All things Pelosi

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Thanks Cyc.

blueflame1 wrote:
"Harman is a big Iraq war and warrantless wiretapping supporter." I guess that's why only the Bushie's are kicking Pelosi over this.
Why would "only Bushie's" be upset about her picking an incompetent? I don't think a rudimentary clue about who our enemies are is too much to ask do you?

Incompetent? He gets tripped up over one question and suddenly he is an incompetent. How many times has Bush been tripped up over a question, somehow the Republic has survived even Bush. If he proves to be incompetent, you can bet Dems will be clamoring for his ouster. The sad fact is that there aren't a lot of really astute people in Congress.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Why would "only Bushie's" be upset about her picking an incompetent? I don't think a rudimentary clue about who our enemies are is too much to ask do you?

True, we should expect more from someone who will be chairing a committee that oversees foreign intelligence -- even one right answer would have been nice. But let's put this into some perspective. After all, George W. Bush whiffed on a similar series of questions during the 2000 presidential campaign, so Reyes can be partially excused for his abysmal performance on his own test. Indeed, if Americans are content to have an incompetent serve as president, it seems petty to object to an incompetent serving in the comparatively minor post of House Intelligence Committee chairman.

0 Replies

2 rudimentary questions, not one. The man is on the intelligence committee for crying out sideways. Bush's incompetence has no bearing Reyes' obvious lack of same. Surely you'd prefer someone who new at least as much as the below average A2Ker about our enemies for the chair???

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

2 rudimentary questions, not one. The man is on the intelligence committee for crying out sideways. Bush's incompetence has no bearing Reyes' obvious lack of same. Surely you'd prefer someone who new at least as much as the below average A2Ker about our enemies for the chair???

Yeah, I would.

I've seen this same stunt pulled on Defense dept. officials and Homeland Security brass.... ignorance about the political and religious divisions in the ME is unfortunately a common problem amongst elected officials.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

2 rudimentary questions, not one. The man is on the intelligence committee for crying out sideways. Bush's incompetence has no bearing Reyes' obvious lack of same. Surely you'd prefer someone who new at least as much as the below average A2Ker about our enemies for the chair???

That's only one question (albeit three question marks).

Without a doubt it would be better, all other things being equal, to have someone in the foreign intelligence committee chairman's position who knew something about foreign intelligence. Nevertheless, we can at least take some small comfort in the fact that Reyes apparantly is aware that there are two major sects of Islam, even though he evidently can't tell the difference between the two. As for the rest, he must regrettably look to the example of the president and do most of his learning "on the job."

0 Replies

From Joe's link:

Quote:

A year after his "Axis of Evil" speech before the U.S. Congress, President Bush met with three Iraqi Americans, one of whom became postwar Iraq's first representative to the United States. The three described what they thought would be the political situation after the fall of Saddam Hussein. During their conversation with the President, Galbraith claims, it became apparent to them that Bush was unfamiliar with the distinction between Sunnis and Shiites.

Galbraith reports that the three of them spent some time explaining to Bush that there are two different sects in Islam--to which the President allegedly responded, "I thought the Iraqis were Muslims!"

0 Replies

As sobering as the above quote is, I still have to come down on O'Bill's side on this one.

The American people know things are a mess, that is why they voted in new people. They are tired of things going downhill while the Republicans offered nothing but excuses.

What the Democrats offered was competence and pragmatism as a relief. Putting a fellow in charge of the Intelligence Committee who doesn't know Shiite from Sunni is clearly not a good start in that direction. Fact is, a brief trip to the library and fifteen minutes with the Encyclopedia would provide the answers Reyes was asked.

For the country's sake, here is hoping Reyes starts his education in foreign affairs immediately, and surprises us with how much he has learned in how short a time.

0 Replies

If he learns a little in the few minutes reading it would take, he at least will be more advanced than the Pres is after six years.

0 Replies

Tu quoque Joe? :wink: Even if the flimsy evidence (that suggests Bush didn't know either) is true (and frankly, I don't doubt it); that provides not one iota of defense for Reyes' incompetence. Nor does it do anything to excuse Nancy Pelosi for making such a blunder. She too, sits on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and should reasonably be expected to pick a qualified chair person... in theory. That Reyes also sits on the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Human Intelligence, Analysis and Counterintelligence, should provide assurance of his expertise. Conversely; it actually magnifies the absurdity of his ignorance and should thoroughly demonstrate his incompetence to Republicans and Democrats alike. Why not select a Chairperson for Ways and Means that couldn't answer rudimentary questions about Social Security despite sitting on the Subcommittee on Social Security?

If the midterm elections were an indication of dissatisfaction with the incumbent President's Foreign Policy shortcomings, how can this nomination be indicative of anything but "more of the same"? Clearly, Nancy Pelosi would rather take care of her friends than her Country.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Tu quoque Joe? :wink:

Not at all. If I had defended Reyes by saying that Bush was just as bad, then that would be a tu quoque argument. But I didn't. Instead, I pointed out that people who were satisfied with an incompetent in the White House should not be so quick to criticize an incompetent in the relatively minor post of house intelligence committee chairman. That's not saying "Reyes is ok because Bush is even worse," that's saying "one should maintain consistent standards when it comes to criticisms of public officials."

OCCOM BILL wrote:

If the midterm elections were an indication of dissatisfaction with the incumbent President's Foreign Policy shortcomings, how can this nomination be indicative of anything but "more of the same"? Clearly, Nancy Pelosi would rather take care of her friends than her Country.

Considering that Reyes has never chaired a single session of the committee, I think it may be a bit premature to start criticizing his performance now. To be fair, he should be given at least six months to prove that he's a complete screw-up.

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
Tu quoque Joe? :wink:

Not at all. If I had defended Reyes by saying that Bush was just as bad, then that would be a tu quoque argument. But I didn't. Instead, I pointed out that people who were satisfied with an incompetent in the White House should not be so quick to criticize an incompetent in the relatively minor post of house intelligence committee chairman. That's not saying "Reyes is ok because Bush is even worse," that's saying "one should maintain consistent standards when it comes to criticisms of public officials."

That would sell if both the President's approval rating and the Mid-Term results didn't overwhelmingly indicate dissatisfaction. The fact remains that Bush's competence or lack thereof has neither bearing nor reason for inclusion in an assessment of Reyes' competence or lack thereof. That could be a sidebar at best.

joefromchicago wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
If the midterm elections were an indication of dissatisfaction with the incumbent President's Foreign Policy shortcomings, how can this nomination be indicative of anything but "more of the same"? Clearly, Nancy Pelosi would rather take care of her friends than her Country.

Considering that Reyes has never chaired a single session of the committee, I think it may be a bit premature to start criticizing his performance now. To be fair, he should be given at least six months to prove that he's a complete screw-up.

Chaired, no; but the man already sits on the committee as well as the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Human Intelligence, Analysis and Counterintelligence. Having demonstrated his incompetence as a committee and subcommittee member, what is fair about giving him 6 months to demonstrate his inadequacy at a higher post? What reasonable need is there for proof that he's a complete screw-up? Surely a candidate could be found with a rudimentary understanding of Public Enemy Number One to chair the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence... and should be.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

That would sell if both the President's approval rating and the Mid-Term results didn't overwhelmingly indicate dissatisfaction. The fact remains that Bush's competence or lack thereof has neither bearing nor reason for inclusion in an assessment of Reyes' competence or lack thereof. That could be a sidebar at best.

It's more of a comment on the abysmal performance of all branches of government and the blithe indifference of the American public. I too wish that our public servants performed at the highest levels of talent and ability, or even at a modest level of competence, but while I am constantly disappointed by their failure to achieve even the latter, I am never surprised.

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Chaired, no; but the man already sits on the committee as well as the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Human Intelligence, Analysis and Counterintelligence. Having demonstrated his incompetence as a committee and subcommittee member, what is fair about giving him 6 months to demonstrate his inadequacy at a higher post? What reasonable need is there for proof that he's a complete screw-up? Surely a candidate could be found with a rudimentary understanding of Public Enemy Number One to chair the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence... and should be.

Fortunately for us all, the house committee on intelligence does no intelligence gathering whatsoever, and only a slight amount of intelligence analysis. The main responsibility of the house committee, then, is to oversee the bureaucracies that actually perform those functions and to hold the executive branch to account when those bureaucracies fail to perform satisfactorily. For that the committee members do not need the same kind of specialized knowledge that one would expect from an intelligence operative in the field, although one would hope that they would have a general familiarity with the issues confronting those operatives.

Reyes has, it seems, failed to demonstrate at least some of that general knowledge that we should expect him to possess, and that's troubling. But, just as the public demonstrated a desire to put competent people in charge of the house's business, it also demonstrated a desire to get rid of the people who were formerly in charge. To that extent, Reyes is an improvement simply because he is not his predecessor. Given that the people have shown that they prefer a house of representatives in which Reyes is a committee chairman over one where he is not, it is, I think, preferable to defer to the judgment of the voters and give him an opportunity to fail miserably, just as the Republicans had been given, and enthusiastically seized, the opportunity to fail miserably for the previous twelve years.

0 Replies

http://cagle.msnbc.com/working/061215/allie.jpg

0 Replies

LoneStarMadam wrote:

Ramsey Clark, George Soros, to name but two slime bags are certainly aligned with communism

I'd somehow missed this staggering display of ignorance. George Soros, aligned with communism? What news that would be to the communists, ex-communists and post-communists of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, who almost to a man hate the guy! After all, Soros has only gifted hundreds of millions of dollars on supporting the pro-democracy, free media and human rights groups that have shouldered the brunt of getting such post-communist totalitarians as Milosevic, Kuchma, Iliescu, Meciar and Shevardnadze out.. sometimes, you wonder if people like LSM even realise there's a whole world out there.

0 Replies

As for Pelosi.. I'm hesitant about her (as in: she's obviously better than any Republican, but I would have hoped for someone better as Democrat). But Joe Sixpack seems to be unconcerned so far:

NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by the polling organizations of Peter Hart (D) and Bill McInturff (R). Dec. 8-11, 2006.

"Now I'm going to read you the names of several public figures and organizations, and I'd like you to rate your feelings toward each one as either very positive, somewhat positive, neutral, somewhat negative, or very negative. If you don't know the name, please just say so. Nancy Pelosi."

25% (Very/Somewhat) Positive
23% (Very/Somewhat) Negative

52% Neutral / Dont Know

Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll. Dec. 8-11, 2006.

"What is your impression of the new speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi? As of today, is it very favorable, somewhat favorable, somewhat unfavorable, very unfavorable or haven't you heard enough about her to say?"

27% Favorable
21% Unfavorable

52% Unsure / Havent heard enough

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

post-communist totalitarians as Milosevic, Kuchma, Iliescu, Meciar and Shevardnadze

For the sake of nuance, read "authoritarians" rather than "totalitarians" for Meciar and Shevardnadze.

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

Joe, meet madam, Madam meet Joe, this could be the beginning of beautiful, albeit brief, friendship.

Hehhehheh

0 Replies

Pelosi Aims To Recast Self, Party
New House Speaker Plans a 4-Day Fete

By Lyndsey Layton
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 22, 2006; Page A01

On a scale associated with presidential inaugurations, Nancy Pelosi is planning four days of celebration surrounding her Jan. 4 swearing-in as the first female speaker of the House. She will return to the blue-collar Baltimore neighborhood where she grew up, attend Mass at the women's college where she studied political science, and dine at the Italian Embassy as Tony Bennett sings "I Left My Heart in San Francisco."

But the hoopla is more than just a party.

Pelosi is grabbing the moment to present herself as the new face of the Democratic Party and to restore the party's image as one hospitable to ethnic minorities, families, religion, the working class and women.

"This is important strategic repositioning," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, who teaches political communication and rhetoric at the University of Pennsylvania. "Essentially, she's trying to embody the Democratic Party that she would like to offer the nation in 2008."

In her meticulous selection of events and venues during a week when she expects to attract media attention from as far away as Australia, Pelosi is clearly trying to bury the label "San Francisco liberal" that Republicans tried to affix to her during the midterm elections.

" 'San Francisco liberal' is a construct used very effectively for a long time by Republicans," Jamieson said. "It's a little like 'Taxachusetts.' It's telegraphic and very powerful. They haven't been able to get her identified with it because, to this point, a lot of people didn't know who she was. She's trying to position a counterimage before she gets well known."

Brendan Daly, Pelosi's spokesman, said the four-day celebration befits a historic moment in American politics. "We've never had a woman speaker before," Daly said. "This is a big deal."

Newt Gingrich (Ga.) took two days to celebrate his election as speaker when the Republicans formally took control of Congress in 1995. They were largely filled with speeches that outlined his "Contract With America" and fleshed out the ideology of the Republican revolution.

Pelosi's mission is entirely different. She is planning events that will highlight select parts of her personal life while muting her liberal voting record and ideology. "She's showing all the ways she shares other women's lives," said Celinda Lake, a Democratic strategist. "It reminds me of the way Sandra Day O'Connor introduced herself when she was nominated to be the first woman on the Supreme Court -- she talked about growing up on a ranch, working as a secretary, all the dimensions of her life."

Ken Sunshine, a communications consultant for entertainers and Democratic politicians, said Pelosi is not creating a false persona.

"If she's going to Mass, right on," Sunshine said. "Going to Baltimore, right on. This is really where she's from. She wasn't born in an elite setting. Here's a wife, mother, grandmother, and in her spare time, she becomes speaker of the House. I don't know if this is a new brand, but it's true about her. Why should the Republicans have a lock on those qualities?"

Pelosi's public relations offensive follows some missteps that marred her first few weeks after the elections, including a stinging defeat when she backed Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) over Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) for the job of House majority leader and a very public spat with Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), who was passed over for the chairmanship of the House intelligence committee.

Continued at this link

I seem to recall a lot of liberal hooha about Bush's inaugeration. Will we see the same ire being directed towards Palosi's massive expenditure? Surely there are some Katrina victims that could use the money being spent on this gala event....

0 Replies

yes indeed, let us close the barn door in Louisiana, long after bushco has let the horse out. Or should I say the four horsemen.....

0 Replies

I think we women have earned that celebration and the female Katrina victims (and probably a lot of males too) will celebrate the achievement right along with the rest of us wimins.

0 Replies

All things Pelosi

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know