The camera bulbs flashed and Dianne Feinstein took the podium, beaming confidently in front of hundreds of cheering supporters.

"Tonight, history is being made," she declared. "In California, two women will be elected to the Senate of the United States."

Ms Feinstein was one of them. The 1992 election that saw an unprecedented number of women - four- elected to Congress' upper chamber. The phenomenon, dubbed "the year of the woman", heralded a new era in Washington, and Ms Feinstein was part of it.

Ms Feinstein spent the next three decades in the Senate until her death at age 90, which her office announced on Friday.

By this point, Ms Feinstein has become a symbol not of progress but of Congress' aging leadership. She spent the last two years in office facing calls to resign over health and cognitive issues that kept her away from Washington for several months.

Yet her career was full of historic moments, of which her Senate election was only one.

 

She was a ferocious political operator who witnessed an assassination, led a major American city, fought for gun safety regulations, battled with the US intelligence apparatus, and served as the unofficial dean of California politics.

 

FULL STORY

She was a fighter a life well lived an excellent run in my humble opinion rip madam and my condolences to her loved ones 

Legend.

 

RIP

39 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Legend.

 

RIP

Legend indeed... for all the wrong reasons.

"Yet her career was full of historic moments, of which her Senate election was only one".

It was the only one if you judge her by any standards other than those of the left-wing loons who have ruined her city, her state, and now hard at work on destroying her country.

5 minutes ago, TooPoopedToPop said:

Legend indeed... for all the wrong reasons.

"Yet her career was full of historic moments, of which her Senate election was only one".

It was the only one if you judge her by any standards other than those of the left-wing loons who have ruined her city, her state, and now hard at work on destroying her country.

Opinions differ.

1 hour ago, Social Media said:

Ms Feinstein spent the next three decades in the Senate until her death at age 90, which her office announced on Friday.

I don't know much about her, but IMO it's an abomination that anyone could spend 3 decades sucking large off the taxpayer to sit in congress, and especially that they did it till age 90. It's not like it's a real job, is it?

 

I'd like a 3 term or 10 years maximum for any politician in any country.

 

The very valid reason is the saying "power corrupts".

45 minutes ago, TooPoopedToPop said:

Legend indeed... for all the wrong reasons.

"Yet her career was full of historic moments, of which her Senate election was only one".

It was the only one if you judge her by any standards other than those of the left-wing loons who have ruined her city, her state, and now hard at work on destroying her country.

She was a centrist actually. 

I loved her and had the opportunity to vote for her multiple times while she was supervisor, mayor, and Senator.

She was the rare kind of politician that had the potential to unite.

She should have been a president. 

Super intelligent lady and she projected as a real leader.

Don't judge her historically long career based on her sad decline in recent months. That's the human condition.

Edited September 30, 20232 yr by Jingthing

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't know much about her, but IMO it's an abomination that anyone could spend 3 decades sucking large off the taxpayer to sit in congress, and especially that they did it till age 90. It's not like it's a real job, is it?

 

I'd like a 3 term or 10 years maximum for any politician in any country.

 

The very valid reason is the saying "power corrupts".

She wasn't in charge of term limits. 

California kept sending her back is all.

Perhaps we can leave the political bickering for one day?

 

Her time in the Senate was influential and consequential. Condolences to her family.

32 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

She wasn't in charge of term limits. 

California kept sending her back is all.

Becoming an elected official is not compulsory but a conscious decision made by the candidate.

 

California did not send her back, she was re-elected.

 

She had the power to support the creation of term-limits by crafting legislation and then convincing the Senate and others to support the legislation. 

They'll embomb her, stick a pacemaker in her and keep her propped up in her seat for another decade and she'll have the same effect as the last half century.

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't know much about her, but IMO it's an abomination that anyone could spend 3 decades sucking large off the taxpayer to sit in congress, and especially that they did it till age 90. It's not like it's a real job, is it?

 

I'd like a 3 term or 10 years maximum for any politician in any country.

 

The very valid reason is the saying "power corrupts".

See? There are points of agreement that can exist between those on the Left and the Right.

She was an effective politician, and got things done. I do not want to rain on her parade, but the major issue I had with her, is the same one I have with Pelosi, McConnell and a few others. They just serve for too long. They do not know when to quit. There should be both term limits (I would suggest no more than 2 terms) and age limits ( I would suggest 75 at the oldest). We should not have to wait for them to die, for their term to expire.

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't know much about her, but IMO it's an abomination that anyone could spend 3 decades sucking large off the taxpayer to sit in congress, and especially that they did it till age 90. It's not like it's a real job, is it?

 

I'd like a 3 term or 10 years maximum for any politician in any country.

 

The very valid reason is the saying "power corrupts".

Like you admit yourself, you don’t know a lot about her.

One other comment on her career. She was way, way off base on her CIA allegations and persecution. They might have used torture from time to time. But, it was rarely on innocents. 

Edited September 30, 20232 yr by spidermike007

I guess nobody remembers what the "P" in "RIP" stands for these days...

47 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

One other comment on her career. She was way, way off base on her CIA allegations and persecution. They might have used torture from time to time. But, it was rarely on innocents. 

It was never acceptable.

A senator who defied natural term limits and became a professional scrounger.

A post and replies contravening our Community Standards has been removed.    

6 minutes ago, retarius said:

A senator who defied natural term limits and became a professional scrounger.

She continued in her position on the Senate Judiciary Committee where she enabled Biden via her vote to appoint Federal Judges.

 

She continued despite health issues because, and only because, Republicans had stated categorically that if she stepped down they would block her replacement.

 

When she didn’t give the Republicans the chance to do so, they attacked her with their usual bag of directed hatred.

 

We will now witness the Republicans doing they only thing they know how to do, block and frustrate the elected administration.

 

 

Edited September 30, 20232 yr by Chomper Higgot

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It was never acceptable.

I felt that way too, until I spent alot of time researching it. They used it on very few, and they did extract alot of valuable intel. It is unlikely they would have had the opportunity to waste Bin Laden by being nice guys. So, what is the trade off?

 

They were planning on blowing up 10 passengers jets on the same day, until they killed one of the terrorists, who was the mastermind. A fair trade off? For 3,000 innocent lives? I think so. 

    She was from the old school of politicians, who were more inclined to work across party lines to get things done.  Whatever happened to politics being the 'art of compromise'?  That used to be the case, but not much any more.  Compromise seems like a scarce commodity in Congress these days.  Sadly, there are not very many like her left, and Congress reflects this with almost every issue that comes up.  Case in point, the current chaos trying to simply keep the government open.

14 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I guess this is based on what people justifying having tortured or authorized torture claim.

 

The value of torture in interrogation was debunked decades ago:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanns_Scharff

CIA and FBI Go Online to Edit Wikipedia

The official refuse to confirm

https://news.softpedia.com/news/CIA-And-FBI-Go-Online-To-Edit-Wikipedia-62990.shtml

 

https://www.wired.com/2007/08/wiki-tracker/

2 minutes ago, impulse said:

CIA and FBI Go Online to Edit Wikipedia

The official refuse to confirm

https://news.softpedia.com/news/CIA-And-FBI-Go-Online-To-Edit-Wikipedia-62990.shtml

 

https://www.wired.com/2007/08/wiki-tracker/

And your point is?

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

And your point is?

Linking Wikipedia as evidence that CIA torture isn't effective is pretty funny when the CIA has been editing Wikipedia since way before 2010.

 

Just now, impulse said:

Linking Wikipedia as evidence that CIA torture isn't effective is pretty funny when the CIA has been editing Wikipedia since way before 2010.

 

But I didn’t link to Wikipedia as evidence that CIA torture isn’t effective.

 

I linked to an Wikipedia article on a Nazi interrogator who is recognized for the effectiveness of his methods that did not include torture.

 

The Wikipedia article also includes references to the impact of his methods on modern interrogation techniques.

 

 

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

But I didn’t link to Wikipedia as evidence that CIA torture isn’t effective.

 

I linked to an Wikipedia article on a Nazi interrogator who is recognized for the effectiveness of his methods that did not include torture.

 

The Wikipedia article also includes references to the impact of his methods on modern interrogation techniques.

The topic of discussion is CIA torture.  Your claim is that it's not effective.  Your linked evidence is Wikipedia.

 

QED.

 

5 hours ago, TooPoopedToPop said:

Legend indeed... for all the wrong reasons.

"Yet her career was full of historic moments, of which her Senate election was only one".

It was the only one if you judge her by any standards other than those of the left-wing loons who have ruined her city, her state, and now hard at work on destroying her country.

Hey TooPooped...reads as if you've POPPED❗???? ????

2 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

She was an effective politician, and got things done. I do not want to rain on her parade, but the major issue I had with her, is the same one I have with Pelosi, McConnell and a few others. They just serve for too long. They do not know when to quit. There should be both term limits (I would suggest no more than 2 terms) and age limits ( I would suggest 75 at the oldest). We should not have to wait for them to die, for their term to expire.

Further, there's good reasons for ensuring that new blood comes into any type of organization* from time to time. And IMHO that includes politicians and their new thinking regularly taking the popium.

 

I was a regional director of a multi-national for 2 decades, my own support team were required to keep me well informed of many items of data (1 example; for each operating company how long since a vacant middle / senior manager / snr supevisor position had been filled by a person from outside (to prevent the organization from ignoring new ideas / processes happening in the outer business environment and to prevent becoming a stale internally focused m'ment team.

 

And I also informed my i'national board of directors they should move me, I had been in the same position for too long.

 

They listened, created a roving CEO performance monitoring position and I did that for 4 years before retiring. In that 4 years I appointed 3 new operating company CEOs from outside, all deliberate.

If she challenged the CIA, that would be enough to give her national honours. America is the first to use questionnable tactics serving it's own interests. But when it comes to other nations doing similar, they butt in and start giving lessons of morale. Very rarewly works both ways with those bureaucrats in Washington. No hard feelings as this is about the absurd politics and not a judgement of the american people who are just as fed up with their governance.