Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Do you think Nancy Pelosi is akin to Neville Chamberlain over the FISA capitulation?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 12:13 PM
Original message
Poll question: Do you think Nancy Pelosi is akin to Neville Chamberlain over the FISA capitulation?
What say you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rockymountaindem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Could we please not go down the bad historical analogy path?
Please? Let's try not to sink to the Republicans' level. Not that I approve of Pelosi's actions (I don't) but that is still not the right analogy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stimbox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. She's more of a Benedict Arnold anyways... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidinalameda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. please explain
this should be good


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stimbox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Read about it yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidinalameda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. Pelosi has sided with the Brits in the Revolution?
:shrug:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stimbox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. Here ya go genius.
"Benedict Arnold" = "traitor"
"Benedict Arnold" has become an American expression used to describe a traitor, an American equivalent to calling someone a Quisling, a term known to few in America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidinalameda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. so who is a traitor to?
the bill was the best of the worst

are you one of these purists who want everyone to follow the party line or else?

if so, you missed your calling in the Lenin era
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. sink to the Republicans' level
Why not she has
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
3. WORSE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
7. Was Neville Chamberlain a war criminal?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Never mind
Edited on Sat Jun-21-08 12:36 PM by Canuckistanian
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Chamberlain said peace in our time
Pelosi said fascism in our time
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Davis_X_Machina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
10. No one's pissed-er at Pelosi than I...
But it's an inherently facile and shallow comparison -- not even apples and oranges -- more like applesauce and pork chops. They go well together, are traditionally mentioned, together, but they're different kind of things.

You want to make a serious comparison, for Congressional sellouts, consider
  • Clinton-era Dems on DOMA
  • Johnson killing the 1956 civil rights bill, after supporting Brown the year before...and pushing the same bill later, or
  • Roosevelt agreeing to the exclusion of farm and domestic workers (i.e. blacks and Hispanics) in order to get Social Security passed, or
  • Stephen Douglas's keep-everyone-on-board Compromise of 1850.
  • John Adams' legislative overreaction to the French Revolution & the Quasi-war.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zachstar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
11. Much Much Worse.
She is not just giving them what they want. She and the other democrats are BEGGING to kiss bush's political ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
12. Other. Chamberlain was an appeaser and a fool, he believed that Hitler could be satiated.
Pelosi is an active participant. She perpetrates this and the other evils out of her own desire to rule over others.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timtom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
13. No comparison.
Chamberlain was desperate to avert war.

Pelosi is more like a quisling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
14. That's a disservice to Chamberlain. I prefer the phrase "Vichy Democrats" myself.
for those that have actively collaborated with this misAdministration.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vichy_France
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrdmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
15. Two problems exist for Nancy Pelosi
1) Her silence on the issue of wiretaps. Ms. Pelosi was informed of the steps the Bush Administration were taking by the Bush Administration.

2) These wiretaps were used on everyone in the United States, including Ms. Pelosi. You can bet your bottom dollar on that.

Nancy Pelosi is protecting her party and the government, such as it is. The victims are the country and its citizens. This is a calculated choice forced by the Bush Administration. This choice protects her and her alone. This choice also protects the power she has amassed. The outcome for Nancy, the Democrats, and the government will not be pretty when all is said and done.

The real problem for all persons involved with the wiretaps are the following:

The Bush administration properly revealed to members in congress their intentions of wiretaps and other measures in response to 9/11. The informed members of congress are aloud to make there concerns be known to the Bush Administration. The informed members of congress are not aloud to make their concerns be known to other members of congress or the general public, not even staff members for research proposes. This gives the Bush administration the upper hand the wiretapping event. All the members of congress could do was complain to the Bush administration, which they did. Of course, the Bush administration did not listen.

The media is not and will not help in this matter. The strategy was set when the New York Times decided to hold off for a over a year before publishing the story. The only reason the New York Times did published the NSA wiretap story, was a book written by journalist James Risen was due out the following week. The story was published December 16, 2005 and was written in October 2004(?). The media will made the same excuses: its not our job, how were we suppose to know?, we did just fine, it is up to the Democrats.

The following is the first 4 paragraphs of the story. Please do not ask for a link because is comes from Lexis-Nexis.

<snip>
Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.

Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible ''dirty numbers'' linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.

The previously undisclosed decision to permit some eavesdropping inside the country without court approval was a major shift in American intelligence-gathering practices, particularly for the National Security Agency, whose mission is to spy on communications abroad. As a result, some officials familiar with the continuing operation have questioned whether the surveillance has stretched, if not crossed, constitutional limits on legal searches.

''This is really a sea change,'' said a former senior official who specializes in national security law. ''It's almost a mainstay of this country that the N.S.A. only does foreign searches.''
<end of snip>

The Bush is lying when stated that they seek a warrant for domestic spying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. The age-old dilemma for the politician with no principles.
They take reprehensible actions in the name of expediency and are thereby committed to defending those actions without the reason of doing what they believed to be right.

Nancy is all about Nancy and only Nancy. Fuck you, you're not Nancy, I know because I am Nancy.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
comradebillyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
16. and what about all the other democrats who voted
or will vote for this legislation, including our nominee? Are they all akin to Neville Chamberlain? if you say yes, why are you a democrat?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VP505 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
19. I think NOT but she
Edited on Sat Jun-21-08 07:18 PM by vpilot
has her own CYA agenda. She along with some of the other so called leaders are up to their eyeballs in complicity, they know that if Bu$hCo is held accountable sooner or later someone will get around to asking her, Hoyer, Emanuel and a few others about, either, their role in all of the illegalities or why they ignored it and looked the other way..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 07:42 PM
Response to Original message
20. She can't say no to bush. No backbone at all. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Pelosi knew about the Torture, Rendition, Illegal Spying &
said & did nothing about those crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-21-08 09:44 PM
Response to Original message
24. Ah! So Pelosi only made sense when she wanted to end the primary in favor of Obama...
Nice, now it's back to, "Eat shit Pelosi!!" :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Oct 28th 2020, 01:46 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC