In a Time of Universal Deceit, Telling the Truth is Revolutionary.
Saturday, April 13, 2024

The Problem that is Nancy Pelosi

"I accept this gavel in the spirit of partnership, not partisanship, and look forward to working with you on behalf of the American people. In this House, we may belong to different parties, but we serve one country." Nancy Pelosi, after being elected Speaker of the House, 2006. Funny how one's words can come back to haunt you. In the early heady days of January, there was a veritable buzz in the air. Change was a'comin. The Evil Empire of Bush/Cheney was finally derailed, and the Constitution was about to be restored.

“I accept this gavel in the spirit of partnership, not partisanship, and look forward to working with you on behalf of the American people. In this House, we may belong to different parties, but we serve one country.”
Nancy Pelosi, after being elected Speaker of the House, 2006.

Funny how one’s words can come back to haunt you.

In the early heady days of January, there was a veritable buzz in the air. Change was a’comin. The Evil Empire of Bush/Cheney was finally derailed, and the Constitution was about to be restored.

Then Nancy got ahold of the gavel. Her first major statement was to take impeachment “off the table.” While her intention may have been to quiet the rancor and hatred between the parties, it had the opposite effect. It showed the GOP minority that the new speaker was weak, ineffectual, short-sighted, and constantly willing to seek accommodation and compromise.

How would any self-respecting GOPer, including Bush/Cheney respond? In retrospect, it was obvious. For 15 years, the GOP was used to rough handling by its leaders. Those leaders managed to keep diverse groups within the GOP in line, and under control. Their unanimity surprised many while they were the majority. Why would anyone be surprised if they maintained it as the minority?

As for the president, her promise to protect the president and the presidency from impeachment was like a red flag to a raging bull. The more he demanded, the more Pelosi would give in. Which in turn, caused him to demand that much more.

Today, Nancy claims to be shocked by the coordination and uniform stances taken by the GOP in Congress. She was “surprised” by their behavior.

Nancy, Nancy, Nancy. You have been in office since 1987, and you claim to be surprised at the GOP? Are you the most incredibly naive politician in the universe, or is something else at play?

Well, let’s take a look. You voted in favor of Patriot Act 1 without even reading the damned bill. You supported the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. You have stopped Democrats from complaining about Israel wall-building, take over of Palestinian settlements and the continued illegal construction of Israeli settlements and compounds. You stopped a congressional investigation of the illegal use of cluster bombs by the Israeli military on civilian areas.

AIPAC thanked you in 2005, and asked you to be the keynote speaker that year. And just this year, you played messenger girl from Prime Minister Olmert to the Syrian president.

And of course, there is the little matter of your cave-in. On Patriot I(b), FISA, Iraq, Iraq, SCHIP, SCHIP II, and pretty much every other issue.

This week, the president insulted you, demeaned your leadership abilities, then ordered you to behave next year. Given the tone of your response, I presume that you heard your orders loud and clear, and are preparing to act next year in the same depressing, disgusting, spineless way as you acted this last week, may, month. Naw, let’s be accurate. You have spoken loudly and carried a big twig this entire year. That’s not leadership, that’s stenography.

When you promised a new tone in congress, little did we suspect that it would be the same as the old tone, only with a new face. As promised, you have become a partner, not a partisan. Except that you have partnered with your AIPAC buddies in the DLC, you have partnered with your GOP friends in Congress, and you have partnered with the White House, leaving America desperate for even a hint of a spinal column.

Worst of all, at the end of this disaster, you took the stage with DLC stooge Rahm Emanuel, and you claimed victory. VICTORY! WHERE? HOW? ON WHAT ISSUE? Oh, yes, Energy and minimum wage.

Nancy, claiming victory under present circumstances is like you squatting & pissing on the great Chicago Fire, and claiming that you personally stopped the conflagration.

And still our constitution remains tattered, in danger of irrelevancy, and further abuse by this president and his criminal cabal.

Shame on you, Madam Speaker. Your failures far outweigh your successes. If you had a shred of decency left, a sense of honor, an understanding of your constitutional duties, you would resign the speakership immediately. You would allow someone, anyone, with a spine, a sense of reality, and an urgent goal (to fix our nation) take over for you. You have been measured, Ms. Pelosi, and you have been found wanting.

16 thoughts on “The Problem that is Nancy Pelosi”

  1. A plea for humanitarianism is very strong in this thread. My growing up in the years before WW2, every charitable organization and all the churches and temples did non-stop fund raising for the people within their districts. The declaration of war redirected the focus and everyone began to work for the servicemen and women.

    Have all these organizations suddenly stopped working for the unemployed, handicapped people and homeless children?

    Could the problem be that our government was elected to take care of all Americans and of course, failed. I’ve worked for my entire adult years and paid into my Social Security so that I never had to depend on federal welfare. I carefully saved on all extras and simply did not spend on anything that was not an essential. I never had health insurance and during emergencies borrowed money on my house. I had no help from my family or ex-husband.

    But, I worked with several local charities to raise funds for their Christmas presents for the kids and would serve dinners with the Red Cross and the Salvation Army.

    Do we now elect leaders who will put many Americans on welfare? Have we ever elected anyone who will correct our academics and in turn teach trades to put people on their financial feet? We did elect one man who promised to declare a war on poverty. Did it work? Nope! His welfare programs were a disaster. He treated many Americans as if they were simply street people, not ill-educated citizens.

    The greatest diversion away from a successful White House is now who claims to be the greatest Christian. One of these days we will see the truth about these holier than thou candidates, including Speaker Pelosi.

    She cut a deal with Bush 43 and we all know it. Bush knew he should have been impeached for war crimes and simply pushed Pelosi into a corner.

    Until we have a third party that runs on truth, there is really no changes we can see with the current list of candidates. The voters are bored with politics and many of us have worked so hard for better officials only to be met with the opposition from the other party.

    Both parties pander to the voters by promising more handouts and lower taxes. The biggest problem comes from the GOP where they are running on prohibitions that will affect half the American people (gays and women) not to mention terminal seniors who must be kept alive whether they want this or not. The Republicans are running on changes in our laws that we will never be able to repeal if they get their way.

    I’m tired of be insulted by the GOP that they will hand me my list of things I can do and another list that I cannot do. The penalties being federal prisons.

    At this point any Democrat is a whole lot safer than a Social Conservative.

  2. We all need to barrage her offices every day all day for as long as she remains in her position. It’s been over a year and she has basically lied to us. She is worse than incompetent. She is complicit in the crimes of the Bush/GOP enterprise.

  3. We need a unity candidate, and Obama is that candidate.


    I happy to hear someone else say that. That is one of the things that attacted me to him. He is totally non-divisive. His record shows an unusual ability to bring differing factions together in agreement. We need a president like that. We need to feel like we are all working together instead of warring with each other.

    We need to get out the old “MAKE LOVE – NOT WAR ” signs and dust them off. A few peace marches would help, too. Of course they would have to turn into riots that made us look bad before this MSM would give then any coverage. But maybe that wouldn’t be such a bad thing, either.

  4. Oh Wexler, you just said it all when you said “If I could magically appoint the next president, it would be Dennis Kucinich’.
    I’m so tired of party politics with greedy politicians and big corporations running things. We have a great constitution and I am sure that when system was set up it was with the understanding that only true humanitarians would work in government. At that time, who else would want to. Today, especially in this administration, humanitarians are few and far between. We could feed the hungry of the world with less money than we waste in excess and the war machine every year.
    All of the frontrunners on both sides of the fence are typical politicians who spend big money to look good and do what ever it takes to stay in the news. I think with any one of them as president we would just have more of the same in varying degrees. I don’t feel that way about Dennis Kucinich though, as far as I can tell, he doesn’t owe any favors to big money like the front runners, he’s right there on getting back our constitution, health care and all the important issues. Some of the others talk the talk about the war and global warming etc. but when you look at their voting record you will see they don’t walk the walk. They skirt the real issues and try to be popular with everyone, they just want to win…. They are politicians, not humanitarians.
    I have to say I like this little guy and when you check him out you’ll see he sure wasn’t born with a silver spoon in his mouth like our current leader, quite the opposite. I know it’s a long shot but I would like to see a guy like this in the white house for a change. I was very impressed with his wife Elizabeth too. One of my big concerns is the starving children in Africa who are forced out of their homes by violence caused by government greed. I was happy to see that Elizabeth is right in there on that issue and has been since she was a kid. Looks like a good first lady to me. We really don’t have to let the TV, commercials and news stations tell us who to vote for, we don’t have to vote for the lesser of two evils and we don‘t have to not vote for someone because he probably won‘t win. Vote for character not charisma … Vote for that person you would want working for you. We need true humanitarians, not more of the same. We need someone who will clear a wide path to the development of clean energy, of course we should not be pursuing any nuclear weapons , weapons of mass destruction or nuclear energy for that matter. We should be an example and encourage others to follow, it’s just too damn toxic for the future of this planet. There is probably more power and cleaner energy in nano technology and water then there ever was in petroleum and we can find it if we reach out to all the good people of this world.
    I am convinced that 9/11 was a desperate attempt to wake up the American people to what our government is doing in other parts of the world, our foreign policy sucks. We’re the most powerful country they say but we’re backing dictators around the world and countries that are occupying land that does not belong to them. We are one of, if not the largest polluter in the world. I use to be proud to be a gringo…. and I still am, but so ashamed of my government and what we’ve allowed it to do around the world in the name of democracy and freedom. We, now more than ever, need to get this country back on track. I can’t, but we can if we back the little guy who’s not afraid to go up against the norm. It should be a prerequisite for anyone wanting to hold public office or work for the federal, state or county governments to be first and foremost humanitarians with a deep desire to serve his fellow man, there are many such people but we won’t find them on the front page and certainly not on Fox News.
    Who can we blame for what’s going on besides ourselves ? Who can we look to if we want to change what’s been going on ? No one but ourselves.
    I don’t know much about politics and world affairs, but I do know human nature and the natural balance in nature. I am a farmer (organic, of course) and work with the earth and nature on a daily basis and see how it relates to all things large and small. Through this I have learned first hand the truth in the Gaia hypothesis and how much we belong to the earth and the earth to us. If we could just follow the little truths and examples that nature has to offer if we just take a moment to look. What I lack in formal education I make up for in instincts and gut feelings. Please think about Dennis Kucinich for president, he is the only one who is, I think, a true humanitarian and not the typical politician

    We have before us some pretty exciting challenges and I know we can do some real good if we come together, learn from the earth and make the changes necessary on all levels. So let’s get our constitution back and start from scratch getting our government working for us instead of the other way around. Then we can get busy doing what needs to be done, saving the planet, alternative energy. We need to end war, hunger, poverty and crimes against humanity and the greed that causes it, here and around the world.
    Just look at one tiny corn or tomato seed, place it in the warm earth and with a little loving care it will produce many pounds of food and many more seeds. It’s the law of ten fold and it tells us that life was designed to be free and self perpetuating. We need to stop taxing a mans wages, so that we all can become self sufficient with little means.
    Then finally we’ll be able to do what it was we came here to do, Live, Love, Laugh and be happy

  5. SEAL, regarding 3rd parties…

    I can’t disagree that a 3rd party movement doesn’t have a chance of succeeding. But it’s my experience (as a precinct captain for Obama) in many phone calls that people at least SAY they cannot vote for Hillary and will either stay home or write in someone else.

    Having said that, I decided to volunteer for the Obama campaign for the positive reasons you stated plus I believe that he is the best chance of winning the election. In fact, I admire all of the Democrat candidates to some degree, although some of Clinton’s antics are starting to piss me off. But the Dem field is full of talent this year. If I could magically appoint the next president, it would be Dennis Kucinich. However, since I haven’t yet figured out how to do that, I think the Dems best bet (again, based on phone calls) would be an Obama/Edwards ticket. That is if they want to keep the progressive wing of the party energized.

    I don’t agree with Obama’s positions on everything, BTW. But campaign platforms are a set of ideas, not a guarantee of future results. To me, when Obama talks about an open government that truly tries to function in a bipartisan way, restores the Constitution, and tackles problems with a common sense approach using all the available resources, it’s music to my ears. We need a unity candidate, and Obama is that candidate.


    PS Happy holidays to all.

  6. I forgot to point out the real danger in such a move outlined above. It is entirely possible that Obama’s third party run would split the voting in such a way that the republican would win. Those die hard Hillary supporters would never switch sides. Neither would the religious right. Obama would attract many of the democrat voters but he would have to get all the independents and a hell of a lot of republican voters to pull it off. A large number of inspired younger voters is what would tip the balance. The envionment and the massive debt are their hot buttons.

    I told Obama a long time ago he should threaten the DNC establishment with doing exactly this to force them to withdraw their support for Clinton. He didn’t, of course. He knows how to hunt but has yet to learn how to kill.

  7. If you guys seriously want to consider a third party, none of the people you listed would have a chance in hell of getting off the ground much less winning anythng. They don’t have the money or the organization. Mainly they don’t have a supporter base worth a damn.

    The only senario that could create a third party run for the presidency is if Hillary wins the party nomination and Obama decides to run as an independent. He has a very large die hard suppoter base and over a half million independent contributors that have provided all those millions of dollars for his campaign so far. They are fiercely anti-Clinton and repugnant. I think they would continue to support him as an independent because that is what they are.

    Obama’s run for the prsidency and his support has been outside the normal political framework from the beginning. He declared it would be, calling it “grassroots.” His message is exactly what those seeking a change in government want to hear. “Together” we can fix the damage and get America back on the right track again. {my words, not his] Every time he has appeared at a university to speak he has drawn crowds of 2-6,000 people. Nothing like that has happened since Kennedy. I’m old enough to remember how the under 30 people supported JFK. They made him president. It could happen again if he continues to motivate them with “we” can change things.

    This is beginning to sound like a political support pitch for Obama but it is not. It is my evaluation of how a third party could evolve out of he current political environmet. I have paid attention to Obama’s campign from the beginning and found that he supports just about everything the majority of us want to see happen. He has been moot on the more radical issues which makes good political sense in a campaign. But he is a very solid strong and appealing figurehead that would give a third party a real possibility of winning.

Comments are closed.