NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060924/ap_on_el_se/speaker_pelosi_4


WASHINGTON - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) stuffs cotton in her ears when she takes her grandkids to a rock concert. She's so petite that a policeman once lifted her out of her shoes during an evacuation of the Capitol. She's a chocoholic with a great giggle.

And she's Exhibit A as Republicans argue that Americans would be crazy to let Democrats take over the House.

"A disaster," former GOP Speaker Newt Gingrich warns, calling the prospect of the San Francisco-area congresswoman standing third in the line of presidential succession truly frightening. "A hyperpartisan obstructionist," a GOP campaign tract pronounces.


While I don't disagree, and I hold to the opinion that giving Nancy Pelosi speakership would be akin to giving it to Fred Phelps, I also don't think that this is reason enough to extend GOP rule.

I think, though, that this "Grand Democratic Agenda" is also a pipe dream. If, somehow, the Dems manage to take back the house, their lead will be slim. Assuming the Senate also falls over and they get their agenda up to the President, they would run up against the brick wall that is Bush who will run up his veto count exponentially. Nothing will get overridden.

The DNC will use this as ammunition in 2008 to justify an all Democratic Washington (which IMHO is equally as bad as an all-Republican Washington). The GOP will use this as ammunition in 2008 to show that even with Congress, the Democrats can't work together to accomplish anything.

Instead of building bridges, the Nancy Pelosi and her own brand of fire and brimstone will lead the Democrats to spend 2007-2008 trying in vain to undo the twelve years since Newt Gingrich's Contract With America (shudder). And the United States will again suffer for it.

Jeezy Creezy, it’s a wonder how anybody in the US gets anything done, what with all these agendas flying about. The “Grand Democratic Agenda”, the “Gay Agenda”, the “National Liberal Agenda”...

People need to attend some AGMs, and stop these agendas before they’re passed.

How come we can't get anyone in the elections who are truly for the People. All our politicians seems only to have self-interest and special-interests. We need someone who is truly for the People.

Huh ... so ... if Pelosi is the She-Devil and Bush is the Devil .... neat! The US *is* Hell!

[url]
While I don't disagree, and I hold to the opinion that giving Nancy Pelosi speakership would be akin to giving it to Fred Phelps, I also don't think that this is reason enough to extend GOP rule.

I think, though, that this "Grand Democratic Agenda" is also a pipe dream. If, somehow, the Dems manage to take back the house, their lead will be slim. Assuming the Senate also falls over and they get their agenda up to the President, they would run up against the brick wall that is Bush who will run up his veto count exponentially. Nothing will get overridden.

The DNC will use this as ammunition in 2008 to justify an all Democratic Washington (which IMHO is equally as bad as an all-Republican Washington). The GOP will use this as ammunition in 2008 to show that even with Congress, the Democrats can't work together to accomplish anything.

Instead of building bridges, the Nancy Pelosi and her own brand of fire and brimstone will lead the Democrats to spend 2007-2008 trying in vain to undo the twelve years since Newt Gingrich's Contract With America (shudder). And the United States will again suffer for it.


Bush will run up his veto exponentially? Let's see..... so far he has used it exactly one time right? Now then, recalling back to basic math - how exponential can you get?

1 squared? Cubed? to the power of one billion?

Why won't he just do what he already does? Sign laws and attach his standard "but I won't bother enforcing it" commentary?

BTW, the Republicans have PROVEN their inability to work with the oppostion, and have leaders who do things like make medical diagnisis by video tape.

All you are doing here is insisting that the Democrats might be as bad, but that this is unpalatable because, I guess, only Republicans should be allowed to act like imperious assh*les.

In other words, more fear mongering to try and retain seats under the threat that the opposition will be *gasp* just as bad as we are, but that this will somehow make things worse. This is, of course, to be accepted based on their personal credibility with the voters.

Which might work...... if they had any left.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060924/ap_on_el_se/speaker_pelosi_4



While I don't disagree, and I hold to the opinion that giving Nancy Pelosi speakership would be akin to giving it to Fred Phelps, I also don't think that this is reason enough to extend GOP rule.

I think, though, that this "Grand Democratic Agenda" is also a pipe dream. If, somehow, the Dems manage to take back the house, their lead will be slim. Assuming the Senate also falls over and they get their agenda up to the President, they would run up against the brick wall that is Bush who will run up his veto count exponentially. Nothing will get overridden.

The DNC will use this as ammunition in 2008 to justify an all Democratic Washington (which IMHO is equally as bad as an all-Republican Washington). The GOP will use this as ammunition in 2008 to show that even with Congress, the Democrats can't work together to accomplish anything.

Instead of building bridges, the Nancy Pelosi and her own brand of fire and brimstone will lead the Democrats to spend 2007-2008 trying in vain to undo the twelve years since Newt Gingrich's Contract With America (shudder). And the United States will again suffer for it.



It's pretty funny that newt gingrich can mention the word 'disaster' in relation to anything but the last six years.

Our current speaker is dennis 'fathead' hastert, widely known as "the dumbest member of congress."

How come we can't get anyone in the elections who are truly for the People. All our politicians seems only to have self-interest and special-interests. We need someone who is truly for the People.
They wouldn't be politicians if they weren't into self-interest and "special" groups.

I think that, either Judge Judy, or the lady from the show that goes, "You ARE The weakest Link, Goodbye" are the she-devils. They are both very mean, there have been rumors that the weakest link lady, cursed at people back stage, SO MEAN!!! Weakest Link Lady, this is for you: :upyours:



Rosie O'donnel=Satan's sister:eek:

Jeezy Creezy, it’s a wonder how anybody in the US gets anything done, what with all these agendas flying about. The “Grand Democratic Agenda”, the “Gay Agenda”, the “National Liberal Agenda”...

Not to worry, the only ones without an "Agenda" are the Republicans! Yah, right...................

Not to worry, the only ones without an "Agenda" are the Republicans! Yah, right...................
That's right, they don't have an agenda because everyone else does, and all those people are going to use their agendas to conspire against the greater good that the Republicans want for America... :p

Bush will run up his veto exponentially? Let's see..... so far he has used it exactly one time right? Now then, recalling back to basic math - how exponential can you get?

1 squared? Cubed? to the power of one billion?

Why won't he just do what he already does? Sign laws and attach his standard "but I won't bother enforcing it" commentary?

BTW, the Republicans have PROVEN their inability to work with the oppostion, and have leaders who do things like make medical diagnisis by video tape.

All you are doing here is insisting that the Democrats might be as bad, but that this is unpalatable because, I guess, only Republicans should be allowed to act like imperious assh*les.

In other words, more fear mongering to try and retain seats under the threat that the opposition will be *gasp* just as bad as we are, but that this will somehow make things worse. This is, of course, to be accepted based on their personal credibility with the voters.

Which might work...... if they had any left.

I think you missed my point, aside from my messed up math. I don't see how people can think a Democratic Congress led by Nancy Pelosi (being who she is) and, presumably, Harry Reid can possibly be any better than a Republican Congress with Dennis Hastert (being who he is) and Bill Frist. The current Congress is little more than a rubber stamp for (yes I'll say it) the worst president in the 21st century so far ;) , but the Democrats spending two years trying to avenge themselves against a president who stubbornly sticks to his guns no matter how good or retarded his position isn't going to fix matters.

In fairness to her, I hate Hillary far more. I'm not saying I like Pelosi, but at least shes not Hillary.

In fairness to her, I hate Hillary far more. I'm not saying I like Pelosi, but at least shes not Hillary.

My general opinion of Hillary is "meh." I don't have an opinion for or against her. My disgust with Nancy Pelosi is the same as my disgust with any politician who thinks that moderation is fine until it reaches party lines. If you vote with the opposition you're giving aid and comfort. :rolleyes:

A little off topic, but it's one of the reasons Ed Case lost here in Hawaii yesterday -- people rejected his moderate views because sometimes he votes with the Republicans. Hawaii, with the exception of the Republican do-nothing governor, is pretty knee-jerk Democrat.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060924/ap_on_el_se/speaker_pelosi_4



While I don't disagree, and I hold to the opinion that giving Nancy Pelosi speakership would be akin to giving it to Fred Phelps, I also don't think that this is reason enough to extend GOP rule.

I think, though, that this "Grand Democratic Agenda" is also a pipe dream. If, somehow, the Dems manage to take back the house, their lead will be slim. Assuming the Senate also falls over and they get their agenda up to the President, they would run up against the brick wall that is Bush who will run up his veto count exponentially. Nothing will get overridden.

The DNC will use this as ammunition in 2008 to justify an all Democratic Washington (which IMHO is equally as bad as an all-Republican Washington). The GOP will use this as ammunition in 2008 to show that even with Congress, the Democrats can't work together to accomplish anything.

Instead of building bridges, the Nancy Pelosi and her own brand of fire and brimstone will lead the Democrats to spend 2007-2008 trying in vain to undo the twelve years since Newt Gingrich's Contract With America (shudder). And the United States will again suffer for it.


she is batshit insane...she needs to jump off a cliff and end her and everyones suffering.

I like she-devils! :D

She has my vote!

"A disaster," former GOP Speaker Newt Gingrich warns, calling the prospect of the San Francisco-area congresswoman standing third in the line of presidential succession truly frightening. "A hyperpartisan obstructionist," a GOP campaign tract pronounces.

Any Republican who complains about partisanship these days should be kicked in the balls. If it's a woman, she should be subjected to the necessary surgery to maker her suceptible to a kick in the balls.

Even Republicans admit that Republicans have created the most partisan government in US history. Tom Delay's speech, when he resigned in disgrace (what he called "the happiest of all circumstances" in which a congressman may resign) he said that he doesn't want a non-partisan house. He wants it as polarized as possible so that even a 49% minority will be irrelevant. Well, I hope that in November he gets his wish.