Minas Tirith Forums
profile | register |
search | faq | avatars | citizens
donate | about | library
  This topic is comprised of pages:  1  2 
Minas Tirith Forums » The Prancing Pony Archive » Speaker Pelosi & Her Thumbsuckers (Page 2)
Author Topic: Speaker Pelosi & Her Thumbsuckers
Thingol of Doriath
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 2718

posted      Profile for Thingol of Doriath   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Please... no matter where you are politically, you have to admit that was a stupid thing to say. He should fire his speech writer, or at least whip him a few times.

By the way, are you planning on answering WT? []

From: Sverige! | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grimwulf Stormspear
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 5157
posted      Profile for Grimwulf Stormspear   Email Grimwulf Stormspear   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
I notice that no one is really interested in defending the Pelosi Agenda. [] I guess we all agree that she reall is an awful Speaker.
From: The central lake-lands of the Great Peninsula. | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Roll of Honor Wandering Tuor
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 1685

posted      Profile for Wandering Tuor   Email Wandering Tuor   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
I notice that, although you were CONSPICUOUSLY asked three times to identify the "serious historians" who you claim support your view of Pelosi, you still haven't done so. Indeed, you won't even acknowledge the question, while calling me ungracious.

Should we just assume that you made them up?

As for Pelosi's agenda, I'll gladly defend it as soon as I hear some intelligent criticism of it.

E: Actually, four times. Including once with a megaphone.  -

[ 04-07-2007, 05:26 AM: Message edited by: Wandering Tuor ]

From: My place | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Roll of Honor Wandering Tuor
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 1685

posted      Profile for Wandering Tuor   Email Wandering Tuor   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Helloooooo?
From: My place | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grimwulf Stormspear
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 5157
posted      Profile for Grimwulf Stormspear   Email Grimwulf Stormspear   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
WT, in case you didn’t notice, this thread is a parody of Pi’s thread. The tongue-in-cheek opening line was a play on an earlier thread which included some ridiculous article by a left-wing historian who had polled a number of his colleagues on “the worst president ever.” [] Many cited the current Commander in Chief, in an obvious example of politically-motivated slander. You may not like Bush, but there is no way that any historian can reasonably call him the worst in history. If nothing else, it is much too early to make such a judgment.

It is also much too early for historians to pass judgment on Speaker Pelosi, although (as I point out) her agenda thus far does not bode well for her legacy. [] Her “First 100 Hours” agenda included legislation that would stamp out jobs for minority teens, stifle pharmaceutical research & development, as well as end petroleum exploration & investment.

I also find her lack of moral courage on the issue of Iraq disturbing. We can & should defeat the insurgency in Iraq. She refuses to support those efforts. [] Her lack of moral clarity regarding the overall War on Terror is frightening. Pelosi & her band do not seem to take our enemies seriously. And, believe it or not, Imbëar is absolutely correct to criticize her bizarre, arrogant, & inappropriate conduct in the Middle East.

As it happens, I did talk to an academic historian the other night — on this topic, among others. [] (We plan to have dinner next week if he makes it into town.) And, no, I will not give you his name. Despite his excellent work thus far, he has to hide his political views. Liberal academic historians tend to be very intolerant of conservative job applicants.

I thought you had more of a sense of humor. I admit, I had some fun watching you bounce of the walls over a joke — I do wish I’d thought of it last Sunday, darn it — but I may have overplayed the gag. [] I apologize for leaving you hanging.

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Furthermore, it is my opinion that Obamacare must be repealed.

From: The central lake-lands of the Great Peninsula. | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Roll of Honor Wandering Tuor
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 1685

posted      Profile for Wandering Tuor   Email Wandering Tuor   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Wow.
From: My place | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kalkin
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 1029

posted      Profile for Kalkin   Email Kalkin   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Meh. []
From: Chicago | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Talan
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 2413

posted      Profile for Talan   Email Talan   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Uhh...

Ahem...

I have yet to see any of the people who are busy attacking Grimwulf address the issue of the whole Olmert thing referenced by Imbëar. Whether or not you have a personal beef with Grimwulf, it seems to me you've all gone so overboard on sniping back at him that you're completely ignoring the issues--issues which you would be outraged over had they involved a Republican speaker. Which is exactly how the vicious cycle continues...the two parties attacking each other at the detriment of the nation. Kind of like a snake eating its own tail.

Anyway, I don't really have time to debate about it, but frankly the snark party here is starting to get on my nerves.

Later.

From: Austin, TX. Home of awesome. | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Roll of Honor Adulithien
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 2193

posted      Profile for Adulithien   Email Adulithien   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
you're completely ignoring the issues--issues which you would be outraged over had they involved a Republican speaker.
Just to be fair, Talan, no one has really said that they're not outraged. Grimuwulf is correct in at least one thing: no one has assumed the position of Pelosi's Heroic Defender.
From: Austin | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Talan
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 2413

posted      Profile for Talan   Email Talan   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
That's fine, Adulithien. Honestly, now that my own only dream is beginning to collapse in my face, I don't much care. All I can find the energy to say is this: Confront untruth consistently; at least as consistently as you can.

And I believe people have done Imbëar an injustice by spending all their energy on Grimwulf, who they (apparently) truly believe to be full of crap, instead of confronting Imbëar, who had a concrete point to make.

I can't pretend to be blameless. I can't claim to have done a good job of protecting truth. I have allowed myself to drift into complacency. But attacking someone when it's easy is pointless. Fight for the truth. In the end, it's the only thing worth fighting for, isn't it?

From: Austin, TX. Home of awesome. | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Roll of Honor pi
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 5374

posted      Profile for pi   Author's Homepage   Email pi   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
A portion off an article in today's Sunday Philadelphia Inquirer, and thus it must be a surrender monkey, left wing, cut and run liberal media blithering idiot piece of a news article. And no, I did not want to provide the link.

Endless legislators, both Democratic and Republican, including Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.), have trooped through Damascus and met President Bashar al-Assad in recent months, with nothing to show for it. Ditto for this visit.

As for "aiding the enemy," the arrival of such a high-ranking Democrat probably did reaffirm Assad's belief he can sit Bush out and wait for a Democratic successor. But Assad was already wedded to a wait-'em-out strategy. The responsibility for that lies with the White House, not the speaker of the House.

President Bush still doesn't seem to grasp the meaning of the 2006 elections. The Democrats who took control of Congress were propelled by voters who wanted a change in Iraq policy. Four years of Iraq turmoil exposed the strategic fraud of a policy that relied mainly on military means to remake the region. It underscored the need for the kind of diplomacy this White House had scorned.

Some in the administration got the voters' message and started talking up diplomatic efforts on Iraq, Iran and the Israeli-Palestinian impasse. But, despite serious work by top State Department pros, the White House commitment to these efforts remains doubtful. The diplomatic efforts often contradict one another, like the simultaneous push to punish Tehran and Damascus while seeking their cooperation on Iraq.

So no wonder the Democrats are restless. They are being asked to back a military "surge" policy in Baghdad, although everyone knows that military action alone can't calm Iraq. Any hope for a U.S. drawdown rests on skilled U.S. diplomacy that persuades all of Iraq's neighbors to stop meddling and work together to calm the sectarian violence. So far, White House backing for such regional diplomacy looks cosmetic.

This puts Democrats in a bind. They can wait for the White House to fail and to bequeath the Mideast mess to them in '08. Or they can try to press the White House through funding measures, troop deadlines - and Pelosi's grandstanding travels.

Sadly, the latter strategy - which the Democrats have adopted - is likely to make a bad Mideast situation worse. Setting Iraq deadlines does encourage hard-line Iraq insurgents of the al-Qaeda kind. It intimidates Sunni nationalists who might be thinking about laying down arms. Visiting Damascus does give Assad a small boost.

But even if Pelosi stayed home and the Dems withdrew their Iraq bills, the Bush approach would still be leading Americans down a blind alley. The White House resists putting muscle behind the one approach that might save Iraq and keep the Middle East from imploding. It continues to reject the one strategy that could unite Democrats and Republicans in a bipartisan effort.

That is the strategy laid out by the report of the bipartisan Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group late last year, which the White House immediately rebuffed.

The beauty of the ISG report was that it gave the White House a framework both political parties could endorse. Its core proposals emphasized regional diplomacy. They set a target goal of 2008 withdrawal but left loopholes if progress (or regress) made more time necessary. Within this bipartisan framework, even a temporary troop surge would have been possible.

The ISG called for talking to Iran and Syria not as a reward for good behavior but as a means to clarify positions on both sides. This would not mean relaxing legitimate demands that both countries stop supporting terrorism or that Iran halt its tirades against Israel and freeze its suspect nuclear program. But it would mean giving up futile dreams of U.S.-inspired regime change in Damascus and Tehran.

Had the Bush team adopted the ISG approach - indeed, were it to do so now - Democrats could join Republicans in a last-ditch strategy that had a chance of working. Iran and Syria could no longer assume that it was worth stonewalling until 2008.

But first the White House would have to recognize that partisan foreign policy cannot work post-November 2006. And the White House would have to put real muscle and coherent strategy behind its diplomatic efforts.

Without such a White House shift, both parties will go their partisan ways. Both will undercut the last hopes of saving Iraq. The fault, however, lies not with Pelosi and her scarves, but with the man who heads the executive branch.

From: Virgo Supercluster, 40º N 75º W | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Imbëar
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 729
posted      Profile for Imbëar   Author's Homepage   Email Imbëar   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Pi,
deflecting the issue back to the President doesn't change the fact of Pelosi's error:

She has no authority to conduct foreign relations.


Imbëar

From: Auburn, CA | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Roll of Honor pi
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 5374

posted      Profile for pi   Author's Homepage   Email pi   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
So Imbear,
Nothing else is germane in that article? That's all you get out of it? I know you're smarter than that. Please try to remove partisanship from discussions such as this if at all possible. It is far too serious a subject to remain behind political fences and throw political barbs.

From: Virgo Supercluster, 40º N 75º W | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Imbëar
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 729
posted      Profile for Imbëar   Author's Homepage   Email Imbëar   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Sorry, Pi, I just can't appreciate your snide address.
I'm too conservative to be smarter than that.


Imbëar

From: Auburn, CA | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Imbëar
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 729
posted      Profile for Imbëar   Author's Homepage   Email Imbëar   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Out of courtesy, I've decided to break the article down.
I guess I'm just *seeing things* when describing the deflection back to the President. This is a garbage article, Pi, rife with the worst kind of partisanship. How, in good conscience, can you accuse me of partisanship/plea to me for less partisanship after you post this reeking ordure?

quote:
both Democratic and Republican, including Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.), have trooped through Damascus and met President Bashar al-Assad in recent months
Partisan.

They (Republicans) did it, too!

quote:
But Assad was already wedded to a wait-'em-out strategy. The responsibility for that lies with the White House
Partisan.

Bush's fault.

quote:
President Bush still doesn't seem to grasp the meaning of the 2006 elections. [...] the need for the kind of diplomacy this White House had scorned
Partisan.

quote:
But, despite serious work by top State Department pros, the White House commitment to these efforts remains doubtful
Partisan.

Republicans foil every peace attempt (especially the kind of peace where we bend over for terrorists).

quote:
So no wonder the Democrats are restless
Partisan.

No wonder the Democrats are acting outside of their authority.
No wonder the Democrats are trying to undermine the President by establishing Democratic Alliances with Terrorist Sponsors.

quote:
[...]although everyone knows that military action alone can't calm Iraq
No, everyone does not know that - because it's patently false. Only the tin-foil beanie-brigade known as the Left has such profound insight into military defeat.

quote:
Any hope for a U.S. drawdown rests on skilled U.S. diplomacy
...by fools like Pelosi

quote:
So far, White House backing for such regional diplomacy looks cosmetic
Partisan.

quote:
This puts Democrats in a bind. They can wait for the White House to fail and to bequeath the Mideast mess to them in '08. Or they can try to press the White House through funding measures, troop deadlines - and Pelosi's grandstanding travels
Partisan.

Tin-hat foolery.

quote:
Sadly, the latter strategy - which the Democrats have adopted - is likely to make a bad Mideast situation worse. Setting Iraq deadlines does encourage hard-line Iraq insurgents of the al-Qaeda kind. It intimidates Sunni nationalists who might be thinking about laying down arms. Visiting Damascus does give Assad a small boost
Partisan.

But, hey, I agree.

quote:
[...]the Bush approach would still be leading Americans down a blind alley. The White House resists putting muscle behind the one approach that might save Iraq and keep the Middle East from imploding. It continues to reject the one strategy that could unite Democrats and Republicans in a bipartisan effort
Partisan.

Oh, the irony.

quote:
[...]which the White House immediately rebuffed
Partisan.

quote:
But it would mean giving up futile dreams of U.S.-inspired regime change in Damascus and Tehran
Partisan.

quote:
Had the Bush team adopted the ISG approach - indeed, were it to do so now - Democrats could join Republicans in a last-ditch strategy that had a chance of working
Partisan.

quote:
But first the White House would have to recognize that partisan foreign policy cannot work post-November 2006. And the White House would have to put real muscle and coherent strategy behind its diplomatic efforts
Partisan.

quote:
Without such a White House shift, both parties will go their partisan ways
Partisan.

quote:
The fault, however, lies not with Pelosi and her scarves,
but with the man who heads the executive branch
Partisan.

Now how on earth could that be *all* that I got out of that article? I mean, the language is so balanced and fair.... []


Imbëar

From: Auburn, CA | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Minas Tirith Forums » The Prancing Pony Archive » Speaker Pelosi & Her Thumbsuckers (Page 2)
This topic is comprised of pages:  1  2 
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic       The Red Arrow!       Admin Options: Make Topic Sticky   Close Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic

About  ~ • ~  Contact  ~ • ~  Minas Tirith  ~ • ~  F. A. Q.  ~ • ~  Help

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.6.1