Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: FFS... the PURPOSE of ENTITLEMENT REFORM is to REDUCE benefits [View all]BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)49. Well, I can chuckle about it now, but I was incensed back then.
It's no surprise to me that she's one of the "Democrats" who is all but willing to "negotiate" earned benefits cuts just to avoid defense from sequestration cuts - due in January if no budget deal is agreed to.
She's selling out, and has been selling out, the American people for personal profit.
Dianne Feinstein resigns committee post amid scandal; accused of war profiteering
Joshua Holland, March 30, 2007
SEN. Dianne Feinstein has resigned from the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee. As previously and extensively reviewed in these pages, Feinstein was chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years, during which time she had a conflict of interest due to her husband Richard C. Blum's ownership of two major defense contractors, who were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by Feinstein.
As MILCON leader, Feinstein relished the details of military construction, even micromanaging one project at the level of its sewer design. She regularly took junkets to military bases around the world to inspect construction projects, some of which were contracted to her husband's companies, Perini Corp. and URS Corp.
Perhaps she resigned from MILCON because she could not take the heat generated by Metro's expose of her ethics (which was partially funded by the Investigative Fund of the Nation Institute). Or was her work on the subcommittee finished because Blum divested ownership of his military construction and advanced weapons manufacturing firms in late 2005?
http://www.alternet.org/story/49970/dianne_feinstein_resigns_committee_post_amid_scandal%3B_accused_of_war_profiteering
Joshua Holland, March 30, 2007
SEN. Dianne Feinstein has resigned from the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee. As previously and extensively reviewed in these pages, Feinstein was chairperson and ranking member of MILCON for six years, during which time she had a conflict of interest due to her husband Richard C. Blum's ownership of two major defense contractors, who were awarded billions of dollars for military construction projects approved by Feinstein.
As MILCON leader, Feinstein relished the details of military construction, even micromanaging one project at the level of its sewer design. She regularly took junkets to military bases around the world to inspect construction projects, some of which were contracted to her husband's companies, Perini Corp. and URS Corp.
Perhaps she resigned from MILCON because she could not take the heat generated by Metro's expose of her ethics (which was partially funded by the Investigative Fund of the Nation Institute). Or was her work on the subcommittee finished because Blum divested ownership of his military construction and advanced weapons manufacturing firms in late 2005?
http://www.alternet.org/story/49970/dianne_feinstein_resigns_committee_post_amid_scandal%3B_accused_of_war_profiteering
Why on God's green Earth was this not widespread by the Democratic Party in 2012? How much are they getting for burying this scandal so deeply that the majority of Californians have never heard of it?
I'm all but certain that Mike Strimling would have won the primary and the election had more Californians known about this Republican-in-Democrat-clothing's war profiteering!
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
119 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
And it's a solely Republican endeavor, not a Democratic Party one. Let's make that clear.
BlueCaliDem
Oct 2013
#1
Excellent expose, JD. Perhaps we should all send a copy of this to our Senators and Congressmen.
BlueCaliDem
Oct 2013
#116
Don't forget! Just a few years ago, Obama thought that Social Security was in such good shape
JDPriestly
Oct 2013
#118
Perception is king. Republicans have successfully marketed the word, "entitlement", as
BlueCaliDem
Oct 2013
#44
The purpose of making the word entitlement pejorative was also to distort the numbers. When you
okaawhatever
Oct 2013
#59
There is zero reason for Democrats to wade in the Republican cesspool of cutting benefits
BlueCaliDem
Oct 2013
#40
But one that not very many Californians know about. And we've got to change that
BlueCaliDem
Oct 2013
#117
Are you saying that these people are not Democrats? (I agree by the way, but Washington doesn't)
Dragonfli
Oct 2013
#69
Unfortunately, no, it's not solely a Republican endeavor. It's in Obama's budget.
cui bono
Oct 2013
#77
I distinctly remember that Obama favored raising the cap in the 2004 debates with Hillary.
JDPriestly
Oct 2013
#102
Conservative Democrats always appear more 'progressive' when campaigning.
NorthCarolina
Oct 2013
#113
You earned it, you're entitled to it. Take it up with those who wrote the Social Security Act. n/t
duffyduff
Oct 2013
#52
"More progressive" = means testing. Means testing and cutting benefits weakens the program.
Enthusiast
Oct 2013
#70
Social Security and Medicare are politically stronger because they benefit everyone.
Jim Lane
Oct 2013
#93
SNAP, Food Stamps, are tied to the farm bill. Would you be for cutting food stamps
Zorra
Oct 2013
#56
Really? When did that happen? I was under the impression that House Republicans were trying
Zorra
Oct 2013
#62
It's like when they claim "waste fraud and abuse" but never on no-bid contracts.
Spitfire of ATJ
Oct 2013
#19
Here's a thought. How about a benefit just for being a citizen of the richest country in the world?
Spitfire of ATJ
Oct 2013
#45
Rather reminds me of Welfare "reform" <- AKA screwing the poorest of the poor. ~nt~
99th_Monkey
Oct 2013
#39
Exactly - why aren't they proposing to use the CPI-E (the inflation index for elderly people)?
Make7
Oct 2013
#41
Fortunately the things elderly people buy are transported by horse drawn buggies.
Make7
Oct 2013
#53
They would PREFER to eliminate Social Security and stick em in an old folks home run by a church,...
Spitfire of ATJ
Oct 2013
#58
Look, we are "entitled" to these benefits for the simple and obvious reason that we "earned" them.
RVN VET
Oct 2013
#42
Peter J. Peterson owns the White House and Congress. He's a crook, pure and simple.
duffyduff
Oct 2013
#54
The phrase, "There's a sucker born every minute" caught on for a reason.
Egalitarian Thug
Oct 2013
#68
If I could accept the good faith of the people arguing about entitlement reform...
lumberjack_jeff
Oct 2013
#67
K&R. Meanwhile, Apple pays virtually no taxes, and it is just one of a number of corporations
JDPriestly
Oct 2013
#88
That's where the reform needs to happen. I'll bet most Americans aren't aware of the corporations
Dark n Stormy Knight
Oct 2013
#103
There aren't enough "richest" to make even a tiny dent in the system total payouts
eridani
Oct 2013
#105