and the RATS, take another one in the...............HA ha!!!
Posted on 10/17/2007 3:54:54 PM PDT by Dane
House Speaker Pelosi lashes out at antiwar protesters By Patrick Martin 15 October 2007
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the most powerful Democrat in Washington, normally maintains a public display of sympathy towards the mass opposition to the war in Iraq—an opposition which propelled the Democrats into control of the House and Senate in the congressional elections last November.
But in the course of a press interview October 9, reported the following morning in the Christian Science Monitor and the Washington Post, Pelosi gave vent to the resentment and hostility that leading Democrats actually feel towards the antiwar protest movement.
The Monitor’s news account of the interview was relatively restrained, focusing on Pelosi’s complaint that antiwar protesters should target the Republican congressional delegation, not the Democratic, because it was the Republicans who through filibusters in the Senate were sustaining Bush’s war policy.
Asked about criticism of the failure (or more accurately, refusal) of the congressional Democratic majority to take action to put an end to the war in Iraq, despite the overwhelming antiwar opinion among Democratic voters, Pelosi said, “I am well aware of the unhappiness of the base.”
She told reporters that antiwar demonstrators had established seemingly permanent protest encampments outside her home in San Francisco several months, and more recently outside her Washington home as well.
The real venom in Pelosi’s comments was reported by Washington Post Capitol Hill columnist Dana Milbank, one of those in attendance at the press interview. While Pelosi invariably maintains a publicly smiling posture, he wrote, “her spirits soured instantly when somebody asked about the anger of the Democratic ‘base’ over her failure to end the war in Iraq.”
“Look,” she said, “I had, for five months, people sitting outside my home, going into my garden in San Francisco, angering neighbors, hanging their clothes from trees, building all kinds of things—Buddhas? I don’t know what they were—couches, sofas, chairs, permanent living facilities on my front sidewalk.”
Pelosi continued: “If they were poor and they were sleeping on my sidewalk, they would be arrested for loitering, but because they have ‘Impeach Bush’ across their chest, it’s the First Amendment.”
Pelosi is married to a multimillionaire investor, and her comments were charged with social resentment as well as political hostility. The antiwar protesters are not only unwelcome because they expose her hypocritical pretense to opposing the Iraq bloodbath—they are dirty, ragged and disreputable, and irritate the neighbors.
Pelosi’s remark—imagine that riffraff “sleeping on my sidewalk”—is reveals the enormous social distance between the masses of working people, housewives, students who oppose the war, and the privileged ruling elite. And her disparaging reference to the First Amendment demonstrates the hostility of a big business politician towards the democratic rights of the working class.
In elaborating on this comment, Pelosi tried to backtrack from her spontaneous display of her real attitude towards antiwar activists. “They are advocates,” she said. “We are leaders.”
And “leaders,” of course, have to be practical. “We have to make responsible decisions in the Congress that are not driven by the dissatisfaction of anybody who wants the war to end tomorrow,” Pelosi continued. “The war has eclipsed everything,” said. “And while I am very proud of the ratings that Democrats have on every issue you can name, I don’t disagree with the public evaluation that we have not done well in ending this war.”
The Democratic leader rebuked those antiwar activists who have begun to recognize that congressional Democrats, not merely the Republicans, are opposed to ending the war.
“I think it is a waste of time for them to go after Democratic members,” Pelosi argued. “They ought to just persuade Republican members who are representing areas that are opposed to the war.”
Pelosi herself faces such a challenge. Antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan has announced that she would run as an independent candidate for Congress against Pelosi next year, because of the decision by Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid last May to push through an emergency funding bill to finance the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Democrats could not be fairly accused of failing to carry out their electoral mandate, Pelosi claimed: “We said we would change the debate; we would fight to end the war. We never said we had the veto pen or the signature pen.”
She concluded with the claim, incessantly repeated by the congressional Democratic leadership, that it is White House veto power and filibusters by Senate Republicans which have blocked any change in Iraq war policy.
“It is clear now that the Senate is not going to be able to do much to overcome the 60- vote barrier that would send a bill to the president’s desk,” Pelosi said. “But that does not mean the House will not move to ... responsible, safe redeployment of our troops, hopefully to end by next year.”
This is the “big lie” that the Democratic leadership—with the full support of the media—has sought to use to excuse its own complicity with the war and cover up the fundamental agreement of both parties to continue the military occupation of Iraq indefinitely.
Pelosi, Reid & Co. have deliberately refused to take the action that they have within their power, cutting off funds for the war, which does not requires a filibuster-proof or veto-proof majority.
A simple majority in either house of Congress could have blocked war funding last May. But with the Bush administration threatening that critical military operations would have to be curtailed by mid-June if the funding was not approved, Pelosi and Reid caved in and agreed to push through the emergency appropriations bill
Poor wittle nancy, when you lay down with dogs you get fleas, and you and your democrat party cohorts deserve them.
I recall her protests when people camped out in Crawford, Tx.
Meanwhile she will be reelected after 2 years of trying to destroy our country. And making millions on the death of our soldiers.
HA HA! You didn't have to place the funding up for a Vote NANCY!
It's your fault, not the Repubs. Nice try though.
I think they deserve each other.
When will this begin?
Since Cindy Sheehan is running against Pelosi, she should set up another Camp Casey outside Nasty’s house for the duration of the campaign ..... wouldn’t that be “rich”!
“Look,” she said, “I had, for five months, people sitting outside my home, going into my garden in San Francisco, angering neighbors, hanging their clothes from trees, building all kinds of things—Buddhas? I don’t know what they were—couches, sofas, chairs, permanent living facilities on my front sidewalk.”
Look like my neighborhood with the third world people living nearby....not just camping out...
Can’t figure how they can scream “cut off the funding” and “we support the troops”....
Cut off the funding...but give the soldiers body armor.
Cut off the funding...but make sure you feed them.
Cut off the funding...but make sure they have electricity.
Cut off .........
Not contradictory at all. You don’t need any of these if the soldiers are brought home.
I'm popping the popcorn now.
Patrick Martin must be smoking something!!
What is she whining about? Those are her constituents, the ones who elected her.
The Democratic leader rebuked those antiwar activists who have begun to recognize that congressional Democrats, not merely the Republicans, are opposed to ending the war.
The dirty little secret is out. They may not want to be In Iraq, but even less do they want to be tagged for another 30 years as responsible for "losing a war". they'd bring them home in a heartbeat with no regard for the people over there or our own safety. But only if they can attach the defeat to a republican. They haven't been able to sucker enough Republicans to go along, so they refuse to do the one thing that could end the war. they are opposed to ending the war so long as they would reap the blame for the chaos and lack of security that unfolds.
Apparently the nuts in their base are finally starting to wake up. They aren't awake, but they are starting to have reality intrude on their dream world.
Psstt....hey leftists...if a Dem President is elected..the troops aren't coming home. Maybe a few thousand for show would be brought back temporarily, but most of them will still be there the same way the troops are STILL in the places Bill Clinton sent them.
You can not say that you support the troops but don’t want them to have what they need while deployed. I am a veteran.
Hey Nancy, it’s your fault; not Bush’s.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.