"Where's Nancy?" Trajectory of a GOP smear on Pelosi
SUMMARY: A political attack that started
with a posting on the website of Rep. John Boehner's political action
committee -- promoting the claim that House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi has made no recent public appearances -- then moved to the Drudge Report website and ended up in
reports on Fox News and MSNBC, with MSNBC chief Washington correspondent Norah
O'Donnell asking of Pelosi, "Where's she been the last
week?"
As noted by the weblog Think Progress on November 2, Internet gossip Matt Drudge, in an article that day on TheDrudgeReport.com, "float[ed] a conspiracy theory that House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has gone into hiding" in the days leading up to the November 7 midterm election. Drudge appears to have taken his cue from House Republican leaders, which first promoted the claim that she has made no recent public appearances. But as Think Progress noted, Pelosi appeared on November 1 at a campaign rally in San Francisco with former President Bill Clinton and was also interviewed by CNN, which aired portions of the interview on that day. Nonetheless, this latest smear has spread to cable news and was reported as fact on Fox News and MSNBC, whose chief Washington correspondent Norah O'Donnell asked of Pelosi, "Where's she been the last week?" NBC News producer and congressional correspondent Mike Viqueira responded by rejecting out of hand the suggestion that Pelosi has been absent.
The claim that Pelosi was "[a]lmost entirely absent from the campaign trail" appears to have originated with The Freedom Project, House Majority Leader John Boehner's (R-OH) political action committee, which claims that its purpose is "to preserve and expand a Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives." An October 31 posting on The Freedom Project's website, titled "Where is Nancy Pelosi?" read:
Where is Democrat [sic] Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)? As CongressDaily reported yesterday, "House Minority Leader Pelosi's schedule for the week remained uncertain today with nothing confirmed." Almost entirely absent from the campaign trail, many are left wondering why ...
- Could it be because Pelosi didn't want to have to defend Senator John Kerry's (D-MA) insults directed at our men and women bravely defending our country in Iraq?
- Could it be because Pelosi didn't want to have to answer questions about Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) coming unglued with a profanity-laced tirade after his scheme to raise taxes on working families was exposed further?
- Could it be because Pelosi is embarrassed about the Democrats' shameful record [sic] national security, including voting AGAINST the Patriot Act, AGAINST bringing terrorists to justice, and AGAINST the terrorist surveillance program?
- Could it be because Pelosi would prefer not to discuss the Democrats' abysmal record on border security?
While Pelosi is trying to run out the clock instead of engaging in the issues that matter to the American people, Republican candidates are focused on their individual races, fine-tuning their get-out-to-vote operation, and making their case about Republicans' efforts to keep taxes low, strengthen border security, and keep America safe.
Drudge posted his item asking "Where's Nancy?" on November 2. On the November 3 edition of MSNBC News Live, O'Donnell raised the issue. Viqueira responded by noting that Pelosi "has been conducting some interviews, a fundraiser, she's still been flying around the country doing some fundraising events." He further noted, "There have been Republicans -- operatives have been sending out e-mails over the past week saying 'Where's Pelosi?' "
From the November 3 edition of MSNBC News Live:
O'DONNELL: What about Nancy Pelosi? We were just showing pictures. She would be the speaker -- likely be the speaker of the House if Democrats win control. Where's she been the last week?
VIQUEIRA: Uh, she's been around. She had a big fundraiser with Bill Clinton in San Francisco. She's been conducting interviews with media. There had been Republicans -- operatives have been sending out emails over the last week saying, "Where's Pelosi? Where's Pelosi? Where's Pelosi?" She has been conducting some interviews, a fundraiser, she's been still flying around the country doing some fundraising events, but largely stuck to San Francisco. Her daughter is expected to deliver, incidentally, Nancy Pelosi's sixth grandchild just about -- right about now, and if that happens on Election Day, Nancy Pelosi's surely going to be nowhere to be found, Norah.
O'DONNELL: Oh, I find that hard to believe, Mike.
VIQUEIRA: No, that's what they're saying. She --
O'DONNELL: Really?
VIQUEIRA: She will be AWOL on Election Day if Alexandra, her daughter, delivers Nancy Pelosi's -- what would be Nancy Pelosi's sixth grandchild.
On the November 3 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy asked: "Have you noticed we really haven't seen much of Nancy Pelosi?" Responding to Doocy's false claim that "the last time people saw her was at an October 21st fundraiser" and comment that "the only place she's [Pelosi] really factoring in is she is starring in a whole bunch of GOP ads," co-host Gretchen Carlson took the attack a step further, baselessly suggesting that "the Democratic machinery has asked her, or demanded that she lay low in the days before the election."
From the November 3 edition of Fox & Friends:
DOOCY: But one other figure from the Democratic Party. Have you noticed we really haven't seen much of Nancy Pelosi?
BRIAN KILMEADE (co-host): Nowhere.
DOOCY: A couple of -- what was it? About 10 days ago, she showed up in that blistering sound bite-fest on 60 Minutes, and she said a lot of stuff that rankled a lot of people. And she has been laying low, and the last time people saw her was at an October 21st fundraiser, and a few pictures were made there. But in the meantime, the only place she's really factoring in is she is starring in a whole bunch of GOP ads, and the message is: "Speaker Pelosi, is this the woman you want running the U.S. House of Representatives?"
CARLSON: And that's probably why the Democratic machinery has asked her, or demanded that she lay low in the days before the election, because that's really the Republican spin: Do you want Pelosi in charge?
Sean Hannity opened his show with it today. Has the Kerry story run out of gas? Have pollsters told Rove that it's not working? Are the fascists going down?
Is there yet hope for America?
Tune in next Tuesday to find out.
on if the voting machines are rigged or not...
[link to nuclearfree.lynx.co.nz]
almost creepy when pres Bush declarted the GOP would control both houses after Nov 7 and sound so sure, specially in light of who owns Diebolt.
when he said "POLLS ARE WRONG!" as in do not believe what you see or hear, I will show you the Truth.
"I know we're going to win Florida" (In Nov. 2000 while early returns were coming in).
I also remember when the Bush family, all gathered together during the Florida returns, when they received the news that Gore had won Florida. Bush jumped up and yelled, That's not right! Jeb wouldn't let that to happen. They knew the outcome then, just as I'm really afraid they do now.
[link to www.hbo.com]
Be sure to check it out. A documentary about electronic polls. Airing on HBO.
and has the potential to rally the right. that is why the dems are keeping her out of the public eye.
PS - i wonder if anyone here saw the new southpark, it was pretty funny.
As much as actual liberals have been coming out and saying "she isn't that far to the Left," blah blah blah, she does indeed scare us righties to death. I do know several people voting only because they don't want her and other Democrats leading the house.
That is exactly the pavlovian response the Karl Rove was hoping for. Here's a milkbone.
the dems would have it no other way, either.... Voting right down the party line.
Voting straight Democratic ticket makes SENSE this tiime. We have to put the brakes on Puddinhead George's Fascist Express.
By putting the other fascists who voted for most of the fascist stuff into power instead....wow, that'll change things.
Why must you insult my intelligence for pointing out what people believe? I wasn't derogatory to you. I could be. But I choose not to.
I don't need Karl Rove's help to be scared of Nancy Pelosi. Her positions on the issues did that for me just fine. Granted, there are a lot of "dittoheads" in the Republican party but do you really think all liberals Democrats are critical thinkers, who never trust what they here? I hope not. I think that would be unfair. I know Democrats who merely repeat the mantra of the Democratic party, and actually, they outnumber the Republicans who did. If I had a dime for every Democrat I've met that doesn't frequently ramble on about the "Culture Of Corruption TM" or "tax cuts for the rich," I would be a very poor man.
I know more Republicans who mindlessly repeat Rush's lies than Democrats who mindlessly repeat the Leftist talking points. I guess your "research" cancels out my "research".
If you deny Rush Limbaugh's influence on Republican voters...if you deny the propaganda prowess of Karl Rove...you aren't paying attention. Are Democratic voters as easily herded as Republicans? I don't know...as you Righties keep reminding me, liberal talk radio doesn't have an audience...so you tell me.
rush has told his audience, in these actual words, not to watch the news or read the paper. "i am your newspaper", he has said. and when you hear franken's dittohead buddy on al's show, you can hear the perfect rush listener. there is no lie that can't be excused. randi rhodes tells people look it up, don't believe me. if anyone ever told me not to listen to or read something, i would dismiss that person as a source of anything. which explains why i'm not a dittohead. i've heard his callers say stuff like they never knew what to think before they started listening to him.
If you would actually mention your problems with accurate descriptions of Pelosi's positions instead of vague generalities about her and useless anecdotes about how she supposedly "scares" you and your friends, it would be much more difficult to presume your apparent reaction to her isn't simply pavlovian/rovian in nature.
Your point is right on the money! Let's actually hear WHY she is so scary? Let's talk about what she stands for? To this point, all you get is vague descriptions of stomach upset.
And I keep proving she's not the liberal the Republicans claim she is. I keep proving she's not liberal at all.
Republicans have any clue what liberal actually means.
it MUST be those "San Francisco values". Oooh, shiver.
...it just so happens there are many Republicans who have been indicted and more under investigation, but, it is not a "culture of corruption" apparently. As for the tax cuts to the rich I don't know what to say except for facts are facts. The tax cut WAS tilted toward the rich.
Is a talking point still a talking point if it's true?
You HAVE to be kidding. The whole REASON for dittoheads is the GOP is much more prone to blindly following. That is why Raygun did such a service to you guys by showing that there is no downside to the conservatives for their leaders to lie to them wholesale. It doesnt matter how often it is shown to you guys the last ten things a President like Bush has said is a lie the next thing out of his mouth is still gospel to you guys. The slam on Dems is they wont get behind a message and message discipline IS a GOP strategy and they are famous for it. The talking points spouted by the rightwingers here alone outnumber those from the left and there are many more of us. On this there is no reasonable dispute, The old conventional wisdom is that getting Dems to agree is like herding cats. YOUR side is the side of mindless repitition.
where are you compared to Ghandi?
I know Democrats who merely repeat the mantra of the Democratic party, and actually, they outnumber the Republicans who did. (RR)
Could you translate this into English?
What they are denying is anyone cares about her. Polls show most people dont even know who she is. To the extent she is polarizing it is only because Republicans are portraying her that way and the propaganda parrots are out skwwaaaaking the message in repeat mode. You know a few iditots falling for the propaganda. Good for you. I know a few uninformed idiots who voted against Kerry because he was going to take away their guns. Bush lies us into a war. The GOP is awash in bribery from Abramoff, already Noe, and Cunningham have plead guilty along with several other prominent Republicans but Nancy Pelosi will become speaker, When she becomes half as polarizing as Bush get back to us.
Freedom is Slavery.
Even if she was out there doing rallies, who would watch a story on her? Between Kerry, the constant poll watch, CA fires (horrible tragedy), and now this Rev. GayMeth, there's not enough bandwidth for the repeat media.
seen by Republicans that only strong women are polarizing. It speaks volumes.
A good non polarizing woman is that Kay Bailey, she sure knows her place. "Get me my coffee ^@#$,"
I know Kay Bailey is polarizing, and so do other conservatives and Republicans. i was watching Tucker Carlson (only viewer in the country) just yesterday and he was poking fun at her. It has nothing to do with "strong women." It has to do with her far-left positions and, if I were to be brutally, brutally honest, many find her looks repulsive.
all the women (how many are there? 13?) seem to be "polarizing." What is this saying????????
"It has nothing to do with 'strong women.' It has to do with her far-left positions and, if I were to be brutally, brutally honest, many find her looks repulsive."
What are her far-left positions?
And admit it; you're in love with Pelosi.
She's totally 100% "keep the war going and spit on the working class". She's about as far left as Goering. .
It seems that you guys really really don't like women, and that's not an accusation about sexual preference at all, indeed you may enjoy having sex with them and I know Republican politicians enjoy having women pose at their sides with frozen smiles plastered on. The women are but another prop in a family values start up kit, like a flag lapel pin; but other than that there is this element of contempt towards women who step out of what they consider the line.
Kay Bailey Hutchison is hideously ugly but its a flight from reality itself to portray her as far left.
anyone said Kay Bailey was far left, it was said that she is polarizing. As in all women so far are seen as polarizing by this person.
I watched her go off on tv once...she wanted us to go in and "kill! kill! kill!" them Iraqis...they wouldn't let an inspection team through a gate fast enough.
Nice people you elect, America...real homicidal maniacs.
...we're treated to this mantra of "far left" positions.
C'mon. We're listening. Let's hear these "far left" positions of Pelosi's that have you quaking in your booties.
har har
but i can cite my source. can you?
Pelosi no shoo-in for job as speaker
By Charles Hurt THE WASHINGTON TIMES October 20, 2006 //artvandelay2006 / Friday November 3, 2006 03:46:57 PM EST
Of course where all really curious, an intellectually honest source would be the RAG of the meglamaniac, sociopoathic religous fanatic/terrorsit Rev. Moon.
I suppose I should be listening to Ralph Reed at the Christian Coalition, or maybe David Safavian, or Sen. Santoroum, or maybe we should follow George W. Bush whom spoke to the almighty. What did the almighty instruct our Unitary Exec to do??? Please start a war in Iraq, and don't forget those no-bid contracts for Dick's buddies. Amen!! Hallalujah, Amen!!!
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
Dismiss his source, without addressing the information inside it. Very good! Maybe right-wingers who believe in a prevalant liberal bias (I'm not one of them) should adopt that policy when someone cites a source they don't like... namely, every major media outlet there is.
The article confirms one Democrat who hasn't been elected yet and three anonymous Democrats. Yes indeed, Pelosi will not become Speaker.
Sounds like "concrete evidence" to me. Another "slam dunk" from the Republicans.
The attacks on Rep. Pelosi have been monumental. They will only get worse next week when she becomes the future speaker. She is a great person and hopefully her and her supporters will outdo the haters. Go Nancy!!!!!!!!!
My fantasy is to tune in to Rush Limbaugh next Wednesday and listen to the parade of suicidal sycophants calling in so Rush can reassure them that American fascism is still alive and well.
will have to fly down to the islands to get over Pelosi taking over.
A great person who kills people? Pelosi votes in favor of the slow genocide of the Palestinians, the destruction of the nation of Iraq and the expansion of the US Empire. She doesn't take a stand against the crimes committed by our government. She votes to fund those crimes, votes to support those crimes, votes to COMMIT those crimes.
"What? A great man? I always see only the actor of his own ideal." ...Nietsche. If that be the case then, Pelosi sets herself some very low standards upon the stage of time.
She has been hiding, now Kerry is too.
Its good strategy. Keep Nancy away.
I am a Democrat and dont like her. I wish John Murtha would be elected the next Speaker of the House. He is correct on the war and is a good man.
she wont have the votes to be elected speaker
That Dennis Hastert ate a trick or treater the other night. Still trying to confirm it, though.
but i can cite my source. can you?
Pelosi no shoo-in for job as speaker
By Charles Hurt THE WASHINGTON TIMES October 20, 2006
[link to www.washingtontimes.com]
Is that Denny won't be speaker either.
is one of the least respected newspapers in America.
Dennis Hastert out campaining?
I don't know but I hope not. Republicans would be thankful, as much as he screwed up the Foley scandal (though there still has been a lot of unfair media reporting on just how bad he screwed up.)
Just like "Band-Aid Purple Heart Republicans" to make a storm of their own lies.
They don't want any part of a fight with the next speaker of the House, a little woman that can hold her own with these little men.
I saw the morning program on C-Span a few weeks ago and they were citing a book or an article which says that the Drudge Report and the Associated Press are the two most influential sources of stories for many mainstream news outlets. This is incredible. Brian Lamb has cited the Drudge Report on Washington Journal many times. If a liberal website was mentioned as a source for news stories, Limbaugh, Hannity, and the other troglodytes would be going insane. This clearly shows that the Drudge Report is influential in setting the standard many times for what the mainstream media covers. Remember that Media Matters for America piece from a few days ago where it was discussed how the Washington Post ran with the story about the Webb novels only AFTER the Drudge Report ran the story? This is ridiculous.
THANK YOU. njguy93@yahoo.com
Druge setting the agenda is that he is gay.
Is that the no. 1 source for that claim is (hmmmm, shall we call him, "a certain individual") who admitted lying in a book he wrote, then insisted that because he became a liberal, you can trust everything he tells you now.
I want to see Drudge with some women like Ford flaunts. HAH!
But the fact remains that other than speculation and the One-who-remains-unnamed's book, you have no evidence.
Get with the times. This is the 21st Century. Rumors are reported and the news cycle fills with talking heads discussing the rumor until the rumor is etched into the public's consciousness.
Not even Orwell could have imagined this.
I agree with you. I can now see why you would be "reluctant" finally.
If you are against speculation taken as fact that would indeed make it apparently very difficult to be a Republican these days.
"Is that the no. 1 source for that claim is (hmmmm, shall we call him, 'a certain individual') who admitted lying in a book he wrote."
Admitting your lies and working to bring truth to the American people are two essential steps for any recovering conservative.
Didn't the claim come from his male lover?
Which is why the stories on this site are so well sourced
you're admitting that he lied when he was writing those right-wing hit pieces?
"Remember that Media Matters for America piece from a few days ago where it was discussed how the Washington Post ran with the story about the Webb novels only AFTER the Drudge Report ran the story?"
Thats because the Allen camp went to the MSM and they refused to run it. Once it went to Drudge, the cat was out of the bag, and had became a huge controversy in the blogosphere and elsewhere. So the newspapers should ignore objects of controversy? The MSM tried to make sure the story didn't get out because they thought (and rightfully so I'll add) that it was a cheap shot. But Drudge took it, made it into a controversy, and the MSM does not and should not ignore controversy.
The media had no trouble virtually ignoring the Downing Street Memo controversy at all despite it being much more sensational and apparently true.
The media should have covered the Webb controversy story (definitely not on page 1 though -- as many did), but they should also report why they thought it was a non-story to begin with as some of the better papers (to their credit) have. It would have been nice if the DSM would have even been given at least the same consideration at the time it was leaked.
This isn't much of a rebuttal, sorry to say. Yes she appeared at a rally with a FORMER US PRESIDENT in her DISTRICT. That's pretty much a "must." Oh and as for the "interview" with Pelosi-- where's the transcript or video? Looked all over and can't find it. ThinkProgress offers a screenshot. The banner on the screenshot says "If the Democrats Become Boss: meet the committee chairs." For all we know it was footage of an interview taken long ago, with other such footage of the other potential chairs, in a segment made up only of video clips from a long time ago. I need a transcript or a video, rather than a screenshot with a banner that doesn't really indicate a fresh interview. I refuse to take Media Matters' and ThinkProgress's word for it.
Besides, the talking points say "almost absent from the campaign trail." Hint: she has been. How many places has she made appearance to to give speeches? She went to a freakin rally with a former president in her party in her own district and POSSIBLY did a new interview with CNN. That's staying pretty low for someone who will probably be the next speaker of the house.
Idk if this was after or before TP or MMFA's posts, but the Drudge report does, in fact, mention her San Fran appearance: Pelosi made a brief public appearance with Bill Clinton this week in San Francisco. [link to www.drudgereport.com]
The Republicans have made it clear that she is a target in the up-coming election and that they are not willing to portray her in any way that could be considered fair-minded.
It is pretty smart for her to be low key IMO. No doubt there are cable news crews and right-wing bloggers staking her out so they can plaster her mug across the screen on the thinnest of pretenses.
Drudge appears to be complaining that he went through all of the trouble of soaking himself in urine in order to go Pelosi hunting, but she (for some unknown reason) apparently won't come out and play. Pelosi is ruining the whole gameplan. That b1t@#!
So they can smear her.
From Boehner's website: "our men and women bravely defending our country in Iraq"
Are there actually people out there who believe that the continuing American occupation of Iraq is "defending our country"?
I understand if the military have to keep telling themselves that they are doing this, just in order to actually keep their sanity. But the rest of the country - are there really people who believe this?
never hears about the psych admissions, the suicides, and the suicide attempts the military has.
And they'll be voting for Republicans in drooling herds next Tuesday.
By cutting and running, millions will be slaughtered in Iraq and it will become a cesspool for sharia loving Islamofacists which is definitely not in the interest of America. Imagine a Lebanon next to Iran the size of Iraq.
It is in our best interest to have a stable Iraq with something resembling a democracy as close as we can get it.
A longstanding presence in the Middle East ala what we did in Germany and South Korea is necessary for long-term stability.
I don't see how you lefties deny this is in our best interests.
"it will become a cesspool for sharia loving Islamofacists"
Too late. It alread is. It wasn't before the war. Good job Bush!
Had this been the consideration up front, perhaps the plan would have been to go in with overwhelming force, secure the borders and re-patriate the standing army.
As it stands, the Commander in Chief, at best a moderately incompetent CEO of a mid-sized company, thought this operation was like an acquisition of a small competitor.
Delegated critical planning tasks off to fast talking consultants who collected their fees and moved on...
So now what ? My son turns 18 this year and I cannot understand why he should go clean this mess.
Sorry for babbling. Just frustrated.
I think you covered all the talking points - even got "Islamofascists" in there. There is nothing fascistic about Islamic terrorism, it's oppressive, but not fascism. I know you're just parroting what you've been told to say, but I figured I'd let you know.
How exactly do you think America is protected by American troops fighting Iraqi terrorists (who are "winning", if you can call it that when they're fighting off an occupation force) on Iraqi soil? I hope you haven't bought that "fight them there so we don't have to fight them here" cr*p. The American presence in Iraq is according to every credible source creating MORE terrorists and thus INCREASING the long-term threat against America. You're right that American troop presence will unfortunately probably be needed in the long term... which of course was the goal all along. It has nothing to do with protecting American citizens though, just about protecting American interests, mostly economic, abroad.
Clearly, it makes no difference to you if American soldiers die, as long as it keeps Republicans in power. Disgusting.
By staying and getting as many Americans killed as possible we will at least make warmongers like leatherhead happy.
Can you cite where you obtained such estimates of the death and destruction from "cutting and running"?
Maybe we should cut and walk instead.
Or we could try slicing and skipping.
Maybe, chopping and crawling.
I'm just not sure.
By cutting and running, millions will be slaughtered in Iraq and it will become a cesspool for sharia loving Islamofacists which is definitely not in the interest of America. Imagine a Lebanon next to Iran the size of Iraq.
As opposed to the close to 600,000 that have already died as a result of our actions? Also, not sure where the whole Lebanon comment comes from; Hezbollah is not Lebanon. They're powerful in the South, but as far as I know that's about it. During their conflict with Israel they actually had large approvals for their response to attack by Shiites (of course), Sunnis, Christians and Druze.
By the way, "Islamofascist" is a contradiction in terms. I believe one might refer to it as Orwellian "blackwhite".
It is in our best interest to have a stable Iraq with something resembling a democracy as close as we can get it.
At one point in time, democracy might have worked. If I recall, the man in charge of getting it done had both sides (Sunni and Shiite) talking. He (a Democrat) was told to pack up and leave. Apparently he wanted to let the Iraqis have control of their own resources. Bad idea!
A longstanding presence in the Middle East ala what we did in Germany and South Korea is necessary for long-term stability.
Good luck with that.
I don't see how you lefties deny this is in our best interests.
I don't see how you righties deny that no one wants us occupying their country.
we stayed in Germany and South Korea as part of our NATO commitment to defend those countries (our allies) from aggressive neighbors. Not even close.
Every newsroom in the country that wants to maintain its integrity should block access to www.drudgereport.com via it's proxy server (or a HOST file... there's no place like 127.0.0.1) . Drudge "report" makes reporters lazy.
A middle-aged mother of several has the GOP'ers quaking in their boots.
a bunch of wussies. They want us to trust our lives with them yet their afraid of women.
Yeah, those women are sure meanies. And it seems the Republicans are proving every day just how they really think of women, seeing that more and more of them are being found to be gay.
How can one talk out of one side of their mouth and talk out of the other side at the same time?
Easy enough, they just talk through their a**es.
How far has the journalistic profession deteriorated when "reporters" can't hit the pavement and track down facts? Even a quick phone call to Rep. Pelosi's office would have yielded her whereabouts. Internet gossip sites?
Fox News reporting it as fact? Raise your hand if you're surprised. I didn't think so. What's next? citing the National Enquirer?
Dear Right-Wing Jerk-offs at Fox, Memo for you:
This is what *real* family values are: being with your daughter when she's delivering your grandchild, whether or not it's Election Day. No doubt that if word got out that her daughter *did* deliver on Election Day, and Pelosi was seen at the polls, that these spinheads would be crowing about how cold and insensitive she is, and how she only thinks about herself, etc. etc. etc.
I'm really starting to hate these bastards.
Boutros2: You are right on with your comments. When I was reading the response to O'Donnell, that was my first thought: Nancy pelosi is the poster adult for family values!!
She's picking out new drapes and carpeting so that when she moves into the Speakers Office she won't have to look at the pink wallcoverings and the frilly lace curtains which these macho Repubs had in that office..Maybe it is about time a NON-WHITE GUY sits in that office.
An aside to Leatherhead:::what is your plan for victory without getting more soldiers killed?? None , I bet. What is your plan to reel in the civil war we allowed to happen?? None, I bet. How do we "unoccupy" without anyone taking over?? You can't, I bet. If invading Iran is an option, please lead the way.
base was the fact she has 5 children. Who could be so selfish as to "punish" the environment by reproducing beyond replacement rate?
but I love drivel, but it begs the question. Why appeal to the procreaters. If we really want change in this country we have to speak a language that we all can relate to.
And, I mean, really--what voters care about this election year is how can Pelosi look so goddamn good for a person pushing 70? That's what we should be asking ourselves. Can we really trust a person like that - she doesn't look a day over 53. Seriously, my thought is that someone who tries to hide her age, and is obviously extra frisky in the bedroom would probably support terrorist activity at the municiapl level.
I don't know where you live, but over here in frackin loony town we're this friggin close to to amending our charter to allow terrorists to fight in certain quadrants of the county - the ones that we've deemed to be heavily democratic - and cease and desist in the rest. That way we can at least isolate the agressive activity. And I think when they stand up we can sit down.
that agressive should have one g.
I don't think I know how to spell municipal. Damnnit!!
off of "fracking" as well as "fricking".
Personal dictionary definition.
Right wing religious Republican-voting Conservative (noun):
1) gay, lying, cheating, corrupt, closet sex or gambling addict, pious, publicly preaching family values and masquerading as family focused, substance abuser (including Limp-bough), political puppets, hate loving, racist.
2) Vote stealing power monger, able and willing to wage war against any ostensible weak political entity for material and political gain under a morally upstanding religious banner.
3) Purveyors of suppression of constitutionally granted and guaranteed freedoms, enabling financial and political gains ONLY for allied corporate cronies in an overall program whose mandate demands nothing short of global domination for 'righteousness' sake, at the expense of the vastest portion of this 'democracy' experiment gone awry, the middle class. ie: America.
4) Proponent of pre-emptive war against anyone perceived to oppose Christian-American conservative ideologies, not excluding nuclear weapons as deemed necessary by the Commander-in- Chief (have you ever heard a 'president' use that word more often? Think about it.) Relentless crusader against all that is unstable or uncooperative in the world, particularly amongst the Godless heathen nations.
5) Incredibly and profoundly learned and wise persons who knows what is best for Americans, their women, their children, their spirits and its needs, though they may be contrary to the individual's wishes and beliefs and constitutional rights.
Am I getting a mistaken impression?
I'm especially annoyed at Nora O'Donnell and the way she delivers her question regarding Pelosi: "Where's SHE been?" With a sarcastic edge to her voice and a smirk on her mouth, she makes it clear that she regards the Pelosi-is-missing fiction as a forgone conclusion. Besides the obvious fact that O'Donnell has not even done the most basic fact-checking and is completely relying on the Republican line, this dramatic inflection is completely inappropriate for a serious news person.
maybe to people who are scared of their shadow ... What's scary about her? It's not like she advocates starting unwinnable wars on false pretenses or running up massive budget deficits to pass along to her grandchildren.
The reason all the polls show that Nancy Pelosi is likely to become the next speaker of the house is that she and all Democrats are far less scary than continued governance by incompetent dimwits with a fatally flawed political philosophy.
What are they scared of? Health care? Secure Social Security? Balanced budgets? Common sense?
Here's my report from Orange County, Ca., which is like a republican wild animal sanctuary.Normal, working middle-aged white people are scared of Nancy Pelosi because their comforting Conservative media puppetes have told them to be afraid of her.Then they show somw pictures of Mexicans jumping a fence and swarthy guys in turbans with their eyes darting back and forth.
I've asked several of these people (I didn't start it, they mentioned Pelosi) what was the worst thing about her,have not gotten an answer yet.
Rush or somebody told them she's bad.
It's "us versus them!" The big tame team is on again, America gets beaten in the old Two-horse, Three-legged Race! Same old story. Keep the sheep so locked on to the spectacle, they don't see the pickpocket or the secret policeman sneaking up behind ya. Sleight of hand, smoke and mirrors, all a huge mindwash. Ignorance is Strength.
The saddest part is...the politicians are actually totally clueless on the issues. So what's that make those who vote for them?
The thing they fear the most...the truly informed voter. He who knows their words do not match their actions. He is beyond their control...and oh, they do love to control.
are asking themselves..Where's Tom DeLay??Isn't he still in our party? Where did he go? Damn Liberals probably kidnapped him. rUSH never said anything about DeLay, so where is he??
Has any voting Republican thought for themselves in the past 20 years? Has any voting Republican ever questioned their supreme leaders in the past 20 years? And for you on the religious right, according to all of the talk by YOUR president and vice president, you are all bad people. Why you may ask?? Pres. Bush has said if Sen. Kerry means what he said, ALL, say again, ALL liberals think like him. This means that if your leader likes his dope and prostitutes, so do you. Can't any of you take off the God-blinders and have real faith, not only in God but your fellow man. None of you have ever heard from God, but your President hears His Voice inside his head. Do you? Or do you kind of feel a little funny about that? Especially if He tells you that other people of different faiths want to kill you. What would God tell YOU?
Maybe Nancy P. is praying? Ever consider that?
Everyoone is spending way too much time on Nancy Pelosi, and it's exactly what the Republicans want us to do instead of concentrating on the really important things that are facing our nation. Who cares where or where not Nancy Pelosi is or isn't? Not me. I care about getting our troops out of harms way, and actually trying to stabilize Iraq and meaning it, about the corrupt and inept administration that's responsible for bringing us down as a nation, about our compromised environment, about health care, and about protecting and obeying our constitution. Nancy Pelosi isn't running for office, but there are plenty of others who are who will have a great impact on this nation, negatively or positively. I'm going to concentrate on the ones I believe will make a positive impact on our country. And , oh, I really think Norah O'Donnell has the wrong job. I think she would really be an asset over there at the FOX NEWS anchor desk. She'd have lots of friends over there, and she'd have a great following. Her obviously conservative slanted newscasts are giving MSNBC a bad name.
Perhaps the media should ask the BOEHNER to explain his comments blaming the Generals and the troops for the mess in Iraq, or his involvement in the Foley scandal cover up. The Boehner should remember that after tomorrow, he will be a nobody, and pay back is a b..th. I hope he is ready for the mother of all b...tch slapping. Man is it going to be sweet!
I've stopped watching the MSM altogether. I can hardly wait to hear Democratic (note the "-ic"--the first man who used only the -t was Joe McCarthy) politicians finally talking about what the media consolidation horror show for the past six years has done to our country--and Bill Clinton signed us up for that). The Republicans have an -xxx- chromosome somewhere that makes them bleat passionately about nonsense. They must have mutated during their Long March when the country was Democratically run (social security, regulation, corporate taxes, etc.--all the things that made for a healthy American market instead of this monopolistic Corporate welfare system for rich people we have now). I get my news from C-Span, books, Democracy Now, the IPL (internet public library) and blogs (Buzzflash, Truthout, MediaMatters). The -xxx- mutation results in self-hating types steaming off while failing miserably to do what they say they'll do.