Cindy Sheehan may challenge CA Senator

[ITPjohn]

Cindy wants to spend even more time in DC. That should make George W. a little nervous.

Cindy Sheehan May Challenge California Senator
By IAN JAMES, Associated Press Writer
Sun Jan 29, 1:05 AM ET

Cindy Sheehan, the peace activist who set up camp near President Bush's Texas ranch last summer, said Saturday she is considering running against Sen. Dianne Feinstein to protest what she called the California lawmaker's support for the war in Iraq.

"She voted for the war. She continues to vote for the funding. She won't call for an immediate withdrawal of the troops," Sheehan told The Associated Press in an interview while attending the World Social Forum in Venezuela along with thousands of other anti-war and anti-globalization activists.

"I think our senator needs to be held accountable for her support of George Bush and his war policies," said Sheehan, whose 24-year-old soldier son Casey was killed in Iraq in 2004.

Feinstein's campaign manager, Kam Kuwata, said the senator "doesn't support George Bush and his war policies."

"She has stated publicly on numerous occasions that she felt she was misled by the administration at the time of the vote," Kuwata said by phone from California.

But with troops committed, Feinstein believes immediate withdrawal is not a responsible option, Kuwata said.

"Senator Feinstein's position is, let's work toward quickly turning over the defense of Iraq to Iraqis so that we can bring the troops home as soon as possible," he said.

Sheehan accused Feinstein of being out of touch with Californians on the issue.

She said she would decide whether to run after talking with her three other adult children. The Democratic primary will be held in June, and candidates must submit their statements for the voter guide by Feb. 14.

Kuwata said Feinstein and Sheehan appear to have a fundamental disagreement over whether troops should be pulled out right now. "That's why they have elections, and if she decides to file (paperwork to run), so be it," he said.

Sheehan said running in the Democratic primary would help make a broader point.

"If I decided to run, I would have no illusions of winning, but it would bring attention to all the peace candidates in the country," she said.

Sheehan, 48, who lives in Berkeley, Calif., said she would head to Washington on Sunday for protests against Bush's State of the Union address on Tuesday, and then return to California to discuss her idea of running against Feinstein with her son and two daughters.

"I can't see — if they think it's going to help peace — that they would be opposed to me doing it," she said.

Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

 

[pek1]

She's got my vote! Time to bring our troops home and get our gas prices lowered, not to mention the oil prices! The Queen has enough money now, after gourging the USA.

 

[Endymion]

I disagree. I think Feinstein is much more qualified than Sheehan for public policy and public administration. Feinstein was the mayor of San Francisco, for one thing.

Cindy Sheehan, on the other hand, does not have anywhere near the administrative and formal background to handle Feinstein's job. It's just like replacing Steve Ballmer with Sarah Jessica Parker as CEO of Microsoft. People like Sarah Jessica Parker, but Parker doesn't have years of experience with business administration. In fact, if you put Parker in charge of Microsoft, you'd see shareholders running away in droves.

That is also why I'm not exactly for people like Ahnold and Ventura in administrative positions. Most public administration jobs are very complex and require a high level of skill, intellect, and experience.

Alternatively (and on a different line of thought), this explains why the Democratic party is having hard times right now. The Republican party has had quite some momentum, and that means they've had the opportunity to train their candidates with higher and higher level positions, preparing them for more solid careers than democrats. This doesn't necessarily mean their candidates are better, it just means they have more momentum and work history.

The opposite has happened in the past as well. The Republicans have been in disarray and the Democrats have been very organized with significant momentum.

 

[pek1]

Most public administration jobs are very complex and require a high level of skill, intellect and experience.

The Constitution doesn't say anything about this. None of the framers had what you are talking about. Reread history.

 

[Endymion]

The Constitution doesn't say anything about this. None of the framers had what you are talking about. Reread history.

Of course the Constitution doesn't say anything about this. There are plenty of leaders who have made it from a humble origin.

But I'd expect Dianne Feinstein to know how to interpret analysis of an urban economy and how a taxation proposal will affect it a lot more than I'd expect from Cindy Sheehan. Does Sheehan have formal training and experience in public policy? Education and experience matter more often than not, unfortunately.

In fact, if Sheehan wanted to be a senator, I'd love to see her take on small-time politics first and move her way up. That way she could get the necessary experience to effectively handle a senatorial position. Maybe I'd give thought to Sheehan after she serves on a few civic and county spots.

 

[pek1]

Of course the Constitution doesn't say anything about this. There are plenty of leaders who have made it from a humble origin.

But I'd expect Dianne Feinstein to know how to interpret analysis of an urban economy and how a taxation proposal will affect it a lot more than I'd expect from Cindy Sheehan. Does Sheehan have formal training and experience in public policy? Education and experience matter more often than not, unfortunately.

In fact, if Sheehan wanted to be a senator, I'd love to see her take on small-time politics first and move her way up. That way she could get the necessary experience to effectively handle a senatorial position. Maybe I'd give thought to Sheehan after she serves on a few civic and county spots.

Sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree. If we all voted for people based on this, we'd have a very corrupted system. It's bad enough as it is right now, but we do need fresh blood, even if it's inexperienced people.

 

[Taylor]

I agree that fresh blood is needed in politics, but it does take experience. While her intentions are noble, will she have the knowledge and skill to represent as a whole? Running for office because you are against the war would be running for the wrong reason. What about all of the other issues that come about, such as social security, welfare, and proper representation of the people she is serving?

There was a local politician that ran against our mayor because he didn't like the way the mayor was handling a particular issue. What this guy failed to remember was that being in office is more than one issue, but a multitude of issues and making things run smoothly. While his intentions were good, he had no clue as to management of public housing, to city goverment (such as police, fire dept, public works, etc). He wanted to increase public housing and decrease the police and fire service. Unfortunately, the police and fire service spend a majority of their calls for service in public housing neighborhoods so increasing public housing would call for an increase of police and fire. He had no idea about our traffic problems, parking problems, tourism, etc. I use this as a local example, but I see with the same with Cindy Sheehan.

If she has the management skills needed to properly serve her consituents, then so be it, but running for office because you are against the president or against the rule is running for the wrong reason. I agree she should start local and make her way up after proving to her constituents what she is made of and has their best interest in mind.

Hillary Clinton comes to mind. I personally cannot stand her and disagree with her often, however, from what I've read, she is serving her constituents well and is popular with them. I hate to admit it, but she does make a good example

 

[Oceanbreeze]

I agree that fresh blood is needed in politics, but it does take experience. While her intentions are noble, will she have the knowledge and skill to represent as a whole? Running for office because you are against the war would be running for the wrong reason. What about all of the other issues that come about, such as social security, welfare, and proper representation of the people she is serving?

There was a local politician that ran against our mayor because he didn't like the way the mayor was handling a particular issue. What this guy failed to remember was that being in office is more than one issue, but a multitude of issues and making things run smoothly. While his intentions were good, he had no clue as to management of public housing, to city goverment (such as police, fire dept, public works, etc). He wanted to increase public housing and decrease the police and fire service. Unfortunately, the police and fire service spend a majority of their calls for service in public housing neighborhoods so increasing public housing would call for an increase of police and fire. He had no idea about our traffic problems, parking problems, tourism, etc. I use this as a local example, but I see with the same with Cindy Sheehan.

If she has the management skills needed to properly serve her consituents, then so be it, but running for office because you are against the president or against the rule is running for the wrong reason. I agree she should start local and make her way up after proving to her constituents what she is made of and has their best interest in mind.

Hillary Clinton comes to mind. I personally cannot stand her and disagree with her often, however, from what I've read, she is serving her constituents well and is popular with them. I hate to admit it, but she does make a good example

Well said, Taylor!

Btw, on a personal note (and very offtopic), but how are you faring with a foot or so of snow on the ground?

Sorry, I couldn't resist the backhanded tease. I'm from your area, as you know, and I remember February snowstorms quite well! I can't say I miss it, either!

Back to topic....