Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Lee Atwater, Nov 18, 2022.
You have peaked my curiosity. You have a citation?
My post is based on personal experience. You can find corroboration regarding her view of enhanced interrogation in Jose Rodriguez's book Hard Measures.
You have wholly mischaracterized my position on her. It has not one thing to do with any "stereotype" and EVERYTHING to do with the results of her leadership and how she has led.
Most people from both sides of the aisle would acknowledge that when she became speaker in 2007 until now, has been amongst the most politically devisive and polarized era's in our nation's history.
As Speaker of the House, surely she bears a large share of that blame. As one of the "most consequential politicians of the last 15 years", why should we praise her for playing a giant role in the polarization of this country that just so happens to coincide with her leadership? She is not known for reaching across the aisle to garner the votes needed to pass legislation, rather she is known for twisting the arms of her own caucus to ensure there are not any defectors. That is not an example of a great statesman, rather it is an example of a bully that is effective at keeping her people in line. She is far more akin to Herman Goering than she is to Thomas Jefferson.
This lady did not just die and thus is deserving of paying her some sort of final respect. She is not even retiring as a House member. The only thing she has done is decline to seek a leadership role.
Good riddance to her. You and the OP's apparent belief that her political opponents are supposed to drop down on their knees and worship this woman is bordering on delusional.
You try to act like pelosi is the only one that's ever suffered political violence.... And she herself never even suffered any violence.
Some nut bag left wing loon went on a baseball field and tried to hunt Republican Congress members and was almost very successful in killing Stephen Scalise
You can’t exactly call Pelosi a financial genius. She knows ahead of time what bills are on the table. As the leader, she is responsible for getting the votes lined up and has the head count to know if they will pass. Therefore, she knows ahead of time which companies might benefit from public laws and policies.
The Pelosi family net worth is in the hundreds of millions, just like the Clinton family net worth. Both have made their fortunes while in government service. Neither has to worry very much about incisive investigations from a fawning press. If either of them do anything illegal or unethical, the press will put a lid it until it blows over or kill the story completely.
If you are disturbed by this behavior, you should demand accountability from the news media, and blind trust fund laws for members of Congress. It’s human nature for most people to grab as much as you can when opportunities are available. Republican and Democrat politicians are no different. The difference is the press is after one side, but not the other.
Not the posts I have been responding to
As far as health care, wage equality, voting rights, and social security/welfare, they do represent every American
Don't you think it was petty and childish of her to rip up the president's State of the Union speech behind his back like that?
No, I do not think it was childish or petty. We were playing under Trump's guidelines and on his court, meaning acting like him is perfectly normal. Trump has never earned respect, meaning there is no reason to give him any.
I don't care if you personally dislike the man she disrespected the office of the President of the United States.
Using someone else's bad behavior as an excuse for your own does not excuse your own.
Especially someone of her position and authority we should expect better of.
Most especially from the party that you just recently told me represents all Americans.
Oh they represent them all right but only if you agree with them and vote their direction if you don't agree with them as far as their concerned you can just go to hell.
I would bet a damn good dollar that no house speaker has even came close the amount of money spent under her watch. She isn’t worth praise at all
Trump was the first person that disrespected the office of president. The oath of office he took meant nothing and he did not respect the Constitution.
Please read my post.
You don't use someone else's bad behavior to excuse yours. So basically what you're telling me is it's okay to do all the things that Trump does that you disagree with but It's ok because Trump does them.
Shouldn't you expect more out of your aristocracy? I thought you guys told us Trump was bad but now it's okay for your people to do similar things.
Notice I didn't say the same thing because Trump never did that, what Nancy did was so childish and Petty and embarrassing on a world stage.
But you're just going to make excuses for her behavior by saying but Truwwmmpfff
Obviously you're trying to take something out of context. Besides that, you clearly don't know the history of past POTUS ignoring the Constitution in their attempts to wrestle control. Your hatred of Trump is blinding you to simple facts.
I really did wish the Pelosi's had started their own mutual fund as I would have dumped money into it. Insider knowledge made them lots of $$$$
One of the many remarkable things about Nancy Pelosi is that she was the first woman to become speaker of the House and yet this historic accomplishment isn’t anywhere near the top of her resumé. She wasn’t a token or a barrier breaker. She was an uncommonly effective speaker.
She practiced good politics. The Democrats had a long, successful run under her leadership. She kept her caucus mostly in the center of where the Democratic party was. None of that is really up for debate. It’s the shared opinion of basically everyone who pays attention to this stuff seriously, on both sides of the aisle.
Democrats and Republicans differ in their value judgments about the merits of the policies Pelosi helped enact. But if the question is: Was Nancy Pelosi an effective leader and do you wish your party had someone like her? Well, there’s no difference of opinion on that.
The author's perspective, that she was an effective Speaker, not that she was infallible, remains unchallenged.
Ever hear of the adage that says "when in Rome, do as the Romans do"?
When you do not get to choose what arena you will fight in, in order to win you have to fight the way the rules are written in that particular arena.
1) debase the enemy
2) make fun of him/her
3) do not follow the rules, make your own
If I understand you correctly, are you basically saying that nothing she could do is wrong because Trump made it so that you do not follow the rules so therefore any subsequent action is perfectly fine?
LOL, that is absolutely preposterous and self-servingly delusional. Using this same logic, then is it safe to assume if she had defecated on the Presidential Lectern that would have been perfectly fine because of what you are calling the "Trump Rules", and furthermore you would still be here calling for everyone to worship the woman?
You mean to say that Trump has defecated on the Presidential Lectern? I had not seen that happen. I have seen him ridicule and make fun of people, but never have seen him defecate. I must have missed that one.
I accept that those who supported and carried out the torture of detainees did so for patriotic reasons. But..........
The Committee makes the following findings and conclusions:
#1: The CIA's use of its enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining cooperation from detainees.
The Committee finds, based on a review of CIA interrogation records, that the use of the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of obtaining accurate information or gaining detainee cooperation.
For example, according to CIA records, seven of the 39 CIA detainees known to have been subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques produced no intelligence while in CIA custody.1 CIA detainees who were subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques were usually subjected to the techniques immediately after being rendered to CIA custody. Other detainees provided significant accurate intelligence prior to, or without having been subjected to these techniques.
While being subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques and afterwards, multiple CIA detainees fabricated information, resulting in faulty intelligence. Detainees provided fabricated information on critical intelligence issues, including the terrorist threats which the CIA identified as its highest priorities.
Give me a break you're just sitting there making excuses.
Trump's downfall was his mouth because as much as they attacked him to begin with he gave them plenty of ammo.
It's sad that you don't think that that was a petty childish act to sit there and rip up the president's speech behind his back with the whole damn world watching
Oh please her words were so garbled it often looked like her dentures were falling out.
And it always looked like she might have been hitting the sauce too
Strong, intelligent and effective women are easy targets for some.
I think it was brilliant. Where else and how else can Nancy make such a clear statement about the BS that Trump delivers. I actually loved to see that.
Bullies need to be made fun of because going face to face with them, you are likely to lose. Nancy has never been a loser.
One question of you though, since when (after 2016) has it been wrong to be petty and childish. After all, I don't see you saying anything about this petty action by Trump.
So instead of discussing and owning up to your nonsensical logic, you decided to instead pretend like I said something that I did not.
That doesn't seem like the tactic of someone that has a strong argument, does it?
Separate names with a comma.