It didn’t take long for the Dems to get caught in a scandal and do what the voters in 2006 feared if the they became the majority of the 110th Congress - members of the “Moon Bat” community [photo courtesy of Moon Battery …

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) seems to be able to point fingers, like other members of her political elite of Sociocrats, at political opponents - and at the same time get caught in a congressional ethics concern – and, as usual without any repercussions other than stepping down from her position in a committee:

CNSNews, Fred Lucas:

Voters in California who have continued to retain such a person representing that state and voting upon issues that concern all American while in Congress – should be ashamed. Just as I am ashamed of voting for President Bush, despite the fact that the choice between Senator John Kerry being president and Bush #2, as a pick of the best of the worst. The key element in the voting procedure is to get the right candidate for the final vote for presidency – which means more people need to quit abstaining from voting in the primaries and leaving their vote for the final election. In addition, it should be allowed to vote in primaries concerning any political entity, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian or whatever – anyone should vote in the primaries of any political candidate. This would help to ensure that quality candidates reach the point of the final vote for presidency. In the case of voting for congressional members, Americans must quit voting strictly by the election rhetoric from the candidate and look objectively at their past voting record and periods in public office. What is said is not as important as what they do. Again, President Bush is a prime example. He has disassociated from members of his own party, and insulted and ignored the people who put him in office. But, why should he care? After FDR, Congress passed an amendment that doesn’t allow a president to serve more than two consecutive[5] terms. This can be a good thing, but we also see a bad thing. President George W. Bush will get his presidential library. In that library his legacy, in his eyes, will be established. But his legacy is only positive when looking at the basic fundamentals of his foreign policy, with his domestic policies being a record of shame, as well as turning his back upon the political platform from which he did not adhere to. Yet, if asked the question” “Which is a better president, William J. Clinton or George W. Bush?” – the answer would, for me, be a no-brainer – President George W. Bush – and not just because of the Lewinsky scandal, as some may surmise.

And, for those of you who are contemplating replacing GW Bush with Hillary Clinton, remember that her scandals amount to almost as much and a part of the William Clinton scandals. She has changed her political rhetoric during the course of her tenure as Senator of the US Congress, not because she has changed her views, but wants to encourage more voters. Her recent action, at least by those who represent her in her campaign efforts to be noted and voted for a possible presidential candidate involving a fellow sociocrat, Barack Obama (D-IL) is a prime example that she has not changed her vicious means of obtaining votes for her continued zeal in involving herself in the affairs of the US government and her personal ideology of American socialism.

Moral of the story: Voters who complain about the actions or inaction of those they voted for should look upon themselves to be a more responsible voter and quit being loyal to political parties that are nothing but a “good fellow club”.

[1] Did you ever wonder how or why the Sociocrats, in their standard socialist ideology, uses social class in their rhetoric, but yet represent the wealthiest group in Washington, D.C.? Being wealthy, or trying to achieve wealth is a sin according to the Democratic Party representing socialism in America. In the past fifty years, since the days of FDR and the “New Deal” – this has steadily been a solid hypocritical propagandist method straight out of the ideologies of Karl Marx.

[2] Points are awarded to the leftist The Nation media entity for their investigation and announced findings made publicly against one of their own. Actually calling The Nation “liberal” is incorrect - even the media entity describes itself as “progressive” - meaning progressive socialism. In other words, Democrats who are really behind the socialist movement in America. Thus the reason for its endeavor to change America traditions, rewrite its history, oversee the workings of our educational system, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

[3] Otherwise, the Senate would be gathering up charges of unethical behavior against Senator Dianne Feinstein. Her anti-war status has been documented, as well as her rhetoric of accusations against President Bush lying to Congress about WMDs and other matters pertaining to the decision to declare war against Saddam Hussein and his regime – and the continued process of eliminating terrorists in Iraq, as well as the process of protecting/training the new Iraqi government, its military and police entities. Oddly, she was the original co-sponsor of a bill to extend the USA Patriot Act – not to “protect” the American people, but to enhance opportunities for her husband’s business enterprises. Yet, the American voters in California re-elected her three times – still allowing her to sit in Congress to this day. This is what I call voter responsibility, or rather the lack of it.

[4] Feinstein’s foreign affairs hypocrisy can be viewed at her website. Her husband has had questionable business dealings with China. Particular note is her anti-Second Amendment policies of the past. Feinstein is ranked the fifth wealthiest senator in Congress with an estimated worth of $42 million to $99 million. Much of her assets are in blind trusts. So, with Feinstein, everyone else’s life must be under scrutiny, but not hers. Feinstein has been behind the banning of legal handguns in California since the 1980s. Because of her interfering actions of San Francisco police detectives and revealing important evidence to the public, the murderer Richard Ramirez (called the “Night Stalker”)left the San Francisco area and committed another murder before being captured again in Los Angeles.

[5] Key word here is “consecutive” – a former president who left office for one term can be re-elected if the people of America vote for him or her.