PDA

View Full Version : Pelosi dishonest?



eg8r
04-05-2007, 07:30 PM
I guess Pelosi was dishonest enough Olmert decided the entire issue needed to be clarified. Pelosi took it upon herself to twist the words of Olmert and he is correcting her. PMO denies peace message to Assad (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1173879247562&pagename=JPost%2FJPArt icle%2FShowFull)

[ QUOTE ]
The Prime Minister's Office issued a rare "clarification" Wednesday that, in gentle diplomatic terms, contradicted US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's statement in Damascus that she had brought a message from Israel about a willingness to engage in peace talks.

According to the statement, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert emphasized in his meeting with Pelosi on Sunday that "although Israel is interested in peace with Syria, that country continues to be part of the Axis of Evil and a force that encourages terror in the entire Middle East.

Olmert, the statement clarified, told Pelosi that Syria's sincerity about a genuine peace with Israel would be judged by its willingness to "cease its support of terror, cease its sponsoring of the Hamas and Islamic Jihad organizations, refrain from providing weapons to Hizbullah and bringing about the destabilizing of Lebanon, cease its support of terror in Iraq, and relinquish the strategic ties it is building with the extremist regime in Iran."

The statement said Olmert had not communicated to Pelosi any change in Israeli policy on Damascus.

...

The officials said Olmert had told Pelosi that he thought her trip to Damascus was a mistake, and that when she asked - nevertheless - whether he had a message for Assad, Olmert said Syria should first stop supporting terrorism and "act like a normal country," and only then would Israel be willing to hold discussions.

The first part of that message, the officials said, was lost in what was reported from Damascus on Wednesday.
<hr /></blockquote> Our new Hanoi Jane is out in Damscus twisting words which definitely are not going to lead to any sort of peace. Her trip is a waste of taxpayer money and she knows it. She is just out there trying to look like she knows what she is doing and it is just humiliating for all American's to watch.

eg8r

Qtec
04-05-2007, 09:11 PM
Talk about mixed signals.

"Olmert Invites Arabs To Jerusalem for Talks

Monday, April 2, 2007; A12

Olmert Invites Arabs To Jerusalem for Talks

JERUSALEM -- Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, warming to a Saudi peace initiative, issued a surprise invitation Sunday to Arab leaders to meet with him in Jerusalem and exchange ideas for settling the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

He also said he would join moderate Arab leaders and the Palestinian Authority president for the same purpose if King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia were to convene such a summit.

"I think it is time to make a momentous effort in order to give a push to the diplomatic process," Olmert said at a news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

There was no immediate reaction from Arab leaders.

The Saudi initiative, a five-year-old plan revived last week at a meeting of Arab nations in Riyadh, offers Israel peace and acceptance in the region in return for Israeli withdrawal from lands it captured in the 1967 Middle East war, including the West Bank, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem. It also demands that Israel recognize the "right of return" of Palestinian refugees from the 1948 war and their descendants.

Olmert's openness to a regional summit was unexpected, given Israel's skepticism about the plan and its historic aversion to multilateral peace talks in which the Jewish state would be outnumbered."




<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> Her trip is a waste of taxpayer money and she knows it. She is just out there trying to look like she knows what she is doing and it is just humiliating for all American's to watch.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

On Sunday 3 rep senators met with Assad - you didn't mention that!

Why should the US and Isreal talk to Syria?

[ QUOTE ]
Statement of Senator Dodd on Speaker Pelosi’s Trip to Syria
April 3, 2007

“Speaker Pelosi’s trip to Syria is absolutely appropriate and reflects her understanding that whether we like it or not, decisions by the Syrian government do impact the lives of our men and women serving in the Middle East in a real and direct way, and therefore we must engage Syrian authorities directly in order to influence their decision making process. Last December, my official visit to the Middle East, which included a stop in Syria, was also criticized by the Bush Administration for meeting with President Assad. The Administration’s effort to change Syrian behavior over the last two years with its policy of isolation has been a failure. In recent weeks there has been a tacit admission by the Administration that the policy of isolation has not worked as it how now agreed to join in talks with all of Iraq’s neighbors, including Iran and Syria, to stabilize Iraq. In light of that action, I find it extremely puzzling that the Administration would continue to criticize Congressional visits to Damascus. I commend Speaker Pelosi for her decision to include Syria on her itinerary, and I again urge the Administration to begin engaging instead of ignoring countries critical to our long-term success in the Middle East.” <hr /></blockquote>

This axis of evil BS is getting us nowhere. Peace in Iraq will require the co-operation of Syria and Iran and most likely a deal with the Palestinians.
The only ones who are trying to score political points here are the WH incompetents who created this whole Iraq fiasco.

Q

eg8r
04-05-2007, 10:13 PM
[ QUOTE ]
On Sunday 3 rep senators met with Assad - you didn't mention that!
<hr /></blockquote> Strawman. The subject is Pelosi. Your inability to stick to the subject is juvenile.

[ QUOTE ]
Why should the US and Isreal talk to Syria?
<hr /></blockquote> It was a waste of time and she along with the media misled what Olmert told her. Sorry, but I really don't care to hear any more of your terrorist appeasing opinions.

[ QUOTE ]
The only ones who are trying to score political points here are the WH incompetents who created this whole Iraq fiasco.
<hr /></blockquote> This was the only reason for Pelosi to go on this trip. She was already going back on her word to do what is right, she already tried to push through some more earmarks, why not head over to Syria and scratch their backs and tell them we wanna have tea and crumpets.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
04-06-2007, 06:04 AM
Tap Tap Tap!!!

Well put Q. I am thankful that the Democratic Party has recognized that leaving things to the Bush administration, is the most dangerous of all options. It is high time, IMO, that people begin to understand what a real and present danger exists if our international policies continue to be left to the whims of such gross arrogance and incompetence, and that Bush's policies, have energized and expanded terrorism, and put our country at much greater risk than before George Bush bagan to dictate his will, upon our free nation.

Pelosi has shown a lot of courage, duty and intelligence, IMO, and didn't even insist on arriving in secret, in the dark of night. Bush and Cheney don't even have enough courage to throw out the first baseball! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Gayle in Md.

pooltchr
04-06-2007, 06:17 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>
Pelosi has shown a lot of courage, duty and intelligence, IMO, and didn't even insist on arriving in secret, in the dark of night. Bush and Cheney don't even have enough courage to throw out the first baseball! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Gayle in Md.

<hr /></blockquote>
Maybe Nancy thinks that since her idology is so closely aligned to those who have declaired their hatred for our country, there is little risk for her traveling throughout the mid-east. They love her over there!
Steve

Gayle in MD
04-06-2007, 06:55 AM
Gee Steve, do you really think that. I really doubt that you believe that anyone in the House, is for the terrorists. Such statements, while they have been promoted by the very people who should be pulling the country together, the administration, are highly false in their premise, cause divisions in our country, and really dirty politics. Although you support the administration, I'm sure your are intelligent enough to understand that the right to take a stand against policies which have so obviously hurt our cause, does not mean that people are on the side of such demons.

We were einticed into Afghanistan, bin Laden wanted us to go the way of Russia. He misjudged our force. We had almost ruined alQaeda, then we gave them a new training ground, in Iraq, fumbled completely there, but since giving them a rallying cause, new cells have grown up all over the world, and those who are killing us in Iraq, are taking treasure, OIL, which they steal, and using it to build their forces all over the globe. The fact is that Bush's policies have unsettled the entire middle east, and greatly expanded our enemies. Ms. Pelosi, and many others, even Republicans, understand this, and since Bush has failed miserably in diplomatic ability, as has Condoleeza Rice, cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Bremmer, Feith, Franks, all those who bungled Iraq, others must be vigilant.

Also, our own National Security Agencies, have told us this. Do you think they, also, are on the side of the terrorists?

Gayle in Md.

eg8r
04-06-2007, 07:59 AM
Steve, Nancy is their hero. Nancy is a terrorists dream, she wants to chat and the terrorists know that no one gets hurt if all the US does is chat. Like it or not, for the terrorist, the understanding that flying planes into buildings in the US will be cause for immeadiate bombing is a lot different than knowing they can fly those planes and then have tea with Pelosi.

How about Pelosi twisting Olmert's words to say something completely different, actually it was an outright lie. She has wasted our taxpayers money and only proven she rather make the terrorists feel good than make them pay for any wrongdoing.

eg8r

pooltchr
04-06-2007, 08:49 AM
Gayle,
The way I see it, Nancy and company believe that we have more to gain through diplomacy with the terrorists than through military action. While the terrorists like this line of thinking, poor Nancy doesn't seem to understand that they hate all Americans (including her!), but are more than happy to take advantage of her twisted line of reasoning when it comes to the terrorist issue.
People who will blow themselves up, blow up their own children, or drive passenger jets into buildings and not going to have their mind changed because Nancy wants to have dialogue with them.
And no, I don't think the Republicans who think that way are any better than Nancy.
You and I are in agreement that the war is not a good thing. Where we disagree is you don't seem to think it was necessary, while I believe it is the only way to get through to these radicals who are determined to inflict whatever damage they can on our country, regardless of the lives that are lost on both sides. While we place a high value on human life, they do not. When someone is willing to die in an effort to kill you, me, our children and grandchildren, etc, the best course of action is to eliminate them first.
It may not be pretty, but it is a fact. It is a question of us or them.....and I vote for us!!!
Steve

eg8r
04-06-2007, 09:09 AM
Here is an article from USA Today (http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20070406/cm_usatoday/pelosistepsoutofbounds). [ QUOTE ]
Democrats in Congress have been busy flexing their foreign policy muscles almost from the moment they took power in January, for the most part responsibly. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi crossed a line this week by visiting Syria, where she met with President Bashar Assad. She violated a long-held understanding that the United States should speak with one official voice abroad - even if the country is deeply divided on foreign policy back home.

Like it or not (and we do not), President Bush's policy has been to refuse to negotiate with Syria until it changes its behavior. That behavior is malignant. <hr /></blockquote> [ QUOTE ]
Pelosi surely knew that as speaker - third in the succession line to the presidency - her high-profile presence in Damascus would be read as a contradiction of Bush's no-talkpolicy. No matter that she claimed to have stuck closely to administration positions in her conversations with Assad, smiling photos of Pelosi and the Syrian president convey the unspoken message that while the U.S. president is unwilling to talk with Syria, another wing of the government is. Assad made good use of the moment.
<hr /></blockquote> [ QUOTE ]
If there's any justification for Pelosi's trip, it is that foreign travel by members of Congress is important. Many come to office with little knowledge of the world and soon need to make important decisions about it. This was starkly evident in December when the congressman Pelosi chose to head the critical House Intelligence Committee revealed that he didn't know the difference between Sunnis and Shiites - knowledge critical to understanding Iraq and the war on terrorism. <hr /></blockquote> [ QUOTE ]
But Wolf can travel to Syria virtually undetected. Pelosi has an international profile. That guarantees her heavy media coverage but multiplies the price of a misstep, which she quickly made when she created confusion about how eager Israel is to resume peace talks with Syria. Israel immediately clarified her remarks.


Pelosi's office defended her trip by noting that the "administration's cold-shoulder approach has yielded nothing but more Syrian intransigence." As true as that is, the place for Pelosi to make the case is not in Damascus. It's not up to the speaker to unfreeze relations with Assad.

<hr /></blockquote> Basically, I believe Pelosi has done more bad than good and alongside Wolf she has defied the Administration and done what she wanted. What happened to "do the right thing"? It seems her intent was use that to win an election, not to actually follow through with it. It certainly is not the right thing for her to be sitting around smiling and having a good time with Assad while misrepresenting conversations with Israel and completely undermining the Administration's stance on Syria.

eg8r

pooltchr
04-06-2007, 10:09 AM
Much like some claim that the present administration believes they are all powerful, it would seem that Nancy thinks she knows better than anyone else, and is more than happy to over step the bounds of her office to flex her political muscle. Her arrogance seems to be similar to that which we have seen in Hillery, and many other liberals. They think that they are right and anyone who disagrees with them must be idiots.
I believe that those who voted for the Democrats as a statement against the present administration may find that they simply jumped from the frying pan into the fire.
Steve

Qtec
04-06-2007, 10:21 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> Steve, Nancy is their hero. Nancy is a terrorists dream, she wants to chat and the terrorists know that no one gets hurt if all the US does is chat. Like it or not, for the terrorist, the understanding that flying planes into buildings in the US will be cause for immeadiate bombing is a lot different than knowing they can fly those planes and then have tea with Pelosi.<font color="blue"> GW can't even catch the most wanted man in the world!!!!!! What message does that send?
I'm sure the terrorists in Iraq are shaking in their boots as they attack and kill 1,000s of civilians AT WILL!
You don't get it. These Islamic whacko,s WANT to die! The big stick isn't working and isn't going to work.</font color>

How about Pelosi twisting Olmert's words to say something completely different, actually it was an outright lie. She has wasted our taxpayers money and only proven she rather make the terrorists feel good than make them pay for any wrongdoing.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

Semantics. Its a non issue since Pelosi has replied to that accusation.

Is the Pres of Syria a terrorist? If so, several Reps have been cavorting with a know terrorist and should be disapeared to Gitmo right away, the traitors!????????

Storm in a tea cup.

Q

eg8r
04-06-2007, 10:25 AM
[ QUOTE ]
You don't get it. These Islamic whacko,s WANT to die! The big stick isn't working and isn't going to work. <hr /></blockquote> Oh I get it. You would rather sit down and chat with them while they run around killing people. Your agenda has never worked. The terrorists know this, why don't you? I can answer for you, you have a heart of gold and don't want the poor terrorists to die.

eg8r

Qtec
04-06-2007, 10:26 AM
Maybe, because this admin has a track history of lying, /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif, she thought it would be better to hear what the Syrians had to say in person.

Q

Qtec
04-06-2007, 10:28 AM
You don't know the dif between Syria and Al Q? Did P talk to Assad or OBL?

Q /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Gayle in MD
04-06-2007, 10:57 AM
The innocent Iraqis did not kill us, until we occupied their country, and turned it to rubble. Iraq, has emboldened the terrorists, that is a fact, I ask you once more, do you our sixteen National Security Agencies are for the terrorists?

Our fight against terrorism, is a fight between ideology. when one studies about the past, one learns a great deal about how these people think, and why they think as they do. Trying to kill all of them, accomplishes nothing. There are far too many who will take their place, as we go. Gaining allies, to assist us in finding their cells, and using diplomacy, and working toward policies which will lead to peace, would be far more reasonable, than occupying countries, who have done nothing to us, and gaining even more enemies.

Bombs are a poor substitution for winning hearts and minds. Obviously, the bombs have not worked. Just look at all the attacks around the world. Their power is building, not receeding. This is a battle between Islam, and Christianity. Yes, yet another religious war. While their tactics are abominable, they do have a side of their own. The history of how they came to become the way they are, was built by western abuses in their land. Like it or not, when people are exploited, with no concern for their plight, they will eventually rise up to settle the score. This is what bombs, killing and exploitation by the west, have led the world to now now have to address. More bombs, certainly not the answer. Trying to blow up the world, over religious differences, is the way of fools, IMO.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
04-06-2007, 11:07 AM
So then, I take it that you also think the Republicans that went to Syria, just last week, over stepped their bounds, love the terrorists? Hamilton and Baker, Arrogant? Our 16 National Intelligence Agencies, arrogant, don't know as much as George Bush?

Sorry, Steve, Bush has made a horrible mess of things, and other than Bush, and his 30% who refuse to acknowledge the dire circumstances he has created, the rest of the world, including Iraqis, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the entire Arab League, and almost 70% of Americans, do know.

When the President lies to congress, and continues to lie over and over for six years, it is the duty of Congressional leaders to search out the facts for themselves. Nobody believes anything that comes out of George Bush's or Rice, Dick Cheney's mouth anymore. they have no credibility in the world, and the world hates the United States, thanks to your boy George. I'm sure that makes us safer...

Gayle in Md.

DickLeonard
04-06-2007, 11:33 AM
Eg8r only an idiot can defend George Bush.####

DickLeonard
04-06-2007, 11:41 AM
Qtec it makes spending spending billions on strategic weapons outdated when a women can do more damage with her body bomb. The real sin is the idiots in charge of this war failed to confiscate Iraqs weaponry, bombs etc. I guess landing on an Aircraft Carrier clouded his Drain{Brain].####

eg8r
04-06-2007, 12:29 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Eg8r only an idiot can defend George Bush.#### <hr /></blockquote> ####, on the other side of the board your opinion is admired, on this side it leaves a lot to be desired.

eg8r

eg8r
04-06-2007, 12:30 PM
Hey Q, keep patting the terrorists on the back and telling them you are on their side.

eg8r

pooltchr
04-06-2007, 02:46 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> one learns a great deal about how these people think, and why they think as they do..... <font color="red"> Ah, yes! Let's try to understand why they hate us and are willing to die to support that hatred! </font color> and using diplomacy, and working toward policies which will lead to peace, would be far more reasonable,.... <font color="red"> When they are willing to consider diplomacy, I might agree. They aren't interested in being reasonable. "Reasonable" is not flying passenger jets into sky scrapers! They are NOT REASONABLE, so how can you reason with them???????? </font color> While their tactics are abominable, they do have a side of their own. The history of how they came to become the way they are, was built by western abuses in their land. <font color="red"> FINALLY!!! It's not their fault...it's our fault!!!!! It is this kind of liberal BS that turns my stomach!!! </font color>
Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

We just spent a week mourning the deaths of two city police officers...ambushed and executed (shot in the back of the head) while responding to a domestic call. And one of our city officials was quoted as saying "I just keep thinking about that poor 25 year old shooter. Where did we go wrong?" While half a million citizens are thinking about the widows of the officers, she is thinking about this THUG. Where we went wrong was allowing him on the streets after his first SEVEN convictions for assaulting a law enforcement officer.
This whole idea of thinking it's our fault when other people kill is INSANE!!! It applies locally, and it applies globally. We will not put an end to terrorism by talking, because while we talk, they will be acting.
Steve

eg8r
04-06-2007, 03:40 PM
[ QUOTE ]
FINALLY!!! It's not their fault...it's our fault!!!!! It is this kind of liberal BS that turns my stomach!!!
<hr /></blockquote> You hit the nail on the head. It is never their fault it is always our fault. The terrorists grin every time the left makes a statement like that.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
04-06-2007, 05:37 PM
They are not reasonable, and neither are you. You can't kill them all off, it won't happen, period, hence, your platform is false, does not hold water, is not reasonable, and will not work. Do you have any idea at all how many countries they are now in, how many more are now planning, plotting, collecting warriors, money, and strength. Bush gave them what they wanted. You obviously haven't studied anything about them. There are always two sides to every story. Being intelligent enough to understand that, does not mean that a person approves of the tactics of either side, only that they THINK, instead fo going foff half cocked, and screwing everything up worse than it already was.

[ QUOTE ]
This whole idea of thinking it's our fault when other people kill is INSANE!!! It applies locally, and it applies globally. We will not put an end to terrorism by talking, because while we talk, they will be acting.
<hr /></blockquote>

The whole idea of occupying Iraq, because our people were killed by someone else, WAS INSANE! And, while we bomb and waste treasure fighting a civil war between people who have been fighting for generations, but never did anything to us, alqaeda is learning, training and strengthening.

Every Peace Accord, has happened betweeen people who formally wouldn't talk. In the case of George Bush refusing to talk, it's a blessing!

As long as bombs and blood and suffering represent a man's, or country's only option, there can be no peace. Iraq was a huge strategic mistake, you just refuse to admit it...70% of us know better.

Gayle in Md.

eg8r
04-06-2007, 05:42 PM
[ QUOTE ]
WASHINGTON (AP) - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, deflecting White House criticism of her trip to Syria, said Friday she thinks the mission helped President Bush because it showed the United States is unified against terrorism despite being divided over the Iraq war. <hr /></blockquote> This woman is nuttier than the libs on this board. All she showed the world is that she has no intention of doing anything she said she would do.

eg8r

pooltchr
04-06-2007, 09:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
WASHINGTON (AP) - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, deflecting White House criticism of her trip to Syria, said Friday she thinks the mission helped President Bush because it showed the United States is unified against terrorism despite being divided over the Iraq war. <hr /></blockquote> This woman is nuttier than the libs on this board. All she showed the world is that she has no intention of doing anything she said she would do.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

More than that, she showed the world that she is willing to undermine the efforts of the properly elected President of the United States in their efforts to deal with the terrorist threat. Since we are at war with the terrorists, that is very near what could be considered treason. Whether you agree with the President or not, he is the Commander in Chief, and the final decision maker.
I guess presenting a unified front to the world isn't all that important any longer, at least to some.
Steve

wolfdancer
04-06-2007, 10:50 PM
More than that, she showed the world that she is willing to undermine the efforts of the properly elected President of the United States in their efforts to deal with the terrorist threat. Since we are at war with the terrorists, that is very near what could be considered treason. Whether you agree with the President or not, he is the Commander in Chief, and the final decision maker.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Pardon me while I puke.....blindly follow the "properly elected" President.!!!!!!!

Isn't that what the Germans did in the 30's?

web page (http://www.uiowa.edu/~commstud/adclass/1984.mov)

pooltchr
04-07-2007, 05:48 AM
Wolf,
There was a time in our history when partisan politics stopped at our boarders. I respect everyones right to disagree with the government, but she went too far when she (and others) violated our policy.
I don't agree with a lot that our government does, but I still abide by their decisions. That is the only way a civilized society can function. You can't pick and choose which policies or laws you will abide by. If you don't agree with the way the government spends your tax money, does that give you the right to withold your tax payments????
Steve

Gayle in MD
04-07-2007, 08:16 AM
Would you mind explaining what policy she violated? If talking to countries in the middle east is proof of a violation of our policies, then why has George Bush been criticised by so many National Security experts, Repubs and Dems, for refusing to have a dialog with the leaders of countries, all countries, in the Middle East? If it is a violation of our policies, then why weren't you righties on here attacking the Republicans who went over there and did the very same thing that she has done.

Mind also explaining to us how you know what she said to them while she was there?

Boiling blood over the idea that one's country is ever wrong, or to some extent partly to blame for the bad foreign relations, which may have contributed to Radical Islamist ideology, surely doesn't indicate an open mind. I suppose, to some, learning, in and of itself, is an act of treason. Wow, education, in and of itself, must also be treasonist. Time to burn the books!!! All we need is bombs!

The very idea that it is inappropriate, after being lied to for six years, for the majority party, including the Speaker Of The House, third person in line for the Office Of The Presidency, to go to the Middle East to find answers and soluations, and factual information, is nothing more than more trumped up outrage and partisan drama, from a bunch of incompetent losers, who haven't done a damn thing well in six years. It's about as funny as Cheney, using the radio program of a mentally ill, drug addict, like Limbaugh, to help him run his never ending BS about alQaeda's connection to Iraq, although that's been proven over and over again, to be a complete lie.

Unbelievable!!!

Gayle in Md.

Qtec
04-07-2007, 11:30 PM
[ QUOTE ]
the "properly elected" President.!!!!!!!
<hr /></blockquote> web page (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5266005172448029956&amp;q=unprecedented)

Q

pooltchr
04-08-2007, 07:00 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> If it is a violation of our policies, then why weren't you righties on here attacking the Republicans who went over there and did the very same thing that she has done. <font color="red"> Read my post again, Gayle. I said Pelosi AND OTHERS. I didn't single her out. </font color>

Mind also explaining to us how you know what she said to them while she was there?
<font color="red"> The same way you seem to know everything that has been said in the White House in the past 6 years. </font color>

Boiling blood over the idea that one's country is ever wrong, or to some extent partly to blame for the bad foreign relations, which may have contributed to Radical Islamist ideology, surely doesn't indicate an open mind. <font color="red"> sorry, but I don't buy into the philosophy that it's our fault that the terrorists attacked us. You, who spews tons of crap about acountability, should understand this better than others. Or does accountability only apply to the Bush administration? I suppose we could say that nothing the White House has done in the past 6 years is their fault...it's all the fault of the terrorists. That would make just as much sense as saying the terrorists attacks are our fault. </font color> I suppose, to some, learning, in and of itself, is an act of treason. Wow, education, in and of itself, must also be treasonist. Time to burn the books!!! All we need is bombs! <font color="red"> If she went to get an education, that would be one thing. By putting herself into the middle when she indicated another country would be open to discussions, she planted her foot square in the middle of her big mouth. </font color>

The very idea that it is inappropriate, ...the Speaker Of The House, ... to go to the Middle East to find answers and soluations, and factual information, is nothing more than more trumped up outrage and partisan drama,

<font color="red"> When she opened her mouth, she stopped trying to find answers and factual information, and started spreading her liberal BS. </font color>

Gayle in Md.

<hr /></blockquote>

Gayle in MD
04-08-2007, 05:35 PM
Nice try Steve, but here's what you wrote.
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe Nancy thinks that since her idology is so closely aligned to those who have declaired their hatred for our country, there is little risk for her traveling throughout the mid-east. They love her over there!
<hr /></blockquote>

[ QUOTE ]
The same way you seem to know everything that has been said in the White House in the past 6 years.
<hr /></blockquote>

I don't claim to know everything that is said in the White House. I know the difference between what George Bush says, and what he does, and how much he lies. It's a face, btw, that he lied over and over about the conditions on the ground, just as Rumsfeld and cheney did. Meanwhile, out troops were being slaughtered, in an unwinnable war, as they still are to this day, and alQaeda is using Iraq, where they never were before, as a training ground. He made a huge mess, and now he's tryg to stretch it out for his legacy, hoping against all reasonable expectations, that he can turn around a no win situation, just like Nixon did to get re-elected, eventhough he knew damn well that after the election, he would have to withdraw from Vietnam.

[ QUOTE ]
. sorry, but I don't buy into the philosophy that it's our fault that the terrorists attacked us. You, who spews tons of crap about acountability, should understand this better than others. Or does accountability only apply to the Bush administration? I suppose we could say that nothing the White House has done in the past 6 years is their fault...it's all the fault of the terrorists. That would make just as much sense as saying the terrorists attacks are our fault. <hr /></blockquote>

I didn't say that. I said there are two sides to every story. Our Middle East policies, have been screwed up for a long time. They contributed to the mess we now have, with the Radical Islamists. there were a number of pe9ople responsible, not just one president, but other Presidents had enough sense to know not to hit that bees nest with a big stick. Bush has made everything worse. Have you ever made a study of the people over there, and how many injustices have been done to them? do you know anything about how they were treated by Bremmer? Why they turned on us after the occupation? Bush lied to us to get us in there, appointed incompetents, intimidated military advisors, refused to fire Rumsfeld, who screwed up everything, beat our troops into the ground, and he STILL refuses to listen to anyone, including the majority of American, and Iraqis. I don't have to hear what is said in the White House to know that much. This occupation was the most devastating policy failure in history, Bush did it, and you don't want to give him the blame? Whose fault is it then?

[ QUOTE ]
She said she supported the President's policies. Wre you in the room with her? I have no doubt, that Isreal got an urgent phone call from the White House...and whatever she accomplished, was destroyed. I think when we have a President soobviously incompetent, and lying to us, proven lies, considered to be completely out of touch with reality by so many foreign affairs experts, and militray Generals, and intelligence experts, and a Vice President, with the same reviews from the same people, that somebody better get over there and try to find out what the hell is going on. You'd follow George Bush over a cliff. We're all not that forgiving. She's the third top official in this country, and the two above her are nuts! I say hats off to Nancy! I sure ashell didn't expect Bush to admit anything good she might have accomplished. That man couldn't tell the truth if his life depended on it.

That's pretty funny, coming from someone who has supported this fiasco. Cheney was out there spreading his same old Bs about alqaeda connections to Saddam, trying to justify this mess they have made, on the same damn day the Pentagon was releasing final statements which completely proved the bush Administration's on-going statements were and are lies, and you don't want any second opinions going on, huh? Beautiful!


[ QUOTE ]
Like I said before, maybe some day right wingers will learn to love this country more than they hate liberals.
Gayle in Md.