Nancy Pelosi Talks Process

Just what does it take to get banned around here?

LOL@"Old botox whore". Love it.

Bruce, that's a harsh way to talk about your mother.

Very true...even Nancy finally understands the reality of the Tea Party. Independent voters are abandoning the Democratic party in droves and for good reason. The crude and often inane dismissal of this movement by liberal Democrat's, is making our choice quite clear. You shall rue the day for this infantile behavior. 68% of American's are concerned about the current direction of our country. This fact alone should give pause to the Tea Party critic's, but they appear oblivious to this fact. Fine with us, we ARE the majority now and our voices WILL be heard! The November elections will prove this point quite conclusively.

Current public opinion about the tea party movement:
.
Favorable: 37%
Unfavorable: 55%
.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/10/AR2010021004708.html
.
You're not the majority. Not by a long shot.

kevin, I don't know. I've tried to cross the line several time but they just kick me into moderation and forget about it.

Yeah, I'd have to think calling for the assassination of the Speaker of the House would result in banning from the site.
.
He might just have to settle for a visit from the Secret Service.

kevin, the Teabaggers are doing their best to have a higher unfavorable rating than child molesters and wife beaters. Both are a step up from them however.

Is this the guy you were talking about?
.
What I'm astonished at is the astonishment displayed over the fact that yet another teabagger has chimed in calling for the death of another American.
.
Would it help any if I pointed out that right wing terrosts have out-killed Al-queda on American soil 9 to 0?

They're all party whores. The only ethical difference between Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Cheney, IMHO, is that she hasn't shot a friend in the back... that we know of, anyway.

The Tea Party, as whacky as it sometimes seems, is a symptom of the greater distrust of party-based politics as usual. We the People are getting very tired of being lied to and having our money spent on what are basically electioneering promotion, not leadership.

I don't agree with Stack or McVeigh as to how to deal with government out of control. The clear answer is to vote third party to make a statement. Voting anti-incumbent doesn't solve anything, because the newbies soon toe the line. Soon Mr. Brown will be the next Mr. Dunning if he doesn't knuckle under.

It is a mistake to think the Tea Party won't succumb to the GOP leadership. I spoke to some of the local Campaign for Liberty people and they refused to disown Cheney and Bush even as the worst of the Justice Department scandals were breaking. The C4L people are far more philosophically sound and bent on real reconstruction in DC, but even they persist in perpetuating the GOP because of its power over election laws and gerrymandering.

The Tea Party people are mostly... well, party animals, FWIW.

True to form, the infant's start squalling and kicking. I guess you learned nothing from Massachusetts, but that is no surprise. Slow learners do not grasp facts very quickly. As stated previously, let us see what happens come November.

What lesson are we supposed to have learned from Massachusetts? Do you think it was a vote against health care reform? You do know that, thanks to Gov. Mitt Romney, the voters there already have health care reform along the lines of what Obama is proposing?
.
If we're supposed to take single-state elections to have national implications, does that mean you think we ought to raise taxes on the wealthy, as they voted to do in Oregon?
.
Or does "the will of the people" only count if it dovetails perfectly with your own politics?
.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/01/the-lessons-of-oregons-vote-to-tax-the-rich/34290/

earljr,
.
How is "Vote for us... we don't like being ignored and we hate libruls" a winning party platform? That is, literally, about ALL I've heard from you.
.
Just seems little thin to me...
.
And, seriously, that chip on your shoulder had GOT TO get in the way during surgery...

afguy: As you state, the tea partiers seem to have no positive agenda. It is all I am agin' them.
They are such a fractured group. Where does their monetary support come from? Who are their leaders?
The American Revolution had leaders and a real agenda. Most tea partiers seem to forget that.
Some remind me more of the French "Reign of Terror".

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2009/04/the-tea-party-movement-whos-in-charge/13041/

Oh, they have an agenda and a leadership all right and they are the usual suspects...Oil gas, major corporations...the usual Republican party supporters, who manage to inflame and manipulate (some of) the working class to act contrary to their own interests. Not unlike the Know-nothing Party of the mid-19th century.

When I look at the current situation regarding the Obama Administration and all their Liberal supporters and how they disregard the Tea Party Movement and average Americans in general, I'm reminded of a statement once made.
The Admiral of the Japanese Fleet that attacked Pearl Harbor said after the attack “I Fear We Have Only Awaken A Sleeping Giant”.
Obama and his liberal supporters have accomplished the same thing.

Current public opinion about the tea party movement:
.
Favorable: 37%
Unfavorable: 55%
.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/10/AR2010021004708.html
.
You're not a giant. You're a tiny little man with a Napoleon complex.

Kevin,
You must first always look in the mirror before you make a post. You obviously are doing a great job of self description.
You are in deed a very little man with very little ideas.
Some day when you grow up you will be able to make more intelligent comments.

Speaking entirely from the perspect of one of the average people...I'm not sure who 3xfire3 is referring to? Certainly not us average folks trying to keep our heads above water, the very ones who will benefit by a public option for healthcare, continued unemployment compensation, etc. etc. It's definitely not the same average Amuricans that I know!

But Fox loves Ceci. That must mean something.

K street...

How is Pelosi corrupt? Details.

Thanks, I needed that laugh! Best line of the day!

You're welcome. I enjoy slamming Sarah more than McCain's campaign advisors.

Or Todd?

Or Levi?
.
I'm ruling out Rush because I haven't even heard a whisper about Palin getting a new spleen.

Nah, Rush prefers sex tourism in the Dominican Republic with a suitcase full of Viagra.

Ah, that must be why he thinks he's an expert in foreign relations.

As Sarah says "you just don't know how to do it until you've done an Inuit"

sacredh,
And you complain about personal attacks on Obama.
You are a hypocrite.

Sarah's book or a campaign book by John's advisors?

Under no circumstances would I pay money for a book written by Palin! Ick!

Tsk tsk. She has trouble reading a book, let alone writing one. She was probably as anxious as her fans to get a copy just to see what was in it.

True! Love to know who the ghost was, wouldn't you?

It's like telling your ex-wife "If you marry me again I'll beat you even harder". Then again, they're so used to saying no that they won't even be able to vote for their own bills. They'll filibuster themselves and brag about it.

No. I'll continue to attack Palin and anyone else I feel like AND complain about attacks on Obama. Free speech and all that. And talk about being a hypocrite, you whine about attacks and then do them yourself. If you can't take it, don't do it. Bring your A-game next time.

sacredh,
So you consider name calling and personal attacks OK as part of your rights under free speech.
When a person lacks the intelligence and knowledge to truly debate policy differences and political positions and must resort to name calling and personal attacks, it's a sign of a very small person.
And many Liberals wonder why so few people in this great country take them seriously. Your actions are a prime example of the reasons why Liberals are not taken seriously.
Notice I did not have to use personal attacks to get my point across.

3xfire3: Go back and read your own posts. You called me a hypocrite. I was posting about political figures. And you JUST called me a very small person in the above post. How can you sit there and do one thing while denying that you did it? I hadn't attacked you personally. You took my attack on Palin as an attack on yourself. You have a long history of doing this in your posts. You attack liberals and everything else that you don't like and then respond just as vehemently (if not worse) and attack the poster. Then you act like your attacks aren't attacks. I don't give a rat's ass whether you take liberals seriously or not. That's up to you, just don't think your opinions carry any more weight than anyone elses'. They don't and neither do mine. Grow up.

sacredh,
I don't consider saying a person is a hypocrite is a personal attack on them when from their own words it is the truth. I also do not consider saying you are a small person, when you use personal attacks on politicians you disagree with, is a personal attack on you either. Again it is only saying the truth.
You need to man or women up and post with some factual information and get away from the name calling and personal attacks. They add no value to any discussions

3xfire3: You're just like the other wingnuts that think that they're the ones that get to decide what is an insult and what is not. You insult people and then cry when you get insulted in return. If you don't don't like my posts...then DON'T read them. How hard can that be? Even someone with limited mental capacities like yours can surely understand that. Your truth isn't a universal truth just because you've convinced yourself that you're right and that you get to decide what everything means. Please keep your moronic bullsh!t to yourself and just ignore my posts, like I'm going to do to yours.

sacredh,
Since you are incapable of a simple rational logical discussion, I guess trying to talk rationally to you is not possible. You appear to be emotionally driven rather then logic driven. Just curious. Are you a woman? Discussing things with you is a lot like dicussing things with my wife.

3xfire3: Whoaaaaa! Here is a comment from a woman.
If you are as self-righteous and as ignorant in your relationship to your wife as you are on this site, she must get emotional. Go back to your "pig" sty.

3x you constantly whine about people calling you names. Well, you just defamed a whole gender.
Here's some emotional, non logical women for you:
Clara Barton
Maria Curi
Elizabeth 1
Indira Ghandi
Sandra Day O'Connor
Eleanor Roosevelt
Hillary Clinton
Ellen Ochoa
Sally Ride
Margaret Thatcher
The list is endless. Now, I would you like to perform intellectually on the same level as any of these women.

apr2563,
As usual you jump to all kinds of assumptions. Perhaps you didn't realize that God made men and women different so that when the two become one those differences add to the relationship not take away from it.
You sure like to call people names and demonize others. Why are you so ready to spread hate?
You accuse me of being unable to accept the opinions of others. You are totally wrong. I have no problem with people having different opinions than I do. I consider that is their right. That doesn't mean I have to agree with their position. Because we have a different view doesn't make either of us a bad person. It simply means we have different beliefs and that's OK. In the USA that is a privilege we are allowed.
Regardless of what the feminist movement has told you, there are differences between men and women. One of those differences is that most men tend to be logic driven. Most [not all] women tend to be emotional driven. When these two strengths are added together it makes for better total relationships.
Apr, Am I not entitled to my own opinion even when it is not the same as yours?