Clark praises Dianne Feinstein -- Clark/Fienstein?

At the Planned Parenthood debate, Clark picked her as his choice for a good female role model. Then someone there joked that it sounded like a good running mate.

What do people here think of Clark/Feinstein? It's about time we got a female VP, and I think Clark can pull it off. Having a female on the ticket can't be seen as weak if you have a General on it too. And Clark can use someone who has experience pushing through votes.

she voted for the IWR AND *'s tax cuts. Having her as VP would make Clark look like a waffle iron. :shrug:

woman, not too bright, too liberal, relative senate lightweight, from a state that should be a strong point to begin with. Fugeddaboutit.

Clark needs Democratic credentials pretty bad. He's already centrist enough. He better get some die hard progressives on board or it's Dean, and that might not be good, ya think?

Then again, if Clark wants to go that way ... maybe McCain, get us a true bipartisan ticket?

Having a woman on the ticket would help soften his image for those anti-military crowd.

I'd rather have Carol Mosely Braun

running mate would not be elected.

lower my opinion of him.

She's a politician through and through, always looking to cover her ass.

Sounds like she has some major negatives. I guess she's not a good choice for VP.

Is Clark now going to associate himself with the biggest corporate whores in the Democratic party? The architect of H1-B visas and L1 visas and deporting Indian guys when they got fired or laid off? She was the major force in cutting pay in California! Could you possibly find a more anti-middle class running mate?

Why not Lieberman or Zell Miller?

Others have pointed out her baggage. Oh well, I guess I just wanted to see a female VP. And with a General on the ticket, there's no way it can be made to look weak.

Maybe Clark/Boxer or Clark/CMB.

That would be truly historic, and Clark would really make a name for himself in the history books. He's got the cojones to do it if he wants to.

Only Clark can pull off a woman VP. His stature innoculates him from being seen as weak on national security if he has a woman VP.

Her track record of supressing personal freedom is horrid. She may be a liberal, but she's an authoritative one at that. I hate authoritative candidates.

Edit: I'd much prefer to see Braun or Hillary Clinton as a VP.

She would rile up the republican base for turnout. Bad idea. And it sounds like Fienstein has too much baggage.

Come to think of it though... Dean/Braun would be a great ticket. Hmmm...

A woman on the ticket can't be seen as weak on national defense if you have a general too.

Dean/woman VP would be crushed.

But then, we Dean supporters have hearing how he's going to be crushed for about a year now :P

i think she will probably be on the list of vice presidential choices for most of the candidates now running. with buffoon arnold republicans now have some power over the state so democrats will need to work a little harder to win this time probably. although i can still see arnold being a disaster, though the problem is they would just like like bush and blame it on the previous administration.

N/T

to take a chance with either a woman or a minority VP candidate.

THIS election is too critical to take chances ... that's why no to Kucinich (no chance, sorry).

Also Dean would be constantly attacked on the civil union issue. And, no that is NOT JUST AN ISSUE IN THE SOUTH.

The religious right is everywhere in the country ... and could make the difference in many states.

Di-Fi almost always votes for the Repubs, drops the ball on Enron, gouging, 9-11, she is one of these Democrats who don't represent anything that different from the Repubs.

Praising her is bad enough as it is, but choosing her as a running mate would not bode well for Clark.

Check her voting record. It is dismal. I am waiting for a good Dem to come up against her in the next election, and hopefully get rid of her.

http://www.forbes.com/finance/mktguideapps/compinfo/CompanyTearsheet.jhtml?tkr=URS

TCG = The Carlyle Group is a beneficial owner of Blum's URS

CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT

The following table sets forth certain information regarding the ownership of our common stock as of January 31, 2003 by: (i) each director and nominee for director; (ii) each of the senior executives listed on the Summary Compensation Table (the “Named Executives”); (iii) all of our executive officers and directors as a group; and (iv) all those known by us to be beneficial owners of more than five percent of our common stock. This table is based upon information supplied by officers, directors and principal stockholders and Schedules 13D and 13G filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Unless otherwise indicated in the footnotes to this table and subject to community property laws where applicable, we believe that each of the stockholders named in this table has sole voting and investment power with respect to the shares indicated as beneficially owned.

Common Stock Beneficially Owned(1)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Beneficial Owner Number Percentage(2)


Blum Capital Partners, L.P. 7,701,544 23.70 %
909 Montgomery Street, , Suite 400
San Francisco, CA 94133(3)

FMR Corp. 2,250,326 6.93 %
82 Devonshire Street
Boston, MA 02109-3614

TCG Holdings, L.L.C. 7,064,033 21.74 %
c/o The Carlyle Group
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20004(4)

Kent P. Ainsworth(5) 387,681 1.18 %
Richard C. Blum(6) 7,813,413 24.04 %
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/102379/000095014903000399/f87695def14a.htm#007



Who exactly is URS DIEBOLD ???

paying a compliment is one thing .....

Dianne's husband would love the connections .... not like he doesn't have enough already

http://www.blumcapital.com/index2.html
http://www.newbridgecapital.com/
http://members.tripod.com/unionplainfacts/documents/archivespage/china.htm
http://lists.iww.org/pipermail/iww-news/2003-May/002213.html

I would hope Clark would not take a chance like that. He's more savvy than thatin my opinion.

Neither one sounds good to me. Why do we want to elect conservatives? Haven't we had enough war and agression?

everything in a candidate! I will support the nomminee!

I have learned a lot about DU in this short excursion into the DiFi thread.

Feinstein has been my senator in CA and I have watched her since the 70's as a player on the SF scene.

She is a solid, serious, thoughtful human who sometimes errs magnificently on issues like the flag burning amendment.

But she is a skilled legislator who is rock solid on choice. She demonstrated amazing skills in getting the assault weapon ban passed. No less a zealot than Henry Hyde was convinced by Diane to change his vote on this issue. In her first term she was successful in getting the Death Valley area declared a national park which her more liberal predecessor Alan Cranston was never able to do.

As a VP candidate, I see as liabilities her husband's business dealings and her age. Some will object to her Jewish roots. The hard left won't go for her (see above comments), but she has appeal for moderates.

Over the years, I have had differences with Feinstein, but I admire her very much and have confidence in her ability to serve with distinction.

That pushing gun control like the 94 AWB that Feinstein helped pass is what helped the Repubs win much of the power they have today. Gun control is the 3rd rail of politics today: touch it any you're toast. That alone would lose her my vote, sorry.

You mean you don't favor a ban on assault weapons? If so, there is no common ground we can make on this issue.

Blanche Lincoln, or Patty Murray if he wants a woman. Bill Richardson or Bob Menendez would make excellent Hispanic nominees; Graham, Dean, Edwards, Gephart, ANYBODY!!! Just save us from Diane Feinstein! She would be the most boring choice imaginable!

Kal-ee-forniah is in the bag anyway. If not, we've already lost.

Haven't we had enough with Bush?

not worth losing over. I'm not saying the assult weapons ban doesn't make sense (a lot of senators voted for it, and Clinton voted for it and won re-election), but Fienstien definetely is to the left when it comes to handguns as well, something which hurts us in the south AND midwest (people forget that people like their guns in Minn., Wisc, Iowa, and Mi, and Penn, and the southwest). OK, come to think of it, people like their guns everywhere except major urban centers on the coasts, and in some of the upper middle class surburbs.

DiFi brings little to the table that would be useful for a general election. Her ecenomic record is to the RIGHT of LIEBERMAN, if that's possible (Liberman, to give him credit, voted AGAINST Bush's tax cuts). I can't forgive DiFi for voting for the tax cuts. That's inecscusable. It's not like she's from Montana (and I can understand why Beucos (sp?) voted for it). The war vote is different, as her FP has always been somewhat hawkish, and the IWR isn't so much of surprise (though that doesn't mean I think of her vote any less negatively).

I even think Fiengold would fair better in a general election than Fienstien. Atleast he'd turn out the base (though I wouldn't necessarily choose him for VP either).

As for DiFi's religion, I could care less, as could most people on DU (atleast I would hope most people on DU don't care about the candidate's religion). Honestly I don't think that really hurt Lieberman that greatly in '00.
Choosing a minority or woman candidate wouldn't necessarily kill us though. It depends on who it'd be. Someone like Landrui (I can't spell any of their names) wouldn't be SUCH a bad choice. How old is Harold Ford? He seems a bit younger, but I expect him to be on the VP spot at some point in his political career. He seems moderate, though a bit to the right on certain issues, intelligent, and elequent as well.

I think choosing someone who is moderate (maybe even right leaning) on issues like gun control, has a clear rationale for or against the war, can fight the right (unlike Lieberman), and has some decent campaign experience, would benefit the dems greatly for '04. I would even say, if the person is all of the above, issues like race and religion will be of secondary importance.

DiFi does what's best for her.

Without reading any other replies first, my reaction is simply: God! No!

As an Anything-But-Bush voter, of course I will vote for Clark if he gets the nom. Nevertheless, I have major reservations about Clark -- which are not assuaged by the idea of Di-Fi as veep.

The best I can say about Di-Fi is that she was a pro-gay mayor of San Francisco. My biggest complaint about her then was that she was too rabid re gun control for my liking -- but I was able to live with that. I voted for her for senator, and have voted for her ever since.

Since then, however, she has voted 180 degrees opposite of my wishes for nearly as long as she's been in D.C.

In short (and as I have told her office many times in writing), I CANNOT support a senator who voted in favor of 1) the USA PATRIOT Act, 2) the Iraq invasion, and -- most recently -- 3) *'s misnamed "Healthy Forests" initiative... among many, many other bills.

Di-Fi is not a DINO -- but she does NOT represent the people of California.

It's not just me, you know; she admitted that she voted in favor of attacking Iraq despite the tens of thousands of letters she received -- of which mine was one -- begging her not to do it. (You want the quote direct from her office, justifying her vote? Ask, and I shall dig it up.)

Simply put: We elect senators to represent us. Di-Fi has repeatedly ignored the cries of her constituents.

As I wrote in my last letter to her (and I assure you, it was my very last letter to her), I can no longer in good conscience support her in any way, shape or form.

(Taking deep breath...)

I will say it: A Clark presidency makes me very nervous, but has my vote. A Clark-Feinstein ticket, however, makes me seriously reconsider voting a straight Dem ticket.

Don't flame me, kids. We all have our limits, and the idea of Di-Fi being second in line to the throne crosses my line.

(IndianaGreen, are you there? Do you remember the lesson you taught me about "core values"?)

Understand, you are listening to someone who has voted straight Dem, every time, holding my nose when needed, for more than 20 years, since I was 18 years old.

In the end, if absolutely forced into no other choice, I would have to vote a Clark-Di ticket. Like I said, Anybody But Bush.

But I will hate myself in the morning.

And if those two end up in the WH, I expect I will hate every minute of the following four years. Not as much as I've hated every minute of *'s term, but hating it, all the same.

God... Why not Boxer? Why not my fabulous, wonderful Babs instead?! (Rhetorical question; I know very well why not.)

P.S. I'm a true feminist. That means I don't give a rat's whisker whether the prez or veep has a penis or a vagina. All I want is the best person in office, period. "It's about time we got a female VP" - ? Yeah, fine, but I really don't care if either the POTUS or the VP is male or female... or black or white, or gay or straight. Sure, I'd love to see, oh, say, a black Jewish lesbian in the WH -- but only if she is the best person to fill the job. Period.

Forget her, bleh.

If it's going to be a woman vp, there are such better choices out there.