Pelosi Needs to Lose Her House Leader status: she voted NAY

[ClarkUSA]

WTF -- she's from San Francisco, where everyone thinks the election was stolen.

[NVMojo]

I agree ...she was sickening to watch this morning.

I called a local Dem Party about her this morning and she said, "you gotta remember, there are alotta elected Dems who get richer under Republican control."

[genius]

11. I agree. Off with her head. Or at least let's make her resign her

leadership position.

[foo_bar]

16. ironically put

'No, no!' said the Queen. 'Sentence first--verdict afterwards.'

'Stuff and nonsense!' said Alice loudly. 'The idea of having the sentence first!'

'Hold your tongue!' said the Queen, turning purple.

'I won't!' said Alice.

'Off with her head!' the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.

'Who cares for you?' said Alice, (she had grown to her full size by this time.) 'You're nothing but a pack of cards!'

[FreepFryer]

23. Bravo.

[renaissanceguy]

50. Her true colors are showing.

Between this and her wanting Tim Roemer to be DNC chair....I've had it with her. We have to get these "business-as-usual" idiots out of office and put in people who will represent US and stand up for what WE believe in.

http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.16200506

[iconoclastNYC]

1. Pick your battles

This isn't about getting Bush overturned........it is drawing attention to the fraud issue....mission accomplished.

[librechik]

8. then why even fight at all? just petition Congress for election reform

until your ears bleed. It's nonsense to challenge, and then not do EVERYTHING to WIN.

To Challenge and immediately surrender, (Oh, your majesty,I will of course certify, but if I may be so bold as to offer a few criticisms in the public interest, nothing PERSONAL you understand...) as SO MANY did is utterly irrational LOSER BEHAVIOR!!! And we were in the RIGHT! This is the same battle as the war for civil rights in the 60s, and too many of our leaders today said, well, we believe in the principle, but not the REALITY of fighting for the right to vote. It was sickening. One REAL democrat (Boxer) in the bunch (along with the handful of worthy House members who have been there all the time.)

Half of America is a bunch of racist complacent assholes, and the rest of us are just letting them rule. Sure we in the base were DESPERATE to have some change happen, but the only Democrats with even a chance of making it happen, weren't even willing to really try, just talk about it. Their votes wouldn't have changed anything, but they would have meant the world to me.

After all the money and support we give them, they don't even stand up to express a willingness to fight, let alone fight. There should be democrats being dragged off the House floor every day by security. Instead we get prayer breakfasts or martini lunches.

We got 2 hours of debate on the most important issue of the day and ridiculed for it? Oh HAPPY DAY!!!

[KittyWampus]

25. It's All On Video. How About Helping Distribute It? You Know,Proactive

stuff?

[Time for change]

70. Why shouldn't it be about both?

[Freddie Stubbs]

2. And far more Democrats voted 'nay' than voted 'yea'

Sound like she is in step with her fellow Democrats in the House.

[EFerrari]

3. This is not leadership, it's appeasement. Same strategy that

has NEVER worked.

It's hard watching these people fail their promises. And yet Nancy is considered a lefty in the party. God help us all.

[anaxarchos]

19. Your use of the term "appeasement" stuck in my head...

If you forget the intended hyperbole in your usage for a minute, I started to wonder what the difference was between "appeasement" and "compromise" or "smart politics". The difference really rests in your assessment of the nature of the opposition, doesn't it?

If it's business as usual, then retreat in order to advance the legislative agenda or to preserve your ass "until next time" is kind of understandable. If, on the other hand, the other sides's legislative agenda IS your ass, then every retreat contributes to your own downfall and it is "appeasement". Chamberlin was not a "wimp". He did completely misread Herr Hitler.

Do you think that is also the basis of the real disagreements on this board?

[fooj]

35. Finally...a voice of reason!

:yourock:

[mikelewis]

4. Nay - this is politics - sometimes it breaks your heart

sometimes it saves your soul.

[anaxarchos]

5. With all due respect...

The one thing that this kind of "politics" NEVER does is to save your soul.

[mikelewis]

7. We pushed, they moved... just a little... next time, we push harder

It's hope and hope can save your soul.

[anaxarchos]

15. There's a difference...

Between principled compromise and unprincipled. That difference is central to anyone who engages in politics. You could see it in the difference between the House and Senate Democrats today. Selling your soul to save it is a non-sequiter - A Vietnam-era double speak.

Advance and retreat? Of course. Abandon what you stand for? You never get it back.

Don't get me wrong. I liked what happened today. It would have been even better if the contrived, self-serving, cynicism that passes for "sophistication" in the Democratic party went away.

"We have to be lame to win but we don't win so we must not be lame enough" is a dead loser. The first thing to go is your "soul".

Any hope based on this is not hope. It is delusion.

[FreepFryer]

6. Bull. Don't shoot your face to spite your nose.

[Webster Green]

10. Totally!

Pelosi is a great congresswoman.

The repukes are killing themselves. They always over reach and they always fuck up everything.

Eventually, the stupid half of the country will notice.

[ClarkUSA]

80. Pelosi shouldn't be the face of DNC leadership, IMO...

and getting rid of her wouldn't spite anything but Roemer's chances of being DNC Chairman.

[ClassWarrior]

9. Bush** Needs to Lose His National Leader status: his syncophants voted NAY

NGU.

[KnowerOfLogic]

69. How do you propose that we make that happen, when our Dem

representatives REFUSE TO FIGHT BUSH????!!!!!!!

[genius]

12. btw, I had the same suggestion in an earlier thread.

Good idea.

[Freddie Stubbs]

13. Far more Democrats voted nay than aye

Why would they want a leader that is out of step with them?

[ClassWarrior]

14. Far more RepubliCONs voted nay than aye

In fact, none voted aye. Why would they want a leader that is any less a criminal than each and every one of them is?

NGU.

[Freddie Stubbs]

18. The Democrats won't pick a leader based on what the GOP believes

Most Democratic members of the House didn't want this. Only 31 voted with Ms. Tubbs-Jones. 88 voted agianst her, and 80 didn't even show up to vote at all. This is not something that had much support among mainstream Democratic members of the House.

[ClassWarrior]

27. So when disinformation fails - start babbling nonsense??

<LMAO>

NGU.

[Freddie Stubbs]

52. What is nonsensical about Democrats choosing a leader who agrees with them

on the issues? It is the job of the House Democratic Leader to lead and represent the Democrats in the House, not the Democrats on Internet discussion forums.

[fooj]

39. The democrats don't support election reform or abhor election fraud?

That's news to me.

[Freddie Stubbs]

64. No, Democrats don't support objecting to Ohio electors

[NickiWitch]

17. HOLD ON THERE, PARTNER!!

She did what she should have done. She voice her opposition, and then voted the way she should have for this election. Why throw her to the dogs (repubes) than historically say that Bush "won" the election.

SHE KNOWS HE WON!!

She also knows he won by FRAUD! We have to prove the fraud and then everyone can stand up and say what they *really* feel.

I'm sorry for rambling. I hope I make sense. I *have* been celebrating tonight and I've had way too much to drinky.

PEACE!!!

[AmerDem]

20. I called her office today to voice my displeasure

Her staff is very considerate, unlike Harry Reid's. The couple of times I called Reid's office (last time this morning), I get this brat young girl who is abrupt and snarky.

[fooj]

21. I live in the Bay Area and her lack of courage yesterday was appalling

She's not representing anyone around here. That is for sure!

[FreepFryer]

22. If you think she wasn't courageous you don't understand the game.

I've posted already about the strategy. Singling out individual Democrats for attacks because they did not vote 'FOR' (or 'AGAINST') is silliness.

And real Democrats don't do it.

Unity Now. E Pluribus Unum.

[fooj]

29. With all due respect...I am not attacking anyone.

Is it true that Pelosi DID NOT rise for her constituents? I speak the truth. Real Democrats? Careful...you kinda sound like a bully! And as far as understanding "the game"...I fear I understand all too well! I have never attacked anyone on these threads. I pride myself in being a team player...may I suggest you do the same. Unity now...now there is a concept I'm sure we can both agree on. It may serve you well to follow your own advice. PEACE!

[FreepFryer]

53. Is it not true that her constituents were divided? That many Dems believe

There was no fraud?

Let's get back to the issues, whenever you're ready.

[fooj]

59. 102 pages of issues, my friend.

How can an informed Democrat not believe that there was, yet again, fraud? Have you read Conyer's report? It is quite compelling...

[FreepFryer]

61. Don't even ask me that with a straight face. I have been over every page..

and I am utterly convinced that there WAS MASSIVE FRAUD, on almost every level. That's a different issue. I don't need convincing, the rank and file do. Her decision was completely reasonable.

Did you listen/read her floor speech?

To be honest, every Dem senator believes there was fraud. Putting a 'yea' vote on the record is a different issue.

It's about how best to win against the foe.

[fooj]

66. Agreed. But you just said in another post that Dems believe no fraud!

i'm getting dizzy...

[FreepFryer]

67. I said 'many' did... so Pelosi's 'NO' is not unimaginable. The polarizing

of my argument isn't necessary.

I'm not taking a side, I'm making a point.

[fooj]

74. 'The polarizing..."

WTF? What have I done to offend you? You know...we all would like to have our points considered. It's not an exclusive club! I try to make funny..."dizzy" and you jump all over me again. Whatever. I'm through.

[KnowerOfLogic]

71. The 'game' is the problem. The 'strategy' is consistent, principled,

unambiguous resistance to Repug despotism, and fighting for average Americans and every decent thing that America has ever stood for.

[RaulVB]

24. Pelosi is a real joke...(n/t)

[nashville_brook]

26. lets not go here... pelosi didn't need to expend that capital

clinton gave (for me) one of the most eloquent, forceful speeches (arguments) of the day and she voted Nay. but that doesn't bother me b/c they didn't have the votes and i need her to fight these court appointments.

but the door is opn. they are expecting "all this election non-sense" to go away. now, our task gets easier -- with the volume turned down, our letters and our voices will be heard louder.

this is Radical Democracy now. try it, it's fun.

[fooj]

32. I'm watching.

Actions speak louder than words. I, for one, find it offensive that people refer to election fraud and thievery as nonsense. I worked my ass off, as did many others, to protect and defend our constitution.

[nashville_brook]

38. i think it's a big mistake for rove to try and paint this as marginal

or "conspiracy theory blahbety blah."

The is the new Civil Rights Movement.

[FreepFryer]

40. Absolutely right.

[nashville_brook]

46. our power is concentrated now -- imagine how many votes it takes for

a Dem to actually pull off a win with all the fraud on the Repug side.

our representatives must get way more than a majority to win -- so think about that -- if a Dem is in office, they are *really* supported.

lets keep it that way -- the support part. fix the fraud part.

[fooj]

43. Pelosi is/ is not a part of that new "CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT"?

Then Stand! Or...play into Rove's 'CONSPIRACY BS"...It is that simple! What message did she send to the American People yesterday? What "message" was she in support of? Maybe I've missed something...

[nashville_brook]

65. HAVA 2 is now the target

pelosi needs as much support (education) she can get in terms of keeping this alive.


for now, she's what we've got. she needs encouragement to stand and fight.

[KnowerOfLogic]

72. Expend what capital? 99.9% of americans don't even know the

challenge happened, or even that the electoral votes were counted, or what electoral votes are!!!

[FreepFryer]

28. Raul - re-replying to posts to 'have the last word' is bad form.

Not to mention with Dem-splitting comments like that. You're entitled to your opinion, but you really should take it to an independent forum.

Your dialogue is at the core destructive, not constructive. That is why I think it's inappropriate. Not censorship.

[RaulVB]

31. I don't really care much about "formalities"...

I've never pretended neither I want o be like "you"...

[fooj]

34. What's with the attacks?

I don't get it. Pretty hypocritical coming from Freep...

[RaulVB]

36. Some don't like dissenters...

That happens on both sides of the establishment.

Normal.

[FreepFryer]

42. it's snipers i find repulsive, not dissenters. "Last gasp -Cry censorship"

[RaulVB]

45. Right on, you can "snipe" at will and cry foul later (n/t)

[fooj]

49. Snipers? WTF?

:shrug: You are in rare form this morning!

[fooj]

47. So, now I'm considered a dissenter?

How ridiculous. If they want to deal with people who all share the SAME opinions...support the shrub. He's got everyone thinking "the same" in his party! Baahhhhhh! Baahhhhhhh!

[RaulVB]

48. I guess the story about "the big inclusive party" doesn't work for some...

I'm beginning to wonder...

[FreepFryer]

55. Read my Posts re the big inclusive party (where we don't lambaste our own)

[RaulVB]

62. Not even when they're wrong, uh?

That's exactly why you and those who think like you will never wake up...

Regards

[ClarkUSA]

81. Exactly, fooj

[FreepFryer]

37. attacks? no. Those have been the posts against the Democrats.

My post to Raul was no attack. Please, it's really transparent...

[fooj]

51. I, for one, have NEVER posted AGAINST a DEMOCRAT!

BACK OFF! Read post#32!

[FreepFryer]

56. Please try to maintain civility. I haven't accused you of doing so.

[fooj]

58. Freep...lets stop this.

I have blogged with you in a completely civil and respectful way this morning! Please- we are in this together, aren't we? Don't give in to the Rovian Theory of Democratic Principles...DIVIDE AND CONQUER! We've come too far! PEACE!

[FreepFryer]

60. Now, we're in agreement. :)

[jsw_81]

30. Most Dems voted NAY

There are plenty of good reasons to dump Pelosi, but this isn't one of them.

[fooj]

33. STOP THE TRAIN!!! Who said DUMP Pelosi?

Communicating how I feel doesn't mean I deem it necessary to run her out of town!

[Walt Starr]

41. Pelosi also supports Roemer for DNC Chair

and Roemer has been connected to Scaife.

Go figure.

[ClarkUSA]

76. Roemer is also pro-life/anti-choice

or shall I reframe that as pro-birth? That's all we need to inspire the Democratic progressive base, right?

Why is Pelosi of SF supporting a pro-life Scaife-connected Republicanesque
Roemer for DNC Chairman? She does NOT represent the Democratic base.

[sportndandy]

44. Pelosi was disgraceful

She talked condescendingly towards african-americans, and she was eager to make us look bad by asserting the belief that bush won fair and square. With friends like that we don't need enemies.

[KansDem]

54. Yes, it is hard to believe, if the positions were reversed,...

...that Dennis Hastert or even Newt Gingrich would have gone along with the Democrats...

[Mojorabbit]

57. Geez

She has been in the sights of the DeLay supporters and yet she still stood up and spoke. Good for her. I am amazed at these posts.

[FreepFryer]

63. I'm with you! I'm starting to think these people can't see Dem positives.

[ClarkUSA]

73. She's a "leader" -- it's part of her job description

She spoke, but what did she SAY? Did she mention election reform?

[KnowerOfLogic]

68. Yep, she's clearly in 'positioning' mode for her own self-advancement;

she is not serving her constitiuents or America. I realize that politicians using their offices for purely personal gain is so much the rule these days that it is basically accepted as a given, as if things could never be any other way; but this country can not stand 1 more year of business as usual, and it is up to US to change things, starting with dumping self-serving, sell-out politicians.

[ClarkUSA]

75. I'd love Tubbs-Jones for House Minority Leader

emphasis on LEADER

[corbett]

77. She Used To Be Such A Good Democrat

Either somebody got to her or she has lost her marbles. Either way, we need Gephardt back in that job!

[ClarkUSA]

78. Gephardt? The guy who made a deal with Bush and shortcircuited...

the bipartisan deal that Biden had worked out re: the Iraq War. Gephardt wouldn't have said "Aye" either.

You're being sarcastic, right?

[corbett]

89. No, I'm Serious But Since You Bring Up That Decision

Gephardt and Kerry made the identical mistake in that regard; they took the shrub at his word. Was it a critical error in judgement? Yes. Was it understandable? Barely but it points directly to the blessing and curse of being a Beltway Insider. They couldn't see the forest for the shrubs. In their heart of hearts, and having worked closely with the first President Bush, they could not believe that the shrub would do what he did.

This situation is exactly why I voted for Perot in 1992. Alas, no Beltway Outsider had a chance in 2004 which is why I supported Gephardt and then Kerry.

[Imagevision]

79. I hope she's repkaced in 06

[formernaderite]

82. Pelosi is a democratic insider with one too many facelifts.....

she's the leader because of seniority and a family history in democratic politics. I resent the long term politicians who think this is a career path...but if we have to deal with the lifers, I'd rather see Maxine Waters or Sheila Jackson Lee as leader.

[genius]

83. And too many Republican ideas.

[ClarkUSA]

84. Agreed and thanks for the background info...

why are the Democratic Congressional leaders always so cautious while the GOP leaders have fire coming out of their nostrils?

I'd love to see Maxine Waters or Sheila Jackson-Lee as House Minority Leader.

[fooj]

85. LMAO!

Too funny...fire coming out of their nostrils........

[ClarkUSA]

86. and bushsh*t coming out of their mouths

:puke:

[fooj]

87. Thank you for that superb visual!!!

Yikes................:hi:

[shance]

88. I, as well. I am surprised so many Dems fall for the blue blood approach

just like Republicans. Perhaps that is why we are dealing with the corrupt, arrogant, entitled politicians we are dealing with today.

[Kevin Spidel]

90. Read her response here

News From House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi
H-204, The Capitol, Washington D.C. 20515

http://democraticleader.house.gov

Thursday, January 6, 2005

Contact: Brendan Daly/Jennifer Crider, 202-226-7616

Pelosi: 'Today's Debate About Election Reform, Not an Election Result'



Washington, D.C. -- House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi spoke this afternoon on the House floor during debate on the challenge to Ohio's electoral votes. Below are her remarks:



"Mr. Speaker, today, we are witnessing democracy at work. This isn't, as some of our Republican colleagues have referred to it, sadly, 'frivolous.' This debate is fundamental to our democracy.



"The representatives of the American people in this House are standing up for three fundamental American beliefs: that the right to vote is sacred; that a representative has a duty to represent his or her constituents; and that the rule of law is the hallmark of our nation.



"And under the rule of law, today this House will accept the election of President Bush and Vice President Cheney as President and Vice President of the United States. There is absolutely no question about that. This isn't about in any way rejecting that outcome. So please, let's be respectful of each other and understand what it is about.



"Today's electoral challenge is not intended to overturn the results of the election. It is instead to discuss the real problems with our electoral system and the failings of the process in Ohio and elsewhere. It is about election reform, not about the election result.



"The Members of Congress who have brought this challenge are speaking up for their aggrieved constituents, many of whom may have been disenfranchised in this process. This is their only opportunity to have this debate while the country is listening, and it is appropriate to do so. If there were other venues of this caliber we would have taken that opportunity, but this is the opportunity. We have a responsibility to take advantage of it.



"The right to vote is the foundation of our democracy. As the Supreme Court noted: 'No right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws, under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined.' The principle of one person, one vote is sacred in our country, and we must do everything to uphold it.



"Yet more than 225 years since our founding, there are still legitimate concerns over the integrity of our elections and of ensuring the principle of one person one vote, that every person has access to voting and that every vote will be counted.



"Twenty years ago, I was the Chair of the California Democratic Party. It was our function, it was our purpose, to remove obstacles to of participation to voting. The greater responsibility, of course, was with the Secretary of State, in our state and in states across the country, who controlled the elections in the state. But we had a responsibility to remove, not throw up, obstacles to participating.



"I know that the issue is not just about counting votes, but what happens in all three phases -- before, during, and after the election. And, in all three phases, there were problems in this election in Ohio and elsewhere.



"Before the election, there were complaints about absentee ballots that were requested but did not arrive. There were reports of registration problems and of improper purging of the voter rolls. And the Ohio Secretary of State made decisions about provisional ballots, partisan poll watchers, and paper requirements for registration forms that some found questionable, leading to widespread confusion and possible disenfranchisement.



"During the election, we know that there were not enough voting machines in poor and minority areas. This is a fact. Yet, there were sufficient machines in wealthier areas. This led to appallingly long wait times of up to 10 hours in certain places. You Republicans can deny it all you want, but it is a matter of public record that this is a fact and that this is wrong. There are credible reports of voter suppression on Election Day through intimidation and misinformation. And the patchwork use of provisional ballots led to unequal treatment under the law.



"As for after the election, the American people must have every confidence that every vote legally cast will be legally and accurately counted. But constantly shifting vote tallies in Ohio, and malfunctioning electronic voting machines, which may not have paper receipts, have led to an additional loss of confidence by the public.



"As elected officials, we have a solemn responsibility to improve our election systems and its administration. We cannot be here again four years from now discussing the failings of the 2008 election. We must work with the Election Assistance Commission to further reform the election process, and we must pass legislation to improve the Help America Vote Act, including universal standards for provisional ballots and strong verification measures and paper trails.



"I want to commend Mr. Ney, the distinguished Chairman of the House Administration Committee, for his leadership in helping to pass the HAVA Act, which is really where we are pinning our hopes. And thanks to Mr. Hoyer who served in that capacity with you. Now a broader array of people is weighing in on that. Congress must seize the opportunity this year to reauthorize the Act and to make the needed reforms and improvements.



"Our very democracy depends on the confidence of the American people in the integrity of our electoral system. So my colleagues, please don't talk about this as a conspiracy theory. It's not about that. It's not about conspiracy. It's about the Constitution of the United States. George Bush and Dick Cheney are the elected President and Vice President of the United States, and the objection will be overruled today in that regard.



"It's never been about that. It has always been about the fundamental principle of our legitimacy of our electoral process. Congress will resolve this dispute today, and we will all abide by the result because we are a nation of laws.



"America is the beacon of democracy to the world. We must never forget the power of our own example to those who aspire for freedom throughout the world. So let's respect this debate today for what it is about -- ensuring the foundation of our very own democracy and sending a message to the world that we are truly protective of our Constitution and that we honor the oath of office that we take to protect and defend the Constitution.



"I urge my colleagues all to join together in a bipartisan way for electoral reform to follow on the good work of Mr. Ney and Mr. Hoyer, and to make sure that four years from now we will not have to have this kind of debate. But today's debate will serve the purpose it was intended to have for our country."



# # #