The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Feinstein And the Ginsburg Betrayal

So then:

Feinstein, who was hospitalized in early March for shingles and has remained in her San Francisco home since March 7, has missed 60 votes of the 82 taken in the Senate in 2023…

…Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said on Monday that Feinstein’s absence from the Senate—and the Judiciary Committee specifically—will impede Democrats’ ability to confirm judicial nominees.

“I can’t consider nominees in these circumstances, because a tie vote is a losing vote in committee,”…

…Feinstein announced she won’t seek reelection in 2024 as a handful of Democratic House members vie for her seat. But she intends to serve out the rest of her term, which is set to end in January 2025.

Ginsburg had cancer. It was a type of cancer which was almost always fatal. She refused to step down from the Supreme Court when a Democratic president could easily appoint her successor, and as a result the Democrats lost a court seat. Ginsburg was looked up to by liberal women, but she betrayed them, though most can’t see past their hero worship to recognize that.

Feinstein is in a similar position: shingles isn’t the real issue, she has dementia and everyone know it. If she cared about the interests of her constituents she would step down immediately so that judges could be appointed and laws passed which need her support. It’s not that she’s a good Senator, she’s voted for a lot of crap, but Democratic appointed judges tend to be better than Republican appointed judges and the difference is important.

Given how bad her dementia appears to be it may be that this isn’t mostly on her: it could be her circle who are keeping her in. If so, they’re the one’s betraying, though she did pick them before age took its toll.

A leader who puts themselves first is not a leader, just someone looking out for themselves.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.


The US Appears To Be On The Road To Civil War


Open Thread


  1. NR

    She’s now asked to be temporarily replaced on the judiciary committee at least. But she should resign from the Senate completely. She should have done that at least a decade ago, probably.

  2. Bill H.

    Why doesn’t the chairman just boot her and appoint someone else to the committee?

  3. Mary Bennett

    Feinstein will be maintained in office until Gavin Newsome can be persuaded to appoint Adam Schiff, another Zionist, in her place. Newsome, likely, is holding out for major funding and endorsements for a presidential campaign, which he has no chance of winning. I suspect that Feinstein’s backers don’t want to be associated with a losing campaign. Newsome knows that appointing Schiff will enrage both white progressives–this is the west coast, remember, where the progressive vote matters, and communities of color, CA being a majority non white state, or very nearly so. Newsome could very well become the first presidential candidate from CA who couldn’t win his own state’s primary.

    Feinstein’s backers and allies will NOT stand for seeing her seat going to Katie Porter. I hope the congresswoman has a bodyguard.

    The above is speculation on my part. If someone has a better idea, I would like to hear it.

  4. Purple Library Guy

    And yet, the vast majority of leaders, throughout history, have been all about putting themselves first. I think if you want a kind of thing that doesn’t do that you need a new word.

  5. Ian Welsh

    Confucius noted that a king who did not take care of his people was not a king, but a tyrant, he called it rectification of terms.

  6. Mark Level

    Is there nobody in Feinstein’s family (I believe she has several children) who can just have her declared incompetent or “non compos mentis” & take legal custody of her? Or do they just stand by as if she hasn’t already earned enough being in the Senate? If these people were remotely human, wouldn’t they find a way to take care of her so she’s not out in public embarrassing herself and everyone associated with her? I guess these ghouls pass on their ghoulishness to the children. My dad started to decline a bit before his death but he was still more cogent than Feinstein, at least according to sources for the last couple of years. It is “sad” as the fat orange one would say that nobody close in her immediate family evidently really cares for her.

  7. Geoffrey Dewan

    Yeah! Start up the rectifyin’!
    Sooner the better.

  8. Feral Finster

    It doesn’t really matter who holds Feinstein’s seat, she could be replaced with ChatGPT Team D or a chimp and nobody would know the difference.

    That said, it has been rumored that numerous members of Congress, both Team R and Team D, are taking Alzheimers meds.

    The average age of Congress is greater than that of the Politburo during the last years of Brezhnev.

  9. mago

    The ruling class—geriatric or younger—are all on another drug mix than you or me. Serotonin enhancers, hormone boosters, uppers downers inners and outers.
    That’s why they’re smarter than you and me, not because they know more, but because they’re enhanced.
    And because they inherited everything they own.
    It all turns to shit in the end.
    Buena suerte a cada. . .

  10. Eric Anderson

    On point, Feral Finster. I think there needs to be more pushback against the idiotic “with age comes wisdom” trope. With age also comes callous indifference. For example, ever hear an old person indifferently exclaim w/r/t climate change “It doesn’t matter to me, I won’t be around to see it”?

    Has anyone not heard multiple codgers say it? It’s pure evil. IMHO the with age comes wisdom is far outweighed by the callous indifference of our geriatric “tyrants.”

  11. Eric Anderson

    I’ll further remark, add bucket loads of cash to aged and their callous indifference to what’s happening in the rest of the world flies off the chart. Evaluating whether any wisdom exists to speak of is not even worth remarking on.

  12. anon y'mouse

    family members don’t actually enjoy the process of having someone declared not competent.

    it creates endless headaches and requires legal procedures, plus rifts.

    from the family point of view, pretending the infirm are still in control while heavily influencing their actions is much easier. then just wait til they die and do the probate thing, which causes most or many of the same problems as the guardianship thing but without the problem of who is caring for the person and how being a part of the disputes.

    **legal scholars do weigh in because i ain’t one. this is what i found to be true in my family (a family that owns nothing to inherit anyway, but still found things to fight over regardless). they didn’t want to be responsible for her because then that would mean being responsible for EVERYTHING. best just to keep her at home with a minder and deal with that until the end, even while she didn’t even know her own ATM number anymore, couldn’t drive, couldn’t walk, and couldn’t really have a conversation.

    unfortunately, the only wisdom we should be talking about here is the wisdom to know when things are beyond your abilities anymore and to hand them off to someone. my gran did really well when she turned over her car keys at 78 y.o. and said “i’m not doing that anymore”, but when the dementia started the family kept fomenting the pretense that she was still in charge while they “managed” everything around her. partially for her comfort and partially because they didn’t actually want the legal and official responsibility. this came to be a problem when she was not getting adequate care by them, as she was still “in control” and basically told the Family Welfare official that everything was just peachy keen when she had bedsores, couldn’t access the toilet, etc.

    ugly stuff that rich grifter Feinstein will never have to deal with. who says money doesn’t solve at least some problems?

  13. Willy

    Some say that power doesn’t corrupt as much as it amplifies innate tendencies. Maybe senility does the same.

  14. Feral Finster

    @Eric Anderson: I have met wise old humans and callous old humans. I have met humans who were over 100 and still sharp as a tack, and those who were drooling into their fruit cup before they reached 65.

    I will say that humans with lots of clout and cash can evade consequences more easily than the rest of creation can.

  15. Willy

    When humans with lots of clout and cash evade consequences, it’s human plasticity doing its job. Well-worn worry and concern synapses can be let go as quickly as a suddenly sedentary body loses muscle and bone density. Maybe inside all cultures, something or someone needs to step in to create consequences lest said culture gets wonky.

    Speaking of wonky cultures, witness the falling for “progressives” like Tulsi Gabbard and Kristen Sinema. Maybe they got rich and powerful and then lost their concern synapses. Or maybe they were always that way and were just waiting for an easier, more lucrative path to reveal itself. It might be a good idea to focus on better discerning the basic nature of progressive leaders going forward, which I do still believe is a thing.

  16. Ché Pasa

    I’m with NR on this. Feinstein should have been primaried out or retired no less than a decade ago, and I dared to say so in California Dem circles back in the day. Was not accepted gladly. Oh no! Feinstein can’t be removed, primaried out or retired! She just can’t! She’s needed! She’s done so much for us! (What?) And on and on. It was ridiculous.

    That she’s being inched out now, when Californian’s could have had a much younger senator many years ago is bitter fruit.

    Diane, Diane, Diane…

  17. Eric Anderson

    @Feral Finster:
    I’m saying we give far much to weight to our leaders “old age and wisdom” and far too little consideration to their “callous indifference.” It’s imperative it begins to become part of the larger discussion when selecting them.

  18. StewartM


    Sinema and Gabbard “put on the ring”, in Tolkien terms.


    You’re spot-on. It’s the Obamacrats and Clintonistas who protect manage to keep protecting conservadem-ist Congresscritters even when they’re an obvious political liability.

    Feral Finster

    I concur. Just maybe the decent olds are like the decent others in a capitalist, dog-eat-dog culture. At some time in order to rise up the political or corporate ladder, you will be presented an opportunity to better yourself at the expense of friends, supporters, coworkers, customers, employees, whoever.

    Those who have an ounce of decency and say “No, I won’t do that or cross that line” rise no further in their career and indeed may see their career ends. Those who say “Sure! I’ll do whatever it takes for Numero Uno!’ continue to rise even higher. That’s by and large why we see the types we see at the top.

  19. different clue

    @Eric Anderson,

    I bet the callous olds you met were already callous when they were young. There are enough non-callous olds that the theory that ” old = callous” seems to have null value and zero predictive power.

  20. Trinity

    “There are enough non-callous olds that the theory that ‘old = callous’ seems to have null value and zero predictive power.”

    Thank you for this, DC. And it’s a logical fallacy to assign any single attribute to any group entirely.

    Some of those non-callous olds were heroes of the civil rights movement, or Vietnam, or women’s rights including abortion rights. And some of them are homeless, a demographic that is unfortunately growing.

  21. Eric Anderson

    Seriously, different clue? Gonna double down on this, eh? Am I calling old people callous? No. What I said was, and I quote: “ we give far much to weight to our leaders “old age and wisdom” and far too little consideration to their “callous indifference.”

    You, then, come swinging in with logically fallacious straw man putting words in my mouth.

    When nearly every old person I speak with discounts climate change because they “won’t be around to see it” they are pretty much saying “F you, have fun burning in hell along with your children.” Pretty callous stuff. Extremely indifferent. Maybe, just perhaps, we “not quite old yet” that are raising children might want to weigh calling bullshit on the whole “with age comes wisdom” con. Juuuust maaaaaybe it’s more important than your tender feelings.

  22. different clue

    @Eric Anderson,

    In your second paragraph you complain about logically fallacious straw man putting words in your mouth.

    Then in your third paragraph you put those very same words right back in your own mouth. Every other reader here can see what you did there.

    Your “theory” has zero predictive power and zero informative value. The low-population area you live in offers too few old people to have the slightest statistical significance. The area you live in is based on a Conservative Callous Culture and I suspect the callous old people you fallaciously cite as being “representative” of “old people” were already just as callous when they were young.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén