Pelosi: Iraq isn’t a war, Gannett = “the voice of the military”

posted at 9:55 pm on November 8, 2006 by Allahpundit

Third in line for the presidency. Two heartbeats away. And one of those is arrhythmic.

The first segment comes from “The Situation Room.” If you missed the story about the Military Times editorials, read Bryan’s post. You’ll need that as background to appreciate her ignorance. The second segment’s from “Special Report” and runs a bit longer than necessary to include her restatement of the Powell doctrine, which remains an attractive policy for doves trying to look hawkish. She’s all for using overwhelming force once we go in, so long as we never go in.

Now she wants a say in Iraq planning.

‘Fess up, righty bloggers: as bummed as you are about last night’s washout, you’re kind of enjoying the thought of how much easier your job’s about to get.

I know. I am too.


For thoughts on Iraq from people who know what they’re talking about, check out the new Instacast on Rumsfeld with Austin Bay and Jim Dunnigan. There’s a fascinating split of opinion between them: Bay believes Rummy was in over his head from 9/11 onward but Dunnigan thinks no SecDef could have done better given the peculiarities, shall we say, of Arab culture. Bay also thinks Joementum was the big winner in the election. He might be right; the nutroots have already found themselves a new hate object.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Good Lord! This woman is nuttier than … oh wait, Southpark’s on, gotta go!

Tony737 on November 8, 2006 at 9:59 PM

…Pelosi…the greatest thing since Patton and Napoleon and that other general-guy…I quiver to see her in Kevlar!

…wait…isn’t that Kevlar that she has injected in her face?

Puritan1648 on November 8, 2006 at 10:06 PM

Its not a war to win? Its a problem to be solved? She will probably start by getting terrorist prisoners to talk with milk and cookies.

jman on November 8, 2006 at 10:18 PM

i’m sure that i will get some heat for this – but, i actually agree with Pelosi that the U.S. Millitary should have gone into Iraq with full force and maybe we could have been or even a possibility winning this war.

Starblazer on November 8, 2006 at 10:19 PM

I agree Starblazer, but she also said she would not have aurhorized it. What do you think she would have said if we had leveled Falluja?

The dems & RINOs tie our hands by challenging wire tapping, secret prisons, interrogation methods and wonder why we are not winning.

jman on November 8, 2006 at 10:24 PM

‘Its not a war to win. Its a problem to be solved.’

I just read this over the phone to my son. He informed me that his M1Abrams had a lot of problem solving ability.

Nuf said on this witch.

Limerick on November 8, 2006 at 10:28 PM

Not so fast – she will surely hand power back to the GOP in 08 if she continues to rack up stupid quotes like this one!

jman on November 8, 2006 at 10:32 PM

so either the U.S. Millitary goes “full force” or doesn’t send enough troops, the Bush Admin gets critisize either way by the democrats

Starblazer on November 8, 2006 at 10:32 PM

When Clinton became President, there was a noted quote from some Hollywood liberal, “It’s our military now! It’s our CIA now!”

Now we have the wonderful vapidity of noted military analyst Nancy Pelosi explaining the failed strategy of Rumsfeld.

Heck, we’ve all had a good time playing Monday-morning quarterback around the water cooler. My particular piece of 20/20 hindsight is that we should have nailed Al Sadr when he was holed up in his mosque during the first militia stand-off two or three years ago.

Why shouldn’t Nancy do it too?

I really long for days past when I thought Dianne Feinstein was the worst that California could throw at the military.

Anton on November 8, 2006 at 10:35 PM

Just a thought from a long term military guy but I think Rumsfield’s problems with the generals had far less to do with the war than his transformation of the DoD to make it more efficient, leaner and responsive to the post cold war environment. In doing this it cut a whole bunch of general officer billets and I think there was a lot of bitterness. People who had counted on more careerist oriented promotions found themselves out of luck. To complain about this would be considered whining which no media outlet would care about, but to imply it was the conduct of the war… Just an opinion.

Bradky on November 8, 2006 at 10:36 PM

Ok, Southpark is over, I’m back. Now, where were we? Oh, yeah, the old “It’s not a war” crap. Just like the larger war against islamoterrorists oughta be a police matter, not a military matter. Read ‘em their rights and book ‘em Dano. Then we can let the lawyers get ‘em outta jail so that they can blow up more buildings, you know, the ‘revolving door’ thing. Sounds great!

Lime, I can’t help but wonder what guys like your son must think about these election results. They’re fighting for us and we’re stabbing them in the back. Lord help us, and let us not suffer too much for our lack of gratitude.

Tony737 on November 8, 2006 at 10:37 PM

Just showing her “progressive” nature. Eventually we’ll get “Iraq is a law enforcement problem” She is all set to “reform” back to the glory days of the carter administration.

jdkchem on November 8, 2006 at 10:41 PM

I think the botox is getting into her synapses.

Soon she will not be allowed to give interviews to anyone other than Larry King.

rw on November 8, 2006 at 10:45 PM

Bradky………yep…..no more Army that needs to storm across the stepps of Russia. He made a lot of enemies. Just like the ‘Gun’ admirals Vs the ‘Flatop’ admirals. Internal war.

Tony737…..I will tell you what my son told me….’no big deal, we will do the missions we are sent on’……he was more worried about getting a waitress to notice him then he was about the Dems.

Limerick on November 8, 2006 at 10:46 PM

Additionally, it’s hard to see what’s going on in Iraq right now as being as much a failure of our policy as it is a failure of their culture.

That is a quote from Bryan’s article. I agreed with that the day I read it and I agree with it now. Having said that, it doesnt mean it isnt a WAR..which is the very DEFINITION OF A BIG PROBLEM…

I think the GOOD news is that the more she gets exposed and rattles on the more people are going to say WHAT???? And that bodes well for 2008. Gotta keep positive here. The Republicans got a comeuppance yesterday as apparently a LOT of people sat it out. Just look at the numbers..more Dems came out and they won. Learn a lesson and move on. And let Pelosi keep talking..it only HELPS.

labwrs on November 8, 2006 at 10:47 PM

i’m sure that i will get some heat for this – but, i actually agree with Pelosi that the U.S. Millitary should have gone into Iraq with full force and maybe we could have been or even a possibility winning this war.

Starblazer on November 8, 2006 at 10:19 PM

I agree, too – this not only makes obvious sense, but it allows warfighters to do what they are trained to do - win!!!

Just a thought from a long term military guy but I think Rumsfield’s problems with the generals had far less to do with the war than his transformation of the DoD to make it more efficient, leaner and responsive to the post cold war environment. In doing this it cut a whole bunch of general officer billets and I think there was a lot of bitterness. People who had counted on more careerist oriented promotions found themselves out of luck. To complain about this would be considered whining which no media outlet would care about, but to imply it was the conduct of the war… Just an opinion.

Bradky on November 8, 2006 at 10:36 PM

You may be part right – I always thought that it was a bit irresponsible to pare down the forces too far and still expect them to be able to fight two conflicts. Under “transformation, it cannot be done – period!

Rumsfield relies too much upon technology – which is great – to a point. But only to a point. There are things for which technology is both ineffective and useless. For those things only skill and training, combined with sufficient technology for the job, will prevail.

Keep in mind that throughout history people have said that this or that weapon will end or reduce the chance of war forever.

Wars are still being fought – as long as they are necessary, we will need armed forces that are properly equipped with not only the latest technology, but having it in sufficient numbers that we can fight anytime, anywhere – as well as having sufficient numbers of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines to do the job.

Emmett J. on November 8, 2006 at 11:17 PM

I have to say that watching the Dems turn on each other and resort to cannibalism should be very entertaining.

Benaiah on November 8, 2006 at 11:26 PM

You may be part right – I always thought that it was a bit irresponsible to pare down the forces too far and still expect them to be able to fight two conflicts. Under “transformation, it cannot be done – period!

Rumsfield relies too much upon technology – which is great – to a point. But only to a point. There are things for which technology is both ineffective and useless. For those things only skill and training, combined with sufficient technology for the job, will prevail.

Keep in mind that throughout history people have said that this or that weapon will end or reduce the chance of war forever.

Wars are still being fought – as long as they are necessary, we will need armed forces that are properly equipped with not only the latest technology, but having it in sufficient numbers that we can fight anytime, anywhere – as well as having sufficient numbers of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines to do the job.

Emmet,
Good points -but the “peace dividend” of the nineties took us to only a million uniformed in all services. At the same time we had more generals and admirals than we did in world war II when four million people wore the uniform. We could use more people I agree, but we have to cut the fat and have some integrity within the system.
Until congress and the public agrees to bump the budget up significantly, we are stuck with what we have. The AF is going through a real painful series of cuts. We have to recapitalize but can’t do it with the current budget. But to keep people with old equipment puts them at more risk since other countries are improving their armaments. Really a catch 22. I’m sure the other services are suffering the same dilemma. Better to acknowledge we can’t maintain two fronts and plan accordingly. Until the public pushes congress to address this it just gets more painful.
I’ll be retiring next year and will retire from a force that is 55% smaller than it was when I came in a quarter century ago.

Bradky on November 8, 2006 at 11:40 PM

‘Fess up, righty bloggers: as bummed as you are about last night’s washout, you’re kind of enjoying the thought of how much easier your job’s about to get.

No, not particularly. There are real lives in the ballance: my friends in Iraq serving in the military and the Iraqis they’re trying to protect. But hey, thanks for putting your lack of anything resembling concern for their welfare into clear view.

But hey, I’m not a blogger.

spmat on November 8, 2006 at 11:47 PM

Fess up, righty bloggers: as bummed as you are about last night’s washout, you’re kind of enjoying the thought of how much easier your job’s about to get.

(knuckles cracking) Time for some OFFENSE.

Buck up, troops. Mama said there’d be Congresses like this.

Good Lt on November 8, 2006 at 11:56 PM

When Clinton became President, there was a noted quote from some Hollywood liberal, “It’s our military now! It’s our CIA now!”

That liberal was Ron Silver. He got an attitude adjustment on 9/11. Last night in a PJM he said “You can’t win a war if you don’t believe you’re in one.” So there’s hope.

The Monster on November 8, 2006 at 11:57 PM

PIMF: ‘PJM interview’

The Monster on November 8, 2006 at 11:58 PM

Speaker of the House Pelousy cannot be ignored as America has spoken, and gotten what it wanted thanks to the cut-and-run Conservatives. Indeed, we can now look foreward to the election of moderate Hitlary.

DannoJyd on November 9, 2006 at 12:01 AM

A situation is where your face looks like a 40 year old but your body looks 66.

tarpon on November 9, 2006 at 12:02 AM

oh freakin NO – Don’t you get it. Pelosi is a shill – she is trying to scare the sh#^T out of the Righties – so we will beg to have our troops sent home immediately. She is more dangerous that Bin Laden!!!

iam7545 on November 9, 2006 at 12:03 AM

She is more dangerous that Bin Laden!!!

A bit of a stretch, but she’s certainly less attractive than bin Laden.

That’s right. I went there.

Good Lt on November 9, 2006 at 12:16 AM

spmat on November 8, 2006 at 11:47 PM

I don’t think he meant that as a poke to the Military… George Bush is still the Commander in Chief. You know that Conservatives love the military way more than Liberals. I think he was referring to the sheer stupidity of the new leaders in Congress.

gmoonster on November 9, 2006 at 12:21 AM

Fess up, righty bloggers: as bummed as you are about last night’s washout, you’re kind of enjoying the thought of how much easier your job’s about to get.

No comment ; )

The Ugly American on November 9, 2006 at 12:26 AM

Speaker Botox is clearly a nitwit, but there are lots of commentators who have criticized the troop levels, and some of them know something about warfare.

That said, and unlike Speaker Botox, they are probably also aware that Rumsfeld’s force went through Iraq like a dust storm, and controlled the entire country in three weeks, from a military standpoint. We now know that in this cesspool, military control was only the first issue. After that, it needed border control, a functioning court system, and about 300,000 trained policemen.

Jaibones on November 9, 2006 at 12:38 AM

I’m just tired of the politics-as-horserace metaphor that people keep throwing about, like “You don’t really take any of this seriously, do you?”

George Will is a fine writer and all, but just what the hell has he actually done to improve the world about which he pontificates? He’s spent his life positioning himself as a “voice of reason” and an “open-minded conservative,” to wit a patsy and a comic foil for the liberal establishment.

Now there’s this patronizing little quote from whomever (it isn’t important), offering to “righty bloggers” the chance to assume their own precious little place as comic foils, ready to do their job playing fool to the wise king Reid.

BS. Reid, Pelosi et al. represent a substantive threat to this republic. Sure, I’m an idiot, but I’m not content being their idiot. I want them relegated to the dustbin of irrelevance. I want them shamed and crushed. I want their political will broken. I want them to desire a nice getaway in Maine more than the toil of dealing with the war they’d have to fight in Washington. Basically, I want them to want to give up, say uncle, and get the hell out of our way.

I’m not here to make a paycheck. Why? Because my family’s life depends on it.

spmat on November 9, 2006 at 12:43 AM

She will probably start by getting terrorist prisoners to talk with milk and cookies.

Hey, in Nancy’s congressional district, many people pay good money to undergo “robust interrogation.” Maybe she can bring some ideas to the table.

Coyote D. on November 9, 2006 at 1:20 AM

A look into the future….
Terrorists bill of right vs American rights, post birth abortion (yes I said it) vs true education, SP’s vs conservatism, etc….
We have to look at this as it is right now and how it became this way. If we trully look at the house races, the dems ran as conservatives. The played the conservative card. Are those canidates really in that mindset or was it a poitical play? Will there be a shakedown of the new dems by the leadership? Let’s watch and see. If the new dems really believe in what they campaigned on, lets steal a few, build back the Newt congress, and win one for the Gipper next go round. If not, it will be thier own destruction. ‘nough said…

lsutiger on November 9, 2006 at 1:21 AM

My son had just gotten up and was meandering around the living room Wednesday morning.

So I told him, “you don’t have to worry about going back to Iraq.”

He said, “why not?”

“Because Iraq is coming HERE.”

Here’s how I see it, ladies and gentlemen. Her comment proved to all by the ardent Bush Haters that like all moonbats, she’s insane.

After January (when the 110th Congress convenes), the responsiblility for the war will fall upon the Democratic Party as Pelosi openly intends to impose their cut and run agenda.

WHEN, not if, a 9/11/01-sized terrorism strike happens after that date, the people America will blame will be the Democrats. No amount of MSM cover will help Pelosi, Reid, Durbin, etc. No amount of spin from Matthews, and the rest of the treasonous media will be able to get them off the hook. And if that strike is a nuke detonated in one of our cities that made in Iran or North Korea, they will wish they perished at ground zero, because they will own it.

georgej on November 9, 2006 at 1:36 AM

I wonder if I’m safer because I live near San Fran?
They wouldn’t srike close to Nancy — right?

I got through last night o.k. but tonight is tough. It was much easier to take these morons before they got made boss.
AP, you should be proud of this:

Third in line for the presidency. Two heartbeats away. And one of those is arrhythmic.

CanaryinaCoalMine on November 9, 2006 at 2:14 AM

Do you think Nancy will reconsider taking the “I word” off the table when she figures out that a twofer of the P and VP would put her in the chair?

CanaryinaCoalMine on November 9, 2006 at 2:17 AM

Speaker Botox…

*snort*….HAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!

OMG I’m so stealin’ that.

The Ugly American on November 9, 2006 at 2:21 AM

Third in line for the presidency. Two heartbeats away. And one of those is arrhythmic.

Best line Ive heard in two days! how very ominous

Viper1 on November 9, 2006 at 5:50 AM

Up until now, re-enlistments were high. I’m afraid that may change now. Bush is still CinC but the Dhimmicrat Nancyboys will try to tie his hands, cut funding, retreat, etc.

I got outta the A.F. just in time to avoid Klinton. Some of my buds that I kept in touch with said it all went down the tubes almost the next day.

I knew some other guys who were in when Carter was prez and said how bad it sucked, but when Reagan took over all of a sudden they were training again, pay went up, it became a respected job again to be in the Service.

Let’s all hope and pray that the Nancyboys are not able to hinder the Troops too much from congress. As long as Bush is CinC they will be well taken care of, but if the dhimmis win in ’08 expect to see re-enlistments go way way down and jihadi enlistments go way way up.

Tony737 on November 9, 2006 at 6:38 AM

SPEAKER BOTOX….new righty vernacular…LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!

And our job is about to get criminally easy—they are like ducks in a shooting gallery…they won’t know whether to shit or go blind.

seejanemom on November 9, 2006 at 6:50 AM

Somehere Osama is partying like it’s 1199.

E L Frederick on November 9, 2006 at 7:48 AM

But on the plus side, you must admit it is going to be harder to oppose a reconstruction than a war for the nutroots.

B Moe on November 9, 2006 at 8:31 AM

She’s an idiot…

BadBrad on November 9, 2006 at 8:51 AM

A look into the future….
Terrorists bill of right vs American rights, post birth abortion (yes I said it) vs true education, SP’s vs conservatism, etc….

They apparrently already have more rights than our soldiers. The dems scream about how we treat the poor terrorist detainees, yet were silent when our soldiers were put in shackles without being charged immediately following the Haditha incident.

It makes me madder than hell to see our soldiers treated in ths way, but don’t expect the same indignation from our new “leadership”. They are the party of double standards.

jman on November 9, 2006 at 8:56 AM

Third in line for the presidency. Two heartbeats away. And one of those is arrhythmic.

Thanks for the observation. Add my heart to the arrhythmia list.

GPE on November 9, 2006 at 9:33 AM

Pelosi never served in the military, so she’s not allowed to have an opinion on the war.

JackM on November 9, 2006 at 9:33 AM

‘Fess up, righty bloggers: as bummed as you are about last night’s washout, you’re kind of enjoying the thought of how much easier your job’s about to get.

True. After visiting with giddy fawning Democrats all day yesterday, I came to realize that they are still all Secular Socialist “progressives”.

A lot of people don’t understand what this really means. But we are definitely going to find out.

Hopefully the RNC is watch and listening now, because the majority of Americans don’t want a Secular society and the don’t want a Socialist government.

Remember this: Democrats didn’t win because the majority of Americans liked their ideas, they won because the majority of Republican Voters didn’t vote.

Point is that a large portion of America didn’t vote for either party in this election and Democrats won by default, not by purpose.

Yes, Democrats do deserve credit for their efforts and for their wins. And they now have a chance to show us what they are really made of.

Lawrence on November 9, 2006 at 9:35 AM

Well guys we had a good run for about 5 years. I am talking to members of the Armed Forces past and present. The American people have spoken and they have said that your sacrifices of blood, sweat, tears, and in 3,000 plus cases life were for naught. The American people have put into power the very people who have compared you to Nazi storm troopers, terrorists, who have spit on you and called you stupid, who advocate that all of you be tried in the World Court for war crimes, who for 5 years have done nothing but condemn and criticise your every action. I will be taking the few momentos I have in my cube at work that reminded me of my military service since there is no sense in making myself a target.
America has spoken, I listened, and now I will crawl back into my hole. The only suspense left for me is to see how long before our soldiers are out of Iraq. I say the end of April ’07.
Thanks America!

LakeRuins on November 9, 2006 at 9:39 AM

She is right, it is not a war.

It is a ‘Police Action’.

Like the 56 year long ‘Police Action’ in Korea.

Marvin on November 9, 2006 at 9:57 AM

Are we going to play word puzzles for the next 2 years?

budorob on November 9, 2006 at 9:59 AM

“The difference between the right word and the almost-right word is the difference between the lightning and the lightning-bug,” – Mark Twain

Of course we are going to be playing word games, those who can’t, teach or are in Politics.

E L Frederick on November 9, 2006 at 10:16 AM

At least she didn’t call it an “opportunity to excel” or some other BS management double speak.
Too bad she will be House Majority Leader; based on her brilliant analysis she seems to be the perfect person to replace Secretary Rumsfeld; assuming we don’t mind losing in Iraq, anyway you define it, and we’re OK with Hamas style attacks here at home. What a maroon!

Have an Evil day.

DrEvil on November 9, 2006 at 10:23 AM

Well guys we had a good run for about 5 years. I am talking to members of the Armed Forces past and present. The American people have spoken and they have said that your sacrifices of blood, sweat, tears, and in 3,000 plus cases life were for naught. The American people have put into power the very people who have compared you to Nazi storm troopers, terrorists, who have spit on you and called you stupid, who advocate that all of you be tried in the World Court for war crimes, who for 5 years have done nothing but condemn and criticise your every action. I will be taking the few momentos I have in my cube at work that reminded me of my military service since there is no sense in making myself a target.
America has spoken, I listened, and now I will crawl back into my hole. The only suspense left for me is to see how long before our soldiers are out of Iraq. I say the end of April ‘07.
Thanks America!

LakeRuins on November 9, 2006 at 9:39 AM

Lake,
Please speak for yourself. You know that by a long shot MOST democrats don’t view the military that way. And as a fellow service member it pains me to hear you say the sacrifices were for naught, even if it is not your sentiment.
There are some who feel this way but they are the wacko far left. There are even some very strange extremist rightists who revel in our casualties.
If we keep talking this way we will quickly become the wacko far right and be dismissed just as much as the wacko left is.
This was just one election. If we go down the rabbit hole of classifying all persons in one party as anti-military far left I think we could be in the political wilderness a very long time.
Please leave your mementos where they are at. Be proud not scared.

Bradky on November 9, 2006 at 10:34 AM

OK Nancy, since the honeymoon is over, how about you
fessing up to how many illegal aliens you and you’re
husband have employed in capitalistic Kalyfornia?

WAITING?

byteshredder on November 9, 2006 at 11:17 AM

The Army Times is the voice of the military? My God, this woman is a walking, talking billboard for why we cannot afford to have a democrat as Commander in Chief. Pray for our troops, while we still can.

BohicaTwentyTwo on November 9, 2006 at 11:27 AM

Now she wants a say in Iraq planning.

‘Fess up, righty bloggers: as bummed as you are about last night’s washout, you’re kind of enjoying the thought of how much easier your job’s about to get.

Sure, no problem. Because once Nancy or any other dem has a say in Iraq planning, they share responsibility for whatever happens from here on out. No more free ride on the issue.

thirteen28 on November 9, 2006 at 11:31 AM

Bay also thinks Joementum was the big winner in the election. He might be right; the nutroots have already found themselves a new hate object.

Un. Freakin. Believable.

As much as it pains me to say it, Rahm did a great job for the dems recruiting candidates who could win, and he should probably get a lion’s share of the credit by his party for their newfound majority status.

On second thought, I guess I should expect this from the nutroots, which I why the job of critics on the right will get much easier, because they will still have their say in setting the agenda.

thirteen28 on November 9, 2006 at 11:38 AM

Bradky, I am deeply upset over this election and it is because of my personal history. I joined the Army in ’77, back when we were all “drug users, baby killers, low life scum sucking idiots”. Along came Ronald Reagan and suddenly we were able to hold our head high. This quaint little experiment of an All Volunteer Force just might work afterall. We worked hard to prove to a unbelieving country that we could do this. Then the “Wall” came down and the first thing to come out of Washington was downsize. Well we survived that and continued to build the most professional, best trained and best equipped military on the face of this planet. I left the service in ’99, my time was up and then Sep 11 happened.
I had a lot of my friends and acquantances still on active duty who answered the call of the Commander in Chief. Some of them I will never see again. A lot of them I trained, especially if they were Infantry since I closed out my career at Ft Benning as an instructor.
Now a lot of the same people who 25 years ago were telling the world what low lifes those in the military were are now elected to Congress. They have taken to the floor of the capitol on numerous occasions since this war on Islamic extremeism began and have continued to repeat the same mantra of the 70′s.
For me it is very personal. You can not spend your entire life denigrating those who wear the uniform and then suddenly as if by some sort of magical fairy dust suddenly was sprinkled on them and they will now embrace the military. A leopard can not change it spots.
It is the short sightedness of the American population and the ease at which they are manipulated that I am angry at. I appreciate places like Hot Air that give me a place to vent, and with time I am sure my anger will mellow, but the first one of these Democratic overlords that take to the floor of Congress and issues one word disparging the men and women who wear the uniform of our country will send me once again into a flying “Told Ya So” rage.

LakeRuins on November 9, 2006 at 11:40 AM

but, i actually agree with Pelosi that the U.S. Millitary should have gone into Iraq with full force and maybe we could have been or even a possibility winning this war.
Starblazer on November 8, 2006 at 10:19 PM

Woah nellie. She’s talking out both sides of her ‘lifted’ arse.
We dont go at all (suck up dems) or we go big (suck up righties). She wouldnt do a frickin thing. She’s evil and know apparently deceptively smart or coached.
Ms. Botox has no clue. I say send her to Iraq for 2 weeks, put her in with Irish’s kid (limerick) in the tank for a week, one week walking the streets. Then I might listen to something she says.
I bet we get this two sided crap for months. Watch her, she won’t give us anything concrete, it will be as vague as her face is tight.

shooter on November 9, 2006 at 11:53 AM

sorry gerogej, but if there is another attack on this country the liberals in this country will no doubtly blame Bush, because we created more terrorists by going into Iraq

Starblazer on November 9, 2006 at 12:28 PM

LakeRuins,
I appreciate the further explanation and can relate to all you are saying. I have been in since July 1981 and lived on a base in the 70′s as a dependent.
I am not trying to lecture you but if we are to regain majority status with a party that really values conservative principles it will be by convincing the soft middle of the rightness of our conviction. Vent away but let’s not lose sight of the objectives and the most effective to get those results.
Quite understandably there is much rage in these first few days after the election. But the sooner we get it out of our systems and channel it into a purpose the better for all. The far lefties would love nothing better than to see us all melting down like they did after the impeachment.
Thanks again for the reply and more importantly thanks for your 20+ years of service during difficult times.

Bradky on November 9, 2006 at 12:40 PM

In spite of my dour mood I do believe in miracles.

LakeRuins on November 9, 2006 at 1:14 PM

Somehere Osama is partying like it’s 1199.
E L Frederick

Give it up!!

CanaryinaCoalMine on November 9, 2006 at 1:51 PM

Hey, in Nancy’s congressional district, many people pay good money to undergo “robust interrogation.” Maybe she can bring some ideas to the table.

Coyote D. on November 9, 2006 at 1:20 AM

HAHA! Waaayyy too true.

But seriously, she and her hubby have amassed an approximate $55mil. using non-union contractors (illegal aliens) in their vineyard and not allowing any of their hotel or restaurant workers to be in unions. And she won the Cesar Chavez Award from the UFW!!!

THe most scary thing is her former leadership of the Progressive Caucus…Back before they took down the website in 1999, it was hosted by the Democratic Socialists of America.

Prior to the cleanup of its website in 1999, the DSA included a song list featuring “The Internationale,” the worldwide anthem of communism and socialism. Another song on the site was “Red Revolution” sung to the tune of “Red Robin.” The lyrics went: “When the Red Revolution brings its solution along, along, there’ll be no more lootin’ when we start shootin’ that Wall Street throng. …” Another song removed after WorldNetDaily’s expose was “Are You Sleeping, Bourgeoisie?” The lyrics went: “Are you sleeping? Are you sleeping? Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie. And when the revolution comes, We’ll kill you all with knives and guns, Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie.”

NTWR on November 9, 2006 at 2:25 PM

Thomas Sowell says it clear and well as always…

Where is the West?

I am not in agreement with Pelosi when I also say that the current situation in Iraq is no longer war. We won the war to remove Saddam and subdue the national forces. Continuing to call it a “war with Iraq” is a lie. We are helping Iraq to defend itself against those who would return it to tyranny, as it is our responsibility to do having invaded.

I agree that we should not be shackled on the field in getting that job completed, with the most ridiculous Rules of Engagement ever devised. Pelosi would pretend to be a hawk by saying this, but she never would have allowed us to go in the first place, so hawkish strategy declarations are absurd.

She’s an idiot, but she’s been getting tutored on how to sound less like a banshee. Replay some of her rantings from four years ago, you’ll see she’s been attending the Clinton school of how to apply lipstick to a pig.

LakeRuins, preach on brother. Navy, ’83 – ’03. Being younger, I was fortunate to ride the first wave of Reagan rebuilding in the military. Everything else you wrote applies to me, however. Many of the smugly victorious people on capital hill today have never once voted to support the military, and now want the nation to believe that they know better how to conduct military operations.
They denigrate those in uniform, they decry any use of strength as imperialistic or inhumane, and they believe that “problems to be solved” against a hateful, intractible, rule-the-world ideology can be accomplished with words. Thank you very much, John McCain.

The good news is, Reagan managed to get the military rebuilt against a strongly opposing House and Senate, so all is not lost. Now if only such as Reagan were in the Oval Office.

Freelancer on November 9, 2006 at 2:46 PM

Today Speaker Botox said that -”we have to let the Iraqi Gov’t know that they MUST stop the armed insurgency and give them a deadline!!”

Wow Miss Nancy – what a novel freakin idea! I wish someone thought of that before!! You are so freakin smart and your pasted on face is really lovely!

I would spin her genius solution around and say -”Hey Miss Nancy – tell the freakin Democratic mayors of LA, Baltimore, Miami, Gary,IND …….- “YOU MUST STOP THE ARMED VIOLENCE IN OUR CITIES and tell those all of the drug dealers and street gangs that there will be a deadline for all of this nonsense to STOP.” Next problem….

She really is an idiot. I am getting info from an Israeli company now to start a business building underground shelters at peoples homes. It is the latest craze in Israel and I am sure that it they will soon be the latest suburban craze.

iam7545 on November 9, 2006 at 2:53 PM

Well, at least she isn’t hiding her ignorance.

By the way, here is her how she is so much against corruption.

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=110906D

Starts at the second paragraph.

BobK on November 9, 2006 at 3:25 PM

So now it is not a war?! Someone forgot to tell
Cindy Sheehan.

Now the “back-spinning” will begin. How long before she has her own “Mission Accomplished” sign?

Whatever opportunity there is now to “flip the script” and reveal that Democrats are not “liberals”, but “PARTISANS” who will say anything to get elected – we are about to have a barrage of puff peaces about Democrats (especially Clinton).

Some have commented that things will be easier – but what has changed? They still have the Press, and we still have the President. The Dems will use misdirection for two years, running out the clock. The press will convince us that things are better (or worse – whichever serves the purpose).

No, we KNOW we can not believe them. We KNOW we can not trust them. We are tired, but the battle has just begun.

Agrippa2k on November 9, 2006 at 4:16 PM

And, as usual, it is up to we, the people, to inform the masses the best we can so that they will wake up and pay attention to what is going on with our country.

Both sides (as well as the all-too fickle press) will use misdirection, and we will have to, as always, read between the lines.

It will be a long process – I think that the best way to get them to show their true colors would be to call their bluff – if they want to sound like hawks – then challenge them in front of the American people (use the media) to come up with a plan to win and hold them to it.

Its a possible win-win. If they come up with something good, our soldiers (and us) benefit. If they don’t, then they are exposed for the frauds they are.

Just a thought.

Otherwise, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Or as the Who famously said many years ago -

“Meet the new boss – same as the old boss”.

How long will it take us, collectively, before we “don’t get fooled again”?

Emmett J. on November 9, 2006 at 6:51 PM

Not a war. This is why I call the Democrats … “Nancyboys”

Tony737 on November 9, 2006 at 7:45 PM

Not a war. This is why I call the Democrats … “Nancyboys”

Tony737 on November 9, 2006 at 7:45 PM

“Nancyboys” – absolutely classic.

Way to go, Tony737!

Emmett J. on November 9, 2006 at 9:39 PM