Friday, May 15, 2009
|
|
Wow! Gingrich Destroys Pelosi.
|
|
Posted by:
Greg Hengler at
12:16 PM
|
So many zingers in this clip; here's one:
NEWT: “She can’t win either way. She’s either got to say to you: ‘Ya know, I didn’t understand.’ In which case she thinks she’s stupid. Or, in fact, she didn’t want to understand; in which case she’s frankly, pretty dishonest. Now I think that’s a pretty weak background for a Speaker to say: ‘Should I take the stupid defense or the dishonest defense?’ Which one do you think works better?"
|
|
Big Sky Cowboy writes: Saturday, May, 16, 2009 11:36 PM
axehole gene
no I'd call clinton a draft dodger, when you write letters and others write letters to get you out of going to Nam and then you are globe trotting in russia norway england , where you attend antiwar demonstrations i would have to call you a draft dodger, but I'll tell you gene, clinton had one snappy salute to the US service men while he was in office I guess he had a lot of time practicing it while I was in Nam and he was in school.
Arch says.
Couldn't agree more. Better leave this one alone. Axeman is really creepy. It wouldn't take much to tip it over! If it gets attention, then bingo it has orgasm! WE do not want to clean up the mess now would we? |
|
Big Sky Cowboy writes: Saturday, May, 16, 2009 9:56 AM
Arch
Nancy should not be considered toast,more like GARLIC BREAD.
Arch says
Big Sky!
I gotta agree with that. The smell is worse than the ogre itself! |
|
|
no I'd call clinton a draft dodger, when you write letters and others write letters to get you out of going to Nam and then you are globe trotting in russia norway england , where you attend antiwar demonstrations i would have to call you a draft dodger, but I'll tell you gene, clinton had one snappy salute to the US service men while he was in office I guess he had a lot of time practicing it while I was in Nam and he was in school. |
|
|
|
|
|
Tell us:
WHAT is Pelosi's job? just as a congresswoman?
What exactly was her job in 202 and 203
Everything else is BS
She needs to be dumped for incompetence and go not do her job somewhere else: |
|
"AxeGene and serving your country means what, did obama and clinton serve, and not serving is one thing, being a draft dodger like clinton is another."
Clinton didn't dodge the draft, his lottery number was too high. He did consider joining ROTC to avoid service, but decided to withdraw when it was clear he wouldn't be drafted. He also wrote a letter explaining to the ROTC officer WHY he didn't want to serve and that he opposed the war.
I find that far better than Dick Cheney, who used student deferments to avoid service, just like Clinton did. But at least Clinton took a stand against an immoral and pointless war.
|
|
My point was that the point you were trying to make was false.
_______________________________________________
That the Socialists in Congress are making a power grab is NOT false. You can return to your kool-aid now! |
|
"Like all other polls, your is one of many. You can't dispute mine either."
No, but I can point out what the CURRENT poll results are; your poll is five months old, and yet you implied that it shows an ongoing trend. In fact, approval of Congress has DOUBLED in the interim.
"So what's your point? If you can't see the Socialist power grab by having ceo's fired and owning stock in private companies, ..."
My point was that the point you were trying to make was false. |
|
I take it you're not disputing my correction of your erroneous information;
______________________________________________
Like all other polls, your is one of many. You can't dispute mine either.
So what's your point? If you can't see the Socialist power grab by having ceo's fired and owning stock in private companies, then you are the reason BO got elected through the "Hope-a-Dope" campaign! |
|
"Obviously Bob is not paying attention to the Socialistic power grab in Congress."
Do you think this imaginary "socialistic power grab" is the reason that the current polls are very different from the one you quoted? I take it you're not disputing my correction of your erroneous information; given that, what exactly is your point? It sounds to me like you're just babbling something you heard on Limbaugh or Beck. |
|
|
served heroically as Bush 1's Sec'y of Defense, including the Gulf War. Again, he served heroically for eight years as W's VP. The left wingers balling their well manicured metro fists at this great man, collectively, aren't worth the hook on one of his fly-fishing tools. |
|
Gallup found a 37% approval.
___________________________________________
Obviously Bob is not paying attention to the Socialistic power grab in Congress. Marxist Socialists like Bob aren't the sharpest tacks in the box now are they!
Now you know why this country is headed to becoming the next Banana Republic.
Thanks Bob! |
|
"Democrats take Congress in 2007......
USA Today/Gallup
1/9-11/09 19 76 19% favor 76% disapprove"
Not exactly. In a poll asking "do you approve or disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job?" conducted May 7-10, Gallup found a 37% approval. That's approximately the same as when the Democrats took over Congress in the beginning of 2007, though it did dip as low as 14% last summer. The long-term average approval rating since 1974 has been 35% approval.
"I guess people are smarter than expected"
Not you, apparently.
|
|
Is Newt the only Republican with a backbone ?
This situation also is a plus for Obama. It is not his intent to share the limelight/political power with anyone and removing Pelosi and substituting his proxy would fit right into that possible agenda. |
|
|
And if he is, don't pay attention. Someone who gives up their right to vote gets no say in how this turns out in the end. Period. |
|
As I said yesterday, I'm sure that those of you who are ranting about Pelosi keeping info from us all will join me in this proposal. Your only anger at Pelosi is because she didn't spill the torture beans, right, that she aided and abetted the torture architects, Bush and Cheney, right?
_____________________________________________
No, it's basically because she's an idiot! Both she and "Dirty" Harry Reid are dumber than a box of rocks! |
|
in 2007......
USA Today/Gallup
1/9-11/09 19 76 19% favor 76% disapprove
I guess people are smarter than expected and in such a short time. |
|
well, i must say the tabloid diversions have served you buffoons well over the years. who's up and who's down and all that inside-the-beltway nonsense. you folks really became proficient at tactics and driving the conversation in the corporate media.
here's the problem: your leadership sucked. you could not--cannot--distinguish between evil and good. our nation is in dire straits--strategically, morally, and economically--because of the Reeps, basically. due to a generation of "conservatives" who were nothing more than radicals. radical punks. agitators. idiots.
and these rabble-rousers are still at it. still agitating. acting as though the issue is "hm, if Pelosi sticks around, that helps us," rather than torture, moral credibility, and our country's capacity to lead and to enforce her interests. it is why your moral authority is at zero. you are thinking about the wrong things. you are snickering about the wrong things. you are high-fiving over the wrong things. and America sees that now--not Fox or CNBC or Drudge or Politico or ABC, but AMERICA. the public. you are at 20% and dropping. in time, the GOP might not even be a second party. you know why? because you are not serious. you are not serious people. and this Pelosi thing is case in point. |
|
|
and serving your country means what, did obama and clinton serve, and not serving is one thing, being a draft dodger like clinton is another. |
|
|
Nancy should not be considered toast,more like GARLIC BREAD. |
|
how nobody from the administration is coming to Botox Nancy's aid. Even her 2nd in command Hoyer won't support her. Pelosi is about to see what that CHANGE means that she was talking about during the election.
Alot of tax cheats and liars in this administration. The Chicago mafia has arrived! |
|
You remind me of a kid I once knew when I was about 12 years old. His name was Eric. Every now and then Eric would come down to my house to see what was going on and invariably we would have some kind of dispute. So Lonny (oops Eric) would go home. When he would get close to his house and he thought he was safe, he would start (liberal in the making!)calling me names. One day I pretended I couldn't hear what he was saying by putting my hand up to my ear. So Eric fell into my trap by come down the street a little closer to me. I kept doing this until I thought I could catch him before he made it home. I was pretty fast in those days and set out for Eric as fast as I could go. I caught the little liberal in the making and beat the crap out of him. Guess what? That was the last time Eric ever called me a name. So Lonny I would lose the name calling if I were you.
|
|
The problem I have with this, is that I don't believe either side...
You have Pelosi, serial liar.
You have the CIA, serial liars.
My guess is that the CIA, which was happy to get involved in torture when the military and FBI refused, probably did tell Congress they did so, but in such a way to make it sound not nearly as bad as it was.
And at the time, Pelosi and every one else was so scared there was an Arab hiding under their bed with a knife that they went along with it.
But we already know that the CIA has lied about one aspect. In the waning days of Bush, they claimed they only waterboarded Khalid Sheik Mohammed once, and he immediately gave up the information they wanted. Now they admit they waterboarded him 186 times.
what else are they lying about? |
|
Lonny, just to be honest here..
"chicken hawks like Cheney and Bush and Kristol and Gingrich, none of whom served ONE day in the military use that to make a profit and to retain power through fear."
Give Bush credit. He did serve in the Air National Guard. That included nearly a year and a half of active duty for basic, officer and flight training.
and please don't give me any "AWOL" stuff. You can't go AWOL from the Guard. |
|
I appreciate your stance, but I don't think a full-blown depression is necessary to wake people up.
Look at the polls. Look at the Tea Parties (more planned for July 4).
How soon before inflation sets in? It is not possible for the government to print trillions of dollars without pushing inflation up, unless they have some trick up their sleaves that most economists are unaware of.
Everyone seems to be focusing on unemployment and bank failures. I think we should be looking at government growth and ownership of private industries. |
|
My dog just jumped because you made me laugh so hard.
You must stop torturing my dog! I might start demanding canine rights for her tomorrow, including her right to marry a doberman.
Oh, wait, that would be ridiculous. Just like...any other "marriage" other than between a man and woman. |
|
That Pelosi dug such a huge hole for herself or the illogic the trolls are using to try to dig her out.
Webster's should define 'screwed' as, "Finding yourself in any situation which requires backup from Lonny, Vlad or PLib".
|
|
|
It is sad that I yearn for a greater depression than the one of the thirties. It is what is necessary to wise up the idiots of the nation. Either they perish and go away or get better informed about survival. What a shame that it will take something like that to educate the libtards! |
|
Can waterboarders marry? I mean...... you know.... each other?
In all 57 states?
Just wondering.............. |
|
Sadly, Pelosi isn't toast. She should be, but the media will back her up.
Even if she were ousted, the nuts in SanFran would probably replace her with someone even worse. This hadn't occurred to me until another commenter noted it earlier, but it makes sense.
The question is, how can we get people in the liberal states like California to understand that they are ruining our country? We probably can't. They are too busy deciding what tattoo to get next. |
|
|
I am with you all the way Neo! Pelosi doesn't even care should San Fran gets bioed or nuked and all her decrepit voters buy a horrible death as long as she gets her choice of drapes in the speakers office! This ska nk must go one way or the other! |
|
No more Mister Nice Guy! I say we Waterboard the San Francisco 'Ho! I say we Rendition the Bay Area B'Yotch to Cairo!
E'Nuff with my fuzzballish tolerance of the Lying Libs! |
|
Pelosi has no business being speaker of the house.
She condoned the very actions that she wishes, and has taken the peoples business in action, to prosecute others for. What a despicable human being! Anyone sticking up for the piece of human garbage, is just as despicable. There is simply no defense of the moron Pelosi or her actions. I knew she was too stupid to remain in power for long. All libtards are! |
|
|
Great comment. But I think it's #3. Either way, she has no business being in the position she's in. |
|
If she had responded and revealed the 'W.B' plan before, we sure wouldn't be involved in a pur-suit to discover and punish torturers now! In as much, as Nancys leadership was out to lunch, Ha!
The 'Dem'wit liberals thought they could weaken the Reps further with the water'boarding scandal but it backfired! Their evil minded Nancy, sees only the splinter in Cons.,eyes and misses the log in her own eye. We are tired of hearing her trash the Bush years. WHAT WAS SHE DOING, THE TWO YEARS (Bush was still President) WHEN THE DEMOCRATS HELD POWER? |
|
|
|
there are only 4 explanations of what happened vis a vis Pelosi and the CIA:
1. She was asleep during the briefings
2. She has forgotten what she was told
3. She is simply lying
4. The CIA is lying.
If it is (1), then she needs to get more rest, or some NoDoz, and it PROVES her incompetency.
If it is (2), then she needs to be tested for Alzheimer's right away and get on medication. Aracept is a good one I hear.
If it is (3), then she needs to resign immediately before she becomes the story -- Oops, she already is.
If it is (4), then show me the CIA memo that says "Ha, Ha, we lied and made it all up. We never briefed them. It was all a joke." I am certain it doesn't exist.
I suspect it is (2), and she should get on medication ASAP. And since she is third inline for the presidency, she should resign immediately, because that position should not be held by a mentally deficient person (no offense to Alzheimer's patients, just her). |
|
is that he gets measurable results for his customers - not simply that he has good intentions for them. That is something Air America, and by extension NPR and PBS, can't lay claim to. The same is true for FOX News vs the other cable channels - look at the ratings.
And please, bring VP Cheney up for war crimes charges. Encourage the House Dems to advance war crimes investigations on all accused Bush admin officials. I'd love to see how the American people respond to that kangaroo court - during an ongoing war, no less. |
|
|
to get back on his meds -- typical lib distorting ALL comments. Because I think Ventura is a WHACKO does not in any way mean that I do not have the utmost reverance and respect for our military. But, of course you being a typical lib would choose a military man that has gone mental AWOL and then try to use him and his craziness to somehow bolster your arguments. You are a typical desperate lib. |
|
|
It all depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is. |
|
Are we to understand you are opposed to torturing because your religion forbids it?
I believe a good waterboarding for today's Jihadist is good for him. And we ought to throw in a haircut and some Frontline flea and tick medicine. Even if they don't reveal when the bio-weapons are coming here, it's still good for their health and sanity.
Who wouldn't demand death for Great Satan, if their lice constantly give them thoughts of mayhem? It leads the poor clucks to enlist their children for suicide missions. Those kids are covered with fleas!
Would they waterboard you when you fall into their hands? NO-- They take turns screwing you, beat you with rocks and finally cut your throat. After that, they say their prayers.
It's a lovely day when I had taken the waterboard to work, instead of westbound highway I-80. Now, if that isn't torture, Dracula made people happy!
|
|
"....if any of those detestable liberals will try to deflect attention away from Pelosi the liar by talking about Bush or some other Republican deemed evil by those who actually ARE evil...."
How perceptive. Maybe you noticed that the country has been moving more and more towards investigating and prosecuting people like Cheney and Yoo, and suddenly the "issue" of what Pelosi knew about it has taken over the news. (You know, the liberal media that goes out of its way to defend everything the Democrats do?) This is entirely manufactured by the right wing noise machine. |
|
....if any of those detestable liberals will try to deflect attention away from Pelosi the liar by talking about Bush or some other Republican deemed evil by those who actually ARE evil....
Naw....they're not THAT stupid...
.....they're not THAT predicatable....
.....are they? |
|
what did Pelosi's alleged 'lies' actually do? Did it mean we sent troops into Iraq looking for non-existent WMD (the 'slam dunk' from the then CIA director)? Did she authorize torture, or just keep it from me and you? And if she'd said something at the time, just what would YOU have done, RT? You would have called her a traitor for revealing information that would give aid and comfort to the TERRORISTS! Those pesky terrorists that the Bush people kept us safe from, not!
In other words, RT, what happens to Ms. Pelosi is up to her party, to her constituents. Words from the mouths of people who defend torture the way you do are irrelevant and immaterial to the discussion.
I suggest you attend to raising money for the war criminal tribunal that Messrs. Bush and Cheney will be hauled in front of. You ain't seen nothing yet. In the docket...just like Nuremberg. |
|
your kids in the military? How many of them? What do you think of Colin Powell? Why do you disparage a vietnam vet like Ventura? Did anyone in your family have a deferment during that war?
Typical right wingers...send other kids off to die, and then disparage them when they don't tow the line (i.e. Ron Kovic, John Kerry). |
|
|
Apparently lying Speaker of the House, 3rd in line, is OK as long as that creature is a dem and a lib dem at that or an incompetent one! Oh the choices th drooling drones have to make! |
|
|
sits in his living room on Saturday nights sprawled on his couch watching wrestling wishing longingly for the days when Ventura jumped around the wrestling ring -- LOL too funny. What a moron!!! |
|
"As for Limbaugh, his ratings and advertising revenues speak for themselves (while your best effort - Air America - is defunct and bankrupt)."
Proving that some folks enjoy listening to pompous people ranting on TV and radio, and others don't. Congratulations. |
|
***I'd rather defer to this (once again)...http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/18usc23402340a2.htm. Can you define what "torture" is? Can you define the parameters of "severe"?****
You seem to be arguing that since the definition of "torture" is not 100% clear anywhere, that therefore there is no such thing as "torture." Pulling up the notorious parsing by the Bush administration hardly helps.
***The words "torture" and "severe" are not set in stone; therefore, any belief, personality, or NGO activist you want to bring up, has not one shred of legal standing for the terms are impossible to define.***
There are lots and lots of terms that are "impossible to define" by your standards, but that doesn't stop our judicial system in its tracks.
What about the fact that we have prosecuted our own citizens as well as foreign combatants to waterboarding people? Does that carry any legal weight at all in your world?
|
|
|
you know you'd have been all over a Conservative like stink on shiit for something like this. Pelosi lied, period; she has no defense and deserves no defense, period. She's gotta go, period! YYYYYEEEESSSSSSSS!!! |
|
Do not respond to the loons sent over here from Daily Kos and MoveOn.
~toma29
Great idea. Let's do it. |
|
and I'll say it again: Do not respond to the loons sent over here from Daily Kos and MoveOn. They will then go away. Trust me. The loudest person in the room is always the one with the least power or control. I say try it for a week and you'll see them begin to disappear.
By the way, once the CIA is done with Queen Nancy, she won't be able to get a job in an abortion clinic in San Francisco. |
|
You really think BHO wrote the Stimulus? Shall I trust you? Or my client that spent a week in DC just thereafter, spending time with congressmen (he is s big player in the foreclosure resolution)...hmmm, I will chose wisdom from his experience.
DC is hardly a mess? yeah right. |
|
|
did any of those presidents break the law by torturing people? |
|
Speaking of blowhards - why don't you learn to use punctuation; it would make reading your screeds a little more "tolerable" (a favorite word of you lefties).
As for Limbaugh, his ratings and advertising revenues speak for themselves (while your best effort - Air America - is defunct and bankrupt). Gingrich and Cheney command respect, if not agreement, wherever they speak as they are clear-thinking, articulate defenders of average American beliefs.
I think many of us would love to see a traveling townhall-style debate between anyone on your Lefty bench and our center-right team. Get the mops out to pick up the remnants of your bloviators. |
|
It's time for that evil old bat Pelosi to pull a cue from the class of Clintonology. Stop waffling. Stop making up new excuses. It's time to tell a gigantic lie and repeat it 1000 times. People with an IQ over 35 will know it's false, but who cares? Her acolytes and the MSM (but I repeat myself) will have what they want to hear. They'll shout it from the rooftops like it's gospel. The whole thing will die out in a couple weeks, never to be heard from again. It's fun to watch her stumbling around with her foot in her smelly old mouth, but it's a momentary bright spot in current events.
Honestly, it sucks that nothing will come of this. The tiny handful of people who will have their mind changed over this will be inconsequential to her re-election chances, and she knows it. Next news cycle, please. |
|
The idiot who was run out of Townhall in disgrace? Unbelievable. After being kicked off TH repeatedly (what is it now rach - 10 times, twelve?), been caught lying repeatedly, been caught plagiarizing others work repeatedly, been caught selectively editing Kos polls and trying to pass themn off as national opinion and she wants to judge others. How special!
|
|
"the flimflam about Pelosi--as opposed to the morally serious question about torture--is case in point. and btw, the corporate MSM will be your willing partners."
If Pelosi was briefed on EIT, and she and her fellow Democrats gave the greenlight (thier non-concurrence would be duly noted), how could they expect the public to approve of indictments? If the CIA fully briefed Congress and Congress said thier actions were legal, how could you indict? Congress approved. In that case, the individual members of the House and Senate Intellegence oversight committes should be the ones indicted since they gave the green light.
Pelosi and the Dems have crossed the Rubicon. If this continues for another week, not only will it destroy Pelosi and co. but could seriously derail anything getting done for the remainder of the year. |
|
"We are thus in agreement. Let's try Cheney and Bush. Let the chips fall where they may."
Not at all what I stated to you.
You continue to grab at things, not for legal reasons alone, but to satisfy deeply held hatreds.
That is not what the courts are for. You're not going to get your hoped for solution.
I am interested in matter of law. Not what someone did or didn't do.
What do you not understand here?
What I am also trying to impart to you, is that there is no way that the Supreme Court can tell the executive how to defend this country.
The executive could indeed, if he/she so desires, to completely ignore the court if need be.
It's been done time and time again. The Supreme Court has always recognized the inherent powers of the executive. Was FDR, Truman, Lincoln, Eisenhower, Wilson et. al ever marched into the central chamber to attone for what they did as the executive?
So, no, your hatred of a political enemy is not going to see the light of day, and it will not be used as a catalyst for constitutional questions. |
|
What does Gingrich's past have to do with this subject? Let me answer for you - Zero. The fact that you target those past shortcomings is like me citing Kennedy's fatal car wreck with Mary Jo - it has nothing to do with this clip, or this issue!
Tell us what you think Newt said that was incorrect? I can't wait to hear your commentary...
|
|
would be the ultimate arbiter of whether a conviction is valid or not depending on whether the statute was valid or not (i.e. vague, etc).
We are thus in agreement. Let's try Cheney and Bush. Let the chips fall where they may. |
|
"American do you get extra points for being a pompous blowhard? if so, you win."
Don't like what I'm saying or how I'm saying it?
Don't confuse debate with someone's temperament.
Instead, contribute something worthwhile.
And change your name, please. I've read to many of your posts to know better.
|
|
"American
take your pick.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:torture &ei=4cINSrX2MZmwtAPZ59HmAg&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=t itle
Again, let's try them (lots of laws are vague--worry about that if they are convicted, then take it up to the SCOTUS) and see what happens.
What's got you so scared?"
Once again, your cognitive dissonance is getting the better of you.
I'm not suggesting any such thing NOT take place.
Indeed, I welcome it, for I know one thing that you continue not to acknowledge.
Just as the superior FISA court stated that the executive branch has the inherent power (which is what this whole kerfluffle is about) to wiretap the countries citizens without Congressional approval, or Judicial acquiescence, there is no way, that the Supreme Court is going to define for the executive his/her inherent power in the Constitution.
I don't give a damn what you, or the NGO activists, want to suggest what those vague terms mean to you.
It doesn't matter. It will remain vague as a matter of constitution law.
Hence, why it is vague to begin with.
Let's have a court hearing. I'll provide the tissues for you, when you realize that the Supreme Court is not the arbiter of definition of legal language. |
|
"American
"What about all the servicemen who participate in "survival training" in which they, too, are waterboarded. Are you going to contend now that the U. S. tortured its own troops?"
Nope, nobody has made that contention. We've been through this a zillion times.
Don't care for Jesse Ventura? Ask Malcom Nance -"
I'd rather defer to this (once again...)...
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/18usc23402340a2.htm
Can you define what "torture" is? Can you define the parameters of "severe"?
Can you, based on your closely held belies, and an understanding of constitutional theory, law, and congressional intent, honestly state that your beliefs own the market on both definitions?
How can you state with absolute certainty that you can readily define, and by extension the personalities that you hold up in a shameful attempt at logical fallacy, the very words I have highlighted, when in fact, neither Congress, the courts, or constitutional scholars can state with any degree of certaintly, what those words correctly convey.
vlad, you are putting the cart before the horse. You can't own something, that in itself has yet to be defined. The words "torture" and "severe" are not set in stone; therefore, any belief, personality, or NGO activist you want to bring up, has not one shred of legal standing for the terms are impossible to define.
That are vague for a reason.
BTW, I have no animosity against Ventura, or Nance, just their assertion that they seem to know, what no one else does. |
|
|
|
I thought Newt laid out a brilliantly scathing attack - Pelosi seems about as sharp as a marble. I'm mystified that S.F. keeps electing her, it must be a very different world out there.
I hope that we can sober up about this argument, but the facts are that there are terrorists who plot to kill Americans, and they want to kill ALOT of us, and they want Nukes to do it with. These terrorists aren't subject to the Geneva Conventions, and we aren't obligated to grant them those protections. The President should have the right to use extreme measures to force information out of terrorists if he believes that doing so will save American lives.
I am stunned that many of my fellow countrymen don't think that we should have the ability to protect ourselves, and stand on a principle that these terrorists don't even rate! Like Newt warns, let's hope our timidity on this won't cost the U.S. a city. |
|
"Who cares what Newt thinks? "
You do. You've made 12 comments on this post. |
|
|
do you get extra points for being a pompous blowhard? if so, you win. |
|
|
|
|
what on earth leads you to say that the radical nonsense Gingrich espouses is "traditional American ideologies"? i guess you don't get what everyone else has already figured out--this generation of "conservatives" is nothing more than a bunch of radical creeps. unprincipled, ahistorical, silly, juvenile, Boomer conservatives like Gingrich have made the American right the object of moral ridicule across the country. you have zero moral authority today. that's the plain fact, and all the clever political tactics in the world ain't gonna change it. the way conservatism will regain its moral force is if and when it grows up. the flimflam about Pelosi--as opposed to the morally serious question about torture--is case in point. and btw, the corporate MSM will be your willing partners. they'll listen to your nonsense and propagate your talking points. in their opinion, you are still playahs. but America just rolls its eyes when Reeps talk. We know where your leadership takes us--into the frigging gutter, that's where. there's a place for conservatism in the American body politic, but the radical pap that chumps like Gingrich, Limbaugh and Cheney have been dishing up is not what a reasonable adult would call "conservative." |
|
"I'm not a socialist. You wouldn't know a socialist if you tripped over him. Progressive taxation is hardly socialism. Perhaps you should visit a true socialist state like Cuba or Norway, you might learn something."
My God, but cognitive dissonance is an ugly thing to behold.
You state that you are not a socialist, that you are something different than the conservatives arrayed against you, yet you continue to grasp at low-hanging fruit in an effort to prove your worthiness to your cause.
A cause that by its very definition, is one that you cannot sustain, nor argue rationally against a viewpoint alien to your own.
Sir, I am not your dog, for you are not my master.
Again, the question begs...who is your master?
You have failed to refute the informative and questioning beliefs I have ascribed to your input in this discusstion. You have shifted goalposts more times than are necessary (what does progressive tax codes have to do with whether or not you are a socisalist?); you continue to sidestep my arguments against your stance of "torture".
Yet, you refuse to define torture. You refuse to define the word "severe". You prattle on about Jesse Ventura, as it he is some paragon of the word and device.
You have nothing.
If, as you say, your dog is capable of debate, I would be most interested in the outcome of said debate if you actually did debate your loving canine.
I'll put five bucks on the mutt.
|
|
"Thanks to Bush/Cheney and their willingness to do whatever it takes to protect this country, thousands of lives were saved is Los Angeles.....maybe even mine!"
You mean when we waterboarded the guy and found out about the attack - a year after it had been broken up? |
|
one of those nutter concepts.
as for Newt, no, he's more like Edwards, and no one has forgiven Edwards. Clinton didn't cheat on a cancer ridden wife. |
|
Who is more liberal/statist than Pelosi? Kucinich? Barbara Lee? Waxman? You lefties have a deep bench of far Left big-government types but Pelosi had seniority. Steny Hoyer may be a less offensive, odious spokesman for the Dems.
As for Mr. Newt, if the American people can forgive Slick Willy for his extra-marital affairs then they'll do the same for Newt. Particularly so as they've seen Newt clearly defend traditional American ideologies whereas Billy Jeff galavants around hobnobbing with elites. |
|
that gave Bush the WMD info? you people are delusional. Get a grip, folks.
If Bush and Cheney ordered people to be tortured, let them be tried. Try anyone in Congress too you think was involved. |
|
|
Then one of two things will happen now, either Obama will release proof that polosi is a LIAR and let her be run out of congress, or the cia will fight back and dig up all there is to use to destroy both polosi and obama, the cia can get info others cant and can bury both these idiots with all their, bet cia can discover evidence on whether obama is a actual citizen or not, and what he did in illinois that was illegal as well, and polosi isnt smart enough to hide her misdeeds from them. As they say, be careful who you anger, they may be able to destroy you, and my money is on the cia. |
|
pointing out your idiocy is hardly a 'debate'. My dog debates more rationally than you do, and he can't speak.
I'm not a socialist. You wouldn't know a socialist if you tripped over him. Progressive taxation is hardly socialism. Perhaps you should visit a true socialist state like Cuba or Norway, you might learn something.
Yes, we use methods that are torture on our own troops. There is a vast difference being waterboarded by someone you know is not going to actually drown you, and being waterboarded by someone you think is. For Ventura and McCain to state that even when it is done by a 'friendly' person, waterboarding is torture just shows how awful it is.
Like I said, it is or it isn't, in a court of law. I'm sure that Cheney and Bush have the best defense attorneys. Let's play. The thing that I find funny is that 3 months ago, I argued with my older son about pursuing this 'torture' thing against Bush and Cheney. Like the Nixon stuff, I thought it was a distraction we did not need as Bush left a mess that needs immediate attention. The torture trials, if they ever were to occur, could wait. The more I hear from Cheney and people like you, dear American, the more likely it is that I will apologize to my son and join him in his campaign to bring the light of day to what Cheney and Bush did, now, not later. Perhaps that will be the stake in the heart of the conservative movement that we need to finally put an end to the religious, anti constitutional crap you folks call 'values'.
|
|
Stop lying, ALL libs do condone torture..and then executing the victim in the process..it's called abortion. So you have no legs to stand on regarding what is and what isn't torture.
Your arguments are meaningless because you delight in the torture and execution of the least
and most helpless of AMERICAN citizens..yet you whine about what you consider torture against those who'd just as soon lop your head off as look at you. Unless you are as heroic as your guy Soros who sold out his fellow jews to the S S so he wouldn't be sent to the camps.
|
|
"American "debating" someone who clearly has no idea what a socialist is is hardly worth my time."
Yet, you continue to respond, despite the fact that I have easily destroyed your argument, and have correctly identified what you are, and the ideology you require to sustain your beliefs.
So, Ventura was waterboarded, eh? Torture, huh?
What about all the servicemen who participate in "survival training" in which they, too, are waterboarded.
Are you going to contend now that the U. S. tortured its own troops?
I served. I was gassed in a room full of others who were gassed in my training so that we could recognize and effect the appropriate action to take when gas attack occurs.
Was "I" tortured?
Like a true socialist, you have no true conviction except that which you have been told.
Using your logic, in holding up Ventura as a logical fallacy (Appeal to Authority), are you now gonna shift your stance when someone like me tells you that he too, was subjected for training purposes, to conduct that could easily be construed as "torture".
C'mon. Be a good little socialist, and at least address the argument I have laid out before you in my two recent posts, and now this one.
Are are you waiting for marching orders to tell you what to do?
|
|
"All you libs keep forgetting the mindset in 2002 and the very real concern that a second wave of attacks were going to happen. Its so easy to be Righteous in hindsight, and conveniently forget what was said."
You are correct that a lot of liberals, mostly in Congress but also some pundits, are blowing with the wind on this one. But not all of them. The argument over torture and interrogations has been going on from the beginning. |
|
"Are you suggesting that she was consulted (why would she have been, by the way, she has only been Speaker since 2007)? Otherwise, the term 'accessory after the fact' is a legal one."
To be sure, she attended briefings as a MINORITY member before 2007.
But she can't be an "accessory after the fact" because the committee wasn't asked for her approval. If it is determined that the interrogations were, in fact, a crime, then anybody who knew about them could be an "accessory after the fact," but then Pelosi would be one face in a very long line.
And if the interrogations were, in fact, a crime, Republican whines about Pelosi aren't going to matter much, are they? |
|
no, Pelosi didn't write the bill. I assume very intelligent, talented people, like Rahm, helped, but Obama is the real deal.
DC is hardly a mess. And SF is very, very liberal. |
|
"You voted, he or she represents you, the country tortured, WHICH MAKES US ALL GUILTY."
Someday I'll figure out when to take you seriously. No, wait, I just figured out an easier way...... |
|
I should learn to proof read..
I meant that I agree with both of Newts comments,
Nancy is BOTH stupid and dishonest. |
|
O what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.
as for Newt..Stupid and dishonest works for me. |
|
How does she impact us all that don't live in SF?
Who do you think wrote the stimulus package? BHO gave her all the power. He was too busy being a rock star. |
|
We focus on the present. Princess P stuck her own foot in her mouth. Please find someone smart enough to have a WSJ and read "Pelosi's Self-Torture" in the Op-Ed section.
All you libs keep forgetting the mindset in 2002 and the very real concern that a second wave of attacks were going to happen. Its so easy to be Righteous in hindsight, and conveniently forget what was said.
Guessing you live in SF Lonny? A very plausible target I am sure. You want spin wheels around the merry-go-round witchhunt? Well the Wicked Witch of the West killed herself.
Now how about we focus our energy in DC on the present. It happens to be a big mess if you havent noticed! |
|
actually, it is funny how righties don't understand any aspect of the law. Did Pelosi know about the waterboarding before they did it? Are you suggesting that she was consulted (why would she have been, by the way, she has only been Speaker since 2007)? Otherwise, the term 'accessory after the fact' is a legal one.
Did Obama know about the flyover before or after? If you have some other information, then I suggest you share it. For now, it is the truth, no? Do you seriously think that was in his daily briefing papers? I mean, you said it was ok for Bush to ignore what WAS in the daily briefing, but are you saying that the flyover was there and Obama approved?
Then you disparage Geithner; have you ever made any kind of mistake on your taxes? Then the Teddy thing. You people ARE bereft of actual ideas, aren't you? |
|
Republican or Democrat, who cares!
You voted, he or she represents you, the country tortured, WHICH MAKES US ALL GUILTY.
The only thing is some agree others not so much.
|
|
"But keep worrying about Pelosi, when it is what Bush and Cheney did that is important. "
Exactly. Thanks to Bush/Cheney and their willingness to do whatever it takes to protect this country, thousands of lives were saved is Los Angeles.....maybe even mine!
....and thanks to Nancy for signing off on it....before she was against it. |
|
|
How bout she is too stupid to be honest. |
|
|
she knew about waterboarding in 2003 and kept her mouth shut. Said nothing and did nothing. If waterboarding is so terrible (I do think it is a form of torture) why did she remain quiet. She was either complicit or cowardly. |
|
Who's complaining.
Hell, vote them in again!
Waterboard away! |
|
one SF congressperson is irrelevant. The person who takes over for Pelosi will have lots of power. And that SF replacement? More power than most of the gop losers. I'm sorry you hate Pelosi so much, fear her. I've always thought she got where she is because she is a woman, and that's how most affirmative action has worked, regardless of what you righties think regarding racial minorities.
But keep worrying about Pelosi, when it is what Bush and Cheney did that is important. |
|
"Guilt by association."
Not me. I voted for my Republican congressman.
Anyway, you voted in the torturers Bush, Cheney, Yoo, Adelson, et al, so don't complain when you get "lumped in" with them. |
|
Dems. always use the "they didn't know til after the fact" defense every time one of they're own screws up.
If it aint Pelosi and torture it's Obama never knew they were going to fly over NYC, lil Tim didn't know about the taxes, I didn't know she was still alive after the car sank or of coarse I whould have tried to save her. etc. etc.
|
|
Do you not understand how seniority work in DC or Sacramento for that matter? If she vacates, the new rep will not yield much power other than another lib vote. The lib part won't change until gerrymandering changes.
|
|
"....(sorry for the redundancy), how do I approach this thread? Do I attempt to defend the indefensible piece of Pelosi, or do I attack Newt Gingrich?"
Who says it has to be either/or? |
|
Well it was you who voted them "mousey ones" into Congress now wasn't it.
Guilt by association.
|
|
who have not been in the military are 'chickenhawks', but the difference between Clinton and Bush, for example, is Clinton was against the war in Vietnam, whereas Bush (and Cheney, and others) were allegedly supporting it, while standing on the sidelines manipulating their deferrments.
Since women could not go into combat for most of our history, I would also think that a woman who becomes president would not be a chickenhawk. And Obama grew up when there was no draft, unlike Cheney and Bush, so his lack of military service is, imo, irrelevant.
Just as this Pelosi issue is irrelevant. You know something, even if she knew that we were torturing people (and Vlad, thanks for the research which seems to suggest she didn't know until after the fact), her involvement is at worst a sin of omission, not outing Bush and Cheney sooner, perhaps out of concern for our troops and ability to end that debacle in Iraq. As I said, if she has information relevant to the illegal torture ordered by Cheney (I think Bush was misled too, but he is the president), she should bargain as an accessory after the fact and put Cheney and Bush in prison. They are the bad actors...she's simply someone who should have raised the roof about this and didn't.
Again, if it wasn't torture, then what she 'knew' and when she knew it is irrelevant. |
|
You say 'not all libs" condoned torture.
Fair enough.
Now stop broad sroking "all Conservatives" as condoning torture.
|
|
....(sorry for the redundancy), how do I approach this thread? Do I attempt to defend the indefensible piece of Pelosi, or do I attack Newt Gingrich?
Hmmmmmm.
I notice one miscreant even works in a little BDS. Niiiiice.
These bags of fertilizer really need a new playbook.....the whole Alinski thing is played out. |
|
"What you don't seem to realize (or just can't come to grips with) is you liberal dems are just as guilty of giving the ok to torture as anyone."
No, not all "liberal dems," only the mousey ones in Congress, who have been attacked by many liberals for years for rubber-stamping Bush's policies.
But I see that now we at least agree that it was torture. |
|
"CIA records show Pelosi attended only one briefing — the one in the fall of 2002 where she says she was told that waterboarding had not been used. A chart released by the CIA detailing its briefings for lawmakers is vague on what transpired at that session."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104177 393 |
|
What you don't seem to realize (or just can't come to grips with) is you liberal dems are just as guilty of giving the ok to torture as anyone.
In 2003 then House Minority Leader (Nancy Pelosi) Democrat CA. sat in and was briefed that the CIA was in fact using waterboarding.
In her official possition as the voice of the democratic party in the house (HML) she niether voiced concern, nor objected to the procedure.
Giving the CIA and the Bush administration the blessing of the dem. party to waterboard away.
|
|
In Ms. Pelosi's position of power and responsibility she was fully responsible to ask the right questions herself and ensure that she had the full story. There is no excuse. This is just one of so many lies, mistruths and calculated political misteps she has made - I can't even believe she is still in position of power.
I'll take my chances with someone else in her district ANY day. |
|
|
Just curious, because, you know, he hasn't served and is deploying troops. Was Pres. Clinton a chickenhawk? Just curious, because, you know, he hasn't served and he deployed troops. In the real world, you can actually take a position on something regardless of your past history. Agree or disagree on the position. Disagreement based on past or on "hypocrisy" is such a joke. Can anyone talk about the evil of sinning? In today's world probably not because they have most likely sinned and are hypocrites. How dumb is that? The President of the United States is the Commander in Chief, and is apparently a chickenhawk if they send troops somewhere while never serving themselves ( I guess ANG doesn't count) Better hope nothing bad happens foreign policy-wise after we elect these non-military guys. Why don't you move down to some banana republic where the military runs everything, then you can stand by their decisions because they aren't "chickenhawks." Logic is unfortunately not taught anymore. |
|
I thought you folks loved people who served?
I want to respect them, even if I don't agree with them. And then possibly love the job they did while serving.
This touchy/feely love/hate way of running the world is going to ruin our world in the US. Its already showing its ugly head in the new generation. |
|
|
why is that relevant? If it isn't torture, it doesn't matter. If it is torture, then she's an accessory after the fact who can turn state's evidence against Cheney and Bush, right? Or is this just the embarassment game you righties play because you have no other things to say? You had no way to beat Clinton in the 1990's, so you 'impeach' him for lying about sex. Even though your guys lie about sex too, oh, the oath thing. I think lying in violation of your marital vows is worse, don't you? Wouldn't 'christians' care more about cheating on your wife then telling her you want a divorce while she's sick with cancer, than they would lying in a legal case about money for Paula Jones? |
|
"debating" someone who clearly has no idea what a socialist is is hardly worth my time.
"Question: why do you think the language in the Federal Criminal Court, such as the word "torture" is vague?" My answer: I don't care. Like I said, let's have a trial and see what happens, ok? What are you afraid of? Let them present their defenses to the charges, let's hear expert testimony on both sides, and then let the jury decide.
Cheney has never been waterboarded. Ventura has. I think I'll accept the pov of someone who has gone thru something, who has served his country at a time of war, than someone who avoided service and then was a war profiteer.
|
|
NOTW--huh? so, the person in SF will be at the bottom? How does that impact you? How frankly does it even impact SF or her district? You are petty beyond words.
and fox, great intellectual comments there. Ignore Ventura's service because his opinion doesn't fit with your reality. Rush picks on McCain's mother. Cheney disparages Powell, for whom Cheney would not be worthy to carry his jockstrap. Selfdestruction of the gop is such a great thing! |
|
Liberals will try to muddy the waters, but the question is what did Pelosi know and when did she know it?
|
|
"American
if it wasn't torture, then Bush and Cheney have nothing to worry about when they are tried, right? Let it all hang out folks."
I'll take this as an admission that you are clearly out of your league debating me, and that you are uttering your unctious nonsense like a typical socialist trying desperately to distance himself from his conservative brethren.
You are missing the point as folks who take your worldview seriously:
Question: why do you think the language in the Federal Criminal Court, such as the word "torture" is vague?
Then, you will come to the only conclustion there is: it doesn't matter what Bush or Cheney says, for it won't matter what Obama says either.
Trying to determine what is vague is like trying to herd a bunch of cats.
Or talk sense to a socialist like you. |
|
|
She may be replaced with someone more left, but they will be at the bottom of the seniority list. So I could live with that. |
|
WHAT A JOKE!!!!!!
Spent most of his life in "professional wrestling"...........
A more dishonest sport can't be found.....
He spent all his life "acting and faking"......
The loony people of Minnesota really should be proud of themselves!!!
Didn't think it possible to elect someone more loony than Gov. Jesse.......
Then you mental lightweights now appear to have elected the not funny, luke-warm Communist......
Al Franken(stein).......
Scary!!! |
|
|
if it wasn't torture, then Bush and Cheney have nothing to worry about when they are tried, right? Let it all hang out folks. |
|
who served? Ventura was a navy seal in Vietnam. Dick Cheney had what, 6 deferments? Cheney is the ultimate chicken hawk, and now torture hawk. Ventura went thru a war and torture, just like McCain. Both say waterboarding is torture and is illegal. Hannity says he'd be waterboarded, but not so much.
You are all so foolish. When people of character, who actually served their nation in war, McCain, Ventura, Powell, say Cheney and Bush are criminals, you turn on the people who actually served, instead of those who used 9/11 to take away people's rights, to destroy what we stand for in the world, from Washington through Powell, great generals?
You rethugs are a bunch of pantywaists who think you are strong because you can terrorize too. I bet those folks in Nagasaki and Hiroshima didn't see the US as anything but terrorists, but 3000 souls die on 9/11, and chicken hawks like Cheney and Bush and Kristol and Gingrich, none of whom served ONE day in the military use that to make a profit and to retain power through fear. |
|
"And, the bottom line is if she's 'lying', so what? She would be lying about something you folks say was ok conduct--torture."
I don't have to read the rest of your post to realize that you are hugely uninformed here.
Maybe you need to rethink your position, and your ideology, which is no better than a conservative.
Sir, the Geneva Convention doesn't even outlaw torture if circumstances permit.
To your internationalist screed, I would like to add that even though Congress passed both ICCPR and UNCAT respectively, the Senate also included a little known twist: that torture would depend on what the 5th, 8th and 14th amendments declared CIDs to include.
Read Section 2340 of the Federal Criminal Code which defines what torture is, and then, you can have the fun of trying to determine what the word "severe" is intended to mean. Then, you can try to determine what torture means, not by what some NGO or college law professor thinks, but what constitutional law says it is.
Throw all the court cases out there that you want that you think will hightlight your socialist worldview.
Just don't let the facts get in the way.
|
|
Where is Jesse's long term pain and suffering, He a loon, kinda like you! its good to see at least you will listen to him,most wouldn't
|
|
"I do not believe the CIA is lying because it has the documentation of the briefings, all 40 briefings on interrogation techniques that they provided to Congress."
Are you sure about that? I heard that they didn't. |
|
"the stupid defense or the dishonest defense?"
HOW ABOUT BOTH????
Both seem to "nail the b!tch on the head"...... |
|
"Obviously, ABC News Radio. They'll be followed shortly by CNN, Fox, CBS Radio, and many more."
Well, of course. Newt's always good for a sound bite.
Pelosi should hope they find more naked pictures of Carrie Prejean. |
|
is a blowhard, and himself a liar in the worst way, in his marriage.
"forced from the Speakership." Why the F do you care? She's a dem, will be replaced by a dem. She won't lose her seat until next year at the earliest, and will likely be replaced by someone even more left. What is your end game, doofus?
"That water boarding was authorized pleases millions of American voters. Talk about it in commissions if needed, but do it again if required." Not at all true. If it is so wonderful and necessary, why is the GOP against releasing the photos? Come on, let's show the world what they are up against, right? You are not clamoring for Obama to change his pov on the photos, are you?
"She's headed for the ash can on this issue alone. Bye-bye big Air Force Jet, private security, big office, committee assignments and all that sycophantic lifestyle, when no one in your Party needs to acknowledge you even exist anymore. Bye-Bye." That's what you think this is about? You righties are way delusional. Dems have power, you don't. And you want to make this about Pelosi. What did she lie about--if torture's ok, then no big deal imo. But it isn't ok, you know it, and Cheney and Bush are going down bigtime. This is just a sideshow.
|
|
Lemme see - Pelosi is Speaker of the House, 3rd in line for the Presidency, she controls everything that happens - and doesn't happen - in the Congress.
New is the prototype Republican - an old white guy from the south hoping voters forget his 3 wives, his infidelities, the reasons he was forced out of the Congress, a guy who called President Clinton a hound dog - at the very saame time he was carrying on an extramaritial affair - of his own.
Lemme see - who you gonna believe?
BBWWAAAAAa............ stop it ... stop it...... you're killing me. |
|
That will be the reason she is forced from the Speakership.
That water boarding was authorized pleases millions of American voters. Talk about it in commissions if needed, but do it again if required.
Pelosi like Clinton before gets tripped up not for her act but for her denial of it. Yes, she knew about EIT and it rankles her that her leftist cadres realize it. However, she'd have been better off going front and center with it because the left doesn't care what she knew ... they only care what others knew.
Gingrich is such an astute observer of the political scene. She's headed for the ash can on this issue alone. Bye-bye big Air Force Jet, private security, big office, committee assignments and all that sycophantic lifestyle, when no one in your Party needs to acknowledge you even exist anymore. Bye-Bye.
|
|
"VENTURA: In my opinion, George Bush is the worst President in my lifetime. ... So Barack Obama, President Obama inherited something I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.
...
I'm bothered over Guantanamo because it seems we have created our own Hanoi Hilton. We can live with that? I have a problem. I will criticize President Obama on this level; it's a good thing I'm not president because I would prosecute every person that was involved in that torture. I would prosecute the people that did it. I would prosecute the people that ordered it. Because torture is against the law. ... I was waterboarded, so I know ... It is torture. ... It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation you are drowning...You give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
|
|
what is the end game for the GOP here? She wins her district by over 70% every time. She's likely to be replaced by someone further left.
And, the bottom line is if she's 'lying', so what? She would be lying about something you folks say was ok conduct--torture. So, she didn't disclose what you say was ok to do, right? What's the big deal? I mean, if she said that she knew about the torture, and torture's good, right, no harm no foul? And if she isn't lying, the torture was still good, right? Or is it that you know torture is bad, and Pelosi was an accomplice, likely after the fact? So, she has to resign? But what about the torturers, those who ordered it? Cheney Bush? |
|
I do not believe the CIA is lying because it has the documentation of the briefings, all 40 briefings on interrogation techniques that they provided to Congress.
That documentation will disclose who is lying. |
|
"Who cares what Newt thinks?"
Obviously, ABC News Radio. They'll be followed shortly by CNN, Fox, CBS Radio, and many more.
But it doesn't make a difference for me. I know who lied, and I know what I know, because I didn't wait for these media outlets to tell me how to think.
For instance, I know why we are in Iraq. I read the bill. I know that we were never there for finding WMD. Therefore, it is inconsequential what a politician, or pundit, states after the fact because their vote, or their action, is what matters.
Ms. Pelosi is in trouble because what she says does not move in tandem with what is written with regard to her actions.
Socialists have floated these little boats for a long time for political expediency. They should be least surprised when the truth comes rushing back.
See? No Newt needed. |
|
thats why you Reeps are in such a world of hurt. you prefer gratifying your souls with cheap put-downs over discovering the truth. Pelosi is the person here who wants the truth uncovered. The Reeps only want certain types of "truth" unveiled, the "truths" that match whatcha already believe. THAT ain't gonna happen. we may not get full disclosure--the problems we inherited, as Josh Marshall points out, are perhaps too immense for President Obama to allow us to get bogged down with a truth commission--but we sure as heck ain't gonna get the sanitized and pre-packaged partisan hoohaw you clowns fed the public with during your years in power.
bottom line is that the Reeps are all over the map. you want disclosure, you don't want disclosure. you want to embarrass Pelosi, if possible, and certainly you'll get some help from the corporate media. but you also don't want to be humiliated and disgraced. well, sorry, chumps, that's not gonna happen. your team disgraced our nation with your behavior and it will not be sloughed off by screeching that Pelosi knew in late 2002. not by a long shot. these are serious times for serious people--you clowns are looking less serious every day. |
|
|
|
|
Newt is 100% correct! Pelosi is either stupid or dishonest. I think she is both! |
|
Every time Gingrich opens his mouth, the first thing out is, "This is the most despicable..." I didn't get two minutes in before I lost count of things he said that were wrong or outright lies. Simple example, he said she was "obligated" to speak up in the intelligence briefings. That's completely false. It was a briefing, not a hearing. You could argue just the opposite: she was obligated NOT to speak up.
I'm not defending Pelosi, who's getting caught in a trap of her own making, but this is a very small side issue that the right wing - with one of its most obedient goons - is making into a big deal for purely political purposes. |
|
|
|