I wanted everyone to know that your calls yesterday to the Feinstein campaign made an impact. In fact, they made a press release on Bradstreet's comments:"Angela Bradstreet was speaking in her personal capacity, not on behalf of the Feinstein for Senate campaign. Senator Feinstein was an early endorser of Phil Angelides and continues to support Mr. Angelides for Governor. Not all we were hoping for, but it does show that our frustration over Bradstreet resonated. We are really on a roll here.

I have also found out more on Bradstreet since then, including that she is very good friends with Susan Kennedy. Susan Kennedy is the "Democrat" Schwarzengegger hired as his Chief of Staff to much hoopla in order to boost his "bi-partisan" credentials. He also pays her $11,000 a month to from the state and $8,000 to a month from his campaign (plus a $25,000 "signing bonus"). That is a pretty fat taxpayer salary, but it is worth every penny for Arnold. Republicans have known for some time that if you can buy off a few prominent "Democrats," it is easy to make your position appear to be the "bi-partisan" position. This is, of course, one of the main reasons why we worked to hard to take down Lieberman. We seem to be running up against a Bay Area circle of rich Democratic donors not unlike the one Matt writes about in Manhattan.

As a final note, I wish to say that the points many made in yesterday's thread about how attorneys in Bradstreet's position are deeply involved in counseling employers to develop solid anti-discrimination policies, and that it is certainly not incommensurate with progressivism to have large corporate clients were well taken. That being said, from what many wrote it seems clear that Bradstreet herself is clearly not a progressive, and her willingness to take down Democrats means she should be kept away from speaking on behalf of Democrats at all costs.