I'm topped by Calitics to the fact that the The NYT, in what's otherwise a fairly typical and predictable profile, calls Sen. Dianne Feinstein a "liberal lioness."
Wow. Where has that reporter been all these years?
Feinstein has never been a "liberal" anything. Yeah, she's good on gun control (having seen first-hand what happens when a a dangerous guy gets a gun and starts shooting), and she's always been pro-choice. But that's about it.
As mayor of San Francisco, she was, for all intents and purposes, a Republican. She handed the city over to developers and once vetoed a resolution declaring "reproductive rights day" because she thought it would be "too divisive." She never once attended a Pride parade.
She was highly critical of Gavin Newsom when he first broke ground on same-sex marriage. She has been, at best, a moderate on economic issues, and was always untrustworthy on labor stuff. She was never good on the Bush wars.
I've had my disagreements with Sen. Barbara Boxer, but there's no doubt that she's been a progressive voice. Not so her colleague.
The Times clearly wanted to make the story look interesting by contrasting Feinstein's current stand on spying with her more left-leaning record. But there's nothing to contrast. She's always been a moderate-to-conservative politician. No story here.