An Open Letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein from this web site:

In an email reply to my protest of your vote in favor of Bush's War, you stated the following:

"There can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein and his arsenal of chemical and biological weapons pose a real and persuasive threat to the safety and security of the United States, the Persian Gulf, and the Middle East. We must push for a resolution now or risk paying a high price later."

In your floor statement, you said, "While the distance between the United States and Iraq is great, Saddam Hussein's ability to use his chemical and biological weapons against us is not constrained by geography it can be accomplished in a number of different ways which is what makes this threat so real and persuasive."

Didn't you know this was a lie when you said it?

You stated: "The great danger is a nuclear one. If Saddam Hussein achieves nuclear capability, the risk increases exponentially and the balance of power shifts radically in a deeply menacing way.

As I said on this floor in earlier remarks, I believe that Saddam Hussein rules by terror and has squirreled away stores of biological and chemical weapons. He has used them on Kurdish villages and in his invasion of Iran.

Evidence indicates that he is engaged in developing nuclear weapons. However, today the best authorities I could find indicate he does not yet have nuclear capability. But this is only a question of time."

At long last Senator, have you no shame? In the same statement, you promote the idea and then qualify it as not true. Is this not in the finest tradition of Bush fear poltics? All that was left was for you to imply that Iraq caused 9-11. When did you join the Bush Admistration, Senator? If only you knew the contempt they hold for you, both for your cooperation and who you are.

But that, as they say, is off message. What resolution were we pushing for in your vote for the war, the first or the second that Bush promised to obtain? Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Why were inspections not working, since Iraq has no WMD? How do you maintain that such a weak country as Iraq is a threat to the security of the United States? What single shred of evidence was there or is there that in any way demonstrates a potential such as the one you used to justified you vote for an illegal war? Now that it has been shown that the entire "case for war" that was put for by the Bush administration was a tissue of lies, what are you doing about it in the Senate?

Now we are in the aftermath of your decision. America's position in the world is terribly damaged. Instead of peace-loving people who are worthy of friendship and cooperation, we are an arrogant, destructive conquering people who receive fear and anger from those who should be our friends. The cynical, hypocrisy that is the hallmark of our attack on Iraq is the bread and butter of the Bush Administration but, Senator, we thought you were better than that.

Now our nation is in more danger than ever. Countries that don't have nuclear weapons will rush to obtain them. They have seen that Iraq was attacked because they did not have nuclear weapons, while a "diplomatic" solution is sought by the Bush Administration in North Korea. I guess the fact that North Korea has nuclear weapons had some impact on that.
What steps are you taking in the Senate to determine if the "case for war" really turned out to be a cynical plan to invade and profit from Iraq? There is substantial evidence of this... at least as much evidence as there was that Iraq had WMD. Oops, I guess you better recuse yourself from that investigation:

-------
SF Chronicle, April 22 2003
URS Corp., a San Francisco planning and engineering firm partially owned by California Sen. Dianne Feinstein's husband, landed an Army contract Monday worth up to $600 million.
The award to help with troop mobilization, weapons systems training and anti-terrorism efforts is the latest in a string of plum defense jobs snared by URS. In February, the firm won an army engineering and logistics contract that could bring in $3.1 billion during the next eight years.

Article LINK
-------

So, I guess that turned out to be the most profitable vote you ever made, didn't it?
This is my personal call as a constituent, a Californian and an American for you to resign your office immediately. The Governor of California should be given the opportunity to appoint a Senator who properly represents the 35 million peace-loving people of California.
I have always wondered where you were when Bush was squeezing California during the power outages and why you voted in favor of his 1.3 trillion dollar tax boondoggle that has bankrupted our country. Now that the deficit is 500 billion and climbing, what say you? Oh right, now you oppose Bush's budget when it is too late.

You recently said of the 2004 FY budget, "While the effect this budget will have on the economy is uncertain, we can be certain that it will increase our debt. In fact, net public debt will exceed $5 trillion by the end of the decade, and interest payments on the debt will double over the next ten years, from $155 billion this year to $310 billion in 2013."
Barn door open. Horse out. Don't you think that your vote in favor of the other Bush tax cut contributed to this problem? Bush can be excused because we know he is greedy and stupid... but Senator, what is your excuse?

Imagine, if you will, the attack ads that Karl Rove would be creating if you were to attempt to run for election again in 2006 during a second term for Bush' crowd. Senator, those people have only been if office for little over two years! Every aspect of our society is bad and getting worse! Can we possibly survive two more years of Bush... much less six!? You already joined Bush once and they will hate you double now, if you cross them. Look at how they eat their own as Republicans unmercifully attack their most sensible Senators Snow and Voinivich. If Bush calls them "French," what would he call you?

Senator, if you are not willing to fight against the Bush adminstration, if you are not willing to stand up for the rights of those who the Bush Administration holds in contempt, if you are not willing to install credible and effective domestic security, if you don't want a robust and generous economy, if you won't fight the ominous rewriting of our Constitution, if you are not willing to stand up for the environment:

Please resign.