Nancy Pelosi Hearts George Bush And His War In Iraq

stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust

Posted April 24, 2008 | 07:45 AM (EST)



Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

After answering question after question about how the American people can possibly think that Democrats, especially the subset of the species that lives in Washington DC are nothing more than spineless, clueless eunuchs, I have done some exhaustive quantitative and qualitative research and discovered the reason behind these widespread beliefs:

Democrats, especially the subset of the species that lives in Washington, DC are nothing more than spineless, clueless eunuchs.

It actually gives me comfort to have come to this understanding, the fresh perspective on reality and allow me to present Exhibit A: Iraq.

Remember 2006? Hell, Remember 2004?

Here's what Nancy Pelosi said almost four years ago:

"This war has been a grotesque mistake that has diminished our reputation in the world and has not made America safer," she said.

One would presume that a person taking such a position and stand would then when in not just a but the position to do something about it, would do something about it.

No, she hasn't. Not only has she not done anything about it, Majority Leader Reid has done nothing about it. They have failed to take Iraq as concrete blocks and tie them around John McCain.

In conversations, it has become clear to me that the Democrats, spineless clueless eunuchs, when given power in the fall 2006 had no clear idea on how to act like damm leaders and lead.

They were so whipped by Republicans they have Stockholm syndrome and want to play nice with those who spanked them for so long - it's a shocking indictment clearly exemplified in this article from The Boston Globe this week.

By month's end, House Democrats plan to produce a major supplemental spending bill - totaling as much as $170 billion - to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan into the next presidency, channel more federal money to the ailing domestic economy, and set policies they hope will begin to move US troops out of the Middle East.

$170,000,000,000 more for George Bush's failure, supported by Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats -- and before you go commenting about the votes and the politics of it, I have one very simple fact for you:

As Paul Abrams and I pointed out, and a private conversation with a very well-connected and beautiful DC insider last week confirmed, not only does Speaker Pelosi NOT have to bring this bill to the floor, thereby not forcing anyone to vote for or against it, it has been brought up to her that she doesn't have to which is spineless.

She and other Democratic leaders also fail to point out that with a Department of Defense budget in the hundreds of billions, they could fund the war if they wished. But what they want is the Democrats to fund the war, because you fund it, you own it. Not realizing that is clueless.

Here are a few facts to consider:

Since the Democrats have taken control of Congress meaning we can do what we damm well please, vote on what we want, when we want or not vote on anything, but consider the news out of Iraq since January 2007,

over 1,000 American men and women have been killed in Iraq,

that's on our watch.

over $300 billion has been wasted, on our watch.

Army, Marine and National Guard units have been sent back for their second and third tours of duty, greatly raising the rate of mental health issues, on our watch.

We own this war.

And Nancy Pelosi is funding it. In doing so, she and the other quote-unquote leaders while failing completely to end the war, they are completely succeeding at ending the Democratic Party as we know it.

 
 

Comments
65
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)

I think I was a lot happier when I ignored all politicians in the belief that they are all lying, conniving, money grubbing, cheating, hypocrites. Then, I figured out I was too old to ignore them and should be a more responsible adult. So, I started to pay attention, swallowed some kool aid, and got involved. Any shred of faith I may have had is pretty well tattered beyond recognition. I no longer believe there is anything covering the emperor"s wrinkly, shriveled balls. They"re disgusting from every angle.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:04 AM on 04/25/2008

Indeed, Nancy Pelosi hasn't done anything about the Iraq war, the economy or leading the Democratic party. And yet, she did not hesitate to meet up with the Dalai Lama in India to campaign for Tibetan freedom and democracy and espoused anti-China rhetoric on que, even though the Dalai Lama is an appointed God-King of the feudalistic Tibet since childhood. The Dalai Lama did not say much about democracy for his country eventhough he enjoyed holding her hand.
What else is more important to this majority leader than to stop this country from going down the drain ?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:42 PM on 04/24/2008

To paraphrase Woody Allen: "If Harry Truman (or insert your favorite Democratic leader's name here) came back from the dead and saw what was being done in his Party's name, he'd never stop vomitting." This is what comes from years of influence of the DLC and the dominance of the Clintons and their thinking. And to paraphrase Vladimir Lenin: "The Democrat Party will fund the rope we hang them with."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:32 PM on 04/24/2008

This is what I think. The most principled people in the party, especially the women and minorities, are isolated and generally disregarded when it comes to setting policy for the party. For the past seven years, Hillary and Bill Clinton have called the shots for the Democratic party along with the parasites within Congress they call "friends," including Evan Bayh, Chuck Schumer, and Rahm Emanuel. The Clintons' sole interest during the past 7 years was to have Hillary align herself with the right-wing so Bill could collect bags of money from the corporate and foreign powers, and in the delusional belief that Hillary could neutralize her opponents.

Then when it's time to run for president, we see Hillary Goldwater: pro war, pro nukes, pro guns, anti-abortion, pro corporation, anti-union, anti-labor, anti-black. Did I forget anything?

Unfortunately I think the people who call the shots within the Democratic party are the ones who control the donations, who can bring in the most money. Bill got a lock on a lot of it, as did his friends, and they are pro war and pro corporate. Nancy Pelosi should not be blamed for the right-wing tendencies of some of the Democrats.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:07 PM on 04/24/2008

*
NABNYC,

"Nancy Pelosi should not be blamed for the right-wing tendencies of some of the Democrats."

One phrase sums up my thoughts on this: "Impeachment is off the table".

That pronouncement was nothing more than the biggest white flag in history. Everything else is secondary after that...

*

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:31 PM on 04/24/2008

One sound bite does not sum up anything. Even if impeachment were on the table, it would have to pass both houses with a majority they simply do not have. I asked that question of candidates personally. I was angry about it too. But it is not as simple as we may think.
History tells us that Richard Nixon stepped down only when he had a visit from key GOP members. This time we don't have the same goods. Some say we do. Criminal charges may be the best answer.
To fix this mess may take more leadership than one lifetime affords. That's just one reality of history. Rock and a hard place for the present crop of Dems. Can we get the change we want?
Or will we elect the president we deserve. Again.Guess it's up to us. Yeah, "we the people".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:48 PM on 04/24/2008

YankeeCanuck,

You have missed my point entirely, it seems. When that "white flag" went up saying "we give up", Bush and Cheney were given free reign, as were all the congressional Repubs. As others are saying, putting Bush and Cheney on the defensive was exactly why the Dems had so much success in the '06 elections. Do you think they were voted in to do what they have done (nothing)? I assume you do not, since that seems a silly premise from my perspective.

When one considers the excuses that have been given over time for making that fateful and unfaithful declaration, it almost rivals the Bush administration's excuses for the Iraq war. One different excuse after another. The excuse that always pissed me off whenever I heard it was that impeachment would take away from efforts to end the war. Does anybody really think that raising the white flag like that ever had a chance of ending the war? Good grief, all it did was give the go-ahead to Repubs to do whatever they wanted. Think of a cop telling a thief and murderer, "Don't worry, prosecution is off the table." Do you think that criminal would change his ways?

And the idea that it would be too complicated is a joke. If doing the job they are supposed to do is too complicated, then they should be fired immediately!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:51 PM on 04/26/2008

Simply because I don't like to see Nancy Pelosi get away with anything, allow me to correct one misconception on which she relies for cover. The House can impeach (think: indict) B&C with a simple majority of votes (remember Clinton?). It is true that the 2/3 majority vote in the Senate to convict is out of reach, but the point was that impeachment hearings would have created one forum to bring up everything, air it out and compel testimony. Too much for Big Eyes With Pearls, of course, but it's not because she could not have. Impeachment would have hobbled Bush and put him permanently on the defensive. It's even possible that the evidence turned up could even have convinced enough GOP Senators to send him and Cheney packing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:10 AM on 04/25/2008

Obviously Bush wouldn't have been impeached, but he and his nasty little cronies would have spent two years pushing documents through shredding machines instead of strutting around beaming about how powerful they are and how cowardly Democrats are. They also wouldn't have been able to spend their free time drumming up a war in Iran by "misspeaking" about how they fund AlQaeda. They would have been more concerned about who they would be throwing under the bus so they could save their own sorry backsides from going to prison.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:07 AM on 04/25/2008

who are you geek to tell people what others are--get to Iraq you gutless wonder--run for office and do something positive since you are an elitist geek--you bottom feeder!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:03 PM on 04/24/2008

James,

You say, "...they are completely succeeding at ending the Democratic Party as we know it", as if that is a bad thing. Personally, I think the Dem Party as we currently know it needs to be ended, or at the very least, divided into two parties -- one for progressives and the other status quo that we have now.

There are still a few good Dems in congress, but they are outnumbered by the PelosiReid-ites that take no solid stand on anything it seems. Those few good Dems should break off and form a new Party for true progressives. I think there is enough support in the nation at this point.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:12 PM on 04/24/2008

We don't need to divide the Democratic party. There's already a group for these cowards to run to. It's called the neocon branch of the Republican party.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:10 AM on 04/25/2008

Vietnam: Demos get US into war over 'freedom & dominoes'. Six years in,
40K casualties (i.e. K.I.A.), $$$$$ spent , Demos turn Presidency over to
Repos, who take another 6 years, 20K more K.I.A. getting US out.

Iraq: Repos get US into war over 'freedom, oil, WMD, terrorists or some
damn thing or other'. Six years in, 4K of K.I.A., $$$$$$$$ spent, Repos
MAYBE turn Presidency over to Demos, who do 'some damn thing or other'.

See the difference?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:08 PM on 04/24/2008

Best article on Huffpo in some time! You speak for a lot of us...Way to Go!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 04/24/2008

The way the scenario played out was we first were treated to a non-binding Iraq resolution which passed in the house and we were all ecstatic that the conflict could come to an end and bush's pals would have to find honest work. Then they proceeded to send thru the binding resolution which did not pass. All politicians were paid or favors gained and bush's conflict went back to normal. Immediately the price of gas jumped up as the oil companies knew no windfall profits tax would be passed. In other words, new faces, same game. Why should we expect change this time? If I believed that then why is gw in such a good mood. He knows something we do not and it scares me.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:48 PM on 04/24/2008

Ending the DemocRAT party?? Hell, they're ending the country. And not a minute too soon. When John McCain is elelcted in November, we can finally drive this barbaric country over a cliff and be done with it. McCain will, as surely as the earth turns, destroy this country completely. That is the only way we are going to cleanse ourselves of the crimes that are being comitted in our names. This cowardly nation of chickenhawks will finally get what's coming to it. Famine, roving armed gangs, rape, destruction, civil unrest. Maybe if we experience it we won't be so gung-ho on spreading it to other countries. I repeat, the demise of the USA can't come soon enough.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:39 PM on 04/24/2008

Mr. Boyce. There is a central flaw to your "spineless, clueless " argument. You refer to the Democrats as "given power in the fall 2006". Exactly what power were they given in those midterm elections by the 35% of voters who got off the couch to "give them power"? A stunning one-vote majority in the Senate, with Lieberman consistently voting with the GOP.
Eunuchs? I'll buy that. And it was the voters who stayed home in droves who did the deed.
So, who is clueless and spineless?
You can't develop much spine lying on the couch. You have no clue if you don"t read, but get your "information" from sound bites.
Namecalling can't change the fact that without a veto-proof majority the Democrats have no real power. Nor will they until we elect a democratic President and a strong majority in the House and Senate. We'll have to give those leaders something to work with rather than calling them names. Reserve some of those names for those who have abdicated their responsibility as citizens in a democracy.
Better yet, encourage everyone to excercise that responsibility in 2008 and beyond.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:37 PM on 04/24/2008

hmmm..... let me think about that one. How about refusing to bring up another Iraq spending bill? Oh, yes, the Democrats can do that. And watch Bush abandon the troops like he does after they come home from Iraq.

Of course, the Democrats would be perceived as abandoning the troops. No, no they would not have. The military and government has contingency plans to withdraw troops in such an eventuality. This would take some time.

However, America is so controlled, the "government of the people by the people" would be shown as the sham it is. Oh, wait. The Demo-Republican Party already does so. And most Americans buy it by voting for The Party and paying their taxes. The troops would remain. The facade of democracy would be gone.

Only, and only when The Party (Soviet Union, anyone?) agree it is to their benefit, not yours or mine, will troops be withdrawn. By electing a strong majority of Democrats to the Politburo, you are essentially changing nothing. You will get your table scraps as befits a serf.

Are you a Party member shill?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:11 PM on 04/24/2008

Here's the benefit of living in Iowa. You get to ask the tough questions of the candidates-- and some of them actually stay and answer them. Unfortunately, the candidates of substance got pushed aside and the candidates of money and celebrity moved to the fore. That's the way it seems to be done in this country. Don;t forget that "we the people" have a say in the matter, if we care to inform ourselves. We waited a little too long this time, as usual.
So, we'll go with what we have-either one is, I suppose capable enough. But I don' understand how folks can say they are so annoyed with the Dems they will vote for Mc Cain. Suicidal!

No, I'm not a shill for the Democratic Party--it sure ain't perfect. But, it's better to actually participate in the process. I became a member to caucus. The rules, eh.
Read my post below for further explanation.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:00 PM on 04/24/2008

He's referring to the leadership, or lack there of, by Nancy Pelosi. Voters gave the leadership of Congress and the Senate to the Democrats. Those seats of leadership are very powerful.

What James has pointed out is that this particular legislation to fund the war in Iraq does not even have to be brought before Congress for a vote. Not only does it not have to be brought forth but Nancy KNOWS it does not have to be brought before Congress. If the legislation were not passed the Defense Department would have to fund the war using their own budget. Instead Nancy is allowing a supplemental bill to hit the floor of Congress that will fund the war in Iraq.

That's pretty spineless leadership by any definition.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:01 PM on 04/24/2008

Nonsense.

The Democrats can defeat all blank checks for Bush already in the House, and they have over 41 votes in the Senate, so they can filibuster all blank checks for Bush.

While larger Senate majorities would be welcome, what the Democrats really need is COURAGE, not votes.

FDR: "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:58 PM on 04/24/2008

The senate isn't needed to STOP a funding bill.
If a majority in the house votes against a funding bill, it dies right there. All funding bills originate in the house.
Pelosi can stop a funding bill all by herself by simply not scheduling it for a vote.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:51 PM on 04/24/2008

Thank you for showing some familiarity with our system of Government. It seems we have entered a collective Alzheimer's state as a nation, where people don't remember what they learned in fourth grade.
Yes, Nancy and Harry could end the war. They could make sure torture-loving war criminals with law degrees do not become Attorneys General of the United States. They could have kept impeachment "on the table" (yes, it's there in the Constitution Nancy. Did you mean that the Constitution was off the table, too, Nancy? Yes, you did.)
The Democrats will ultimately go down in history as the party that deserved Ralph Nader. A pathetic, even tragic legacy. Pathetic for them, tragic for us.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:20 PM on 04/24/2008

They can't hide behind that excuse. Pelosi had plenty of opportunity to block alot of things from coming to the floor and there are plenty of things they could have done to at least stall Bush.

If it were the GOP in this position, they'd get almost everything they wanted.

The problem is Pelosi and Reid are Corporate-friendly Neoliberals. Them along with a dozen or so "Blue-Dog" Democrats continuously vote with the Repugs on issues of war and slavery (Globalization).

The Liberal base should be supporting Sheehans' early primary against Pelosi. It's time to take back the Democratic Party from the Corporate henchmen.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:43 PM on 04/24/2008

Don't get me wrong, I'm angry too. But it's like this. What the Dems effectively decided, referring to our personnel in Iraq is basically this: "They are in it-- we can't sink them by witholding funding." Instead they inserted funding for properly armored vehicles and equipment. Don't forget, the majority of the electorate was for the war in the beginning. And, although it's open to debate, they elected GWB twice.

I assume all you righteously angered folks have actively done something like voting in every election, writing your elected officials, getting out and protesting this horror at every opportunity, volunteered for a candidate. We are all implicated in this mess. And that is my point.

Leadership? Apparently we tend to get the leadership we deserve rather than the leadership we need.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:46 PM on 04/24/2008

When the Democrats won both houses, you could see the expressions on the faces of idiots like Tucker Carlson resign to failure. They were afraid there usually lines of garbage would suddenly become worthless. They were quiet and reserved. Then as time started to pass and the Democrats didn't seem to be moving in any direction towards investigating, much less stopping Bush, you started to hear some of the old neocon nasty lies coming back to the surface. As more time went by it got a little louder. Then when Nancy Pelosi took impeachment off the table, they turned it up full volume. Tucker and the other idiots were grinning ear to ear. His life of lying rhetoric was back. Bush decided to start pushing the Democrats around. Ha ha, he was getting away with it. He savored every minute of his foul actions. He was right back in the saddle. Call the Democrats a bunch of sniveling cowards and demand they give him even more than he was asking for before.
We all know Bush caused more damage to this country than any terrorists could have dreamed. However, what Nancy Pelosi did to her own party is deplorable. She embarrassed and disappointed the Democrats beyond repair. And for failure to protect the USA as required by the constitution, she broke the law. This is one Democrat who will NEVER forget what she did.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:42 PM on 04/24/2008

Pelosi does not have to care. Get that through your collective heads, Americans. She is set for life. You may be set, for now. LOL.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:13 PM on 04/24/2008

Excellent, tyrodin. This is another Dem who will never forget.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:01 PM on 04/24/2008

It's hard to admit to ourselves the full extent of Democrat complicity in the crimes, so we don't.

It's hard to admit that the government has been taken over by a class of criminals willing to kidnap, imprison, torture and kill anyone they designate as their enemy, so we don't.

It's hard to admit that the criminal class's NSA can and will destroy any opposing public figure with their illegal spying and total invasions of privacy, so we don't.

It's hard to admit that America is not what we were taught (and hoped) it was, so we don't.

He has threatened to expose their crimes, so I predict that they will probably destroy Obama, the heir apparent to JFK, King & RFK together and the only real leader to rise from beyond the circle of criminals in a long time. It will be another "loner", of course, who takes the fall (that works very well, if memory serves), or, if they get especially creative, a conspiracy of "radical leftists" so they can discredit their entire opposition even as they decapitate it.

I don't think this is even mildly paranoid, but logical and, if history is a guide, likely. The magitude of the crimes of the ruling class over the last seven years demand a highly criminal means of preventing their investigation and subsequent exposure. Obama has promised to expose them, so...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:26 PM on 04/24/2008

"heir apparent to JFK, King & RFK together and the only real leader to rise from beyond the circle of criminals in a long time."

I'm looking forward to the day you wake up and realize he is just another politician with a silver tongue. that is going to be hurtful.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:16 PM on 04/24/2008

Last seven years? Try since the 1930's. At least.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:14 PM on 04/24/2008

Obama has promised...that pigs can fly!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:03 PM on 04/24/2008

"Obama has promised to expose them, so..."

Mmmmhmmm

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:37 PM on 04/24/2008

This article is accurate - Pelosi could prevent funding just by not scheduling a vote - she has that power.
But the author doesn't complete the story by relating why Pelosi doesn't do this. She knows that AIPAC has intimidated house democrats to the point that they will replace her as speaker if she doesn't allow a funding vote.
AIPAC wants the Iraq occupation to continue and Syria and Iran to be conquered so Israel can finish the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. Since AIPAC controls the campaign finance committees through Schumer and Emanuel, they control which politicians get money for their campaigns.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:18 PM on 04/24/2008

I'm so tired of people talking and pushing for defunding the war in Iraq. It shows they still don't undertand the gravity of the situation and after seen years, they still don't understand the person in the White House, a sociopath without ethics or a conscience, maybe not even a brain.

What in the world makes anyone think that defunding the war will end the war? George Bush and the republicans have built enough money into the Defense Department budget to fund this war well past January 20, 2009.

The only people that would suffer from defunding the war will be the troops on the ground, you know, those people the neocons don't give a flying fig about..

As for having a large enough majority to end the war, forget it. It is simply not there. If one has any idea how congress works, one would not call Pelosi and Reid names. Don't forget, there are still some democrats voting with the republicans on this.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:36 PM on 04/24/2008

Yes, and this affects not only the war, but our domestic spending also. Now Schumer is backing off of universal health care saying we don't have the money---but he can send billions to his zionist pals in Israel!