Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The REAL problem with Pelosi

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 10:51 AM
Original message
The REAL problem with Pelosi
Actually, it is not just one issue. It is not simply being from San Fran, nor being a perceived liberal, nor being a woman (ergo hysterical, emotional, cat-fighting, menstruating, etc), nor is it the fact that she attempting to herd a gaggle of cats known as the Democrat Party House Congresscritters. It is all of that and it is none of that.

It is actually immaterial who our leader is. The GOP response would have been the same regardless of who it was. They, under Mitch McConnell, Ed Gillespie, Dick Cheney, and many other hatchetmen, would have pulled the same criticisms, complaints and below the belt attacks on any Democrat who would be taking control in a month and a half. Heck, these talking heads are already blaming us for inaction WHILE THEY CONTROL THE CONGRESS! And not one MSM talking head has bothered to call them on their campaign. Perhaps, KO, but few others.

Nancy Pelosi is a smart, experienced, and respected leader. Her steady hand has been obvious throughout her tenure as minority leader; I expect the same degree of exellence and professionalism from her as Speaker. These attacks are meant to hamstring her, to make her lame, to make her damaged goods in the minds of Americans in advance of '08. The fact that she is female, liberal, from San Fran AND successful in herding cats simply makes her more of a target.

One thing I admire about her is how she is dealing with the strain and responsibility of arranging the new congress. It is no easy task. She has a snake in the grass in J. Harman, an AIPAC operative more in line philosophically with the neocons than the Dems. She has history with Alcee Hastings, an undistinguished jurist, but a popular and apparently, effective legislator and representative. She shows a willingness to support mavericks, like Murtha, yet reach to Boehner and make peace in a public and convincing way. She has 230 children she must coral, tame, and at the same time, keep energized. Considering that there are at least that many personalities (some suffer from multiple ones), egos, needs, demands, assets and liabilities, while undergoing one of the most aggressive attack campaigns before taking office, she is doing a bang-up job. We are lucky to have her where she is.

The attacks on Speaker Pelosi (damn, that just rolls off the tongue so comfortably, no?) remind me of something that took place in 1992, when a governor from a backwards southern state was about to be sworn into office. We made a serious mistake then. We did not defend Bill Clinton as we should have early on. It was understandable, although regretable, because most of us hardly knew him or about him. After months of constant attacks, many of us actually believed that there had to be something behind the rumors, etc. So we sat by and watched as special prosecutors sucked the life and energy out of his appointees; as rumors grew and grew, until they sounded like conventional wisdom instead of a finely crafted(and false) attack. In retrospect, the attack mounted on Bill Clinton was a conspiracy of sorts. It was financed, organized, and controlled by some rabid neoconMen intent on controlling all branches of government. Well, they succeeded - and look where that got us. They are starting their nepharious attacks again, this time against Nancy Pelosi. This time we cannot afford to sit back and let them do their damage. We need to out the attackers, refute all accusations, and place the blame squarely where it belongs - on the folks who got us here in the first place.

The real problem with Pelosi is that she exists at all. That is reason enough for these attack dogs. And that is reason enough for us to stand behind her and support her during these trying first days. You go, Nancy. We love and respect you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
IndyOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 10:57 AM
Response to Original message
1. Exactly. (n/t)
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
2. I think conservatives also get her confused with Boxer. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. After all, one older woman looks just like another.
It's hard to tell them apart. Once you've seen one, you've seen them all. They all look -- well -- older.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Liberal, similar voices. both from California. We all take those shortcuts.
Have you not gotten your evangelical leaders confused? I have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-30-06 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #6
57. No. They are so weird, there is no confusing them.
For example, Falwell and Robertson -- very different.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
17. Indeed. Pelosi is NO Boxer.
I seriously question the Pelosi tactic of responding to a right-wing philosophy of "preemptive attack" with a Quisling philosophy of "preemptive surrender."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
classof56 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
3. Right on! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
4. So what you're saying is that there ISN'T a problem with her?
My main beef with Pelosi is that she's caved in to the Bush administration too many times for me to feel totally comfortable with her. Now that she's the incoming Speaker, that may change, but I'll have to wait and see.

There's also the problem with mobilizing Texas Democrats. We took a beating on November 7 overall, even though Nick Lampson took Tom DeLay's old seat and all of the judician campaigns in Dallas County were snatched up by Democrats. Our state party is in disarray, and I think part of the problem is that the Capitol Hill establishment isn't giving us enough recon support to actually win House and Senate seats. Maybe Pelosi can tweak a few things up on the Hill to change this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. Pelosi leads from the rear & has apparently hobbled those
Edited on Tue Nov-28-06 11:46 AM by Vidar
who actually might lead such as Conyers & Feingold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #8
21. She also hobbled Rep. Cynthia McKinney, refusing to
restore the seniority McKinney was due when after a one-term absence
she did her sixth term in the house; while two white Congressional
Reps, Dan Lungren and Bob English, had their seniority restored by the
Republican leadership after they were similarly absent from the House
for one term or more.

http://www.blackcommentator.com/176/176_cbc_monitor_silent.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #21
29. Very good point. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #8
28. hobbling leaders...
Edited on Tue Nov-28-06 06:12 PM by bobbolink
You've put your finger on exactly what I see, too.

Here's hoping Waxman can escape her grasp, and then free Conyers.

hehe.... there's a button for ya... "Free Rep. Conyers" :hi:

edited to add: I don't think she can do much hobbling with Feingold, since he's a senator. :)
Unless there's something going on there we don't know about. :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #28
34. Nancy Pelosi is a fine and capable leader......BUT
what is not remembered here is that We the People instruct our leaders.

John Conyers and Henry Waxman will investigate. My bumper sticker is Pelosi in '07. What's yours?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-29-06 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #34
56. this shit isn't worth it
Edited on Wed Nov-29-06 09:36 PM by bobbolink
:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. Actually win?!?!
Edited on Tue Nov-28-06 11:59 AM by BeFree
Maybe it's the way the votes are counted is why you act like losers? Maybe the people actually did elect Dems but the machines stole votes? Can you prove that votes were not stolen?

Let us pray Pelosi tweaks a few things to fix this problem. One way to do it is with HR 6200, a paper ballot law for federal elections.

And see this Election Reform link about Texas e-voting problems:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x460564
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #4
12. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Mr_Spock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
42. Point ............... .................. ..................... ................. .......... missed
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IronLionZion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
7. I think Madam Speaker will do a terrific job in spite of the tremendous burden
I like to stress the "MADAM" in Madam Speaker as opposed to Speaker Pelosi because I just love the fact that she's a woman. I've always had at least one woman manager at every job I've held. Women tend to be good managers. The best managers are also good mothers. If you can effectively deal with children, then you can manage a team of adults.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
9. Rarely do I read a post on DU and say, aloud, Whoa!
On this one, I did.

Man oh man did you hit that nail smack on its head.

I don't disagree with one word you wrote. Not one.

We Democrats tend to be so eggheaded that we often fail to be hardheaded. We can argue all we want, but we should NEVER allow our squabbles to become fodder for the opposition (but we almost always do) and we should ALWAYS defend vociferously and energetically our own (we almost never do).

Say what (rhetorical) you will about Hillary Clinton, but she was 100% correct with her 'vast right wing conspiracy'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. Yes. Financed by Richard Mellon Scaife. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #16
26. a truly sick example of neoconmanism.
he has no morals, no hesitation about promoting lies, and has even fewer ethical genes than Tom DeLay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
11. EXCELLENT post!
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
13. great post!
you hit it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brazenly Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
14. I could swear I heard Tweety (of all people!) call someone on it the other day
The TV was on in the next room and some GOP spokesswiftboater was yammering on about how the Dems were going to do this and that and nothing is getting done and Tweety said something along the lines of "You do know they aren't in office yet, don't you?"

I'm hoping someone else heard it and can either tell me I got it all wrong or give more detail on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 12:14 PM
Response to Original message
15. "...the attack mounted on Bill Clinton was a conspiracy of sorts."
I remember someone saying something about it - a "vast right-wing conspiracy".

That person was then flayed by republicans and democrats alike.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. was it cassandra who was vilified for speaking the truth?
I forget my ancients so easily these days.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. That was Hillary who referred to the attacks as a vast right-wing conspiracy.
Stupid me, at the time I rolled my eyes.

She was speaking the truth. And the next truth is that the conspiracy is still in place, more rabid than ever. As the OP has so astutely pointed out, it is now Speaker Pelosi who remains in their sights.

What this country needs is a damn good left wing conspiracy. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. you and me both. And am I ever sorry for it.
If you noticed how several successful people have stood up to the swifties and Scaiffettes, they immediately call a spade a spade. That shuts up the rumor mongers faster than anything, especially when the sources of the rumors become the story instead. That is what we need to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalEsto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-29-06 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #15
52. delete the words "of sorts"
and you've nailed it.

The entire thing was a vicious pissy sour-grapes plan to discredit the man who "stole" the presidency from *41 and denied him a second term he thought he was entitled to. The BFEE and the neocons weren't going to take that lying down. And they didn't.

They were attacking Clinton before he even became president. I can remember seeing "Impeach Clinton" bumper stickers immediately after the '92 election, way before Inauguration Day, 1993. They didn't care what they nailed him for, as long as they nailed him. Clinton's error was in providing them with ammunition in the form of Monica.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
22. I do think the American people are learning to tune out the 24/7 war
profiteering corporate news monopoly propaganda machine. It's been harder for them to do so, than, say, the indigenous in southern Mexico, or the vast poor of Venezuela, whose corporate news monopolies are just like ours, and even openly supported the 2002 violent military coup attempt against Hugo Chavez. The people just IGNORED these insane "news" dogs. Tens of thousands of Venezuelans poured into the streets, during that coup attempt, demanding return of their elected president and reopening of their National Assembly. They DIDN'T BELIEVE what their corporate news monopolies were saying.

And that is happening here, too. It actually began happening a ways back, when FIFTY-SIX PERCENT of the American people opposed the Iraq War, BEFORE the invasion (Feb. '03). That would be a landslide in a presidential election. 56% is A LOT. They just didn't believe Bush. They TUNED OUT all that intense propaganda--even with formerly reputable organizations like the NYT pushing the war--and made up their own minds that the facts did not justify a war.

It's also happening on the election fraud/election reform. Ordinary people are way ahead of the corporate "news" media on this. Word of mouth--and our modern day "Committees of Correspondence," the internet--are succeeding in creating a virtual community of concerned citizens, that parallels/replicates the people-to-people information systems among the indigenous and the poor in Mexico, Venezuela, Bolivia and other places. One of the evidences that this is happening here is the huge Absentee Ballot vote in the recent midterms. The AB vote has been on the increase in proportion to the cancerous spread of these insecure, hackable, electronic voting machines--amidst a near total blackout in the "news" on this vital matter. And we saw some dramatic increases this time, with just a little more news making it into the establishment press--it was 50% of the vote in the entire state of California, with big increases all over the nation. What this tells me is that people are onto the electronic voting scam--and they've done it virtually on their own, with no help from the corporate news monopolies--and they are trying to find a way around the rigged electronics, by voting with an Absentee Ballot.

Notice how quiet the media has been about this? I think I'm one of about five people in the country who was paying attention to the AB vote. People don't realize what happened. It was a huge rebellion--a boycott, a protest. And if we can only get this big constituency of discontented and distrustful voters mobilized, we can force election reform NOW, at the LOCAL level, by insisting that AB votes be handcounted and the results posted BEFORE any electronics are involved. I think this is doable, and may be the only way to get real election reform (a paper ballot system BY DEFAULT). Diane Feinstein--the other face of California feminine politics--heads the Senate committee on elections, and I think she will gut or block any serious reform of the election system.

But anyway, to get back to Pelosi and our rightwing, fascist corporate news monopolies: I think we have a much savvier public now than we did during the Clinton years. Bush has done us that favor, in a way. His lies were so egregious--and the parroting of his lies by the corporate news monopolies was so obvious--that people don't trust those news monopolies any more, just like they don't trust the voting system any more. They tune it out. In fact, whatever they hear or read from these untrustworthy sources, many just figure automatically that the opposite is true. So, who knows?--their ragging on Pelosi may be to her benefit.

Propaganda only works for a time. The human mind hungers for truth and reality. And the human mind WILL start translating propaganda into its opposite, when the propaganda starts getting tiresome. I have personal experience of this, having been raised in rather rightwing Catholic schools. After a while, I realized that, whatever they said, the opposite was probably true. I think this is what's happening to the American electorate.

This is not to say that these corporate news monopolies are not dangerous--and that they shouldn't be fought tooth and nail. Item no. 1 on my list, after throwing Diebold/E&S and other election theft machines into 'Boston Harbor,' is busting the news monopolies. (Boy, do they need it! Bust 'em down to one TV station or one newspaper per CEO--or less.) But, right now, I think we should put more energy into getting real information to the people (for instance, via the internet and listserves)--and to correcting and commenting on the corporate garbage--than I would put into trying to get the corporate entities off their rightwing "talking points." They are the tools--the propaganda organs--of the war profiteers and the corporate fascists. They are not going to change--and that is very much to their peril. They are stiff and unchangeable. That's what corporations become--with monopolies, and power, and control, and immense wealth. They become ossified (--just like the Catholic Church!). They think their brainwashing techniques will keep working. But, more than this, they insist on it--because, like kings and queens gone bad, they are suffering from hubris. How dare anyone challenge them? Like the Red Queen, in "Alice in Wonderland," they WILL paint the white roses red. They don't care if the roses die. Their POWER to DICTATE the parameters of the nation's political debate has gone to their heads. They have lost any creative edge they might once have had.

Clinton was a curious case. He was really a corporate tool in many ways, himself. The outsourcing of jobs began with Clinton, not with Bush--for instance. The bad trade deals--and the broken promises about labor and environmental protections--were Clinton's. The destruction of the welfare system, while putting nothing in its place to help the exploited and downtrodden poor, was Clinton's handiwork.

And so, the rightwing assault on Clinton is odd, and a little hard to figure out. He gave them much of what they wanted, except war. That's part of it. Well, and multiple tax cuts for the super-rich WITH war, and a $10 TRILLION deficit--to be paid for by the poor. (I noticed the tax cuts for the rich bothered Clinton--I heard him say recently that HE should be paying more taxes.) My guess: Clinton, for all his "free trade" promulgation, actually had/has some more socially responsible intentions. Universal health care, for one. And maybe that's what Kenneth Starr, Grand Inquisitor, was all about--to insure that global corporate piggery would not be tempered by ANY concessions to, or help for, workers and the poor--or protections for our poor, dying planet. It would be a total, unmitigated, global pigfest.

They were also laying the groundwork for the mind-boggling combination of "christian values" with total piggery--as the false, corporate-created narrative for why normally sensible people would vote for unnecessary war, multiple tax cuts for the super-rich and a $10 TRILLION deficit. It started with this moralistic tone about Clinton. The hypocrisy was amazing. Clinton actually did pretty well through it all. I remember that his polls were never higher than when they were reviling him for getting a blow job. What the American people weren't very savvy about was the rightwing plans to steal elections. (Nor were they savvy about NAFTA--but that has changed as well.) This narrative as to why people would hand over the nation's treasury to Halliburton, Bechtel and assorted predators, or would vote to applaud the slaughter of one hundred thousand innocent people, or would vote for torture (when 63% of them oppose torture "under any circumstances"--May '04), got geared up and went into full force after 9/11. The notion that Christians just love to see children's bodies shattered by bombs "in order to keep us safe," that people want to be fleeced, that ordinary people have no ability to resist simplistic slogans (" you're either with us or agin us," "mission accomplished"), and that most Americans are bigots (anti-gay, anti-brown, anti-women)--and many other such insane and deceitful "memes"--became the "narrative" for explaining stolen elections. The 'christian' right--always a small minority in our society--was given a BIG TRUMPET, to make it SEEM like they are the majority. It fooled us for a while. In fact, it was the Corporate Rulers' only propaganda victory--convincing the rest of us that rightwing nuts were "winning" and that WE liberals, and believers in the Constitution, and sane, normal, generous, open-minded, tolerant people, were now in the minority. I don't think it was ever true. (And opinion polls over the last several years bear me out.) But Jesus dropping bombs on Baghdad was the nutso thing they wanted to "sell"--and we had early warning of just how crazy this "product" is, with the "Starr Chamber" proceedings against Clinton over a stained dress.

So my advice--re Pelosi (or other rightwing plots):

1. Election reform. Right now, we have two Bushite corporations "counting" most of our votes with TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code. You've all heard about Diebold. But do you know who initially funded its brethren corporation, ES&S? Rightwing billionaire Howard Ahmanson, who also gave one million dollars to the extremist 'christian' Chalcedon Foundation, which touts the death penalty for homosexuals (among other things). THAT's who is "counting" our votes under a veil of corporate secrecy! (No, no "conspiracy" here. Move along.) As we begin to reform this egregiously non-transparent voting system, we will begin to elect real representatives of the people, to add support to the good Democrats who have managed to make it into Congress, in onerous, very handicapped conditions. With real Democrats, truly representing the majority of Americans, it will cease to matter much what the rightwing is fulminating about. Our lives will begin to improve, and the benefits will be obvious! We can't make the composition of Congress any better right now--than what we got from the midterms (a great improvement, but still not adequate as to representing the interests of the majority)--but the threat that we can and will be electing even better reps in the future will influence the current office-holders--bolster up the good ones, get THEM to ignore the corporate/rightwing bullshit, and proceed with the PEOPLES' business.

2. Work from the margins! Most Americans exist in the margins. Their concerns have been ignored or trivialized--quite deliberately. So don't be thinking about the phony "mainstream", as sold to you by the corporate news monopolies. The real mainstream is the great progressive American majority, which has managed to survive this fascist onslought, and grievous disempowerment and disenfranchisement, and is still here. It never went away. But it has been shut out of power, and shut out the corporate-permitted political debate. People need information. They need hope. They need to realize that they are the majority. Educate, inform and motivate the PEOPLE, as the first priority--and only secondarily strike at the decrepit power of the corporate news monopolies. For instance, I think it's far more important to post a CRITICISM of a rightwing/corporate lie on the internet, than to write them a letter about it. Do both if you can. But the first priority is to inform and hearten the people who are the victims of 24/7 propaganda. The rightwing/corporate news monopolies are not likely to change. But the PEOPLE can and do change--and are the key to change--and many of them are hungry for real information. The American people are a lot savvier than people give them credit for. But there are some lies that still take hold--for instance, this persistent lie about Hugo Chavez (that he is "authoritarian") that we see time and again in the corporate news monopoly press. (What they are trying to hide from the American people is this great populist revolution that is occurring throughout South America, because it might give us some ideas here--for instance, that maybe oil profits should benefit the rest of us--should be used for schools and medical care for the poor? Got to kill THAT idea!) Inform and hearten the People first, and make sure they do get "ideas," and you thereby undermine the corporate propagandists. The corporate propagandists are NEVER going to inform the American people about this peaceful revolution in South America. WE have to. And, from us, on the internet, it spreads out--forcing open the political debate, and maybe even helping Nancy Pelosi to be bolder and to steel her spine against the corporate/rightwing's increasingly desperate attacks and all their same-sounding, pre-written "talking points."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Peace, what you said.
You should start a thread on those points - it would make for great reading and discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. Wow! Interesting analysis.
And I'm on board with the substance and tone of what you convey. Just one question ... $10 trillion deficit? Must be a typo there. The national debt might be nearing $10 trillion now, but not the deficit (i.e. the amount of new debt the US assumes in a given year).

:patriot:

-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warrens Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
24. No matter what she does, they'll be out to get her
She showed personal loyalty to a friend, and it was construed as incompetence. She knew Murtha was unlikely to win, but she owed him. Not everything a person does is calculated purely for victory. She now has Murtha firmly in her camp, and the guy is extremely valuable as an outreach to the Pentagon.

The political shows are a blast during election season. Then they scrabble for whatever controversy they can find to attract eyeballs. There's a reason that the only person outside of Daily Show who is succeeding is KO. He doesn't play that game. There's plenty of news out there, and inside politics only appeals to political junkies. And even I, a total addict, am turning off CNN and MSNBC when they get into their attack mode.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #24
33. Yep, right on, warrens..
The media is calling her first decision a failure, debacle, disaster... It's as you've mentioned. No loss at all, if anything, the galvanizing of a relationship that will benefit her future political outreach far and wide.

And Keith Olberman is the man to go to...His viewership ratings are through the roof.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 06:03 PM
Response to Original message
27. Peace Patriot, please send all of that info to Pelosi and do start your
own blog about this, so more will see it. Send it to KO and anyone else that might use it. It always amazed me that as moderate as Bill was that he was so excoriated by the Pugs, but it makes sense when one understands that it was Clinton's combination of moderation and committment to the people of all races that screwed the pile of money for these lame-brains. He was so popular. Of course despite the polls (which in retrospect were obviously fixed) saying that Bush was ahead, Al Gore was so obviously so much more popular than Bush...he won more popular vote than any other candidate ever (except Reagan in his second run) that there is no way we were not cheated out of potentially the greatest president ever, usurped by James Baker and the Bushistas and their cheating ways, ending up with undoubtedly the most egregiously pathetic example of a man, much less president, in the whole history of civilization. I for one think that James Baker is amoung the most despicable and heinous people to ever live, especially since he knew what he was doing and did it purposefully.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
30. Nancy's the bomb.
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David Zephyr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
31. Great post.
Nancy Pelosi is going to be a great leader. I'm solidly in her corner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
32. WOW. Pelosi negotiated with Hastings and won.
Talk about a talented person defusing a potential landmine. My guess? Hastings will be #2 on the committee and will get another plum over the course of next year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonRiver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
35. They tried to smear her before the election, and they FAILED.
People are willing to give Dems a chance to turn this country around. Nancy Pelosi is a NON-ISSUE, imho, to the majority of Americans. What we do over the next 2 years is the REAL ISSUE. The Democratic Congress just needs to ignore this idiot Repuke spin machine, and simply do their jobs.

And ditto to WE LOVE YOU NANCY! YOU GO GIRL!! :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Anakin Skywalker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 08:38 PM
Response to Original message
36. Nancy, Along with Great Power Comes the Great Responsibility
TO KICK @$$! Do it! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
37. We shall see come January, currently I'm more pleased with her then Hastert
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 08:44 PM
Response to Original message
38. The Democratic Party House Congresscritters, that is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. a-hem. but, yes. you be correct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autonomy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
39. I see your point about defending Pelosi
but we should also be wary about continuing to act like the minority party. We're the majority now. We need to remember to act like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auntie Bush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 10:21 PM
Response to Original message
41. So true and you should send this post to Nancy.
I think she'd like to know she has our support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
43. We didn't defend Clinton, Gore or Kerry. Will we help Pelosi
when the neo nazis attack her??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. I hope so, but
I doubt we will, or if we try that it will be effective.

We have seen recently that at least with Kerry, it is not just those with an R by their name that want to take him down. I wonder how true that also was with Clinton and Gore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 11:56 PM
Response to Reply #44
45. Yep, even Dems start believing the repug propaganda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-29-06 01:18 AM
Response to Original message
46. A bumper sticker I'll have on shortly...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-29-06 01:45 AM
Response to Original message
47. Declaring her intent to violate the Congressional oath is the . . .
Edited on Wed Nov-29-06 01:56 AM by pat_k
. . .main problem with Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi.

Impeachment is the weapon we gave Congress to defend against threats from within. When she took it "of the table" on behalf of the Democratic caucus she made it impossible for them to fulfill their oath -- a "pre-emptive surrender."

With great crises come great opportunities. The failure of our Democratic leaders to stand up and fulfill their oath by demanding the impeachment of Bush and Cheney long ago is deplorable, but what makes it so heartbreaking is that they are failing to seize an unprecedented opportunity.

The biggest problem the Democratic Party has is the perception that Democrats are weak and unprincipled. It is hard to imagine a more effective way that Democrats can prove they are the party of strength and principle than to stand and fight for the Constitution.

What better time than now, when the principle of consent and the dictates of our Constitution are so desperately in need of a champion?

The Nov. 7th "wave" demonstrated the power of the public's growing dismay at the arrogant, irresponsible, and autocratic Bush Cheney White House. But the election could only give voters an indirect means of venting their anger, and as such, it did not fully tap into the anger or bring it into focus.

If they have the courage to stand up and make their case for impeachment, Democratic leaders would provide a voice and a focus that could energize voters across the political spectrum.

Democratic leaders may never have a greater opportunity to engage and inspire the public.

Speaker-elect Pelosi is exactly what we DON'T need -- an "anti-champion" who is doing everything she can to suppress the public's outrage and energy (her "let's play nice with fascists" pablum) and to "sit on" anyone in the Democratic caucus who looks like they might be on the verge of becoming a champion. (For more on champions, see http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2694923#2699414">this post)

With all the lip service Democratic "strategerists" give us about needing to define what they stand for, you'd think they would jump at the opportunity to Prove what they stand for by actually STANDING and FIGHTING for something -- you know, little things like "We the People," the principle of consent, and the dictates of our Constitution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-29-06 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #47
48. well said n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-29-06 07:45 AM
Response to Reply #47
50. I believe that you are taking her statement out of context
I believe her intent was to not concentrate on impeachment as the top issue, but to follow an agenda in the early days. If the facts came out the supported impeachment, I believe that she would be behind it. Of course, for the past 6 yrs, we have been frozen out of getting all the intel.
Heck, we couldn't even hold committee meetings - and were forced to move to the basement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-29-06 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #50
53. Facts are out. She exonerated them -- gave them cover with her "off the table" pledge
Edited on Wed Nov-29-06 11:16 AM by pat_k
60 Minutes
22-Oct-06

Pelosi: No, impeachment is off the table

Stahl: And that's a pledge?

Pelosi: Well, it's a pledge in the – yes, I mean, it's a pledge. Of course it is. It is a waste of time.


She has repeated "off the table" numerous times. She has never equivocated or "backed off."

There is only one way to interpret for her statements. Perhaps she is lying, but her words are what they are. Just as there is no other way to interpret Sen. Reid's statements http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1116/p11s01-usmb.htm">reported on 16-Nov-06.

. . .
"One of the things that we were able to cut off pretty quickly is the 'impeach Bush' program," said Reid, referring to some Democratic activists who have that goal. "That was because of two words: Dick Cheney," he joked.
. . .


The leadership has handed down an edict: "Impeachment is off limits." They view it as a waste of time; a joke.

Bush and Cheney committed their crimes and continue their criminal enterprise in plain sight.

They have usurped our will, terrorized us into war with the most colossal bomb threat in history (mushroom clouds over out cities in 45 minutes), committed war crimes (so ruled the stacked Supreme Court), and broken our laws ("unitary" fig leaf for their criminal domestic surveillance program is laughable -- even Specter scoffed).

It is nearly impossible to imagine "facts coming out" about crimes against our constitutional democracy more egregious or abuses of power more demanding of impeachment.

The case for impeachment is simple, clear, convincing, and complete. There is no excuse for delay. If you doubt this, see http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Senator/10">this journal entry.

Our so-called "leaders" are turning a blind eye.

When the police, who are sworn to protect the public, turn a blind eye when they witness crime, they are derelict in their duty.

Congress is sworn to defend the Constitution. The White House is on the attack. Members of Congress are turning a blind eye -- and even worse Pelosi and Reid are effectively saying "Don't worry, we won't do anything so hold them accountable or stop them. It's a waste of time."

They are betraying their oath. They are derelict. Whether they are deceiving themselves or are unprincipled cowards, their failure is deplorable.

Numerous charges against Bush and Cheney are well known to the public. Elected bodies, good government organizations, and countless individual citizens have examined the evidence and judged Bush and Cheney to be an intolerable threat to our constitutional democracy. We are calling on Members of Congress to act, loud and clear.

Every day the so-called leadership does nothing they demonstrate contempt for us.

Every day that they do nothing effectively exonerates Bush and Cheney.

If exoneration is their intent, then they should do it honestly by telling the nation why the abuses that http://january6th.org/oct2006-newsweek-poll-impeach.html">a majority of Americans can see are not abuses in their eyes.

We need a champion. Pelosi is standing in the way. Those who are committed to rescuing the Constitution have little choice but to do whatever they can to wake her up or, failing that, to take her down by telling the truth about her -- that she is giving the criminals in the WH cover and is thus making herself an "accessory after the fact" war criminal and destroyer of our Constitution.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kokonoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-29-06 02:28 AM
Response to Original message
49. "place the blame squarely where it belongs
On the folks who got us here in the first place.":toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rosesaylavee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-29-06 07:57 AM
Response to Original message
51. Her first 100 hours
starting on a day the Congress hasn't worked in years (January 3) will be a joy to watch.

She has my support not because she's a woman but because it appears she wants to get some work done and appears to know how to go about it. A rarity in politics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-29-06 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #51
54. I don't want. . .
Edited on Wed Nov-29-06 11:23 AM by pat_k
My message to Members of Congress (and indirectly to those who oppose impeachment):

I don't want my new minimum wage when the massive power of the American Presidency is in the hands of War Criminals.

I don't want affordable health care if "rule by signing statement" and Bush as unitary authoritarian executive is left unchallenged.

I don't care about breaking the link between law makers and lobbyists while Bush and Cheney wield ever more unconstitutional power to force the wishes of their tiny faction on the rest of us.

I don't care about enacting the 911 commission recommendations until habeas corpus is restored and the men behind nullifying it are removed from power.

As long as you allow Bush and Cheney to abuse their power by picking and choosing the laws they execute or enforce, you will not get my support to pass more laws for them to ignore.

The War Criminals Protection Act of 2006 was a landmark achievement in White House conspiracy to violate our Constitutional rights and commit international crime. Lifting the restrictions on stem cell research imposed by a small faction can wait until that act is struck down and Bush and Cheney are removed from office for leading the conspiracy.

With threats of "mushroom clouds over our cities," Bush and Cheney terrorized the American people into submitting to their criminal war of aggression. I cannot imagine how you think the United States can help to end the conflict and chaos that is spreading inhumanity and destroying lives in the Middle East if you leave governing power in the hands of the men who are responsible for the horrors.

I am one of the majority of sensible Americans who want SENSIBLE priorities. There is nothing partisan or radical about inaugurating a President and Vice President committed to fulfilling their oath to execute our laws BEFORE we worry about passing more laws.

BTW -- you don't even have to WAIT to engage the stakeholders in finding solutions to the critical problems we face as a nation. You and your staffers can fight to remove Bush and Cheney from power and design and pass legislation AT THE SAME TIME. Multitasking is the name of the game. Just make sure Impeachment never takes a back seat to those other tasks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rosesaylavee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-29-06 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #54
55. If it were me,
if I were Speaker Pelosi, I wouldn't telegraph my intentions to hold impeachment hearings. The 110th Congress may do exactly what you say you want them to. I think January will be a very interesting start to the year.

I do agree with you that Impeachment is imperative to move this country forward. Otherwise, the Constitution means nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC