand : You can put all kind of restrictions on government to collect info on any of us. But there are no such rules for corporations.
The Koch Brothers can collect any information they want on any of us, without a FISA warrant.
Or Russia for that matter.
In June 2013, Feinstein labeled Edward Snowden a traitor after his leaks went public. In October of that year, Feinstein stated that she stood by her labeling.
I'm not sure if I would call him a 'traitor', but it comes pretty close.
Either way, he should have his day in court.
-Wiretapping
In August 2007, Feinstein joined Republicans in the Senate in voting to modify the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) by narrowing the scope of its protections to sharply alter the legal limits on the government's ability to monitor phone calls and email messages of American citizens. Feinstein voted to give the attorney general and the director of national intelligence the power to approve international surveillance of the communications of Americans entirely within the executive branch, rather than through the special intelligence court established by FISA. Many privacy advocates have decried this law and Senator Feinstein's vote in favor of it. In February 2008, Feinstein joined Republicans in the Senate in voting against removing the provisions that provided immunity from civil liability to electronic communication service providers for certain assistance (most notably, access without warrants to fiber-optic cables carrying bulk transmissions for the purposes of interception and monitoring) provided to the Government.
Regarding FISA, I stated before that it only applies to the US government agencies.
So corporations (or foreign governments) can do whatever surveilance they want.
Keep that in perspective please.
-USA PATRIOT Act
Feinstein was the original Democratic cosponsor of a bill to extend the USA PATRIOT Act. In a December 2005 statement, Senator Feinstein stated, "I believe the Patriot Act is vital to the protection of the American people."
Feinstein proposed an amendment to the Patriot Act would have explicitly excluded U.S. citizens from the detention authority created by the Authorization for the Use of Military Force passed just after the September 11 attacks in 2001. The amendment failed 45-55.
Though her amendment was defeated, the compromised amendment, passed 99-1, affirmed that nothing in the NDAA is intended to alter the government's current legal authority to detain prisoners captured in the war on terror.
I guess that Feinstein was one of the 99 senators that approved that bill ?
... And so on...
Of course, it would save me a lot of time if you would say that, after reading all these things, you're not all that convinced anymore about Feinstein's intentions and progressive image, Rob!
Sorry Neven. There just seems to be a story behind ANY of your allegations against Feinstein, and at closer scrutiny each story seems to indicate that Feinstein simple reflects the will of the people of California, not corporate interests...