rsmith6621
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:03 AM
Original message |
Pelosi Is trying to Derail Obama |
|
........recovery plan for America.....but yet she still wont prosecute members of the Bush administration...
...............SHE NEEDS TO BE REMOVED FROM HER CHAIR NOW......
|
LakeSamish706
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:05 AM
Response to Original message |
1. I agree, and Reid can go with her. n/t |
w4rma
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:05 AM
Response to Original message |
2. How? The House passed that bill a week ago. (nt) |
JohnnyBoots
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:05 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Harry and Hoyer too. The all suck. Let's get some real Dems with spines. |
InAbLuEsTaTe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
18. Never going to happen, sorry to say. |
MNDemNY
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:07 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Why, Obama has no intention of seeking prosecutions. |
John Q. Citizen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:07 AM
Response to Original message |
5. Do you have a link to what you say is her plot to derail the jobs/recovery bill? Thanks. |
polmaven
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
Just more "Pelosi took impeachement off the table so she is the root of ALL evil" ranting.
|
martymar64
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
37. So you think the BFEE should get off scot-free? |
|
She's not evil, just weak and compromised. Somebody that weak has no business as Speaker. Let her go to the back bench and serve from there. We need a Speaker with a spine, something she sorely lacks.
|
polmaven
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-09 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #37 |
41. Where did I SAY that? |
|
Edited on Fri Feb-06-09 07:41 AM by polmaven
Perhaps you need to have some reading comprehension lessons, first, and then some lessons on how things work in the real world.
Impeachment would NOT have been the right thing to do, and I have stated my reasons for thinking that often on this board. I mean, talk about scot-free! Acquittal in the Senate from impeachment charges brought by the House would have been a DISASTER!
No one, as far as I have seen, has taken anything off the table now! Lets give the AG some time to get his office door open before we get into prosecutions. Nancy Pelosi has NO PART in that! That will be up to the Attorney General, NOT the House of Representatives.
I still have seen NOTHING to back up the OP's claim that she is trying to undermine the President. It is more unsubstantiated bluster.
|
Rosa Luxemburg
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:10 AM
Response to Original message |
6. no she is not trying to derail Obama |
saltpoint
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:12 AM
Response to Original message |
7. There's a logistical consideration to be made in "removing" |
|
the Speaker of the House, herself re-elected by a decidedly informed and liberal Congressional district to the 111th Congress, and chosen by other elected Democrats in the majority of that chamber to be Speaker.
Good luck on this project.
|
DrDan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:23 AM
Response to Original message |
8. I don't necessarily disagree - but how is she trying to "derail Obama"? |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:27 AM
Response to Original message |
SIMPLYB1980
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:28 AM
Response to Original message |
10. Well fuck it I guess we should all vote republican next cycle. |
Deja Q
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
ClarkUSA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:30 AM
Response to Original message |
11. What PROOF do you have for this OP? Or is this another no-sourced brain-dead BS opinion? |
|
Edited on Thu Feb-05-09 10:31 AM by ClarkUSA
|
onenote
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:31 AM
Response to Original message |
12. And how exactly is she trying to derail obama? |
|
If you can make the charge, presumably you can back it up.
|
uponit7771
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
16. Letting the bill hit the floor KNOWING it was OVER LOADED with shit that GOP was going to pick at... |
|
...make it too easy to label the bill as pork without a true disciplined message that got out in front of GOP objections.
I understand over ask and correctly receive but this was stupid, they didn't have the message discipline to keep the GOP from labeling the bill.
Thx
|
onenote
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
17. and do you think the Obama team had absolutely nothing to do with the bill? |
|
This bill wasn't drafted exclusively by Pelosi or even by the House. The White House had considerable input into it and has defended some of the very provisions that have become fodder for the talk show circuit. The inclusion of some provisions that have become controversial was strategic -- they were put in the bill (i) as a marker for future action and (ii) as items that could be negotiated away since it was always never going to be the case that the repubs would accept the bill as presented no matter what it had in it.
|
backscatter712
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
|
Obama and Pelosi deliberately overloaded the bill before it went to the Senate - the Rethugs were going to screech and howl no matter what we did - this just ensured that there were a few bones that could be thrown at them.
You know how negotiations go - one side high-balls, the other side low-balls, then they meet in the middle.
|
Occam Bandage
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
21. That's funny. A week ago, people were calling for her head because |
|
she was "complicit in letting the GOP strip progressive provisions from the bill." Damned if she includes 'em, damned if she doesn't.
|
martymar64
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
38. She needs to remember whose side she's on. |
|
She needs to stop coddling the Rethugs and grow a spine already.
|
Occam Bandage
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #38 |
39. So you disagree with the OP, then. nt |
martymar64
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #39 |
40. I don't know if she trying to derail Obama or not |
|
But her coddling of the Rethugs is definitely not helping. I feel her loyalties are more to the "investor class" than to the people. She's a modern day Marie Antoinette that longs to have homeless people thrown in jail (her own words). She's not one of us like Obama is, that's for sure.
|
truebrit71
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:41 AM
Response to Original message |
13. She and Reid need to be replaced post haste... |
|
...they are fucking useless...
|
Bleacher Creature
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:49 AM
Response to Original message |
14. She may be ineffectual, but she's NOT trying to derail anything, nt |
Marrah_G
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 10:50 AM
Response to Original message |
15. Obama doesn't want to prosecute Bush either.......... |
|
Where is she derailing Obama? Details please.
|
WI_DEM
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 11:21 AM
Response to Original message |
19. It's not to her advantage to undermine a democratic president if she wants to remain speaker. |
|
The Dems could easily lose their majority in the next election, just as Bill Clinton did in 1994.
|
Occam Bandage
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 11:24 AM
Response to Original message |
20. She isn't "trying to derail Obama." What BS. They have the same position. And, moreover, |
|
she doesn't have the authority to "prosecute Bush."
|
NoPasaran
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
|
I remember reading last year that the notion people should have a basic understanding of civics was a pro-DLC position.
|
vaberella
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
24. Agreed...not to mention she has been Obama's staunchest advocate if not confidant. n/t |
Clear Blue Sky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 12:22 PM
Response to Original message |
25. She's reminding Barack that SHE'S in charge of Wash DC... |
AtomicKitten
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #25 |
26. Wait. I thought Diane Feinstein claimed the throne with her hissyfit over the Panetta nod. n/t |
Clear Blue Sky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #26 |
30. Nope. It's Queen Nan... |
AtomicKitten
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #30 |
31. Thanks for clarifying the hierarchal pecking order, tough to discern with so much barking from D.C. |
Deja Q
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 12:58 PM
Response to Original message |
29. Everyone seems to be. |
|
Which includes President Obama himself based on some of the people he's chosen, some of which have backed down because of sufficiently serious "oopsies" they made. I do feel sorry for the President; it's not an enviable position to be in anymore.
|
Radical Activist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 01:19 PM
Response to Original message |
32. Speaker Jan Schakowsi |
Enrique
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #32 |
|
Obama would never want her.
He'd want one of the Blue Dogs who wouldn't do anything the republicans could attack too easy.
|
Enrique
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 01:51 PM
Response to Original message |
33. so who's Obama prosecuting now he's president |
|
now he runs the Justice Department. His U.S. Attorneys could start proceedings on any of these people that are thought to be slam dunk cases.
So? What's he done?
|
democracy1st
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 01:59 PM
Response to Original message |
34. WTF President Obama tells her what to do! |
democrattotheend
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-09 04:51 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I think she and Obama have a pretty good relationship...there will inevitably be some White House-Congress turf battles, as is inevitable even (or especially) when one party controls both, but I don't think Pelosi has the knives out for Obama or anything.
|
alwysdrunk
(908 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-09 08:21 AM
Response to Original message |
42. I miss Dick Gephart :-( |
|
Tom Daschle's not looking so bad these days either.....
|
RollWithIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-09 11:34 AM
Response to Original message |
43. OMG! Pelosi is killing Obama by getting EVERYTHING PASSED! |
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-06-09 12:19 PM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 10:17 PM
Response to Original message |