Take Nancy Off The Table

[Wiley50]

House Dems elected Her Speaker

House Dems Can Un- Elect Her Speaker

And Elect Kucinich Instead

He Is The People's Speaker Anyway


Let's Start Movement For Making That Happen

ACTIVISTS, MAN YOUR STATIONS!

Let The Letters And Emails Fly!

[Buzz Clik]

1. I guess the honeymoon's over.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

34. Honeymoon over after 100 hours?

Is that a legislative "quickie"?

I'll be impressed when congress does SOMETHING to end the war. The other stuff is nice, maybe, but not the main reason Democrats won the majority in both houses.

[Buzz Clik]

36. I'm guessing that ending the war will take more than 100 hours.

Keeping Bush from committing us to an armed conflict with Iran may end up being a full time job.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

38. I agree it's more than a hundred hour job

But other than speeches, I don't see anything that starts to end it. No legislation to get out, or even prepare to get out. Just more money going down that rat-hole.

I never claimed it would be easy, just that I'd like to see some movement there.

[Dawgs]

67. Uh, they've been in charge for about two weeks.

Do you really think they could get something done this quick? If you do then you really are asking to much of your leaders.

[LanternWaste]

61. That's precisely where I stand on the issue.

That's precisely where I stand on the issue.

I'm convinced that there are a LOT of back-room negotiations currently going on and will be going on for some time. But to think that Pelosi can wave a wand and *poof*! we're-not-in-Iraq-anymore is absurd at best.

To think that we're getting the full story (even from our own guys on the Hill) is naive. This is politics, guys. Hushed plans getting quietly leaked to see how they'll fly with public opinion. Smoke filled rooms with whispered dialog, compromises and negotiations.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

77. I hope you're right, that back-room anti-war stuff happens

... well, except for the "smoke-filled" part. I'm not sure if Speaker Pelosi is a big-time cigar afficianada.

If I don't hear about it, well I guess that's no big deal. It would be nice to be surprised by an announcement of anti-war action sometime in the near future.

[Dawgs]

66. Maybe not you, but...

It's why I voted Democratic.

"I'll be impressed when congress does SOMETHING to end the war. The other stuff is nice, maybe, but not the main reason Democrats won the majority in both houses."

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

78. I'm just SAYING that's why I voted Democratic

... but actually I would have voted Democratic anyway, war or no war.

I just want the war to end so we can go back to bickering over guns and abortion. The good old days.

[Nutmegger]

2. What really burns me

is that people are dying while our servants are bickering back and forth on what and what not to do.

End the god damn fucking war now! Stand for principal for god's sake!

How many more people have to die until they realize that it must end? How many people here in America must be against it before they take action?

STOP THE WAR NOW!

Edit: Don't flame me. I sincerely hope Nancy has something up her sleeve.

[Captain Hilts]

3. You need to 'up' your dosage. nt

[Toucano]

4. You already have a thread about this topic on the front page.

Why are you starting another?

It's like spam, Wiley

[Wiley50]

7. Not Spam. That Was a Personal Indignation. This Is A Movement n/t

[aquart]

10. Yes. Smells like one, too.

[ronnykmarshall]

41. You beat me to it!

[crispini]

47. ROFL.

[progressoid]

50. Yeah, I had two of those movements today already! (bad tacos yesterday)

[Hobarticus]

55. BWAH-HAHAHA!!!

Aquart, you're my hero...

[Redneck Socialist]

5. Don't hold your breath. n/t

[hiaasenrocks]

6. Some leader she turned out to be.

Oh well. So much for that. I will not support anyone who supports this war and if Nancy won't take action to block or stop funding, she is for the war, plain and simple.

[aquart]

12. That's a lie. Plain and simple. Back it up or take it back.

My, the agitprop is thick on the ground tonight.

[Jcrowley]

18. How quickly we forget

Concern Grows over Democratic House Leader Pelosi’s Support for Iraq War
by Stephen Zunes

 
On January 4, Congressional Democrats re-elected California Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi as minority leader in the House of Representatives. This comes despite that, since assuming her current leadership position two years ago, Pelosi has not only disappointed her liberal San Francisco constituency, but the majority of Democrats nationally as well, through her support for President George W. Bush’s policies toward Iraq.

Back in December of 2002, as independent strategic analysts were arguing that the evidence strongly suggested that Iraq had rid itself of its chemical and biological weapons some years earlier, Pelosi categorically declared on NBC’s Meet the Press that “Saddam Hussein certainly has chemical and biological weapons. There’s no question about that.”

<snip>

Furthermore, by giving bipartisan credence to the Bush administration’s unprincipled use of such scare tactics to gain support for the U.S. takeover of that oil-rich country, she negated a potential advantage the Democrats would have otherwise had in the 2004 campaign. After it became apparent that administration claims about Iraq’s alleged military threat were false, the Democrats were unable to attack the Republicans for misleading the American public since their Congressional leadership had also falsely claimed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

During the first twelve weeks of 2003, there were a series of large demonstrations here in her California district against the war, including one on February 16 which brought out an estimated half a million people. The day the war broke out in March, San Francisco’s downtown business district was shut down by thousands of anti-war protesters in a spontaneous act of massive civil disobedience. In response, Pelosi denounced the protesters and rushed to the defense of President George W. Bush, voting in favor of a resolution declaring the House of Representatives’ “unequivocal support and appreciation to the president …for his firm leadership and decisive action.” She personally pressed a number of skeptical Democratic lawmakers to support the resolution as well.

In response to those who argued that Iraq was not a threat to the United States and that United Nations inspectors should have been allowed to complete their mission to confirm that Iraq had disarmed as required, Pelosi went on record claiming that “reliance by the United States on further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone” could not “adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq.”

more:
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0122-08.htm

[leftchick]

24. omg

I never saw that. It certainly explains lot about her wanting to keep the war funded now.

:puke:

[Marie26]

31. She voted against the Iraq War Resolution

How quickly we forget.

"That fall, before her ascension as minority leader, Pelosi proved her ability to lead the party in a new direction during the fight against the resolution authorizing the administration to go to war in Iraq. When Gephardt announced that he would support the president's proposed resolution, many Democratic members were furious at his capitulation. Pelosi asked South Carolina's John Spratt, a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee and nobody's idea of a dove, to craft an alternative resolution. The Spratt amendment, which required the president to return to Congress for authorization to use force if the United Nations declined to do so, received 155 votes on the floor, 147 of which came from Democrats (roughly 70 percent of the caucus). Democrats were pleased that Pelosi had enabled them to go on record against a unilateral war, and to do so through the handiwork of a member whose defense credentials were unimpeachable."

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=7699

[mmonk]

8. .

:rofl:

[RB TexLa]

13. agreed

party activists are going to cause a Speaker of the House to be removed. :crazy: :rofl:

[aquart]

9. What utter flaming crap.

Thanks for deliberately agitating to split a remarkably united party.

And thank you for your concern.

Oh, you might want to check Letterman tonight for his singing Kucinich ad.

[EFerrari]

11. No, the chant is "Nancy, SET THE TABLE!"

:)

[Wiley50]

16. I Really Don't Like Disagreeing With You

But If She Does have a plan
let's apply some heat and flush it out

I'm just sick of being jacked around by politicians and their lobbyists

So are the people
They (We) didn't take it back in Nov for this

Stop The War
Bring the troops home, NOW

Nothing Nuanced about it

[EFerrari]

17. I know.

Look, she's my rep. Can you imagine how it feels to hear her saying impeachment is off the table?

I'm sick of being jacked around, too. We all are.

[dogday]

60. She promised to clean up the Culture of Corruption, well the

corruption starts at the very top and that is where she needs to be cleaning... Not just the Congress, but the Executive Branch and DOJ as well....

[Imagevision]

14. After experiencing 6 years of Bush, there are some who won't give Pelosi 6 months??

counter-productive, step back look at the bigger picture, if Rice was fired within a week would that be a satisfactory temporary distraction...

[NotGivingUp]

26. we've experienced 6 years of bush...impeachment should NEVER be off the table

[sendero]

28. There are so many here..

... who simply cannot accept the reality of POLITICS. They couldn't in the 70s, when they got their way not by convincing the populace of the correctness of their views, but by shoving lots of legislation down the throats of Americans and then being surprised by the Reagan backlash.

You can be right, right and righter, but it "impeachment" is gone about the wrong way, Dems will be out of power for decades and then none of your precious aims will be realized.

A lot of the left has a huge amount of growing up to do. Yes, the war sucks, it is wrong, immoral and at this point pointless. So is rabies, cerebral palsy and cancer. You can bitch and rail all you want, but you have to deal with reality whether you like it or not.

Pelosi isn't perfect, no politician is - but so far I think she's doing fine.

[crispini]

48. RIGHT ON

:applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause:

Very well said.

I can't believe the OP is slamming on Pelosi after she's been in office, what, two weeks? Stuff like this makes me wonder if that person has ever had a JOB or been involved in LOCAL GOVERNMENT? 'Cause, Jesus H. Christ, it takes TIME to change shit.

[Wiley50]

15. Here's The Link. Let's Write Them!

Thanks to The Wielding Truth

http://thinkprogress.org/escalation-house-senate

[Blue_In_AK]

19. Get a grip.

[KitchenWitch]

20. Nothing like eating our own, eh?

:eyes:

[xultar]

22. Tastes like chicken.

[timtom]

21. God, yes!

Great idea. I'm tired of "electability" and popularity being the bottom line.

It's time to let fundamental issues sway our vote. Otherwise, we're merely cynical.

[Bluebear]

23. OK, Nancy, you get off of that table now, hear?

[EstimatedProphet]

25. Wait! why don't we just kill her?

:eyes:

[mmonk]

27. In all seriousness though,

we need to seek to reinstate the constitution, the Bill of Rights, the writ of habeus corpus because the REAL matter of the truth is, we do not live in a western style free democratic republic without the aforementioned no matter WHO is elected.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

29. Yes! Opposition for ever! No compromise with the electorate!

Who cares about going after the Republicans? Lets concentrate on purging the ideologically impure from the Democratic party first.

Once we've done that, the ideologically perfect Democrats, all five of them, can criticise the Republican government in perfect righteousness.

Incidentally, your claim that Kucinich is "The people's speaker" is one who's absurdity will, I think, be demonstrated come primary time. *I* agree with a lot of what Kucinich believes in, but to talk about him as "the people's anything" in America implies you're using a very odd and very selective definition of "the people" indeed, not including most of the electorate.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

30. Yes! Opposition for ever! No compromise with the electorate!

Who cares about going after the Republicans? Lets concentrate on purging the ideologically impure from the Democratic party first.

Once we've done that, the ideologically perfect Democrats, all five of them, can criticise the Republican government in perfect righteousness.

Incidentally, your claim that Kucinich is "The people's speaker" is one who's absurdity will, I think, be demonstrated come primary time. *I* agree with a lot of what Kucinich believes in, but to talk about him as "the people's anything" in America implies you're using a very odd and very selective definition of "the people" indeed, not including most of the electorate.

[Marie26]

32. Wow, this is lame. nt

[mondo joe]

33. Posts like this make Libertarianism more appealing to me.

For fuck's sake.

[theboss]

35. What is today's reason for flying off the handle?

I went home, read a book, went to sleep, and just got to the office. I haven't even opened a newspaper yet.

Why are we filled with righteous indignation today?

[Norquist Nemesis]

37. Way back in jr high we had a nice response for things like this

"Let's don't and say we did"

:eyes:

[pat_k]

39. Find a primary challenger with a Name and Money (Sean Penn might move over from Marin. . .)

If she doesn't muster the courage to utter the word impeachment by President's Day (Feb 19th), it will be time to take out the big guns.

A big gun like the threat of a primary challenger with clout and dough.

Someone demanding impeachment NOW.

Someone with MONEY.

Shouldn't be too hard to find in affluent SF.

Sean Penn is in Marin. Perhaps he's ready for a change of scene? Would just need to find a place across the bridge to be in Pelosi's district. Heck, he may already have one.

Ed Asner's got connections (wife's nephew is the Mayor of SF). Or maybe Viggo Mortensen(1) would like to move up from LA.

And then there are the Silicon Valley folks.

So many possibilities.

In a district that passed Proposition J (impeach Bush and Cheney) by 60%, Pelosi's refusal to fight for impeachment is a VERY risky game. We need to make it clear just how risky.

----------------
(1) November 2005 Interview
http://www.progressive.org/mag_intv1105

Mortensen: It’s too easy, and it lets a lot of people off the hook. I think impeachment proceedings need to be started immediately but not just against him. God forbid we should have Dick Cheney as President. No. Those two need to go, and many of the others in the inner circle need to go.

[ronnykmarshall]

40. Knock yourself out

[DancingBear]

42. Oh dear, Wiley, I believe you have upset the status-quo apple cart

Conventional Democrats (you know, like almost everyone here) have to go through their own non-awakening process. It goes like this:

1) Close their eyes and believe really hard that the two parties are really really different.

2) Convince themselves that any Democrat (no matter how pro-corporate, or how 'empty-suit', or how telegenic) is better than any Republican.

3) Convince themselves that talking about the war and holding non-binding resolutions is OK, because (this is my favorite):

4) THAT'S THE WAY POLITICS WORKS!:
(note: this excuse can be used to rationalize almost anything)

5) Go ga-ga when ethics rules get "changed" (even though K Street is now chock full of Democratic lobbyists), or when the minimum wage gets raised. Eat all the low-hanging fruit until you become sick.

6) Go super double ga-ga when someone "smacks down" any of the bad guys either in the House, the Senate, or on TV.

7) Pick a designated progressive to show that the Democratic Party could really be just like that if we all just worked at it. Discount the fact that there is no way in hell that the that would ever happen, and that you are merely looking at window-dressing to keep the left pacified. If you don't believe this, look around and see which Committee Dennis Kucinich is heading in the new Congress.

8) When no one steps up to end the war, or when Obama says his usual mouthful of nothing (but with great panache) bitch and moan how disappointed everyone is, and that we really expected a lot more from our elected officials.

9) Decide that the only way to get more "'progressive" is to (my second favorite one):

ELECT MORE DEMOCRATS!

9) Make fun of third parties, and keep them out of the electoral process. If they actually draw votes, be sure and ostracize them because they are taking votes away from "your" guy, and letting the other "guy" win. Pay no attention to the fact that the reason people vote for them is because they don't like either of the conventional "guys."

To do otherwise requires an introspective and honest look into the farce that is a "two-party" system, but that entails admitting (as many of us have) that we have and will continue to be duped, and that the change we strive for will be superficial at best.

Let me know when the Fairness Doctrine gets implemented, or when universal health care is put up for a vote, or when corporate CEO salaries/bonuses are capped, or when the Woolsey/Lee bill gets passed in both Houses, or when someone opens up a real investigation into 9/11, or when someone commends Jimmy Carter for being truthful, or when the "I really was against the war, even though my vote showed otherwise" chorus leaves town, or when someone cuts off ALL war funding, or when someone starts using the word "impeachment" on a daily basis.

While I would love to eat crow and see it all happen I probably have a very long wait...

[BlameCanada12]

49. Best post I've read here in a long time. Thank you.

Lurked since before the 2004 election - finally signed up.


I'm scared for your country.

[nadinbrzezinski]

58. Welcome to DU

[bigwillq]

84. Hello!

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[mdmc]

85. welcome to DU

[jus_the_facts]

51. this post deserves it's own thread...

:applause: :yourock: :applause:

[Dawgs]

74. Why, this person obviously thinks Democrats are no better than Republicans.

Do you agree with that? If yes, then why are you here?

[Hobarticus]

57. Sooooo....why are you here?

If you're that disenchanted, why subject yourself to this nonsense, here at DU?

Don't get me wrong, I personally welcome all sides of a debate, but you sound genuinely disgruntled, and I can't imagine why on earth you'd subject yourself to this.

[otherlander]

62. We should be able to rec. replies like this.

:applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause:

[Dawgs]

75. Why, because it's anti-Democrat?

Hmmm, I wonder why someone of you even post here.

[Dawgs]

69. Ah, another post from a Ralph Nader voter.

Do you feel better now?

It's because of you that we have Bush.

[cool user name]

73. Very well said, dancingbear ...

Excellent. :patriot:

[rinsd]

79. Shocking sentiment from a PI dweller

:eyes:

[IndyOp]

83. Kucinich, Chair of Subcommittee with Broadest Oversight Authority in Federal Government

HEY - YOU! I don't disagree with your general message that many on this board are blind to the faults of Dems and drink as much corporate-kool-aid as the average Amurkan, but I think you've missed something important about my man Kucinich.

Kucinich, Chair of Subcommittee with Broadest Oversight Authority in Federal Government

This week Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of the Committee on Government Oversight of the United States House of Representatives, with the approval of members of the full committee, created a new subcommittee; one with the broadest oversight authority of any subcommittee in the federal government, with jurisdiction over all Domestic Policy in the United States. With the support of all 23 democrats on the committee, I have been selected to be the Chairman.

This subcommittee has jurisdiction over the following departments of the federal government:
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Education
Department of Energy
Department of Health ad Human Services
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of Interior
Department of JUSTICE (Gonzales!)
Department of Labor
Department of Transportation
Department of the Treasury
Department of Veterans Affairs


It also has jurisdiction over the:

Broadcasting Board of Governors
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Consumer Product Safety Commission
Corporation for National and Community Service
Environmental Protection Agency
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Farm Credit Administration
Federal Communications Commission
Federal Deposit and Insurance Corporation
Federal Election Commission
Federal Housing Finance Board
Federal Labor Relations Authority
Federal Maritime Commission
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
Federal Reserve System
Federal Retirement and Thrift Investment Board
Federal Trade Commission
General Services Administration
Inter-American Foundation
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Capital Planning Commission
National Credit Union Administration
National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities
National Endowment for the Arts
National Endowment for the Humanities
Institute of Museum and Library Services
National Labor Relations Board
National Mediation Board
National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK)
National Science Foundation
National Transportation Safety Board
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
Office of Government Ethics
Office of National Drug Control Policy
Office of Special Counsel
Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation
Railroad Retirement Board
Securities and Exchange Commission
Small Business Administration
Social Security Administration
Tennessee Valley Authority
United States Commission on Civil Rights


Plus, over 50 Boards, Commissions and Committees, including:

Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States
Endangered Species Committee
Federal Financing Bank
Marine Mammal Commission
Migratory Bird Conservation Commission
National Indian Gaming Commission
National Park Commission
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
United States Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board

The subcommittee also has jurisdiction over the following quasi official agencies:

Legal Services Corporation
Smithsonian Institution
...and more…

[Swamp Rat]

43. Um, shouldn't we give her more time?

Like at least 3 months? :shrug:

[Hobarticus]

59. Typically it only takes a few days for a roomful of "Dems" to eat each other...

So we're right on schedule.

[Swamp Rat]

80. LOL! I love your sigline 'time traveler!'

:rofl:

[LoZoccolo]

44. Why couldn't the "people's speaker" get more than 4% of the 2004 presidential primary vote? n/t

[LSK]

45. W.T.F!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:wtf:

[LynneSin]

52. Yes, plus Nancy failed to split the atom, cure cancer and solve PI

Damn that woman, damn her

It's off the table but trust me it's not out of reach. We need to get the truth out there so we can have 67 senators support us

[ContraBass Black]

65. Solve pi?

It's a constant.

[IndyOp]

68. Yes, but it goes on into infinity and Nancy hasn't finished working it out (n/t)

:hi:

[LSK]

82. well in that case

Impeach her!!!!

:P

[LostinVA]

64. I like Speaker Pelosi -- GO NANCY!!!

[bullwinkle428]

46. 100-Hour agenda accomplished in 87 hours...

...yeah, you're right - she has no idea what she's doing. Time to bring back a legislator that knows how run things efficiently...I hear Tom DeLay's still available!

[mdmc]

53. I love Kucinich

but think Nancy is doing fine:shrug:

[LynneSin]

54. So, when just 51 senators vote to remove Bush which means Bush stays

How are you gonna feel about the impeachment then?

You need to learn how to play chess - it's a strategy. We need to expose the truth so hopefully we can get the

67 SENATORS

we need in order to actually remove Bush

[mzmolly]

56. Yes indeed Lynne,

and we need to take down the Republican Party when we pursue Bush for the good of the entire world. :hi:

[MzNov]

71. Make that 50. My guess is his evil twin LIEberman won't vote with

the Dems. GEE, DO YA THINK???

:mad:

[SaveElmer]

63. Uhhh...No

Nancy is doing a fine job as speaker...absolutely no reason to even remotely contemplate removing her...

And as to Kucinich....he would be a joke as speaker!

[Rosemary2205]

70. Oh look - it DANCES!

LOL :)

[Dawgs]

72. Impeaching Bush could lose us the Presidency and eventually the Congress.

If that's okay with you, then fine. But I'm guessing it's not.

[ShortnFiery]

76. Smaller and realistic steps?

Just like I tried to convey to the good "Kucinich for President" people a couple of years ago, Dennis will NOT EVER be mainstream. It's regrettable but a FACT. He serves us well as is and can be part of many committees.

Nancy Pelosi is IMO the appropriate Speaker who can tap down the Neo-Con ideologues. :shrug:

[Stinky The Clown]

81. And you're saying this because ....... ?

[Renew Deal]

86. Huh?

Did I miss something? Why do we want civil war in the party? Why do we want to make fools of ourselves less than a month after taking power?