• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Diane Feinstein needs to resign.

HomerJS

Lifer
I've heard the arguments against it. There have been men out longer etc, but here is the dilemma.

The White House judge nominating process is stalled because she is out recovering from an illness. Noone knows when she will return, and she requested Chuck Schumer temporarily replace he on the Senate Judiciary Committee. That requires a full filibuster proof vote and Mitch McConnell has already said he will not cooperate.

Remember the stolen Obama SCOTUS seat? If Feinstein resigns the Gov of California Gavin Newsome can pick a replacement. Democrats spend too much time being timid and not learning lessons from the past. They should have been more forceful with Ruth Bader Ginsburg. We cannot go through this same shit again.

Diane needs to resign for the sake of the country. She needs to stop being selfish.
 
She was my congress critter when we lived in CA. She did great work for (moat of) the citizens of the state...but I agree...it's way past time for her to step down and let someone younger take over.
 
Feinstein voted for the war in Iraq. Her election was the only time I ever voted for a Reoublican knowing perfectly well Feinstein would still win. But I hope she does not resign. If she resigns Newsom has stated what he will look for as a replacement for her and that person will be thus advantaged in the next Senate election in two years. I personally want Porter for the job followed by Schiff and word is Newsom wouldn't pick either of them. And she will ask to be removed from the judicial committee, I think.
 
I don't mean to sound ageist, but she's pushing 90 and yeah, that means she needs to GTFO. She said she isn't seeking another term, so in the worst case, we have another 20 or so months.

I don't necessarily blame her, I doubt she's still firing on all cylinders. I blame those around her. The leeches. This is the time they should be having discussions about "Shady Acres assisted living community" and not about how she can still participate in committee business remotely from a prone position while heavily medicated.
 
The ego of this lady is amazing, should have retired years ago. Probably has dementia if she can't/won't appreciate how much she is screwing things up for the only rational group of people in Washington. This 'select a temp replacement' bullshit is just her still putting her ego first, it's ridiculous. Now when she does leave it will be when everyone resents her for being selfish and an obstacle. Nice work Diane, way to end your career there.

We need age limits for office, they are every bit as necessary as minimum age requirements.
 
The ego of this lady is amazing, should have retired years ago. Probably has dementia if she can't/won't appreciate how much she is screwing things up for the only rational group of people in Washington. This 'select a temp replacement' bullshit is just her still putting her ego first, it's ridiculous. Now when she does leave it will be when everyone resents her for being selfish and an obstacle. Nice work Diane, way to end your career there.

We need age limits for office, they are every bit as necessary as minimum age requirements.

She's probably one of those people who is so defined by their job that they never want to retire. They feel that if they retire, they'll just go home and wait to die. I tend to agree with the other poster who says the people around her need to be more forceful about it.
 
Someone explain to me why a resignation/replacement Senator is easier to place on the Judiciary Cmte. vs. a temporary replacement. Wouldn’t Republicans have the power to obstruct either way, or is it the difference between 50+1 vs. 50 or 49+1 vs. 50??
 
Someone explain to me why a resignation/replacement Senator is easier to place on the Judiciary Cmte. vs. a temporary replacement. Wouldn’t Republicans have the power to obstruct either way, or is it the difference between 50+1 vs. 50 or 49+1 vs. 50??

Senate rules. A committee change requires a full vote of the senate. If she resigns, then CA governor appoints someone new and Schumer can pick a new member for judiciary.
 
half of congress needs to be sent to the glue farm. Focusing on some 90 yo woman when there are women and men 30 years her junior who'd be better off spending their days playing bridge and drinking sangria.
The focus is due to pointed votes and confirmations that she herself is specifically holding up or delaying, and causing more risk of appointments failing.

THAT is why she specifically RIGHT NOW needs to GTFO. IMO it has nothing to do with sexism. Ageism maybe, but nothing to do with her being a woman. She is fucking shit up RIGHT NOW, it isn't some vague and generalized notion of how she might affect her party's progress in doing their jobs. She already has been.
 
She's probably one of those people who is so defined by their job that they never want to retire. They feel that if they retire, they'll just go home and wait to die. I tend to agree with the other poster who says the people around her need to be more forceful about it

Possibly, but given the position that still smacks of selfishness, not to mention you don't define the job by not doing it, which is what's happening. I would hope someone as stubborn and/or committed by that definition of work would want to end that career with dignity, maybe even praise. Instead of exiting of her own volition, now she's the person seen as in dereliction of duty and runs the risk of being shown the way out.

I did hear about some staffers who were ringing the alarm bell not too long ago. From what I gather the lady is completely lost most of the time. Clearly more needs to be done, and I'm every bit as interested in seeing the Chuck Grassleys gtfo out of Congress too Nancy Pelosi (who should retire as well).
 
Possibly, but given the position that still smacks of selfishness, not to mention you don't define the job by not doing it, which is what's happening. I would hope someone as stubborn and/or committed by that definition of work would want to end that career with dignity, maybe even praise. Instead of exiting of her own volition, now she's the person seen as in dereliction of duty and runs the risk of being shown the way out.

I did hear about some staffers who were ringing the alarm bell not too long ago. From what I gather the lady is completely lost most of the time. Clearly more needs to be done, and I'm every bit as interested in seeing the Chuck Grassleys gtfo out of Congress too Nancy Pelosi (who should retire as well).

Yes I suppose clinging to the job is selfish, but she's also no longer in her right mind. That means others need to take initiative here. Would be ashame if they had to remove her, but it could come to that. She should not have run in 2018, but that ship has sailed.
 
half of congress needs to be sent to the glue farm. Focusing on some 90 yo woman when there are women and men 30 years her junior who'd be better off spending their days playing bridge and drinking sangria.
I really do wish that there was a mandatory retirement/age limit for congress. 70 would be nice, maybe 75; but having octogenarians in congress is just nuts. Some of those folks are on Parkinson's and Alzheimer drugs (from an expose' years ago).
 
Noone knows when she will return, and she requested Chuck Schumer temporarily replace he on the Senate Judiciary Committee. That requires a full filibuster proof vote and Mitch McConnell has already said he will not cooperate.

Wait.. what?!
it's not a simple majority?
50 dems + vp???
 
Back
Top