It’s so good to have the positivity of Ms. Feinsteins life and work put out so well, especially given the tragedy of her final time. She and Ruth Badger Ginsberg’s final chapters beg to be delved into. How does one who is a paragon of our times lose track so completely? Given our political gerontocracy , this seems to be a basic question!
Off subject-are you reading Brian Klingborg, really good,timely China insights woven into dynamite mystery’s.
I think an appropriate person to fill the unexpired term would be Nancy Pelosi. I can’t understand why she chose to run again for her Congressional seat as I don’t see how she would be more impactful inside Congress than outside. However, filling the vacant Senate seat until 2025 would be a fitting capstone on her career.
I am a big fan of Katie Porter. The problem, as you say, is that she's so actively involved in next year's race for that very seat. So it would have all the ripple effects of Newsom going back on his preceding commitment, and also bigfooting the potentially quite divisive 2024 Senate race. (Porter, Lee, Schiff, et al.) But she has been a tremendous public figure and "explainer" — I think I mentioned in a recent post that she and Pete B were the current best explainers on the Dem side.
I freaking love Jerry Brown and always have. I sent him money when he ran for president! (From Minnesota, then and now.) But. Barbara Boxer would deliver half of the (dumb) demo promise, in no way would confound the primary, and her learning curve would be next to nothing. If she's willing, this should work well.
Of course it would require Newsom explaining the choice in some way that didn't blow up Democrats in the state and nationwide, even apart from damage to his own longer-term prospects (whatever they might be).
But on the merits, agree with everything you say about her in the job.
As discussed in some other comments: In a world free of political constraints, he would be an excellent choice. He has been *such* a practical-minded political figure, and also so visionary and spiritual. But I don't think Newsom has full freedom-of-action in this decision.
Jerry would be a great call, excepting Newsom's previous statement he would nominate a black woman. Why the heck did he say that? Leaves him in a pickle.
The tensest day I have ever spent was the day Moscone and Milk were murdered. (Even more than the day last year I lost my wife. I never expected to lose her, and then the phone rang at 2:50 a.m.) I was an intern at Seattle City Hall. And the afternoon edition of the Seattle Time would be delivered in stacks. And the headline said "SF Mayor Murdered." And there was a major increased police presence in the building. The tension was palpable.
Ooof. I am sorry on all fronts, especially about your wife
I was working in the Carter White House on the day of the Moscone / Milk assassinations. I mainly remember having to get some presidential statement put out — while the Secret Service went on hyper-alert and the Justice Dept / FBI etc tried to figure out what was actually going on.
I also like the idea of Jerry Brown as a placeholder, but the optics of having yet another white male 80 yr old + (even one as vibrant as Jerry appears to be) instead of someone like Barbara Lee, are terrible. The Dems are already losing Black votes to the GOP, and this wouldn't help.
As mentioned below, I agree that this is something that is easier and more appealing to think about, by those of us outside the stewpot that is operational politics, than it is for Newsom to act on. Only two Black women have ever served in the US Senate, and none of them at this moment. I think that reality, plus Newsom's pledge, probably control this choice.
100% agree with you, Jim. Of course, I also pondered your recent piece which discussed the age issue in relation to FDR & Biden and the implications of having Harris as his Veep. While I think this is HIGHLY unlikely (and would almost certainly be coordinated with the White House), I wonder if the idea of appointing Harris to the position would be viable. Much as many Dems feared the idea of Henry Wallace as a potential president (and, hence, got him replaced with Truman), I wonder if this sort of calculation is not going on right now in Washington and Sacramento. Again, highly unlikely, but I suspect the idea has crossed more than a few minds.
Sadness for the death of two distinguished women, one still in her prime and the other who overstayed her life of exceptional public service.
I only know of Judge Tabit through Jim and Deb. She seemed exceptional and died in her prime.
Senator Feinstein was a pioneer in California and later in the Senate. However, like Churchill, she stayed in office too long (Churchill returned for a dismal two years in 1953).
This should not diminish the praise for her multi-generational service. Nor should it have any effect on discussion of President Biden’s (and Trump’s) age and capabilities.
Biden at 80 this week stood in a UAW strike line and then, in Arizona, delivered a powerful and heartfelt presentation on how one has to be tough to preserve democracy and how he is for us and Trump (and his MAGATS)) are for me me me.
Based on his daily actions and programs, his alertness and physical adroitness, and his commitment to my United States, I welcome Biden as my helmsman of our ship of state into the late 2020s.
Compared to a ME ME ME Trump, whose physical flabbiness matches his mental vacuousness, the choice is to proceed forward for a better America or slip into a Trumpian authoritarianism of revenge and injustice.
I was proud to vote for President Eisenhower in my youth. In my ‘late middle age’ I will be even prouder to re-elect President Biden, who exemplifies the soul of America for which (as a ‘loser’ in Trump’s terminology) I gladly put my life on the line.
Agree on all points about the inevitable toll of age, but also the very different ways in which it affects people. (For instance, when Dianne Feinstein was 62, the age at which Joanna Tabit's died this week, she was just *beginning* her time in the US Senate, and had several decades of high-level leadership ahead of her. Life is unfair.)
I agree as well that Sen. Feinstein should mainly be remembered for those decades and her best, and not the sad past few years.
Before the news appeared about both D Feinstein and J Tabit, I was in the middle of doing a piece on the theme you raise about Biden — the way he is dealing with the limits but also the virtues of age. I think his McCain Institute speech displayed that. Will turn to that this weekend.
I once thought that Jerry Brown would one day be regarded as the John the Baptist of American politics, the harbinger of a more enlightened era. No such luck, although Oakland and California were fortunate to have him these latter decades. Had Newsom not boxed himself in with that unnecessary pledge, Brown would be a distinguished addition to the Senate.
It's a genuine dilemma for Newsom. On the merits (and in my view), Brown would far and away be the best choice. Among other reasons, because he wouldn't be looking to make this into a career, and wouldn't get in the way of the upcoming race. Also, with Newsom having spent two terms mostly in Brown's shadow as lt gov, there is a nice karmic switch in his being able to make the choice this way.
And, the promise to appoint a Black woman to the position was, as I understand it, made with the general expectation that he had Karen Bass in mind. Obviously she is otherwise engaged now.
But it was a promise. I expect that he will feel bound to respect it. This is one of many illustrations of why having executive-level "decider" power is so complicated and so often leads to decisions that create more resentment than support. (As in the famous and probably apocryphal Louis XIV quote about each appointment creating a hundred enemies and one ingrate.)
Rand Congressman Lee has a distinguished record. HOWEVER, she would be in her late 70s, were she to become senator. Too many old folks in the Senate and elsewhere in Washington? I consider President Biden aged like vintage wine. Not so with others, including the Trumpeter.
Rand Agreed. Jerry Brown would be a fine senatorial seat sitter prior to the 2024 California Senate race. However, he doesn’t look like a Black female.
It’s so good to have the positivity of Ms. Feinsteins life and work put out so well, especially given the tragedy of her final time. She and Ruth Badger Ginsberg’s final chapters beg to be delved into. How does one who is a paragon of our times lose track so completely? Given our political gerontocracy , this seems to be a basic question!
Off subject-are you reading Brian Klingborg, really good,timely China insights woven into dynamite mystery’s.
I think an appropriate person to fill the unexpired term would be Nancy Pelosi. I can’t understand why she chose to run again for her Congressional seat as I don’t see how she would be more impactful inside Congress than outside. However, filling the vacant Senate seat until 2025 would be a fitting capstone on her career.
Katie Porter? Most likely not a placeholder. Still. Shout out to single Moms.
I am a big fan of Katie Porter. The problem, as you say, is that she's so actively involved in next year's race for that very seat. So it would have all the ripple effects of Newsom going back on his preceding commitment, and also bigfooting the potentially quite divisive 2024 Senate race. (Porter, Lee, Schiff, et al.) But she has been a tremendous public figure and "explainer" — I think I mentioned in a recent post that she and Pete B were the current best explainers on the Dem side.
True that. And, it allows Newsome to get out of the corner without getting paint on his shoes.
I freaking love Jerry Brown and always have. I sent him money when he ran for president! (From Minnesota, then and now.) But. Barbara Boxer would deliver half of the (dumb) demo promise, in no way would confound the primary, and her learning curve would be next to nothing. If she's willing, this should work well.
Excellent idea.
Of course it would require Newsom explaining the choice in some way that didn't blow up Democrats in the state and nationwide, even apart from damage to his own longer-term prospects (whatever they might be).
But on the merits, agree with everything you say about her in the job.
I’m all in on Jerry Brown. Intelligent, self-critical and deeply spiritual.
As discussed in some other comments: In a world free of political constraints, he would be an excellent choice. He has been *such* a practical-minded political figure, and also so visionary and spiritual. But I don't think Newsom has full freedom-of-action in this decision.
Agreed his options are constrained by his own words and what is politically acceptable in this expedient times we find ourselves in.
Jerry would be a great call, excepting Newsom's previous statement he would nominate a black woman. Why the heck did he say that? Leaves him in a pickle.
The tensest day I have ever spent was the day Moscone and Milk were murdered. (Even more than the day last year I lost my wife. I never expected to lose her, and then the phone rang at 2:50 a.m.) I was an intern at Seattle City Hall. And the afternoon edition of the Seattle Time would be delivered in stacks. And the headline said "SF Mayor Murdered." And there was a major increased police presence in the building. The tension was palpable.
Ooof. I am sorry on all fronts, especially about your wife
I was working in the Carter White House on the day of the Moscone / Milk assassinations. I mainly remember having to get some presidential statement put out — while the Secret Service went on hyper-alert and the Justice Dept / FBI etc tried to figure out what was actually going on.
I also like the idea of Jerry Brown as a placeholder, but the optics of having yet another white male 80 yr old + (even one as vibrant as Jerry appears to be) instead of someone like Barbara Lee, are terrible. The Dems are already losing Black votes to the GOP, and this wouldn't help.
As mentioned below, I agree that this is something that is easier and more appealing to think about, by those of us outside the stewpot that is operational politics, than it is for Newsom to act on. Only two Black women have ever served in the US Senate, and none of them at this moment. I think that reality, plus Newsom's pledge, probably control this choice.
100% agree with you, Jim. Of course, I also pondered your recent piece which discussed the age issue in relation to FDR & Biden and the implications of having Harris as his Veep. While I think this is HIGHLY unlikely (and would almost certainly be coordinated with the White House), I wonder if the idea of appointing Harris to the position would be viable. Much as many Dems feared the idea of Henry Wallace as a potential president (and, hence, got him replaced with Truman), I wonder if this sort of calculation is not going on right now in Washington and Sacramento. Again, highly unlikely, but I suspect the idea has crossed more than a few minds.
Sadness for the death of two distinguished women, one still in her prime and the other who overstayed her life of exceptional public service.
I only know of Judge Tabit through Jim and Deb. She seemed exceptional and died in her prime.
Senator Feinstein was a pioneer in California and later in the Senate. However, like Churchill, she stayed in office too long (Churchill returned for a dismal two years in 1953).
This should not diminish the praise for her multi-generational service. Nor should it have any effect on discussion of President Biden’s (and Trump’s) age and capabilities.
Biden at 80 this week stood in a UAW strike line and then, in Arizona, delivered a powerful and heartfelt presentation on how one has to be tough to preserve democracy and how he is for us and Trump (and his MAGATS)) are for me me me.
Based on his daily actions and programs, his alertness and physical adroitness, and his commitment to my United States, I welcome Biden as my helmsman of our ship of state into the late 2020s.
Compared to a ME ME ME Trump, whose physical flabbiness matches his mental vacuousness, the choice is to proceed forward for a better America or slip into a Trumpian authoritarianism of revenge and injustice.
I was proud to vote for President Eisenhower in my youth. In my ‘late middle age’ I will be even prouder to re-elect President Biden, who exemplifies the soul of America for which (as a ‘loser’ in Trump’s terminology) I gladly put my life on the line.
Agree on all points about the inevitable toll of age, but also the very different ways in which it affects people. (For instance, when Dianne Feinstein was 62, the age at which Joanna Tabit's died this week, she was just *beginning* her time in the US Senate, and had several decades of high-level leadership ahead of her. Life is unfair.)
I agree as well that Sen. Feinstein should mainly be remembered for those decades and her best, and not the sad past few years.
Before the news appeared about both D Feinstein and J Tabit, I was in the middle of doing a piece on the theme you raise about Biden — the way he is dealing with the limits but also the virtues of age. I think his McCain Institute speech displayed that. Will turn to that this weekend.
I once thought that Jerry Brown would one day be regarded as the John the Baptist of American politics, the harbinger of a more enlightened era. No such luck, although Oakland and California were fortunate to have him these latter decades. Had Newsom not boxed himself in with that unnecessary pledge, Brown would be a distinguished addition to the Senate.
Thank you.
It's a genuine dilemma for Newsom. On the merits (and in my view), Brown would far and away be the best choice. Among other reasons, because he wouldn't be looking to make this into a career, and wouldn't get in the way of the upcoming race. Also, with Newsom having spent two terms mostly in Brown's shadow as lt gov, there is a nice karmic switch in his being able to make the choice this way.
And, the promise to appoint a Black woman to the position was, as I understand it, made with the general expectation that he had Karen Bass in mind. Obviously she is otherwise engaged now.
But it was a promise. I expect that he will feel bound to respect it. This is one of many illustrations of why having executive-level "decider" power is so complicated and so often leads to decisions that create more resentment than support. (As in the famous and probably apocryphal Louis XIV quote about each appointment creating a hundred enemies and one ingrate.)
Rand Congressman Lee has a distinguished record. HOWEVER, she would be in her late 70s, were she to become senator. Too many old folks in the Senate and elsewhere in Washington? I consider President Biden aged like vintage wine. Not so with others, including the Trumpeter.
Rand Agreed. Jerry Brown would be a fine senatorial seat sitter prior to the 2024 California Senate race. However, he doesn’t look like a Black female.