Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

June 4, 2008
By: Neil Sinhababu

MEET NANCY....It'd be a mistake to think that the loyalties some women feel to Hillary Clinton are immediately transferrable to other female politicians. We've seen all sorts of misogyny thrown at Hillary over the last 16 years, and that's the sort of thing that bonds you to a particular individual.

But when this primary is far behind us, I hope that people looking for awesome female leaders will start paying more attention to Nancy Pelosi.
Nancy
In 2005, Pelosi inherited a House Democratic Caucus in shambles. Her predecessor, Dick Gephardt, was probably the Democrat most responsible for the Iraq War. Bush had been re-elected, and Democrats were completely demoralized.

That's when Pelosi pulled the Democratic Party together and saved Social Security. Atrios remembers this awesome anecdote about Pelosi refusing to even dignify Bush's privatization attempt with an alternative plan. She knew that if Democrats were bullied into pretending Social Security was a problem (it's actually the most secure part of the federal budget), Bush would probably get what he wanted. She imposed so much party discipline that a united Democratic Caucus stared Bush down, rejecting the entire idea of monkeying with Social Security, until his plan crashed and burned.

Under her leadership, Democrats won a resounding victory in 2006, elevating her from Minority Leader to Speaker. And as dday argues below, we're headed for another great year in 2008.

[Update: How could I forget to mention her essential role in making firm opposition to the Iraq War a fundamental part of the Democratic agenda? The moment in 2006 when she showcased ex-Marine Jack Murtha introducing his withdrawal resolution was absolutely tremendous for the party.

People should remember this telling clip from December 2005:

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) and Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (Md.), the second-ranking House Democratic leader, have told colleagues that Pelosi's recent endorsement of a speedy withdrawal, combined with her claim that more than half of House Democrats support her position, could backfire on the party, congressional sources said.

Despite Emanuel and Hoyer's backbiting and timidity, Pelosi got her way, and the Republicans got crushed.]

I was thinking about this as I read the dialogue between two of my favorite feminist writers, Katha Pollitt and Amanda Marcotte, in the LA Times. While it's definitely bad that only 16% of Congress is female, I take exception to Pollitt's line that "This dismal picture is masked by the high profile of a few stars who are "firsts" -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton."

Pelosi isn't just some 'first' -- she's the most powerful legislator in America! This is the office that Newt Gingrich held at the height of his power. So much depends on the way she sets priorities and enforces unity among the fractious House Democratic caucus, and she does it masterfully. Pelosi may be the single Democrat most responsible for our Party's resurgence over the past 3 years. When the next Democratic President introduces domestic legislation, I'll feel absolutely confident to have it in her hands.

I've heard some Democrats complain that she isn't doing enough to push for things like impeachment. I'd like to note that the median vote in the House is that of a very conservative Democrat, and turn you over to Kansas science blogger Josh Rosenau:

I wish that those people would spend a few years living in Kansas, or even in Bakersfield, CA. They'd realize that what's holding Pelosi back is not her own political desires. If we had 290 Nancy Pelosis in the House, and 67 in the Senate, we'd have all of those policies. With 218 in the House, 60 in the Senate and one in the White House, we'd have them also. The thing is, we don't have a few hundred Nancy Pelosis in Congress. If Cindy Sheehan and Shirley Golub want to enact their policies, they should be doing everything they can to replace Todd Tiahrt with Donald Betts, Pat Roberts with Jim Slattery, and ensuring that obstructionist congresscritters in every other district face challenges.

Running against Nancy Pelosi, however, is stupid and naive, and makes these candidates and their supporters look stupid and naive. Does anyone believe that a dollar spent on Golub's primary campaign couldn't be better spent electing Charlie Brown in the open congressional seat just in northeastern California? Or in a primary campaign against incumbents who voted for the war in Iraq, for the bankruptcy bill, CAFTA, a police state, and the rest of the Bush agenda?

In large part because of Pelosi's leadership, we're now in position for a second landslide victory in which we defeat some of the Republican incumbents Rosenau is talking about. This is a presidential election year, so even with a huge win, it won't be her face on the covers of the newsmagazines at the end of the year. But when the night of November 4 rolls around, those of us who know how things really work in America will be drinking a toast to her.

Neil Sinhababu 2:03 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (51)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Ah ah, Josh Marshall and TPM saved social security, or at least did as much as Pelosi.

Also, I ask you to forgive me. Whenever I see your name I read it as "shabushabu" which is Japanese Hot Pot.

Posted by: MNPundit on June 4, 2008 at 4:04 PM | PERMALINK

"Pelosi may be the single Democrat most responsible for our Party's resurgence over the past 3 years."

She certainly is in terms of Democrats regaining confidence to challenge Bush and the GOP in Congress. However, I think years from now Dean will be considered the most consequential Democrat of our time. First, he spoke out forcefully and passionately on Iraq when nobody else - nobody - had the balls to do so. Second, he and Joe Trippi understood the mobilizing and financial power of the internet far earlier and better than anybody else; Obama's internet success is a direct result. Finally, as DNC chair he dismissed the tired DLC way of thinking that Democrats can and should only win the Presidency when the GOP stumbles and instead declared that every state and district would be contested, regardless of how a strong a hold the GOP had on it. Look at the recent success in Mississippi.

Posted by: on June 4, 2008 at 4:19 PM | PERMALINK

"Pelosi may be the single Democrat most responsible for our Party's resurgence over the past 3 years."

She certainly is in terms of Democrats regaining confidence to challenge Bush and the GOP in Congress. However, I think years from now Dean will be considered the most consequential Democrat of our time. First, he spoke out forcefully and passionately on Iraq when nobody else - nobody - had the balls to do so. Second, he and Joe Trippi understood the mobilizing and financial power of the internet far earlier and better than anybody else; Obama's internet success is a direct result. Finally, as DNC chair he dismissed the tired DLC way of thinking that Democrats can and should only win the Presidency when the GOP stumbles and instead declared that every state and district would be contested, regardless of how a strong a hold the GOP had on it. Look at the recent success in Mississippi.

Posted by: A.B. on June 4, 2008 at 4:19 PM | PERMALINK

Marcotte's a proven racist and sexist. She's also proven to lie and misrepresent others. She's woeful on the facts and ignorant on the science.

She wants government to mandate unproven drugs into prepubescent kids.

It is no wonder and unethical dipshit as yourself would consider her one of your favorite feminists.

At last count, individuals from the following groups have come out and said she is a liar: non-radical feminists, gays, transgendered, women of color, people of color, liberals, libertarians, conservatives, straights, gays, and even white men.

It is no surprise that Marcotte would find herself at the same LA Times that publishes Jonah Goldberg. I expect to see you there too.

Posted by: Bad Moon Rising on June 4, 2008 at 4:19 PM | PERMALINK

Neil,
You need to get over your Nancy Pelosi crush, it's unhealthy! Try to focus on Inkblot instead.

Posted by: optical weenie on June 4, 2008 at 4:20 PM | PERMALINK

What is Condoleza Rice a first at? lying to congress without destroying her reputation?
She was preceded as secretary of state by a black man and a woman.

Posted by: yep on June 4, 2008 at 4:22 PM | PERMALINK

Damn, that picture SO much looks like a spot for some new sitcom. Has madcap hijinks written all over it.

Posted by: DrBB on June 4, 2008 at 4:23 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah and she's done a wonderful job defunding the war, restoring habeus corpus, preventing administration over reach, finishing off warrantless wiretaps, restoring science to a central place in decision making, ending boondoggle programs like the missile defense, reacting to the housing bubble collapse, withdrawing the horrible bankruptcy bill, encouraging alternative energies...

Oh, no actually she's been a miserable failure at all of those. Good on her about SS, but when you only manage to protect *the third rail of politics* and you fail to stop every other atrocity then you aren't really a very good Speaker of the House.

Her tenure has been one of enormous disappointment. I'll be only too glad for it to end (hopefully as of 2009). Maybe we can get someone in place who can actually make positive changes, instead of one who merely stops the worst (while letting the bad slide by).

Posted by: Tlaloc on June 4, 2008 at 4:23 PM | PERMALINK

Tlaloc, she's done the maximum that her caucus allows. You should read the mid-post update I just put in, and thank your lucky stars that she's speaker, and Hoyer and Emanuel aren't.

Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf on June 4, 2008 at 4:27 PM | PERMALINK

MNpundit, I think that Josh Marshall deserves to have Howard Dean hang a medal around his neck for his services to the Party on privatization. But without Pelosi, he'd just be a lonely blogger yelling in the wilderness, like the Iraq War days.

Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf on June 4, 2008 at 4:29 PM | PERMALINK

I was thinking about this as I read the dialogue between two of my favorite feminist writers, Katha Pollitt and Amanda Marcotte, in the LA Times.

Ooh, now you did it. By even mentioning the name, you've ensured that this will turn into the All The Ways Amanda Marcotte Sucks thread.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on June 4, 2008 at 4:39 PM | PERMALINK

Will she or can she stop the retroactive immunity bill? That would be a sign of influence!

Posted by: Captain Dan on June 4, 2008 at 4:45 PM | PERMALINK

95% agreement Neil, but a little contrarianism:

You were saying all this about Reid during 2005 and 2006. Now as Maj Leader, he seems less effective. But of course, Minority Leader has disproportionate power in the Senate (relative to most American institutions) and Speaker has disproportionate power in the House (ibid).

I fear your praises are a bit dependent on the mechanics of the particular offices and national circumstances that weren't really under these people's control.

Pelosi did darn well in 2005-6, has performed ok in 2007-8, but we won't really be able to judge her success until we see her try to actually pass some legislation and maybe succeed.

Posted by: Shock Mouse on June 4, 2008 at 4:46 PM | PERMALINK

Mr. Sinhababu must need some additional San Francisco parking permits.

Posted by: Brojo on June 4, 2008 at 4:48 PM | PERMALINK

ding! ding! ding!

Brojo wins the thread!

Posted by: optical weenie on June 4, 2008 at 4:50 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, she is just wonderful; except that she has been totally fucking derelict in the ONLY duty she swore to perform in her oath to office. Namely, to protect and defend the Constitution. By refusing to even contemplate impeachment, much less allow an effort to be worked toward the floor, she has failed completely at the very essence of her job, allowed and abetted incalculable harm and sold the country down the river for purely partisan and self serving sheer and raw political reasons and calculation. That overshadows completely the good things she has done that you refer to; for you to hold her out as admirable and as a hero is beyond the pale. Get. A. Clue. Dude.

Posted by: bmaz on June 4, 2008 at 4:51 PM | PERMALINK

hank your lucky stars that she's speaker, and Hoyer and Emanuel aren't

The Democratic Party represents the worst of all possible liberal worlds.

Posted by: Brojo on June 4, 2008 at 4:53 PM | PERMALINK

bmaz, if you think a 2/3 vote to impeach in the Senate is anywhere near the realm of possibility, please pass the bong.

Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf on June 4, 2008 at 4:55 PM | PERMALINK

I am a Californian and I will never vote for Nancy Pelosi again after her meddling in this campaign.

Posted by: on June 4, 2008 at 4:57 PM | PERMALINK

I agree with Tlaloc and bmaz. Lionizing Nancy Pelosi for her commendable efforts on Social Security would be like lionizing Bush because he took a somewhat moderate stance on immigration.

Nearly 18 months later, we have to ask the fundamental question - how is the Iraq war different today than if the Republicans had kept control of Congress?

(My answer: it's only a hypothetical question because the Republicans still do have control of Congress.)

Posted by: Larry on June 4, 2008 at 5:02 PM | PERMALINK

if you think that counting the juror's votes before you have even investigated a case and filed charges, you really have a view of criminal behavior I don't understand. The key is allowing an impeachment investigation to find and display the facts before you decide whether to charge via articles of impeachment. There are many heightened investigatory powers available (for instance, many executive privileges fall by the wayside) through an official impeachment investigation, that can yield a lot more of the story than we currently have. Whether articles are filed after that is a matter to be determined at that point. But the investigation should be had and Pelosi refuses. Put that in your bong and smoke it.

Posted by: bmaz on June 4, 2008 at 5:03 PM | PERMALINK

She is also second in line to the Presidency, which makes her the highest elected female politician in American history.

Posted by: Nazgul35 on June 4, 2008 at 5:03 PM | PERMALINK

Good point, Shock Mouse, but it's a little hard to do anything with a Liebermajority.

Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf on June 4, 2008 at 5:03 PM | PERMALINK

Neil, an impeachment trial in the Senate would not necessarily have to return a guilty verdict to be worthwhile. It would bring the administration's many high crimes and misdemeanors to the public's attention and to the front page of the newspapers, and would put future office holders on notice that such transgressions will not pass unchallenged in the future.

By refusing to hold impeachment hearings, Pelosi is indirectly sanctioning the administration's behavior, and, as bmaz said, thereby violating her oath of office. If I lived in San Francisco (I'm close, but not close enough), I would not vote for her.

Posted by: Larry on June 4, 2008 at 5:07 PM | PERMALINK

how is the Iraq war different today than if the Republicans had kept control of Congress?

Well, now we have a nominee who thinks the war should end. Who knows what would've happened with a GOP congress, but a Hoyer- or Emanuel-run congress could have kept the Democratic message so far to the right that we wouldn't have a chance at a pro-withdrawal president. Look back at what those guys wanted, and how that'd shape Democratic messaging.

Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf on June 4, 2008 at 5:08 PM | PERMALINK

Sorry, Pelosi lost me when she declared that impeachment was "off the table". That was a clear statement that her wrong-headed notions about what would be politically advantageous for the Democratic Party were more important than doing what was best for America, democracy and the rule of law.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on June 4, 2008 at 5:11 PM | PERMALINK

AMEN, Neil! I think that she and Reid don't get nearly enough credit for the fact that the last two years have only been a disaster. (And no, I'm not kidding.) I would say that Pelosi has the narrowest of majorities with which to work, except that Reid doesn't even have that much, and a President that will veto anything remotely close to good. Given that, the amount they've managed to accomplish in terms of Corporate Fuel Economy Standards, killing the worst Pentagon programs (including the Reliable Replacement Warhead and the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator), and making headway on caucus unity is astounding.

Yeah, I know. I'm an inside the Beltway pondscum. And, trust me, NOBODY is angrier than I about the failings of this congress, from Global Warming legislation to telecom immunity to the shredding of the Constitution. And all of those complaints are right on. This Congress has been frustrating to work with, and tone deaf to the progressive base.

But Pelosi has managed to keep the caucus together on almost every important issue that she could win on. If she couldn't win - couldn't get a vetoproof majority - she has chosen not to fight. But I think that's smart. Not as politics, but as management. If you pressure the caucus with every vote, you can't expect them to stay with you. If you only pressure the members when you NEED them, they can hang together. It's worked, in a body where that has not always been the case. And I think it's Pelosi's strength and leadership that has made it work.

She's not perfect. I think she's wrong on some of the issues. But she's a masterful politician, and has done one hell of a job, IMHO.

Posted by: Ron Zucker on June 4, 2008 at 5:13 PM | PERMALINK

Neil wrote: "Well, now we have a nominee who thinks the war should end."

We now have a nominee who is on record saying that he will keep thousands of US troops in Iraq indefinitely.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on June 4, 2008 at 5:15 PM | PERMALINK

Neil, you're absolutely right on Congress not being able to actually DO something major against Bush.

Without veto-proof majorities its just chip away and prevent really ugly stuff being making it to the floor in the House. Poor Harry is herding cats in the Senate and doesn't have enough vote to even prevent a filibuster on anything substantial.

Given the restraints of reality, Nancy is doing good at herding her cats, they usually line up behind her after the hissing is done.

AJ

Posted by: AJ on June 4, 2008 at 5:16 PM | PERMALINK

Love the picture - You can almost see the stick up Bush's ass, where Cheney makes him talk and turn his head.

Posted by: The Conservative Deflator on June 4, 2008 at 5:23 PM | PERMALINK

Whether an impeachment investigation by a Democratic House would have been able to convice a 2/3 majority of senators to vote for impeachment is beside the point. An impeachment investigation of W. Bush would have exposed his many crimes to the public, which may not ever happen now. W. Bush's ability to manuever would have been greatly limited and his approval ratings would be much lower today, improving the chances for an even greater Democratic victory in November.

Posted by: Brojo on June 4, 2008 at 5:31 PM | PERMALINK

if you think a 2/3 vote to impeach in the Senate is anywhere near the realm of possibility, please pass the bong.

Hey fucktard, was it possible before the hearings for Nixon to be impeached?

We'll never know what might have happened since Pelosi took it all of the table. And even if it wasn't possible, what would the political pressure have done to this guy in terms of signing statements, gitmo trials, energy policy, environmental policy.

I am so glad we have ethical assholes such as yourself and Marcotte who know what is best for all of us.

Mnemo, no need for a flame Marcotte thread, the best place for that is in the feminist blogosphere these days, it turns out feminists hate Marcotte far more than the angry white men that you blame. As I've said, as you know full well, we've seen feminists, gays, lesbians, transgendered, women of color, straights, liberals, libertarians, and conservatives all come out against Marcotte. And what is common to all their complaints is that she lies and misrepresents what they have said.

Marcotte disgust, it's not just for angry white men anymore. (And never was.) So suck on that Friedman.

Posted by: Bad Moon Rising on June 4, 2008 at 5:35 PM | PERMALINK

The Bush/Cheney plan was a way for the Wall Street investment bankers to steal the Federal pension fund - i.e. social security. They have already managed to steal the private and state employee funds. They are dead men walking - deeply invested in toxic waste.

As a 61 year old, semi-retired person, I regard SS as a government sponsored Ponzi scheme. For the moment, it will pay benefits, because it's taxing a surplus. But as we drift into recession/depression, employment and SS receipts will shrink sooner than expected, and then the SSA will start having to cash out all those Treasuries "surpluses" into geezer checks. And where is the money to convert those Treasuries going to come from?

Furthermore, as Kevin Phillips so ably documented in the May Atlantic, the real CPI is at least double what the BLS (the Bureau of Lying Statistics) reports and authorizes through a variety of successive scams going back to the '60"s. Since SSA COLA's are based on the CPI, Phillips estimates that if the books hadn't been cooked, SS benefits would be 70 percent higher than they are today. Or conversely, they had 70 percent more buying power back in the 1960's than today. Maybe the hedonic quotient should be measured in cans of Alpo.

The only way the Fed (and Treasury) can escape, short of default or slashing, is to monetize the debt through inflation and devaluation. So batten down your hatches - the storm has already started. Even though it's disadvantageous for me tax-wise, not being fully retired, I'm putting in on my 62nd birthday, and moving those monthly checks into a stronger currency or precious metals while they last and are worth more than the paper they are printed on.

Posted by: el pollo on June 4, 2008 at 6:20 PM | PERMALINK

"MNpundit, I think that Josh Marshall deserves to have Howard Dean hang a medal around his neck for his services to the Party on privatization. But without Pelosi, he'd just be a lonely blogger yelling in the wilderness, like the Iraq War days."

Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf

Josh Marshall was pro invasion prior to the invasion. How quickly we forget these things.

Posted by: el pollo on June 4, 2008 at 6:36 PM | PERMALINK

"Tlaloc, she's done the maximum that her caucus allows."

That's not the way it works, Neil. The *job* of the speaker is to get the caucus to work together towards a unified goal. Not to be held hostage by them. She's failed. Badly.

"You should read the mid-post update I just put in, and thank your lucky stars that she's speaker, and Hoyer and Emanuel aren't."

Yeah and I guess I should be thankful that bush is president and not William Kristol. You can always find some fuckhead whose worse. That doesn't make Bush or Pelosi worth a damn.

She damn well should be out on her ass come 2009. She had a serious house majority to work with and accomplished nothing. At best she stopped a few of the most egregious works of the MINORITY party. That's a failure with a capital F.

Majority party legislators are in place to make legislation, not act as bad goalies. If she'd been in the minority it would have been maybe passable, in the majority it is just embarrassing.

Posted by: Tlaloc on June 4, 2008 at 8:19 PM | PERMALINK

I find it pretty interesting that none of the Pelosi haters here have said who they'd want for speaker.

Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf on June 4, 2008 at 8:42 PM | PERMALINK

I think it is perfectly valid to recognize the woman's shortcommings without suggesting an alternative. She had a job to do and it didn't get done.

Posted by: Tlaloc on June 4, 2008 at 8:53 PM | PERMALINK

No, Tlaloc. If you can't even find an alternative who'll be more aggressive, that's a sign that she's pushed the caucus as far as it could go.

And when you say that you'd like to see her leave the speakership in 2009, you'd better come up with a plausible idea about who would be a positive improvement.

Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf on June 4, 2008 at 9:00 PM | PERMALINK

aw poor Neil's upset because his "I need a parking permit/I'm not a misogynist/Clinton is the suck"
paean to Pelosi was harshed on.

She is a fair speaker but far from a powerhouse.
Not privatizing Social Security is the minimum requirement for a Democratic leader not some sort of Herculean triumph.

Posted by: Sam Rayburn chuckles on June 4, 2008 at 9:24 PM | PERMALINK

aw poor Neil's upset because his "I need a parking permit/I'm not a misogynist/Clinton is the suck"
paean to Pelosi was harshed on.

She is a fair speaker but far from a powerhouse.
Not privatizing Social Security is the minimum requirement for a Democratic leader not some sort of Herculean triumph.

Posted by: Sam Rayburn laughs on June 4, 2008 at 9:26 PM | PERMALINK

Criticism of Rep. Pelosi is not necessarily a call to replace her. Most criticize her for her lack of confrontation with the president with the newly elected House Democratic majority, not for her party organizational and legislative skills. Many felt W. Bush needed to be opposed about Iraq, and he never was with the new power Pelosi won.

The point Pelosi may have been the very best candidate for Speaker who could push the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives as far as it could go is a sign that many Democratic Congresspersons need replacing. Voters continue to vote for moderates who populate the Democratic slates. Before real change can take place, that has to change.

Posted by: Brojo on June 4, 2008 at 9:33 PM | PERMALINK

Oh so, Neil, is this the first time you've thought to ask someone what they might want?

Well, gosh drearie, I want you to be speaker, you know it all anyway.

Posted by: Bad Moon Rising on June 4, 2008 at 10:04 PM | PERMALINK

Yup, I remember Nancy Pelosi. Wasn't she the brave Speaker of the House who managed to end the Iraq War her first year in office by refusing to pass any defense authorization bill that didn't include a mandate to leave Iraq within 12 months? And didn't she get new CAFE standards passed that raised fuel economy standards that started the rollback on gas prices in 2008? And surely we all remember how she got the habeas corpus restoration act passed, the bill to reverse the Supreme Court's awful Ledbetter decision that allowed companies to discriminate against women, and how she put the kibosh on any talk of amnesty for the telecoms that spied on the U.S. And that was only the prelude to the impeachment resolution against President Bush and VP Cheney for their deliberate violations of their oaths of office and their flouting of the Constitution..... Ah, those were the days. A truly great Speaker...

Posted by: James Finkelstein on June 5, 2008 at 1:09 AM | PERMALINK

I am a Pelosi fan and I live in Hoyer's district. She is immensely preferable to The Dear Leader. However, her behavior on impeachment is irresponsible. I believe that her lackluster performance on illegal phone tapping, torture and impeachment arises out of her participation in the decisions to spy on citizens, deny habeas corpus and torture detainees as a member of the Gang of 8. We are all complicit to some extent, but she could walk on to the House floor and with absolute immunity, reveal what happened in the decisions to spy, torture and detain.

Posted by: rip on June 5, 2008 at 7:24 AM | PERMALINK

Neil, of course you love Pollitt and Marcotte. Wow, two white women feminists with identical pro-Obama viewpoints. Thx for your feminism!

Posted by: on June 5, 2008 at 9:44 AM | PERMALINK

"No, Tlaloc. If you can't even find an alternative who'll be more aggressive, that's a sign that she's pushed the caucus as far as it could go."

Or it's a sign that I don;t know who will be in the house come 2009, and the *first* step is to fire the failure, the second step is to hire their replacement. DOing it in the other order is classless.

Posted by: Tlaloc on June 5, 2008 at 12:43 PM | PERMALINK

What a bunch of bullshit !!!

Pelosi is no different from the rest of the hypocrites & jackasses running this country, that is why the war-criminal-in-chief is not being impeached.

Posted by: ZombieNation on June 5, 2008 at 4:40 PM | PERMALINK

And when her replacement makes a Gephardt-like calculation and decides it'll be politically smart for Democrats to help McCain bomb Iran, what will you say?

Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf on June 5, 2008 at 4:49 PM | PERMALINK

What will Rep. Pelosi say when W. Bush bombs Iran?

Or President Obama?

The next thing I will write is Pelosi would have done exactly like Gephardt did in 2003, if she had been Speaker.

The photo attached with this post is telling. Pelosi is supposedly looking over W. Bush's shoulder as someone with the power to challenge what he might be up to. W. Bush plays along and emotes a forlorn look of now having a foil in his midst. The trouble is Pelosi was not W. Bush's foil; Pelosi did not vigorously oppose W. Bush with the new Democratic majority won in 2006.

Anyone who has attended organized group meetings where the elites perform games for the enjoyment and fraternity of the rest of the group, recognizes something similar in the photo, too. The photo communicates that Pelosi and W. Bush are members of an exclusive group whose bonds are stronger than the actual purpose of the elected positions they hold.

Posted by: Brojo on June 5, 2008 at 9:47 PM | PERMALINK

Deniis Kucinich read out Articles of Impeachment against Bush just a few hours ago on C-Span

Posted by: some girl on June 10, 2008 at 3:35 AM | PERMALINK

Hello everyone. I used to think that the brain was the most wonderful organ in my body. Then I realized who was telling me this. Help me! Looking for sites on: Automatic execution forex trading system. I found only this - 1 choosing forex part system trading. Forex trading system, holders named for the available money had to be internationalized for the program information. There are expansion of robots and cars out only leading to conduct you with all the challenges to a speculative trade doubt trend, forex trading system. With best wishes ;-), Brianna from Cameroon.

Posted by: Brianna on February 19, 2010 at 3:41 PM | PERMALINK
Post a comment









Remember personal info?










 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly