Media quoted criticism of Pelosi for wearing headscarf in Middle East without noting that Rice, Laura Bush have also done so
News reports in the Associated Press and the New York Post, and an editorial in Investor's Business Daily, quoted Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney criticizing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) by saying that "being seen in a head scarf and so forth is sending the wrong signal to the people of Syria and to the people of the Middle East," without noting that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and first lady Laura Bush have both done the same when visiting the Middle East.
An April 5 article in the New York Post asserted, "From the campaign trail in Iowa, GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney slammed Pelosi's diplomatic excursion," before offering Romney's quote:
"I just don't know what got into her head, to be completely honest with you," he said.
"Her going to a state which is, without question, a sponsor of terror, and having her picture taken with Assad and being seen in a head scarf and so forth is sending the wrong signal to the people of Syria and to the people of the Middle East."
An April 4 AP report similarly noted Romney's criticism without offering any context. Neither that report nor the Post article made it clear in the text that Pelosi wore the scarf during a visit to the tomb of John the Baptist inside the Umayyad mosque in Damascus and not in her meeting with with Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad. Romney's quote could be read to suggest that Pelosi wore the scarf during that meeting. A photo accompanying the Post article shows clearly that Pelosi's head was not covered when she met with Assad.
Additionally, an editorial in the April 5 edition of Investor's Business Daily asserted, "Anyone who thinks Nancy Pelosi showing up wearing a scarf around her head visiting a mosque" will lead to peace negotiations "won't even make janitor in the foreign service." The editorial continued, "Speaking of that scarf, one waggish Canadian commentator remarked that 'given the maple leaf-studded head scarf she donned before entering a Syrian mosque yesterday, American House Speaker Nancy Pelosi could have been an ambassador for Canada,' " adding that Pelosi "represented the dovish foreign policy of the land of the maple leaf a lot more than that of a post-9/11 America leading a global war on terror."
By contrast, an April 5 article in the Los Angeles Times noted that the conservative "Family Research Council disapproved of Pelosi for consenting to the Islamic custom of covering her head during a visit to a mosque," and added, "The group said doing so 'is usually seen as a sign of submission in the Muslim world.' " But the article went on to note that "U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and First Lady Laura Bush are among many high-profile women who do the same when in the Mideast."
As early as 6:38 p.m. ET on April 3, Internet gossip Matt Drudge had a picture of Pelosi wearing the scarf on the front page of his Drudge Report website. That picture moved to the top story as early as 7:12 p.m.
I was wondering when MMFA was finally going to jump on this. The righty blogosphere went absolutely 'ga ga' and had a huge, but shortlived orgy over this one.
and what do almost all women, politician or not, do when they meet the pope? wear a veil or hat. personally i find all of it a lot of nonsense, but this is the stuff that goes on all the time. it's typical right wing hypocrisy to single out pelosi.
Absolutely agree 100% with you mefirst.
And it's sooooo obvious this has diddley to do with wearing a head scarf [as pointed out it has been done by others] and everything to do with the Right attempting to knock Nancy Pelosi.
We have to learn to take foreign culture seriously. The British are ahead of us on this and the Russians are so far ahead it isn't even funny. We in the United States are in the stone age of human relations in the overseas field.
Pelosi, Rice and Laura sent the right signal by wearing the scarf.
If you were in Japan and noticed how everyone is removing their shoes just before entering a room you would probably remove your shoes too. That is called sending the right signal.
When in a strange place you do as the Romans do that's how you avoid hostilities.
Pelosi, Rice and Laura sent the right signal by wearing the scarf.
Do you think she "sent the right signal" by wearing the knee high dress that 'creeped' up to her thighs while she had her picture taken talking to Assad?
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/currents/20070408_Worldview___Why_criticize_Pelosi_for_Bushs_mess_.html
Sorry, forgot to link a link.
This just proves that you would attack her no matter what she wore. If she wears a hijab, she's a traitor, and if she wears a skirt she's being immodest and is sending the wrong signal?
Try to think logically. In your opinion, is she showing respect for a religion/culture by wearing the hijab? Then, is she showing respect for the same religion/culture by wearing the short skirts? It isn't me who's complaining about her wearing the hijab, I have no problem with that. I just think pointing out that many others seem to prop her up for being 'considerate' to Islam, but fail to notice the leg she's flashing Assad. So, she covers her head, but bears the legs? Democrats don't even understand when they are being rude to a religion. Understandable.
For starters, she wasn't meeting with Assad in a church or a mosque. Secondly, Assad is an Alawite, a sect that doesn't have rules regarding public dress. Alawite women who wear the hijab do so as a personal preference. If you were offended by Pelosi's skirt, then that has to do with your own issues, not Assad's.
Bunch of rightwing whackjobs. They've learned from the Swift Boat Liars for Bush that these is no longer any boundaries to lying, sliming or just what exactly consitutes "Truthiness". And the Laura headscarf was referred to as being respectful while Pelosi is now a terrorist sympathizer.
Typical rightwing whackjob swiftboaters.
And I guess when American blacks visit South Africa they should wear "Apartheid is cool" T-Shirts.
This is the dumbest thing I have ever seen. Women wearing hajibs as a sign of being inferior submissive beings.
And a liberal wearing one at that. Good god, you people are insane to be saying this is a good thing.
i noted above women wearing veils and hats to meet the pope. since the church says women can't be priests, isn't that the same thing in your eyes?
I don't think hats and veils are mandatory to be worn by Catholic women, are they?
READ before you post. Women wear a hat or veil when they meet the Pope.
Can you not read or comprehend?
veils and wearing black for Catholic women while stupid is just a fashion etiquette. They are not forced to wear it 24 hours a day and beaten by religous police if they do not wear the veils.
You have no idea what you're talking about. This is just another factually bereft attempt at demonizing Syrians. Violence against women who don't comply has been extensively documented in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan, but I couldn't find any information about violent reprisals among Syrians. Maybe you hear about the Taliban punishing women for not wearing their burquas and you've applied that across the board to any head covering? Here's some more reading:
[link to en.wikipedia.org]
And where is your proof of violence against catholic women who don't where hats and scarves? If you're going to give such an inane arguement against a fashion choice and compare it to a way of life in a violent culture, follow through with your 'veiled' insinuations and give some proof. If you don't have any (which everyone knows to be true) then stop this stupid comparison unless you're simply trying to say catholicism is a bad thing.
I never insinuated anything of the kind. Catholic women wear black veils or hats when visiting the pope and Syrian women wear a hijab when going to church. Leatherhelmet was the one who tossed around grossly inaccurate generalizations about the violence visited upon women who don't comply. For starters there's no Syrian law that says women have to wear it 24 hours a day. He just made that up. And of course police don't bash a woman's head in for not wearing one. He made that up too.
As I said, I could find no information on violence done to Syrian women in retaliation for not wearing the hijab. I think you and Leatherhead are thinking of the Taliban and the burqua. Other countries in the Middle East, yes, but not Syria. Women are abused there, to be sure, but you guys really don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the hijab.
you're equating two different situations, leather. i fully agree with the comments about oppression of women. but in fact, it's not only the women who get beaten. in many countries, men who do not wear beards get the same treatment. and in some countries prayer at the mosque is mandatory. i am more than willing to condemn forcing anyone anywhere to observe religious customs, and it is a big problem in many muslim countries. that is beside the point of the hypocrisy we see here. pelosi and laura bush did the same thing.
nothing is "mandatory", mr. strawman. it's what the custom is.
If by custom you mean if you don't wear it you get your head beaten in.
You must have not worn something and gotten your head beaten in. That's the only thing that explains your ignorance.
Leather,
Do us all a favor and "SHUT THE F**K UP"
I apologize to all other posters for my crudeness but just couldn’t help myself.
sfcretired, don't stoop down to Leatherhelmet's level. Debate the issue at hand without screaming and name-calling.
TMan, SFC is just observing Leatherhead's customs out of respect.Besides, it's hard to hear through a thick skull, a leather helmet and a padded wall.
I've been called worse on the board, he's going to have to get more creative than that.
The bilious sputum, which you continuously execrate upon this site & its contributors, reveals your most distinguishing characteristic, in all its glorious splendor…leatherhelmet, the pissant.
Have a nice day!
Much more elequant, thank you.
Thank you.
Also, your spelling needs work...much work.
TMan,
You are right, I shouldn't stoop to his level. I was really pissed after reading this story in the NYTimes.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/05/us/05VET.html
How any person can continue to support George W. Bush, his administration, and this unholy war in Iraq is beyond ignorance, it's criminal.And after serving my country for 20 years and see it being torn apart like this just breaks my heart. Too many good people being killed and maimed for a war that was cooked up by Dubya and "Darth" Cheney. Yet even now, after the American people have spoke loud and clear that we need to find another way, its obvious that no one in the Bush administration is listening. Why shouldn't Pelosi go and make it know to our enemies and our friends that everyone in America isn’t as hard headed as our Commander in Chief. Leather is the type of person who would want to blow up a gnat with a stick of dynamite and then brag about it.
Don’t think I’m sympathizing with or believe that all terrorists shouldn’t be brought to justice and hung if they deserve it. But I just believe that we need to use some diplomacy now, since four years of war have not accomplished much. I was thinking about what Theodore Roosevelt said:
“Speak softly and carry a big stick – you will go far.”“Right here let me make as vigorous a plea as I know how in favor of saying nothing that we do not mean, and of acting without hesitation up to whatever we say. A good many of you are probably acquainted with the old proverb, “Speak softly and carry a big stick – you will go far.” If a man continually blusters, if he lacks civility, a big stick will not save him from trouble, and neither will speaking softly avail, if back of the softness there does not lie strength, power. In private life there are few beings more obnoxious than the man who is always loudly boasting, and if the boaster is not prepared to back up his words, his position becomes absolutely contemptible. So it is with the nation. It is both foolish and undignified to indulge in undue self-glorification, and, above all, in loose-tongued denunciation of other peoples. Whenever on any point we come in contact with a foreign power, I hope that we shall always strive to speak courteously and respectfully of that foreign power. “http://www.startribune.com/blogs/oldnews/?p=11I also found this when I Googled “Walk softly, But Carry a Big Stick” which Roosevelt did not say, but it makes my point that after 3000 plus dead soldiers, thousands injured and maimed for life, thousands of Iraq dead and injured, I don’t see where we are anywhere near a resolution of our fight against “Terrorism” . http://ics.leeds.ac.uk/papers/vp01.cfm?outfit=pmt&requesttimeout=500&folder=1393&paper=1507Now its a hundred years after T.R. spoke these words, and it can be debated whether they are relevant in today’s world, but I just feel that had George used more diplomacy and less stick we would not be in the fix we are in today as far as Iraq is concerned.LOL.
I guess that is liberal "rage".
No that's liberal thought, and if your "lol" means that conservative humor is laughing at a vet who is torn up about the state of the country- a state brought about by the conservative agenda you promote here - then you just graduated from amusing Republo-Zombie troll to sickening p*ssy anti-American douchebag.
You may find out now how nice people have been to you here as long as you were a clown. This last comment was just idiotic, even without the LOL.You might start getting a little more honesty, and I can't wait to hear you squeal.
And SFCretired, I hope you run into leatherhead some day when you're in a really bad mood.
Sticks and stones H.B. Your people control the purse strings to the war.
I'm sorry you are so consumed by the war that you cannot wrap your mind around the fact that Muslims mistreat women and wearing hijabs as a fashion statement supports something you liberals are supposed to be against.
But then its all about Bush Derangement Syndrome, isn't it?
"Sticks and stones H.B. Your people control the purse strings to the war."
-----
Yup, and we've voted all the funding Commander-in-Chief Bunnypants wanted.
This is easily the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard. It ranks up there with Sean Hannity criticizes Nancy Pelosi for dealing with Syria, while talking to OLIVER F'N NORTH. Wearing a scarf isn't condoning anything as bad as Apartheid. It is merely showing respect to the culture. I've seen non-Jewish men cover there heads. I've seen foreign diplomats show our customs respect as well. It's called diplomacy, moron.
LeatherHelmet,
You, some others in here and all those right-wing clowns in the media are the perfect example of why this new brand of conservatism is bad for America and the world when you and they say these kind of childish, uninformed, and blantantly ignorant words!
You should send your resume to the WH
I read the book, The Ugly American, a couple years ago. Although it was written about 50 years ago, it's amazingly relevant today. The basic premise was the failure of US foreign policy due to foreign service personnel with little or no knowledge of local culture and customs who assumed their job was done once they had a photo-op presenting a foreign aid check and shaking the hand of the political leaders.
there was an excellent movie a few years ago, tanked at the box office. michael caine in the "quiet american". all about how our misunderstanding of vietnam led us into the war. bush promised a "humble" foreign policy. i guess if you define that as swaggering righteousness then he succeded. i have no problem with taking a decisive stand when you need to, but just insisting that we are right because we are america is the wrong signal. we need to lead by example.
I actually have the book. It is a terribly written book and one based on a false premise, that only our misunderstanding of a different culture got us involved in Viet Nam. In fact, the book is pretty silly propaganda. There is a character who is winning the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese, only to be undermined by the ugly American.
In fact, as the Pentagon Papers reveal, the US wanted to invade Viet Nam no matter what because the US knew Ho Chi Minh would be elected the leader in an election called for by the 1956 peace accords, and the US couldn't stand to have him as the leader because he couldn't be controlled.
i don't think vietnam came down to two characters. they were representative of two ways of thinking. and we did misunderstand the situation because we should have realized that ho chi minh's appeal was more as a nationalist than communist. he felt, rightly, that the french should have been called on to free indo-china after ww2, as we did with the philippines.
No, it does not come down to two characters, that's true. But the book makes it look like the US had good intentions in Viet Nam, and only misunderstood the situation. Protestors in the 60s thought this way, but they were shocked to learn the cynicism of the US, which knew exactly what Viet Nam wanted but simply ignored that.
i never read the book, so maybe the movie took a different tack. i know there were elections in south vietnam in the 60's and the communists, viet cong, whatever you want to call them, were not allowed on the ballot. in the end, we got a communist government anyway, when we probably could have gotten a more moderate government in the beginning if we had backed the aspirations of the vietnamese after ww2. in spite of all we did to them in the name of anti-communism, they still seem to like us, much like the british are still liked in many of their former colonies. the french are generally not well regarded in theirs, indochina and algeria for two. clinton was in hanoi a couple months ago and was mobbed. [unlike bush]
Here is the picture of Laura Bush wearing a headscarf "tightly" around her head during a visit to a mosque in the West Bank in 2005:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-05/23/xin_180502230902240008739.jpg
the story went on to say,
"Mrs. Bush removed her shoes as she entered the mosque and walked barefoot on the red carpet. She held a black scarf tightly around her head as she gazed up at the gilded dome and the colorful mosaics."
Um, no, the Hijab is a sign of modesty. Was it dumb when Condi Rice and Laura Bush wore one? My cousin wore one when she was a Christian missionary in a muslim country.
A sign of modesty? Not in Iran or Saudi Arabia where women are whipped and beaten if they don't wear one.
By the way, was it dumb of Condi Rice and Laura Bush to wear one?
Yes. Although I believe in the picture of Laura Bush she was with a Catholic priest in a mosque which is an odd combination. I still say it is inappropriate for a western woman to wear hajib scarves to appease muslim culture. I see media women do it all the time and it just looks ridiculous and it is just wrong to participate in a culture that shackles women like no other culture in the world.
A lot of women in these countries actually like wearing the hijab.
but the question here, leather, is whether this was something only pelosi had done. the right seems to be saying so because they are making such an issue of it. as usual, they ignore the same behavior in their conservative heroes.
I don't disagree with that at all. They should be fair with criticism. Although in certain areas in Jerusalem I believe even mosques contain Catholic artifacts such as John the Baptist's tomb so I don't know for sure whether Laura Bush was with Catholic or Muslim people. Either way, I agree with the point others who did the same should be mentioned. However, in this case, given Pelosi possibly violating the Logan Act and wearing a hijab-type scarf, she is fair game to huge amounts of criticism.
Good grief you bring up a bunch of nonsnese!
The Logan act was passed in 1799 and hand never resulted in one conviction in over 200 years. There have been dozens and probably hundreds of congressional delegations that have made similar trips (see my link below when Gingrich himsel did it).
It does not apply to members of congress, anyway!
So please stop quoting from the crackpot Wall Street Jounral Editorial page. It might surprise you to learn they don't usually do truth there.
Hilarious!
"However, in this case, given Pelosi possibly violating the Logan Act" --LH
That is probably the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Mr. Bush, please charge Nancy Pelosi under this act! Please! Nothing would do more to guarantee this administration's expedient doom.
I can't believe some conservatives are really this stupid. Thanks for that LH. A good laugh on Good Friday.
Get off of it leathert
Talk about rank hipocracy!!!!! Are we not still living in a country that has YET to Pass the ERA. Where the Current Dept for family Health and services is an idiot who believes that a women's purpose is to conceive and that birth control is somehow degrading because of that. GET OFF IT. You people make me laugh. You act as if we are just this whole open society for women and all, when this country falls far behind others in Women's rights becuase the party you support keeps distorting family values issues because MOST conservative men in THIS country can not accept a women on equal standing-- hense the harsh criticsim of first woman speaker of the house.
Never has the Speaker been so visible or closely examined as if they are just looking for her to srew up so all you men can say look "I told you So " You to stand there and hand out that line of garbage. If you want to talk about women's equalilty, we don't have to venture out side our own borders and don't hand me that crap about how we have it better than those women. That a stupid and pacifying arguement meant to make people not demand higher status. Just because some other country treats their women like dirt does not excuse ours from being hypocrites. As a women I understand the diplomancy involved in observing a foriegn custume while visiting-- what I do not stand for is when concervatives who have long contested womens rights issues in this country gets all upset about women's rights meanwhile they are slamming shut many of the doors our mothers and grandmothers have pried open in the face of our daughters.
Maybe if we through a burqua on you and you were one of four wives for an imam you would wake up.
When in Rome, do as the romans do. there is nothing illogical about that.
Maybe MMFA should save some hard-disk space and just let us know when someone in the "liberal media" got the story right for a change.
Priceless. Alan Colmes singlehandely neutralised Crazy Annie tonight , not even Sean " suck up Bush " Hannity could save her.
Wait a minute...I'm not quite sure I understand this concept.
Alan Colmes. Speaking?
Alan Colmes...doing his...job? A job?
Alan Colmes...actually spewing out what the public needs to hear? I don't understand this conceept.
First off, I think sfcretired is out of line. I don't condone the restriction of anyone's free speech - shut the fck up is not appropriate.
Leather, I agree that enforcement of dress code is oppressive. I'm not aware that Syria has such laws, but I'm not certain. Still, there is a certain amount of give-and-take in these situations. I'm from a conservative Baptist background and as I mentioned, I have relatives who are missionaries and there is a certain amount of adopting local customs that is required to gain credibility (and even survive) in other cultures.
To put it another way, many cultures in our world are not as tolerant and diverse as America. In fact, probably most are not. I think that puts the onus on us Americans to "meet them halfway" and make token gestures to acknowledge their culture and customs in order to conduct international relations in a non-hostile manner. Not perfect or ideal, but the way I see the world. We'd be much more tolerant of a person arriving in robes, turban and sandals than they would of a woman with uncovered head. That's one of the things that makes us Americans great. But frankly, it is a double standard that requires tolerance and compassion. But I see it as the most expedient way to reduce conflict and bloodshed.
I fully support your constitutional right to disagree with my opinion.
Since this is a private board, I don't really have an constitutional rights, but thanks.
I understand wanting to stop the bloodshed. I don't think Pelosi has any more impact than you or I would talking to Syria. In fact, her defiance of the Logan Act and her cowboy diplomacy will only make her a pawn. Her only power is closing the checkbook on the war.
But there also is a women's movement among Muslims for basic human rights. I think we are defeating the purpose of changing that culture in the long run by our women of power wearing oppressive clothing in the face of a society that dehumanizes them.
Once again, Pelosi did not violate the Logan act. You are making things up as usual. The Logan act applies to *private* citizens. Peolosi is not a private citizen, but a member of congress who has the "authority of the US," to quote from the Logan act itself. The Logan act was passed in 1799 and was not designed to stop the sepaker of the house; it has never resulted in a conviction, though dozens if not hundreds of congressional delegations have made similar trips. See my link below in which Gingrinch, now a critic of Peolosi, made a trip to Israel to undermine Clinton's efforts.
Second, women don't get their heads beat in in Syria if they don't wear head scarves. You have the wrong country. I doubt any woman right's activist would object to Pelosi's actions. Can you quote any, including those inside Muslim countries who you mentioned in earlier posts?
Actually, Pelosi would probably indeed be regarded as a "private citizen" in this instance as she has no Constitutional authority to represent the US abroad. The real problem for the conservative Bush Derangement Sydrome (or BDS) types is as you stated is that this would be an entirely selective prosecution. "[D]ozens if not hundreds of congressional delegations have made similar trips."
I really hope the administration follows LH's advice. It will really make the Bush Administration look absolutely stupid and it would more likely expose their hypocrisy at not going after the many previous "violators" and quite stupidly singling out Pelosi.
I really hope they try this. They will get absolutely creamed in elections for a long time.
I don't know if Pelosi is a private citizen since she is an elected official on the federal level. I don't think the constitution strictly forbids such visits? You could be right, but I read several comments on the free rupublic (a site naturally hostile to the Pelosi trip) that stated the Logan act does not apply to the speaker of the house. I think you would have to look up the intent of the act.
However, it is ludicruous for right wingers to be citing it, as if it were some active, meaningful law, instead of a little-known statue that has no relevance.
Actually I dont think that is accurate. She is NOT a private citizen and has every RIGHT to represent the country anywhere in the world she has no authority to negotiate foriegn policy. Which I am sure she knows very well. Nor is there any evidence I have seen to say she did. The bottom line is this kind of congressional delegation has been visiting foriegn countries for the last two hundred years. There were dozens of congressional visitations of Nicaragua in the 80's. From both parties. They have gone all over the world. They went to Iraq. The claim is ludicrous UNLESS someone can show she was doing negotiations FOR the State Dept without being under their egis. Without showing THAT directly the claim she violated the Logan act is pure garbage.
Debate the issue at hand without screaming and name-calling.- tman418 / Thursday April 5, 2007 11:19:22
And, we hear from the resident 'scremer/name-caller' with the usual uninformed blanter. How bout you stay on topic and talk about the head scarf incident like the rest of the posters? I realize it's very tough for you to follow the conversation, and you didn't want to post right after tman said that, but when you do speak, try to make it a bit more ON TOPIC! If you want to talk about the logan act go back to the other thread where you complained about people taking the thread off topic.
On this thread the conversation is about laura bush, I mean nancy pelosi wearing a head scarf to show respect for the Muslim culture of keeping women in there place, which every good liberal just loves and admires about the republican party. But, no one has said anything about the mini skirt she wore for the photo op with Assad. I'm sure that was in full compliance with Muslim dress tradition for women in Syria.
leatherhelmet doesn't have constitutional rights because this is a private website?
some nefarious agency just hit him with a brainwashing gun.
I am curious if he glowed momentarily with the ghost of Winston Smith.
He must be very close to Corporate America and overheard a rumor...but got it wrong. "Private institutions do not have to respect constitutional rights" was probably the correct quote.
These Rightwingers like Leather who decry that a simple scarf is "representative" of oppression of women and shows an unconscionable cow-towing to people who have "wrong" ideas ... are the FIRST to defend the flying of the Confederate Flag. "Why, it just shows respect for the old south, there's nothing representative of oppression about it!" they claim, ever so hypocritically.
Which brings up the major point: WHY should anyone with a lick of sense listen to a Rightwinger, about ANY topic? They are so tied up in hypocritical knots and devoid of logical thinking, everything they SAY is simply ridiculous. Ah, but that now includes OUR MEDIA. So sad, obvious Partisan Rightwingers telling us what is "NEWS", and what is NOT, who to excoriate (Dems), and who to give a pass (GOPers doing the exact same thing).
How would wearing a head scarf send a mixed Signal?
When the United States military had substantial numbers in Saudi Arabia all female personnel were required to wear head scarves. When they were not on the military base.
In fact one woman soldier actually tried to sue the government because she was forced to do this.
Speaking of hyporcrisy, look at this link
link
Which shows that one prominent critic of Pelosi's trip, Gingrich, did the same exact thing as Peolosi.
Good link. Did any democrats complain about his trip, or did they all say; 'hey, no problem...he dressed accordingly'? So, this so-called hypocrisy is being done by who?
"And I guess when American blacks visit South Africa they should wear 'Apartheid is cool' T-Shirts." - Leather head
===============================
You AMAZE me, LH . . . every time I think you can't possibly say something dumber than you have before, you COMPLETELY SURPASS it . . .
First, try and keep up with the times: there hasn't been Apartheid in South Africa for more than a decade.
Second, what is it with rightwingnuts like you and Romney that you can gin up all this outrage when Pelosi wears head covering in a ME country, but the cat has your tongue when Laura "Pickles" Bush does the same thing?
Romney: "being seen in a head scarf is sending the wrong signal to the people of Syria and to the people of the Middle East." Hey genius - that happens to be the CUSTOM over there; for her not to have done so would have been considered disrespectful . . . what kind of "signal" would THAT have sent??? {Especially during wartime.}
And this clown wants to be president? Oh, boy . . .
"I'm sorry you're so consumed by the war that you cannot wrap your mind around the fact that Muslims mistreat women and wearing hijabs as a fashion statement supports something you liberals are supposed to be against." - LH
==============
You're right, pumpkin . . . I shouldn't be PO'ed at all about an illegal preemptive strike that was supposed to be a cakewalk lasting six months at the most that has taken the lives of 3000+ US servicepersons and thousands of Iraqi citizens . . .
And I LOVE how wingnut whack jobs display such concern for women's rights overseas . . . too bad they can't extend that same respect for an American woman {Pelosi} - else they wouldn't refer to her as "the San Francisco speaker," "Little Speaker Girl," or talk about how they're "going to paint a big bullseye on her wide, laughing eyes" . . .
"But then its all about Bush Derangement Syndrome, isn't it?" - LH
================================
Oh, so now you admit Bush is deranged? Well, welcome to reality . . . this is something a majority of the country is already aware of.
"I still say it is inappropriate for a western woman to wear hajib scarves to appease muslim culture."
===============================
Hmm . . . so we Americans should not show ANY respect {or, to use your word, "appease"} any other culture when we go abroad?
OK, if you insist . . . so, when a foreigner comes over to our shores and burns the US flag, you aren't gonna have ANYTHING to say . . . because no one should have to "appease" another nation's culture when they visit, right?
Right?
Step back and look at yourselves, USA. Turning upon each other, our public "servants" waste our misplaced trust. Drooling over a woman wearing a head covering-how pathetic. The good old boys have glorified sports above education. And you are surprised that all this "sportification" of your once respected government has happened? Marketing to those average citizens with their short term memories to sell -whatever- during sporting event commercial breaks has made you so narrow-minded. The corporate elite's filling of the airwaves with low-class entertainment because you believe thats what the low and middle class population, your "liliputions" want is your first mistake. And the population watches it because that's what is there. They can't afford to make their own very often.
The reality is the low-class entertainment came out of your own heads, you prideful and arrogant lice. "Lice" I said. Leaders you are supposed to be. Making your people better is your task. But what do you do? You see thier faults and spend your time making yourselves "rich" in earthly ways, by preying upon their weaknesses. Instead of seeking the rewards from heaven. So look at yourselves, now. On the weekends you glorify in sports . One man seeing the weakness in one of the other team's members---pouncing on that weakness. Oh my-how clever! At the end of the game though. The ball returns to the storage room. What has been accomplished? Really? And this attitude seems to be overtaking the corporate and government world. What is being accomplished in that "game?" Will the ball return to the locker after the game is over? No. The game is just over in the real world. Peace is boring to these guys. But they need to remember that peace is the prize. When the whole world is destroyed, there will be no Sunday evening crowd cheering those who made the most clever play. The ball will be in the locker, with the veil.
Don't be distracted by the veil too long. Or hey get a case of beer and whatever else you need and just tack the thing on the wall and stare at it for a week or two. ... OR......Lift your chin up and. . . keep eyes on the goings on...
To make clear where I'm coming from, I'm a US ctizen, served in the military and yes I believe the 9 11 2001 wtc demolition theory. The idea that this is a counter terrorism operation operation like Northwoods is believeable . Our leaders gave up on peace apparently. They don't have faith in their own selves, and pride refuses them the opportunity to ask average people how to solve the problem, so they lie in order to protect us. They make tv shows detailing the stupidity of the average guy on the street, but the goal of these "entertainment shows" seems to be to prove how stupid the average person is, instead of looking for the occasional genious in the street. Shows like American Idol seem to demonstreate faith in the possibility of finding great singing and dancing abilities from the commoners. But the idea of any talent in other areas, such as the peace and security of the world you wouldn't know, Mr USA, if it bit you in the ass. And who would not be fearful of speaking their mind if such a talent show were to exist? Bill O'reilly and some of his guests would hang Rosie O'donnel and others for having an opinion. But Rosie and O'reilly both seem pretty arrogant to me. But that's what you have to be to make it in American television, now.
Can you imagine if someone quietly and soberly told the US, as Andy Taylor would tell Opie Taylor in the fictional Mayberry, " Now, Opie, Ernest T. is a good man, he's just different. I know the things he's telling you are not right. Listen to me Opie, I'm your father and I love you. When Ernest Blew up the bank because the banker winked at his girl, it wasn't right. When he blamed it on the banker, and threw stones at him it wasn't right either. It doesn't mean the banker was right. But I'm glad you told me that you saw Ernest blow up the bank, son. I get tired of shooting at the banker and he just keeps keeps denying it." Now I can put Ernest in Jail. Otis is lonely anyway."
If Rosie could come out and say it like that, it would be OK. But then she might be too feminine for her own good.
It would be great if say, Angelina Jolie came out in a sexy ad and said, "911 was an inside job" (kiss) Baby. Then even O'reilly might take it calmly.