Video: Reporter asks Pelosi, how are you “anything other than a failure” on Iraq?
posted at 12:39 pm on September 12, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
People were e-mailing about this yesterday and Instapundit picked up it this morning so here you go. It’s fun as a piece of theater but the seeds of Republican ruin lie within. It’s true, the Dems have failed to implement their agenda on Iraq, but only because they lack the 60 votes needed to break a GOP filibuster and the 67 needed to override a GOP presidential veto. The obvious lesson for the majority of the public who wants to start pulling troops out is to remove those roadblocks at the polls next November, unless of course things improve significantly in Iraq between now and then and anti-war sentiment softens.
It’ll be interesting to see whether and how the prospect of an anti-war landslide next fall motivates the Iraqi government to get it in gear. The left has been insisting for months that a partial pullout will “send a message” to Maliki that he and the parliament need to get cracking on reconciliation. If they’re right, then polls next spring showing the Dems with a 10- or 15-point lead should accomplish the same trick, since a victory for the left means some type of significant drawdown starting in January 2009 and Maliki, the Sunnis, the Kurds, and certainly Iraq’s neighbors all know it. Make a move soon, boys — well in advance of next November, because jittery Republican senators aren’t going to wait that long to flip — or prepare for the consequences. The Saudis in particular may want to start here.
Anyway, a bad day all in all yesterday for Madam Speaker. But watch Reid try to come to the aid of the damsel in distress. Pelosi’s having none of it.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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
Comment pages:
Was the Speaker implying that the reporter was from FOX news, and therefore had a political bias?
Dork B. on September 12, 2007 at 12:50 PM
AP, perhaps you can enlighten me. I have yet to see the poll that specifically calls for a cut and run from Iraq. The wording I have seen has been more along the lines of “are you satisfied with the progress” or “would you like to see US troops come home” or “do you want to see additional US casualties” or something stupid like that. The questions seem to be framed to get a result.
And I don’t buy into the theory that the Dems won in the last election because of America’s disgust with the war.
conservnut on September 12, 2007 at 12:51 PM
Coming from a woman who spends half of her time feeding memes to the press for use in questions asked of Republicans…
DaveS on September 12, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Ah yes, it’s just as sickening hearing it the second time as it was the first.
Sorry Pelosi, nobody annointed you queen Commisar.
BKennedy on September 12, 2007 at 12:52 PM
The editors of the papers that commission those polls don’t want the real question asked, I imagine.
DaveS on September 12, 2007 at 12:53 PM
Hmm sounds like that reporter extracted that question straight from Bin Laden’s rant.
Allah is in the House
Zetterson on September 12, 2007 at 12:53 PM
“to come and join with us and do the right thing for the company.”
A little Freudian slip by Reid?
BadgerHawk on September 12, 2007 at 12:54 PM
To me it sounded like Jim Axelrod, but I could be mistaken.
Ordinary1 on September 12, 2007 at 12:55 PM
You said next November and next Fall. Did you mean ‘07 or ‘08?
JiangxiDad on September 12, 2007 at 12:55 PM
The attempts by the dimocrats to undermine the troops has resulted in the lowest ratings for a Congress in history. This is not looking good for the first dimocratically controlled Congress in over a decade. Failure fits.
volsense on September 12, 2007 at 12:55 PM
I doubt it was anyone from FOX, but if it was, my money’s on Shep Smith.
Laura on September 12, 2007 at 12:57 PM
Why limit Pelosi’s failure to Iraq? Yes, it is true that the inability to muster enough votes is part of the reason for Pelosi’s inability to immediately surrender the troops and abandon the Iraqi people to the “benevolence” of Iran and Syria BUT how does that explain the rest of Madame Speaker’s failures:
1. Constantly putting forward unfit Democrats for key Congressional assignments. Jane Harman was the best choice for the Chairmanship of the House Intelligence Committee but Pelosi put forward Alcee Hastings and settled on a no-name from Texas just because she has a personal vendetta against Ms. Harman. There also is the whole Jack Murtha as her #2 epic. Not to mention the fact that William Jefferson is still in Congress and still has committee assignments (way to drain that swamp- you go girl).
2. There is the fact that she has repeatedly put in earmarks that make the GOP years look lean. Remember tunagate? Remember that $25M gift (in a bill funding the troops) Pelsoi was trying to give a single spinach producer that “coincidently” was a major Democrat contributor?
3. There is the fact that she has been unable to get a single part of the “rat” promised 100 hours agenda pushed into law with the exception of the hike in minimum wage which was pretty much agreed to with the GOP prior to the 2006 elections and relatively non-controversial.
4. There is the fact that the only thing the Democrat party has done since taking power is launch an endless stream of “get Bush” investigations and hearings.
5. There is the fact that the government’s fiscal year ends in three weeks and the “rats” aren’t even close to getting a budget out the door- let alone through the President. Our troops and military will suffer under yet another round of continuing resolutions and inadequate funding because the “rats” are unable to end the war and refuse to go on the record as approving the funding the troops they sent to fight it.
Bottom line, Pelosi and Reid are complete and total failures and not just because they can’t muster enough votes to undermine the operations in Iraq. They are simply the wrong individuals to be in majority party leadership positions. They are nasty partisans who refuse to work across the aisle and/or create the right mix of bullying and horse swapping necessary for their pathetic little political party to gets its agenda out of committee.
highhopes on September 12, 2007 at 1:00 PM
No, Shep’s too busy bashing Bush over Katrina every chance he gets. On the whole, he’s as biased over the issue as Geraldo is over immigration.
highhopes on September 12, 2007 at 1:02 PM
‘08.
I’m happy to enlighten you. Question 53 in the new Times poll shows 76% of the public wants “large numbers” of U.S. troops out within two years. Of that 76%, 54% want them out in less than a year. In the new WaPo poll, per questions 12 and 13, 58% say they want troop levels decreased and the vast, vast majority of them want it done either “right away” or by the end of the year.
Granted, no one’s specifying the numbers of troops to withdraw but neither is Petraeus beyond the surge brigades.
Allahpundit on September 12, 2007 at 1:02 PM
Hilarious.
“I won’t ask your affiliation.” That’s because it might be a bit embarrassing know that he’s a Democrat from MSNBC…
Jaibones on September 12, 2007 at 1:03 PM
Sounds like the questioner is a Sheehan supporter.
jaime on September 12, 2007 at 1:03 PM
Reporter: How are you anything but a failure when it comes to Iraq?
Reid: Why, we legislated college loans!
hehehehe
cadetwithchips2 on September 12, 2007 at 1:07 PM
Hard to imagine Iraq being the focus in Fall ‘08. George Bush said he will not allow Iran to have nuclear weapons. We accomplish that through diplomacy or war, or both, but will steal the spotlight from the Iraq war, or permanently change it’s character.
JiangxiDad on September 12, 2007 at 1:07 PM
Pelosi probably doesn’t want to know the affiliation. She can easily rationalize it as a vrwc question when it is just as likely coming from the left, with whom she is in hot hot water….
rw on September 12, 2007 at 1:08 PM
I just ate and as soon as Reid opened his mouth, I had to fight back my lunch in order to save my monitors. He claimed defeat already. Why does he have to say anything else.
“The Presidents war”? Hmmm, I seem to recall the President had bipartisan support and nearly all agreed to go to war in Iraq.
OT – has the congress worked a 5 day week yet. I have not kept track. I am betting – NO!
On-my-soap-box on September 12, 2007 at 1:10 PM
Oh really? Maybe not the whole pie, but I’m pretty sure a big slice. I’d be curious to hear your perception.
Man o man, Reid just chomps at the bit for that mike time.
SouthernDem on September 12, 2007 at 1:17 PM
Where are we at now… about 1,000 hours? And still she’s accomplished nothing that benefits us ALL, except appointing nefarious sewer-rats to positions on high, and that’s no benefit to anyone but THEM and THEIR special interests. The exact opposite of her/their campaign promises is all they’ve done.
Typical politicians. Piss ants, the lot of them.
SilverStar830 on September 12, 2007 at 1:19 PM
Lol, Pelosi’s “knight in shining
armorglasses?”Did anyone catch Reid:
Reid: “I can’t stand here without defending… y-y-y- you.”
(Pelosi, away from mic: “You don’t have to defend me” [awkward chuckle])
Reid (recognizing his habit of creepiness around Madam Botox): “Us.”
Oh, Uncle McFeely, who do you think you’re foolin’? You think we forgot about this?
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/04/25/video-reid-puts-a-squeeze-on-pelosis-shoulder/
RightWinged on September 12, 2007 at 1:19 PM
No….not ‘the people’ it is ‘the sample’. Polls are the biggest sham and the media loves them because it is impossible to challenge them. Every day another poll to fit the message they want the sheeple to believe.
Limerick on September 12, 2007 at 1:22 PM
It seems obvious enough to me Iraq’s main focus will be the home of several American military bases supporting the Iranian war by November ‘08.
Griz on September 12, 2007 at 1:23 PM
And we’ll all be glad we’ve got ‘em.
Griz on September 12, 2007 at 1:24 PM
And …
Reid: “We held hearings on the war.” … “We passed sweeping ethics and lobbying reform.” … “We unraveled the scandal at Walter Reed.”
hehehehe indeed. This from the Majority Leader in the Senate.
Call the wahmbulance.
fogw on September 12, 2007 at 1:26 PM
I am sorry but, didn’t a kid unravel the problems at Walter Reed in a video? Is Reid so desparate to gain glory for the dimocraps he will take candy from a baby?
A rhetorical question – I know.
On-my-soap-box on September 12, 2007 at 1:30 PM
I agree that polls don’t mean squat.
If MSM (or whoever) does a poll and the results don’t jibe with the message they want the poll to project, they simply don’t release the results of the poll.
However, if the results confirm their position, they send the poll results to all media outlets to trumpet.
omnipotent on September 12, 2007 at 1:31 PM
Reid did far more than unravel it… words fell out of his mouth pertaining to the subject. And in the end, isn’t that what really counts?
cadetwithchips2 on September 12, 2007 at 1:35 PM
There is no way to verify the sample. You have to rely on the pollsters word that the sample was x-y-z groups. No granted, if the poll is being used in business (election campaign) then the pollster wants to get it right so he gets another contract later. But polls like the ‘how do you feel about the war’ are complete scams. You could do the whole thing in Notepad and post it and there would be no possbile way to prove it was faked.
Limerick on September 12, 2007 at 1:35 PM
The same war you voted for, Harry?
That, and is it me, or does Durbin look more and more like Spanky McFarland with each passing day?
yo on September 12, 2007 at 1:38 PM
I don’t know, the question sounded objective to me. Of course from San Fran Nan’s viewpoint, any question that is not framed from the lib point of view will sound biased and right wing.
Mallard T. Drake on September 12, 2007 at 1:42 PM
I rarely “fix” other people’s comments, so apologies in advance to cadetwithchips2, but,
subject. And in the end, isn’t that what really counts?
Had to fix that for ya.
RushBaby on September 12, 2007 at 1:55 PM
Good catch ;)
cadetwithchips2 on September 12, 2007 at 1:56 PM
The thing is, people are more than willing to believe polls whenever it benefits them. Including the right.
SouthernDem on September 12, 2007 at 1:56 PM
What’s sad is there are actually people out there who think she makes sense.
csdeven on September 12, 2007 at 1:58 PM
Everything bad is because of the President. Everything good that the Dems can take credit for is wonderful, showing how hard they are working.
Reid is a sad sack. I’ve been paying attention as much as anyone-the one credit to the account of Congress-both parties-is the minimum wage increase. If the legislative branch could be convinced to do their job, and leave the executive branch to do its job, the world would be more in sync.
I am a taxpayer-I never approved the dems illegal war of attrition against President Bush. If we had a political “Lemon Law” in place, possibly we could recoup some of our losses and trade in this Congress for one that actually works.
Doug on September 12, 2007 at 2:09 PM
From what I see on these polls, these are not even “likely voters” In the first one 25% didn’t even vote in the last election.
As far as the last election goes. I believe that the Dems won (and remember it was not by much in most cases) was because the conservative base stayed home. And unless we get a candidate to pump them up in the next election, they will stay home again.
conservnut on September 12, 2007 at 2:13 PM
Southern Dem: I think one of main rubbutals to the theory of anti-war disgust during the last election was Joe Leiberman.
Senator Leiberman was FOR the war. Not even a little but VERY MUCH for the war.
He lost the primary to…an Anti-War candidate who was going to “end the war and bring our soldiers home”.
HarryStar on September 12, 2007 at 2:30 PM
Very very true, on both sides. That’s one of the reasons that I laugh at politicians who bring up these polls. Lead for cryin’ out loud, just lead!!! Believe in something and get the people to follow.
The thing that kills me about many in Washington is that they look at the polls to determine what to do.
That to me is NOT a leader and one of the reasons that I truly loved Reagan as President. There were many times that he was told that “Don’t do that because people will be upset (SDI, Berlin “Tear down the wall”, etc).
HarryStar on September 12, 2007 at 2:33 PM
I would love to seem some facts supporting this statement.
I’m as skeptical as the next guy of media bias. However, having worked in a newsroom, I’m more measured in my attacks on mainstream news organizations. That is not to say that they are unbiased; most reporters are democrats. Rather, I choose objective criticism over engaging in an equally biased backlash.
It’s very en vogue to attack the MSM, I know. But some of the mantras are so partisan and biased in the other direction, we really do run the risk of sounding unhinged.
There are only a handful of bloggers, citizen-journalists and crowd sourcers who actually break news. The vast majority are commenting on someone else’s reporting.
Even if you only read blogs, you still get most of your news from one of the wire services. How do you know when to believe what they say? Are only stories about politics affected by media bias?
RE: Nancy Pelosi
The only thing more embarrassing than having her as Speaker during a war is the fact that Republicans do nothing to refute her lies.
The Race Card on September 12, 2007 at 2:40 PM
Exactly, as all politically astute individuals know we lost far less than the average of any president in his 6th year. By that standard we actually did pretty well. Only the far left, faux conservatives and country club Republicans know that. It’s far too easy to be intellectually lazy and blame the losses on Iraq.
Capitalist Infidel on September 12, 2007 at 2:42 PM
Spin ‘em however you want, guys. I sincerely hope you’re right.
Incidentally, CI, since you seem to have such contempt for my “faux conservatism,” why do you continue commenting here? Every time a comment from you pops up, it’s in some sense sneering at something I’ve said.
No one will arrest you if you don’t want to read the site, you know.
Allahpundit on September 12, 2007 at 2:45 PM
And nobody will arrest you if you choose not to read my comments. Are my opinions invalid because they don’t agree with you?
Capitalist Infidel on September 12, 2007 at 2:51 PM
Whenever I see see these two howling monkeys on TV, this unbidden thought comes to mind: “corrupt, disloyal traitors!”
Both are rank and raw failures. “Ethics?” give me a break, DirtyHarry!
georgej on September 12, 2007 at 3:01 PM
Who does Reid remind you of: Howdy Doody, or Alfred E Newman? I can’t quite decide…
jimbo2 on September 12, 2007 at 3:04 PM
Well, that doesn’t exactly prove a point, but I digress.
None the less, I haven’t seen an answer. If Iraq wasn’t the big factor, then what was it? (I will laugh my ass off if someone uses a poll)
SouthernDem on September 12, 2007 at 3:06 PM
Lord and Lady Douchebag have spoken………
So let it be spoken. So let it be done…..but only if we can get 3 Republicans to quit the courage of their convictions.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 12, 2007 at 3:08 PM
Are the Nutroots going C R A Z Y trying to identify and out the reporter?
Topsecretk9 on September 12, 2007 at 3:10 PM
Does Pelosi strike you as a lot more intelligent than Reid? And do you think that’s why she was embarrased by his “defense” of her?
jimbo2 on September 12, 2007 at 3:16 PM
You’re right on both counts. He’s both a puppet-on-a-string and an imbecile.
fogw on September 12, 2007 at 3:17 PM
Sorry SD, I have been away from the computer. The answer is this. A major chunk of the conservatives stayed home because,
A. The are disenchanted with Bush over domestic spending and other core issues
B. They are even more disenchanted with the Republicans in the Senate and the House and their lack of “stones” in dealing with the Dems and some of the above mentioned issues.
or C. All of the above.
I can’t tell you how many conservatives have told me they didn’t vote because they really didn’t see any differance between Dems and Repubs anymore.
Unfortunatly, little has changed since then.
conservnut on September 12, 2007 at 3:21 PM
By the way, sorry, no dumba$$ poll here. Just my observations.
conservnut on September 12, 2007 at 3:23 PM
The one thing I agree with is nailing the journalist. More politians (read Republicans) should put stupid journalists in their place.
right2bright on September 12, 2007 at 4:22 PM
I always get mixed-up on this; but, as between Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, which one is the old lady?
Sorry for the confusion.
OhEssYouCowboys on September 12, 2007 at 4:53 PM
Ok, we need to find out who this reporter is. I can’t place it, but the way he says “power” in the begining is the give away.
- The Cat
MirCat on September 12, 2007 at 6:27 PM
I get confused myself sometimes, theres nothing to be sorry about. Harry is the old lady while Nancy is actually one of the Greys
Keli on September 12, 2007 at 6:35 PM
Found him. It’s Bob Simon. Close your eyes when you listen to the two.
- The Cat
MirCat on September 12, 2007 at 6:38 PM
P.S. Pic
MirCat on September 12, 2007 at 6:41 PM
“The most comprehensive ethics legislation”?(translation)Ethics legislation written in a manner that I can act as unethically as I want and no one will know until it’s to late to do anything about it.
Question for San Fran Nan Belicosi; How does it feel to know that the Iraqi parliament is making you look even more incompetent than you have already proven yourself to be?
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
paratisi
paratisi on September 12, 2007 at 6:50 PM
Liars at the podium, liars in Congress.
madmonkphotog on September 12, 2007 at 7:32 PM
AP:
This is not news. It’s the same 50-60% who have wanted the US out within a year for more than a year. It’s not a good thing, inasmuch as it enabled the Dems to regain Congress, but it also means the electoral fallout is likely limited to the vulnerable Senate seats… and that may be mitigated, depending on who the nominees for POTUS are. And, as AP rightly notes, the conditions in Iraq are also a major known unknown.
Here are the numbers:
The NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll had 57-61% saying the US sould reduce its number of troops now that Iraq has adopted a constitution throughout 2006.
CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. Dec. 16-18, 2005: Only 38% think the US should have a significant number of troops in Iraq for more than a year.
Time magazine’s Nov. 29-Dec. 1, 2005 poll had 49% wanting troops out in a year.
CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. Nov. 11-13, 2005: 52% wanting troops out in a year.
Through most of 2005, the Harris Poll had about 60% wanting troops out in a year.
Karl on September 13, 2007 at 12:02 AM
Speaker Pelosi and Reid are out of touch with the rest of congress as evidenced by their spouting the same list of success (phoney) vice answering a question that they simply do not understand or agree with.
This is a do nothing congress (unless you consider finally naming all unnamed Post Offices after fellow Demoncrats)
MSGTAS on September 13, 2007 at 9:52 AM
Comment pages: