NYT explores her relationship to the left on intelligence
by Brian Leubitz
Sen. Dianne Feinstein has had of a bit of an on-again/off-again relationship with the Left. But to the NY Times, our senior Senator is a “liberal lioness”, whatever that means. Clearly she has done a lot for progressive causes, from gun control to fighting for reproductive freedom and many other issues. However, the issue that keeps coming up again and again is the balance between individual liberty and the importance of intelligence. And her position on the NSA leaks, PRISM, and the prosecution of Snowden doesn’t help the rift:
She fought so hard to outlaw assault weapons that the National Rifle Association deemed her efforts tantamount to proposing the largest gun ban in American history. Well before the Supreme Court took up same-sex marriage, she sponsored a bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. And she urged President George W. Bush, and later President Obama, to shut down the prison camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
But Senator Dianne Feinstein – California Democrat and liberal lioness – has taken on a role that is leaving many of her allies on the left dismayed: as perhaps the most forthright and unapologetic Congressional defender of the National Security Agency’s surveillance programs.(NYT)
Perhaps some on the Left would have expected something different, but for most, this is exactly what we expected. For better or worse, Sen. Feinstein has placed the needs of intelligence on a pedestal, there is nothing new here.
Liberal Lioness? — Feinstein?!? — Geez…standards for liberal lionesses have sure fallen.
Sure, she has her few pet issues that she has fought pretty well for. But otherwise she’s been a terribly unreliable liberal. I always think of her as a middle-of-the-road “business/centrist” democrat. Well, rather than middle-of-the-road, perhaps really I think she is a finger-in-the-wind calculator who always wants to create leverage for herself by sitting at precipice of the decision points of an issue … just ’cause that’s how she rolls.
I am not a fan, but obviously we could have had all sorts of worse.
She’s a terrible Senator, especially for a state as blue as California.
…but holds a fairly progressive social agenda. Methinks the grey lady doesn’t want to stretch her mind too much, comprehending such an unfathomably incompatible pairing.
I consider myself an honorable progressive, but these attacks on Sen. Feinstein are illogical.
Why is it that we denounce Tea Party Republicans for marching in lockstep and putting ideology ahead of what’s best for the country but demand the same of progressives?
I can’t believe one of your posters said that we have “too many” Rockefeller Republicans. That’s crazy. The gridlock and ideological meltdown we are facing today is because we have too few rational, reasonable Republicans, not too many.
And while I certainly have some issues with the Patriot Act, I am willing to give Sen. Feinstein the benefit of the doubt this time. If the NSA program has truly meant that we have prevented terrorist attacks on our soil and saved lives, putting the security of our country “on a pedestal” is for better, not for worse.
Feinstein has always been for Feinstein.
Not all the time, there are times she only cares about Dick Blum a little contract here and there never hurt the family bank $$$$$$$$.
I remember the time our senior senator just barely missed a censure vote by the state Democratic Party for her conservative votes. The chair told people later that he called her to tell her about it because he was so shocked by the level of upset from the Party faithful.
At the same time, Democracy for America sent out an email about those same votes to all their members in the state.
And my mother, who is a VERY conservative Republican, says senator Feinstein is the only Democrat she could ever vote for.
Yes, she has supported gun control and a woman’s right to choose. And I thank her for that. But a “liberal lioness”? I think not. She has, as other posters have said, been a staunch defenders of Wall Street, property developers, corporations, and the military-industrial complex.