Senator Feinstein is perceived as low key corrupt and an entitled oligarch. Look at how she talks to kids: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIebWywFfNw&ab_channel=USATO... She's just not the person who has credibility to tell Californians not to fear nuclear power.
Thank you for sharing.
I was not in support of her until I saw this video. She calmly handled a crowd of kids yelling what the one adult was telling them to repeat, and now I think she's an excellent leader.
I donate to climate action regularly btw, the issue is more nuanced than whatever these bozos wanted from her.
Senator Feinstein ran for reelection at aged 85. A full term in the Senate is 6 years. So if she didn't die in that time (which is a very real possibility at her age) then she would be 91 at the end of her term. That's... ridiculous. She seems to be in clear mental decline now, so much so that she stepped down (some say was removed) from the senate Judiciary committee [1]. So what allowed her to get renominated? Simp…
Wish there was a good solution to the problem of those in mental decline keeping hold of a political office. I don't like the idea of strict age limits since different people age at different rates. Any sort of competency test is likely to end up being gamed by one side or the other. Ultimately it is up to the voters in the electing jurisdiction to decide. Much of the problem in the Senate and House seems to stem from these very old office holders having accumulated lots of power. Some of that is due to seniority rules. Perhaps once an office holder gets past their first term, "seniority" should be assigned by rotation or random, rather than by how many times to same person has been sent back to Washington. The current system seems to reward power hoarding and punishes those districts/states that give undesirable politicians the boot.
Why do you say "this Supreme Court"? The make up of the court has changed dramatically since. I don't think it's better now. Just different.
Not different when it comes to this issue though. More of the current justices likely agree that money == speech.
>likely
Perhaps but until they rule that way, they're not the ones responsible for that ruling. Anyone who follows more of the Court's rulings than just the ones the press decides to highlight will notice how frequently judges from "the other side" end up agreeing. In addition to the many 9-0 rulings, there are many split rulings where the split isn't based on which party's president nominated that justice.
Senator Feinstein ran for reelection at aged 85. A full term in the Senate is 6 years. So if she didn't die in that time (which is a very real possibility at her age) then she would be 91 at the end of her term. That's... ridiculous. She seems to be in clear mental decline now, so much so that she stepped down (some say was removed) from the senate Judiciary committee [1]. So what allowed her to get renominated? Simp…
Wish there was a good solution to the problem of those in mental decline keeping hold of a political office. I don't like the idea of strict age limits since different people age at different rates. Any sort of competency test is likely to end up being gamed by one side or the other. Ultimately it is up to the voters in the electing jurisdiction to decide. Much of the problem in the Senate and House seems to stem fro…
> Any sort of competency test is likely to end up being gamed by one side or the other.
Why do you say "this Supreme Court"? The make up of the court has changed dramatically since. I don't think it's better now. Just different.
Not different when it comes to this issue though. More of the current justices likely agree that money == speech.
Money !== speech, but money is essential to speech. I can say things, but if people can't hear me, because I can't spend the money to get that speech out, does it really matter?
The other thing I hear a lot is: corporations aren't people! But they're made of people. I want the EFF and ACLU and SAF and Humane Society to be able to advocate on my behalf. That's why I give them money.
Senator Feinstein is perceived as low key corrupt and an entitled oligarch. Look at how she talks to kids: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIebWywFfNw&ab_channel=USATO... She's just not the person who has credibility to tell Californians not to fear nuclear power.
That video is delightful; Feinstein actually won my respect for that encounter for telling it like it is and indirectly giving the middle finger to whoever tried to manipulate her using a bunch of kids as sockpuppets.
OMG, I’m no fan of Feinstein’s position on many issues - and am not her constituent - but yes. That teacher should be ashamed of herself, not only for trying to use kids as a front to push her own agenda, but clearly she’s been preaching apocalyptic visions to these kids. Wonder why your kids have anxiety problems?? Because people they view as ultimate truthful authorities are telling them the world will literally end within their lifetime. There will be plenty of time for those kids to make their lives a stressful hell, but as adults there’s something to be said for sheltering children from the worldly issues that make our own lives hell. Try your best to insulate little children from stress, provide a solid sense of strategic security (along with freedom to make tactical mistakes, get injured and recover), and avoid passing on your own insecurities and daily anxieties to them. Above all, don’t use them for political gain. It’s one thing to teach them civics that young but you can just hear the fear in that little girl’s voice saying we only have 12 years and we’re impacted by you not voting for this shitty spending proposition we have no earthly comprehension of. Bad adulting! Bad!
Senator Feinstein is perceived as low key corrupt and an entitled oligarch. Look at how she talks to kids: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIebWywFfNw&ab_channel=USATO... She's just not the person who has credibility to tell Californians not to fear nuclear power.
>low key corrupt I think even many democrats know she is garbage. She regularly votes against the little guy and for the big business interest. She's a relic of the worst age of the democratic party, and her continued safe seat is basically one of the reasons America can't have nice things and has so many struggles.
Can’t do anything about it except wait for her to age out. Progress occurs one funeral at a time and all that jazz.
Senator Feinstein ran for reelection at aged 85. A full term in the Senate is 6 years. So if she didn't die in that time (which is a very real possibility at her age) then she would be 91 at the end of her term. That's... ridiculous. She seems to be in clear mental decline now, so much so that she stepped down (some say was removed) from the senate Judiciary committee [1]. So what allowed her to get renominated? Simp…
> “this Supreme Court” Assuming you mean Citizens United, decided twelve years ago, the Court has had a nearly 50% turnover since then. It was still “the Robert’s Court” but hardly “this Court”. But the current Court would likely hold a majority for same conclusion of CU - that the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneer…
It's still the Roberts Supreme Court. Some of the actors may have changed (eg RBG, Scalia) but do you really think the current makeup of the court would rule otherwise if that case was decided today?
Senator Feinstein ran for reelection at aged 85. A full term in the Senate is 6 years. So if she didn't die in that time (which is a very real possibility at her age) then she would be 91 at the end of her term. That's... ridiculous. She seems to be in clear mental decline now, so much so that she stepped down (some say was removed) from the senate Judiciary committee [1]. So what allowed her to get renominated? Simp…
I just want to point out that the headline for this should be updated to California from "Cali" as it comes off as something somebody from out-of-state would say. For those unfamiliar with such things, you don't say "San Fran" or "Frisco" and only tourists and non-locals call it "Cali."
If you think 91 is a ridiculous age for a senator, you might want to recalibrate your feigned outrage a notch or two. The racist bigot from the great state of South Carolina, Strom Thurmond, has her beat by at least a decade (b 1902 d 2003). Feinstein is a spring chicken next to Thurmond (may he rot in pieces).
Not different when it comes to this issue though. More of the current justices likely agree that money == speech.
Money !== speech, but money is essential to speech. I can say things, but if people can't hear me, because I can't spend the money to get that speech out, does it really matter? The other thing I hear a lot is: corporations aren't people! But they're made of people. I want the EFF and ACLU and SAF and Humane Society to be able to advocate on my behalf. That's why I give them money.
Except that what we've done is not given the ability of groups of people to be heard per se, we've given disproportionately powerful voices to the wealthy and allowed corporations to dictate policy to an extent that almost no individual ever could.