CA SENATOR REPLIES TO ThePETE

Sadly, the senator that replied was the one I dislike more--but I guess Boxer is busy being a hero. Anyway, so here's Senator Feinstein's reply to the email I sent her back on the 24th of January asking her to vote against the confirmation of Alberto Gonzales:

Thank you for writing to express your opposition to National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice's nomination to be Secretary of State. I appreciate the time you took to write.

I regret we disagree on this issue. As you may know, the votes in the Senate for confirmation were 85 to 13. I have attached a copy of my remarks before the Senate which states my reason for support.

I would like to make an additional point. While the Secretary of State is always an extension of the sitting President's foreign policy, I believe the key is to be able to work with a Secretary to make changes for the better. I intend to do that with Dr. Rice as the second Bush Administration gets underway.

Again, thank you for writing.

Isn't that funny? While I did give her crap about Rice, I was actually writing to get her to vote against Rice, Chertoff and Gonzales. These are all people she helps let in or keep out of power. However, because she's a pal of Rice's, she obviously let her bias for Rice alert her defenses. I always knew Rice would be confirmed--she's been the Bush clan's golden-boy (girl?) since the 80s. Like Kerry said--we all knew she would be confirmed--but what about Chertoff and Gonzales?

Anyway, thought I'd share that letter back from Feinstein. It was nice of her to reply directly and I credit her for that. Too many people in charge of things don't respond directly to "their public" but I havet to point out that her willingness to get along with the Republicans in order to bring positive change is likely to be her downfall. Like I said in that email I sent her--she's going to look into the mirror one day and see a Republican staring back at her. For now in her mirror is just the political equivalent to an Uncle Tom.

Let's look at that comment she made for a moment. She said:

While the Secretary of State is always an extension of the sitting President's foreign policy, I believe the key is to be able to work with a Secretary to make changes for the better.

So, Feinstein wants to make changes for the better at any cost? She won't mind when Rice gives advice or makes statements that will help Bush get his way so more US soldiers can be put in harms way? She won't mind when Rice spews pro-war propaganda to get more billions more to pay for war? And what about the costs to civil rights? How does she like being a party to war crimes in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib?

I'll have to email her again and ask her. I'll also email her to encourage her to help her fellow Dems fillibuster the Gonzales confirmation. I'll have more on this in a bit.