Print Page - Pelosi

I think Pelosi is obnoxious enough to deserve her own thread too. As with Obama, she is like a bump on the skin that you can't leave alone.

SPEAKER OF THE FLOP: PELOSI SELLS 2,737 COPIES OF BOOK
Thu Aug 07 2008 08:11:48 ET

The most powerful woman in the history of American politics is suffering a humiliating defeat at the nation's bookstores, sales figures show.

In her first week at market, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi sold just 2,737 copies of her book KNOW YOUR POWER, according to NIELSEN BOOKSCAN.

The DOUBLEDAY release was launched with a full media push, featuring high profile interviews on TODAYTHEVIEWTHISWEEK.

"I wrote the book in response to people asking me what it was like to go from housewife to House Speaker and for advice as to how young people, especially women, could balance family and career," Pelosi told the WASHINGTON POST.

Pelosi's sales debacle [#41 on the Non-Fiction Chart] is dramatically overshadowed by the first high profile anti-Obama book, OBAMA NATION, which debuts at #1 on both the BOOKSCAN and the NEW YORK TIMES Bestseller List, with 21,466 copies moved, industry insiders tell DRUDGE.

"The speaker was pre-occupied with house business last week," a source close to Pelosi explained Thursday morning. "She has now turned her focus to promoting this extraordinary book... doing local signings and speeches. I think we'll see an uptick."

Cindy Sheehan Qualifies to Challenge Pelosi
by Associated Press
Monday, August 11, 2008

SAN FRANCISCO — Cindy Sheehan, an icon of the anti-war movement, has qualified to challenge House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for her seat in Congress.

Sheehan, 51, says Pelosi failed to persuade her party to end funding for the Iraq war after Democrats reclaimed the House majority in the 2006 midterm elections. She also accused the speaker of failing to hold the administration accountable for the administration’s warrantless wiretapping program.

Sheehan, who lost her son in the war, is best known for beginning a vigil outside President Bush’s Texas ranch in August 2005.

“I feel like Nancy Pelosi, as the Democratic leader, has failed our country miserably, funding for more war,” Sheehan said Monday. “The speaker’s failed to hold George Bush and Dick Cheney accountable.”

San Francisco election officials on Monday said Sheehan turned in 214 more valid signatures than the 10,198 she needed to qualify for the November ballot as an independent candidate for the 8th Congressional District seat.

The speaker welcomes the challenge, said Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill.

“The speaker has the highest respect for Cindy Sheehan. Ms. Sheehan lost her son in the Iraq war and has the right — as every American has — to run for office,” Hammill said in a statement.

Pelosi, 67 and in her 11th term, has said she is disappointed that Democrats have not been able to stop the war in Iraq. Last year, the House passed legislation giving Bush $70 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with no deadlines for troop withdrawal.

Pelosi won her 2006 campaign with 80 percent of the vote. Sheehan also will be at a distinct financial disadvantage as she takes on one of the most powerful politicians in the country.

She said her campaign has collected more than $300,000, compared with nearly $2.4 million collected by Pelosi through the end of June.

The other candidate on the ballot for the 8th district seat is Republican Dana Walsh.

Cindy Sheehan Qualifies to Challenge Pelosi (http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/11/cindy-sheehan-qualifies-to-challenge-pelosi/)
~~~~~~~~~~

Good Grief!! Talk about your rock and a hard place!!

Top 10 Energy Questions For Speaker Pelosi
by U.S. Congressman Kevin Brady
08/11/2008

10. Two years ago, you said, “Democrats have a common-sense plan to lower gas prices.” Since you took over as Speaker of the House fuel prices have nearly doubled, which is punishing American families. Will you be releasing that common-sense plan anytime soon??

9. So far, your Democratic House of Representatives has done nothing but propose gimmicks. Your first energy gimmick was to pass a law that allows America to sue OPEC, apparently so we can become more dependent upon Middle East oil. This is puzzling to most Americans. Remind us again what that accomplishes??

8. Your second gimmick was “Use it or Lose it,” based on the notion that millions of acres of land with vast energy reserves are leased by oil companies but not being developed. Unfortunately, no independent geological association in America agreed with that wild claim. And during debate on the House floor, Democrats couldn’t identify even one acre where that was happening. How embarrassing was that??

7. Your next gimmick was to stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which is the nest egg for America’s energy security if a major foreign country cuts off fuel to the United States. You predicted that fuel prices would go down, but instead they continued to rise. Was that more embarrassing or less embarrassing than the “Use it or Lose it” fiasco??

6. Apparently assuming that failed ideas are reassuring to the public, recently you proposed to sell off 10% of our Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which you also predict will lower fuel prices. Unfortunately, that equals just 3.5 days of American oil, which changes nothing, so that gimmick collapsed on the House floor. Do you have any more ideas related to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, like selling it to China or donating it to a Hollywood charity??

5. You keep saying Republicans are beholden to Big Oil, which you despise and accuse of obscene profiteering. But I noticed your Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has accepted a whopping $809,000 from energy special interests this session -- which I’m sure you’ll want to return. I’m just curious, but when can those oil companies expect their checks back??

4. Turning to your unique interpretation of the Constitution, you have stated repeatedly that the House of Representatives will not get a vote on exploring for more energy here in America, such as in our deep ocean waters or U.S. Arctic Reserve, no matter that the American public supports it 2-1. In your mind, do you believe America is a democracy or a dictatorship??

3. Two weeks ago you hastily shut down the House floor, turned off the lights, microphones and cameras so that the American public could not hear Republicans debate the energy crisis and the need for Congress to stay in session to pass an energy bill rather than head out on a five-week vacation. Do you still believe in open government and the freedom of speech, or did all that change when you became Speaker??

2. Last Sunday on the news show This Week you said Republicans would have to “get creative” to receive an up-or-down vote on the House floor to explore for more energy here in America. Our founding fathers were creative, too. They established a legislative body where the pressing issues of the day would be openly debated and the majority will of the elected representatives prevails. Are you afraid that, if a vote were taken, you would lose? Isn’t America supposed to be a democracy of the people??

1. Americans don’t get a vacation from high gas prices, but you sent Congress on a leisurely five-week vacation. Republicans have stood on the House floor all recess and pleaded with you to call Congress back into session and schedule an up-or-down vote on exploring for more oil and gas here in America. Aren’t American families and small businesses who are getting hammered by high gas prices more important than your book tour??

Quote from: DreamWeaver on August 12, 2008, 02:33:16 PM

Top 10 Energy Questions For Speaker Pelosi
by U.S. Congressman Kevin Brady
08/11/2008

10. Two years ago, you said, “Democrats have a common-sense plan to lower gas prices.” Since you took over as Speaker of the House fuel prices have nearly doubled, which is punishing American families. Will you be releasing that common-sense plan anytime soon??

They did ... air up your tires to conserve gas, if you still can't afford it then use city transits, if your city doesn't have a transit system then move to one that does

9. So far, your Democratic House of Representatives has done nothing but propose gimmicks. Your first energy gimmick was to pass a law that allows America to sue OPEC, apparently so we can become more dependent upon Middle East oil. This is puzzling to most Americans. Remind us again what that accomplishes??

it kills time postponing the inevitable and tries making it look like they are earning their money (I know they failed again.)

8. Your second gimmick was “Use it or Lose it,” based on the notion that millions of acres of land with vast energy reserves are leased by oil companies but not being developed. Unfortunately, no independent geological association in America agreed with that wild claim. And during debate on the House floor, Democrats couldn’t identify even one acre where that was happening. How embarrassing was that??

It wasn't embarrassing for them, after all they know more than anyone else does.

7. Your next gimmick was to stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which is the nest egg for America’s energy security if a major foreign country cuts off fuel to the United States. You predicted that fuel prices would go down, but instead they continued to rise. Was that more embarrassing or less embarrassing than the “Use it or Lose it” fiasco??

Nope, not embarrassing at all. It serves there purpose of turning the U.S. over to foreign entities and in making this a third world nation where the majority of the people have to rely on the government for everything.

6. Apparently assuming that failed ideas are reassuring to the public, recently you proposed to sell off 10% of our Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which you also predict will lower fuel prices. Unfortunately, that equals just 3.5 days of American oil, which changes nothing, so that gimmick collapsed on the House floor. Do you have any more ideas related to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, like selling it to China or donating it to a Hollywood charity??

Yep, just give it away to our enemies.

5. You keep saying Republicans are beholden to Big Oil, which you despise and accuse of obscene profiteering. But I noticed your Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has accepted a whopping $809,000 from energy special interests this session -- which I’m sure you’ll want to return. I’m just curious, but when can those oil companies expect their checks back??

Figure the odds of that.

4. Turning to your unique interpretation of the Constitution, you have stated repeatedly that the House of Representatives will not get a vote on exploring for more energy here in America, such as in our deep ocean waters or U.S. Arctic Reserve, no matter that the American public supports it 2-1. In your mind, do you believe America is a democracy or a dictatorship??

In their minds it is a communistic nation with Obama, Pelosi and Reid the only ones intelligent enough to run it.

3. Two weeks ago you hastily shut down the House floor, turned off the lights, microphones and cameras so that the American public could not hear Republicans debate the energy crisis and the need for Congress to stay in session to pass an energy bill rather than head out on a five-week vacation. Do you still believe in open government and the freedom of speech, or did all that change when you became Speaker??

Yep. They believe in change.

2. Last Sunday on the news show This Week you said Republicans would have to “get creative” to receive an up-or-down vote on the House floor to explore for more energy here in America. Our founding fathers were creative, too. They established a legislative body where the pressing issues of the day would be openly debated and the majority will of the elected representatives prevails. Are you afraid that, if a vote were taken, you would lose? Isn’t America supposed to be a democracy of the people??

Yep, they're afraid of not being in control in their eyes it's only a democracy for them.

1. Americans don’t get a vacation from high gas prices, but you sent Congress on a leisurely five-week vacation. Republicans have stood on the House floor all recess and pleaded with you to call Congress back into session and schedule an up-or-down vote on exploring for more oil and gas here in America. Aren’t American families and small businesses who are getting hammered by high gas prices more important than your book tour??

Nope. They are all that matters. That's why the DNC got tax free gas for non government activities.

Nancy Pelosi is feeling the heat of thousands of grassroots
phone calls, and faxes demanding a return to work, and an
increase in domestic drilling.

In fact, members of the GOP returning for their second week of
protest on the House floor have called on pro-drilling Democrats
to defect from Pelosi's staunch anti-drilling position!

"We know that a number of them are with us," said Rep. Mike Pence.
"I say to them, 'Come to this floor and let's make this
demonstration bipartisan.'"

The pressure on House Democrats is nearly bubbling over.
Politico.com reported that the House Speaker, no doubt
attempting to alleviate the pressure has encouraged rank-
and-file Democrats to support increased drilling if they
believe it will help them win their elections in November!

Pelosi and her cohorts have labeled the protesting Republicans a
"Shadow Congress", and called their plan a "hoax."

But she knows that she's hopelessly out of step with the majority
of Americans who are demanding their Congressmen take action. And
she knows that 40-50 Democrats support increased drilling.

Call, email, fax and mail EVERY DAY and urge your member of Congress to answer the
invitation of GOP protesters by joining them on the House floor.
Demand they support a comprehensive plan that includes:

* more offshore and Alaskan drilling;
* opening up our vast shale oil reserves
* expanding nuclear energy
* promoting alternative energy

Pickens, Pelosi plan environmental pocket picking
House Speaker, billionaire behind 'going green' racket

TV commercials touting a new clean energy strategy and an environmental ballot measure in California both have one thing in common: if they succeed, they'll make investors – from "big oil" to the U.S. Capitol – a lot of money.

The TV commercials champion Texas oil billionaire T. Boone Pickens' "Pickens Plan" to move our nation from foreign oil dependence to domestically produced wind power and natural gas fuel for automobiles. The plan is touted as a cleaner, more eco-friendly alternative to our current reliance on coal power and gasoline.

The ballot initiative is California's Proposition 10, known as the California Renewable Energy and Clean Alternative Fuel Act, which would spend $5 billion in California bond money ($10 billion by the time the interest is paid, according to the L.A. Times) to promote natural gas as an cleaner alternative for automobile and truck fuel.

Not surprisingly, the nation's largest provider of natural gas for transportation, Clean Energy Fuels Corporation (alternatively known as CLNE) has a great deal to gain from the adoption of Pickens' fuel strategy and the passage of Proposition 10. In fact, according to the California Secretary of State website, CLNE has contributed $3,247,250 to supporting Proposition 10's passage.

CLNE, however, was formerly known as Pickens Fuel after its primary investor, T. Boone Pickens.

While Pickens touts a plan in the name of environmentalism that will also line his company's pockets, a #dontgo investigation has revealed that another environmental champion and backer of Proposition 10 has also invested in CLNE: House Speaker and California Representative Nancy Pelosi.

According to the investigation, "Nancy Pelosi Purchased between $50,000-$100,000 in CLNE stock on May 25, 2007, apparently on its initial public offering."

Now the California representative stands to make a large profit on her reported 22,000 shares of CLNE if she and other public figures can persuade the people of California to vote for Proposition 10 in the name of renewable energy and clean, alternative fuels.

In an L.A. Times editorial, Anthony Rubenstein was highly critical of Proposition 10, calling the measure billed as an environmental altruism a "raid on California's general fund" to support "Pickens' self-serving national gas agenda."

"The initiative deceptively reads like it's supporting all alternative-fuel vehicles and renewable energy sources," Rubenstein wrote. "But a closer read finds a laundry list of cash grabs. … Much of the measure's billions could benefit Pickens' company to the exclusion of almost all other clean-vehicle fuels and technology."

Rubenstein also noted that Proposition 10 charges environmentally conscious Californians with the bill for an initiative that may not benefit California at all.

"Even worse, private trucking and delivery companies could buy 5,000 natural gas trucks, collect California taxpayer-funded rebates of $200 million or more and immediately send those fleets out of state," he wrote. "It's like asking California voters to finance a new bridge with taxpayer dollars, without mentioning that the bridge could be in Ohio."

As WND reported earlier, Pickens touting of wind power is also tainted by his opportunity to profit, as The Economist reports Pickens' oil company, Mesa Oil, has invested $2 billion to build the world's largest wind farm in Pampa, Texas.

If the "Pickens Plan" calling for more wind power and natural gas fuel is implemented, it will further the billionaire's other ventures as well, including a major land and water investment in the Texas panhandle that would essentially enable Pickens' companies to control a water pipeline the way petroleum companies control oil supplies.

The venture, according to the Terrell Tribune, includes forming a fresh water district in Texas' western panhandle and spending over $100 million to acquire rights-of-way through as many as 12 counties to ship the water to water-needy Texas cities. Part of selling the plan to investors and thirsty municipalites, some of whom have balked at the idea of private water control, is coupling the water pipeline with power lines from Mesa Oil's massive wind farm.

"It is hard to tell if the water scheme is the device being used to seize the land or if the wind turbine scheme is the means by which he will fund the water scheme," wrote William R. Collier Jr. in the #dontgo investigation that uncovered the link between Pickens and Pelosi.

Collier further speculated Pelosi's investment partnership with Pickens will profit them both.

"No matter what the case may be, Nancy Pelosi will personally profit from whatever (Pickens) does as an investor."

Collier points out that Pelosi is one of the richest members of Congress and that her wealth comes primarily from investments, real estate and "now, of course, stocks in CLNE."

Likewise, Collier pointed to potential benefits for Pickens to have Pelosi's support, not only for the legislation CLNE wants passed, but also for her help with touting his "Pickens Plan".

"While the stock was initially offered at $14 and is now valued below that amount, the low of $10 in early July of this year is bouncing back," wrote Collier, "especially in light of ads by Pickens and growing consensus that the Pickens plan will gain support, especially if Pelosi is firmly behind it."

Pelosi told: Planet has already been saved ... by Jesus
Congresswoman hits speaker: 'We all know that someone did that over 2,000 years ago'

Continuing her push for a comprehensive energy plan that includes increased oil drilling, Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., reminded Americans that the Democrats message to save the planet doesn’t add up. The world has been saved already, she says.

Responding to Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s comment about creating an energy policy to help save the planet, Bachmann added religion to the energy crisis during her interview with OneNewsNow, a Web site run by Christian American Family News Network.

“[Pelosi] is committed to her global warming fanaticism to the point where she has said that she’s just trying to save the planet,” Bachmann said. “We all know that someone did that over 2,000 years ago, they saved the planet — we didn’t need Nancy Pelosi to do that.”

Bachmann said Democratic leaders are committed to stopping bills that allow drilling. Bachmann plans to join other Republicans in the House chamber on Friday to continue their protest during the congressional recess to bring members back for a vote on an energy bill.

The Minnesota DFL released a statement Tuesday denouncing the protest at the Capitol, calling it an “Olympics of meaningless rhetoric.

According to the statement, Republicans “would rather grandstand in a meaningless charade in Washington that will do nothing to reduce the cost of gas or the overall economic squeeze on Minnesota’s working families.”

Bachmann’s recent comments are reminiscent of her earlier religious comments in 2006 at the Living Word Church in Brooklyn Park when she said she was “hot” for Jesus.

“What does God say when he looks at you or looks at me? He wants to say, ‘she’s hot, he’s hot,’ because we are hot for him on the inside,” Bachmann said. “When you are hot for Jesus Christ, nothing is like that life.”

Pelosi's Big-Wind Boondoogle

HOUSE Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently called congressional Republicans who want up-or-down drilling votes "hand maidens of the oil companies." Let's call Pelosi what she is: House girl of the Big Wind boondogglers.

Pelosi refuses to consider GOP energy proposals that don't include massive government subsidies for so-called eco-alternatives that have never panned out.

Which brings us to Pelosi's 2007 financial disclosure form. Schedule III lists "Assets and 'Unearned Income' " of $100,001 to $250,000 from Clean Energy Fuels Corp. - Public Common Stock. Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (CLNE) is a natural-gas provider founded by T. Boone Pickens, the former oilman turned wind-power evangelist.

Pickens and Pelosi both downplay the need to drill for more US oil. Instead, the Pickens plan proposes to replace natural gas with wind power in power generation and free up natural gas for transportation needs.

Let's be real about the limitations and costs of wind power: Experience demonstrates the unreliability of wind and the miserably low operating capacity of wind-power facilities here and around the world. Depending on wind requires supplemental fossil-fuel plants as backup to be turned on and off to compensate for wind-power-supply shortfalls - nullifying any reductions in carbon-dioxide emissions.

Naturally, the Pickens Big Wind plan is proudly endorsed by Pelosi's friends at the Sierra Club. Through another company, Mesa Power, Pickens has committed upward of $12 billion in wind farms on the Texas panhandle. CLNE and Mesa Power are separate entities, but what benefits one piece of the Pickens puzzle benefits them all. The wind venture, as Pickens himself admits, depends on permanent federal subsidies.

Pickens is banking on 'em. And Pelosi is banking on him. She bought between $50,000 and $100,000 worth of stock in Pickens' CLNE Corp. in May 2007 on the day of the initial public offering:

"She, and other investors, stand to gain a substantial return on their investment if gasoline prices stay high, and municipal, state and even the federal governments start using natural gas as their primary fuel source," reported dontgomovement.com.

CLNE also happens to be the sponsor of Proposition 10, a ballot initiative in Pelosi's home state of California to dole out $10 billion in state and federal funds for renewable-energy incentives - namely, natural gas and wind.

Follow the money. Or, to put it in economist's terms, as energy analyst Kenneth Medlock III did in The Dallas Morning News about the Pickens multibillion-dollar wind-farm investment: "A lot of what he's trying to do is add value to a stranded asset . . . he's obviously got millions of dollars on the line."

And so, potentially, does Pelosi - all the while wagging her finger at the financial motivation of others.

Quote from: Pastor Roger on August 13, 2008, 11:12:52 PM

I love her!

Quote from: DreamWeaver on August 12, 2008, 02:33:16 PM

This was great! Emailed to my family and friends.

Playing Political Games, Dems to Offer Drilling Bill of Their Own

Sensing blood in the water, their own blood that is, House Democrats will offer a bill that includes drilling. But somehow I don’t believe that it is a genuine drilling bill. Let’s investigate.

The al-Reuters headline reads:

Democrats to offer bill with offshore oil drilling

Quote

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Saturday when the U.S. Congress returns next month from its summer recess, Democrats will offer legislation that could give oil companies drilling access to more offshore areas.

By moving to open additional federal waters to energy exploration, Democrats could narrow the differences they have with Republicans on tackling America’s energy problems, a concern that ranks high with voters heading into the November presidential and congressional elections.

This is a setup America. They want to be appearing to be taking action on the energy crisis BEFORE the election because they now perceive it as beneficial to their political ambitions. But if you think for a moment that anything they consider is genuine OR will actually pass, take another hit of that bong lefty because you are delusional.

Democrats do not want additional drilling and if they must submit to more drilling offshore, they will want some additional spending for pet projects that will have nothing to do with energy production or for futile “alternative energy” programs that are already over-funded and have no chance of contributing to energy independence in the foreseeable future.

So what is the catch? According to the Wicked Witch of the West herself…

Quote

In the Democrats’ weekly radio address, Pelosi of California said expanding drilling areas would be part of a broader bill which addresses other energy issues.

“It will consider opening portions of the (offshore) Outer Continental Shelf for drilling, with appropriate safeguards, and without taxpayer subsidies to Big Oil,” she said.

Pelosi said the legislation would require oil companies to pay billions of dollars in drilling royalties, which would be invested in clean energy resources.

That’s right, she wants to cut into the measly 9 percent profit margin in order to fund these massively expensive “alternative fuels” projects that, AGAIN, HAVE NO HOPE OF REDUCING AMERICA’S DEPENDENCY ON FOREIGN OIL IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. None, nada, no-way Jose.

What does House Minority Leader John Boehner have to say?

Quote

House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said the Democratic proposal falls short of Republican-sponsored legislation that would open more areas to oil drilling, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska.

“While the speaker now claims to embrace a comprehensive energy plan that includes more conservation, more innovation, and more American energy production, the fact is her new effort appears to be just another flawed plan that will do little to lower gas prices,” Boehner said.

He said if Pelosi was serious about boosting domestic oil supplies, she would call the House back into session to take up such a bill. Congress is scheduled to return on September 8.

People if the oil companies are going to have subsidies cut and a tax levied on their profits, what incentive will they have to begin drilling? And who do you actually think will pay for these losses in revenue to the oil companies? WE WILL!

Pelosi’s pie-in-the-sky ambitions to “save the planet” are going to bankrupt American families. This left coast liberal (socialist) wants to spread her San Francisco brand of liberalism (socialism) into fly-over country. But Nancy doesn’t realize that it takes an awful lot of gasoline for us out here in fly-over country to function.

Nancy hopes to begin to profit from the Pickens Plan and that is her personal goal (beyond her political goals). I’ll guarantee that should the Dem plan actually pass, some of the “royalties” money that she wants to embezzle from oil companies will make their way into the hands of T. Boone Pickens and increase the value of her stock in his companies.

It is time to reject Pelosi and the “Gang of 10″. Support the Republicans holding the rogue session in the House and push for passage of their bill. And while we’re at it, don’t fall for her political ploy. Democrats are not interested in solving our oil dependency problems. They want the US dependent. It gives them power. Our only hope is a true Conservative takeover of Congress in November.

Joseph Farah
WND Commentary
August 16, 2008

Let me give you a glimpse of the kind of world we will be living in for the next few years under the rulership of Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer as, in all likelihood, the totalitarian-minded Democrats strengthen their stranglehold of power over both houses of Congress.

Sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees.

You can look at outrageous new wealth-redistribution plans. You can look at proposals to kill free expression with the reintroduction of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine." You can look at the way the leadership is salivating over a massive new amnesty program for illegal aliens that will forever change the character of the United States.

All of that is important – but a little hard for the average American to get his mind around.

But try this.

(Column continues below)

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., is one of the real good guys in Congress – a man who knows, respects and reveres the Constitution and its commitment to limited government. He is the author of a great book, "Breach of Trust: How Washington Turns Outsiders Into Insiders." He's a man of principle, common sense and, most of all, decency.

So what happens to a guy like this in an institution run by sociopaths like Reid, Pelosi and Boxer?

Sen. Tom Coburn

If you haven't already heard, prepare to be shocked.

The Senate Ethics Committee, chaired by Boxer, is accusing Coburn of a "serious violation of the Senate rules."

What has he done?

Has he accepted graft?

Has he promoted ideas that are anathema to the American way of life?

Has he cheated on his dying wife?

Has he taken advantage of congressional pages or interns?

No, he hasn't done any of those things.

Coburn was and is a medical doctor. And he has continued to treat a few patients. Specifically what has Boxer's secret inquisition in an uproar is the fact that he has delivered some babies in his home district!

But it gets worse.

Apparently what makes this sin so egregious are Senate restrictions on outside income. But Coburn is doing this for free as a public service!

Now let's remember that Boxer and her Democratic cohorts are the ones always screaming about the high cost of medical care. It is because of that they seek to empower the federal government to run the entire health-care industry. This, they believe, would be the ultimate act of "compassion."

You want a baby? Check with Beijing – er, I mean Washington.

But here's a senator who is actually personally involved in specific acts of genuine compassion – delivering babies for free for his long-standing patients.

This is seen as a "serious violation of Senate rules."

Coburn, however, isn't so easily intimidated. In character for him, he responds: "On my own time, I'm taking care of women who have a need, and I'm going to continue to deliver babies. I'm not going to stop."

If more Republicans had this guy's backbone and intestinal fortitude, the party might actually be a viable alternative to the pathological Democrats. May his flock indeed prosper and multiply.

Think about this.

Would Boxer and company, meeting in secrecy, ever contemplate filing ethics charges against one of their own for providing free health care to the public?

Or, how about this: Would Boxer and company ever seriously consider censuring a member of the Senate who was moonlighting as an abortionist? My guess? They would come up with a new humanitarian-of-the-year award for their colleague.

Stand tall, Sen. Coburn. The attacks against you by these vermin are a testament to your integrity.

Quote from: grammyluv on August 09, 2008, 10:52:00 PM

(http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k53/Mike12816/democracy_killer3.jpg)

Wanted: Nancy Pelosi, a susect in the torture and murder of Democracy.

Great thread! YES - Pelosi does deserve her own thread. JUST THINK - many of the things we're watching every day now really are like a trip into the Twilight Zone. If the same things happened 10 years ago, many of them would have been put in prison.

ARE THESE SIGNS OF THE TIMES? I think the possible answer is "YES"! Regardless, I still think that the people should expend every effort to set things right. When I hear or see the name "Pelosi", I think immediately of someone riding in and presiding over a gay pride parade in San Francisco. How would the same circumstances have gone over just 10 years ago? It isn't just INSANITY and EVIL in this part of the world - RATHER the entire world. Isn't that what we're watching? As Christians, I think that we should have more than just a clue about what's going on. IS THE GREAT RESTRAINER OF THE DEVIL BEING REMOVED?

THE GREAT RESTRAINER OF THE DEVIL IS THE HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD. This is just one function of THE HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD. As Christians, we have the HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD living in our hearts. The Holy Bible doesn't tell us a lot about THE GREAT RESTRAINER, but we know this is a function of the HOLY SPIRIT. The HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD can and does work through Christians. The HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD has awesome power that's infinitely greater than anything that we've ever seen or could imagine. HE does live in us, but this doesn't mean that we can beat the devil. ONLY CHRIST HIMSELF CAN BEAT THE DEVIL, AND HE WILL AT HIS SECOND COMING!

SO, we are watching increasing EVIL, and it doesn't appear that we can stop it. This doesn't hint that we should lay down and stop trying. We still have a fight to finish, and we shouldn't give the devil anything easily. When we talk about giving the devil something, we are really talking about letting the devil have our children and family members without a struggle. The time will come when Christians are RAPTURED and removed completely from this earth. Until then, we have GOD to be with us and help us - AND WE DO HAVE A FIGHT THAT MUST BE FOUGHT!

Love In Christ,
Tom

Favorite Bible Quotes 202 - Isaiah 5:20-23 Woe unto them that call
evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for
darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! 21 Woe unto
them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
22 Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to
mingle strong drink: 23 Which justify the wicked for reward, and take
away the righteousness of the righteous from him!

Nancy Pelosi on drilling: “Can we drill your brains?”

You stay classy, Pioneer Pelosi:

Quote

House Democratic leaders and protesters waving McCain signs had a war of words Tuesday at a press event outside an old train station. The demonstrators interrupted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi with chants of “Drill here! Drill now!”

Pelosi paused and asked the group, “Right here?”

Seeming to enjoy the back and forth, she followed with another question: “Can we drill your brains?”

She went on to refer to the protesters, who continued to chant sporadically, as “handmaidens of Big Oil.” Arguing that increased offshore drilling would reduce gas prices by only a couple of pennies a decade from now, she referred to the demonstrators as the “2-cents-in-10-years-crowd.”

Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer swiped at the demonstrators, too, saying that “sophomoric chanting” won’t solve the energy crisis and that “all thinking Americans know” — stressing the word “thinking” and looking at the crowd — that America doesn’t have a quarter of the word’s fossil fuels yet uses a quarter of the world’s energy.

When you don’t have anything intelligent to add, what do you do? Name call and use insults, the preferred tactics of liberals everywhere!

Pelosi gets unwanted lesson in Catholic theology (http://smilies.zx6r.info/lachen/567.gif)
Aug. 28, 2008

By RACHEL ZOLL
AP Religion Writer

Politics can be treacherous. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi walked on even riskier ground in a recent TV interview when she attempted a theological defense of her support for abortion rights.

Roman Catholic bishops consider her arguments on St. Augustine and free will so far out of line with church teaching that they have issued a steady stream of statements to correct her.

The latest came Wednesday from Pittsburgh Bishop David Zubik, who said Pelosi, D-Calif., "stepped out of her political role and completely misrepresented the teaching of the Catholic Church in regard to abortion."

It has been a harsh week of rebuke for the Democratic congresswoman, a Catholic school graduate who repeatedly has expressed pride in and love for her religious heritage.

Cardinals and archbishops in Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, New York and Denver are among those who have criticized her remarks. Archbishop George Niederauer, in Pelosi's hometown of San Francisco, will take up the issue in the Sept. 5 edition of the archdiocesan newspaper, his spokesman said.

Sunday, on NBC's "Meet the Press" program, Pelosi said "doctors of the church" have not been able to define when life begins.

She also cited the role of individual conscience. "God has given us, each of us, a free will and a responsibility to answer for our actions," she said.

Brendan Daly, a spokesman for Pelosi, said in a statement defending her remarks that she "fully appreciates the sanctity of family" and based her views on conception on the "views of Saint Augustine, who said, 'The law does not provide that the act (abortion) pertains to homicide, for there cannot yet be said to be a live soul in a body that lacks sensation.'"

But whether or not parishioners choose to accept it, the theology on the procedure is clear. From its earliest days, Christianity has considered abortion evil.

"This teaching has remained unchanged and remains unchangeable," according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. "Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law."

The Rev. Douglas Milewski, a Seton Hall University theologian who specializes in Augustine, said Pelosi seems to be confusing church teaching on abortion with the theological debate over when a fetus receives a soul.

"Saint Augustine wondered about the stages of human development before birth, how this related to the question of ensoulment and what it meant for life in the Kingdom of God," Milewski said.

Questions about ensoulment related to determining penalties under church law for early and later abortions, not deciding whether the procedure is permissible, according to the U.S. Bishops' Committee on Pro-Life Activities.

Augustine was "quite clear on the immorality of abortion as evil violence, destructive of the very fabric of human bonds and society," Milewski said.

Regarding individual decision-making, the church teaches that Catholics are obliged to use their conscience in considering moral issues. However, that doesn't mean parishioners can pick and choose what to believe and still be in line with the church.

Lisa Sowle Cahill, a theologian at Boston College, said conscience must be formed by Catholic teaching and philosophical insights. "It's not just a personal opinion that you came up with randomly," she said.

Catholic theologians today overwhelmingly consider debate over the morality of abortion settled. Thinkers and activists who attempt to challenge the theology are often considered on the fringes of church life.

However, there is a rigorous debate over how the teaching should guide voters and public officials. Are Catholics required to choose the candidate who opposes abortion? Or can they back a politician based on his or her policies on reducing, not outlawing, the procedure?

The U.S. bishops addressed this question in their election-year public policy guide, "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship."

They said that voting for a candidate specifically because he or she supports "an intrinsic evil" such as abortion amounts to "formal cooperation in grave evil."

In some cases, Catholics may vote for a candidate with a position contrary to church teaching, but only for "truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences," according to the document.

It is a complex discussion. The Rev. Thomas Reese, senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, has some advice for candidates who seek to join the debate: Stick to politics - and support programs that truly help reduce the number of abortions.

"It is a big mistake," Reese said, "for politicians to talk theology."

Pelosi gets unwanted lesson in Catholic theology (http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/story/662014.html) (http://smilies.zx6r.info/lachen/567.gif)

EXCLUSIVE: Pelosi paid husband with PAC funds
$99,000 for rent, utilities, accounting fees

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has directed nearly $100,000 from her political action committee to her husband's real estate and investment firm over the past decade, a practice of paying a spouse with political donations that she voted to ban last year.

Financial Leasing Services Inc. (FLS), owned by Paul F. Pelosi, has received $99,000 in rent, utilities and accounting fees from the speaker's "PAC to the Future" over the PAC's nine-year history.

The payments have quadrupled since Mr. Pelosi took over as treasurer of his wife's committee in 2007, Federal Election Commission records show. FLS is on track to take in $48,000 in payments this year alone - eight times as much as it received annually from 2000 to 2005, when the committee was run by another treasurer.

Lawmakers' frequent use of campaign donations to pay relatives emerged as an issue in the 2006 election campaigns, when the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal gave Democrats fodder to criticize Republicans such as former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas and Rep. John T. Doolittle of California for putting their wives on their campaign and PAC payrolls for fundraising work.

Last year, Mrs. Pelosi supported a bill that would have banned members of Congress from putting spouses on their campaign staffs. The bill - which passed the House in a voice vote but did not get out of a Senate committee - banned not only direct payments by congressional campaign committees and PACs to spouses for services including consulting and fundraising, but also "indirect compensation," such as payments to companies that employ spouses.

"Democrats are committed to reforming the way Washington does business," Mrs. Pelosi said in a press release at the time. "Congressman [Adam] Schiff's bill will help us accomplish that goal by increasing transparency in election campaigns and preventing the misuse of funds."

Last week, Mrs. Pelosi's office said the payments to her husband's firm were perfectly legal, insisting she is compensating her husband at fair market value for the work his firm has performed for the PAC. But ethical watchdogs said the arrangement sends the wrong message.

"It's problematic," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a nonprofit ethics and watchdog group. "From what I understand, Mr. Pelosi doesn't need the money, but this isn't the issue. ... As speaker of the House, it sends the wrong message. She shouldn't be putting family members on the payroll."

A senior adviser to Mrs. Pelosi described the payments to FLS as "business expenses."

"She's followed all the appropriate rules and regulations in terms of records and paperwork," said Brendan Daly, Mrs. Pelosi's spokesman. "When [former treasurer] Leo McCarthy became ill, she thought that it was best that that firm did the accounting and she's paid fair market value in San Francisco."

Between 1999 and 2006, FLS collected $500 per month to cover rent, utilities and equipment for the leadership PAC, according to the FEC records. The PAC's address is listed as a personal mailbox in San Francisco, across the street from FLS's Montgomery Street office building, but the rent payments went to an office space.

In early 2007, the PAC's treasurer, Leo T. McCarthy, former Democratic speaker of the state assembly and lieutenant governor in California, died. Mr. Pelosi took over as treasurer and his company's PAC payouts rose.

At that point, FLS started charging the PAC $24,000 per year for accounting work. In January 2008, the PAC's rent - paid to FLS - also quadrupled from $500 to $2,000 per month.

Katie Falkenberg/The Washington Times PARTNERSHIP: Nancy Pelosi's husband, Paul F. Pelosi, was by her side at a Democratic event in 2006.

Mr. McCarthy, the previous treasurer, had done the work as a volunteer, according to FEC documents and Jennifer Crider, a senior adviser to Mrs. Pelosi and spokeswoman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. She said FLS' accounting fees are in line with costs for other PACs.

The jump in rent was an adjustment to reflect San Francisco's pricey real estate market, Miss Crider said. The rent was adjusted to $1,250 per month, with $750 in back rent to reflect that the rent should have been increased in mid-2007. This was the first increase since the PAC was established in mid-1999, records show.

Over the first six months of 2008, FLS was the largest vendor for Mrs. Pelosi's PAC. Brian Wolff, a political consultant, is the second-largest vendor, bringing in $22,500 this year.

FLS' payments represent 11 percent of the $213,900 the PAC raised over the first half of this year, according to the FEC documents.

PACs, which are designed to help politicians contribute to other candidates and build influence with colleagues, operate under lighter restrictions than traditional campaign committees.

Meredith McGehee, policy director at the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, said putting family members on a PAC payroll is bound to raise questions and, in some cases, allow for abuse.

"The reality is that under the current system, PACs are rife with self-dealing transactions," she said. "The laws and regulations could and should be strengthened.

"There is a point now that you're starting to talk about real money," she said of Mrs. Pelosi's PAC. "This is not just a mom-and-pop operation and any self-dealing transaction by a member of Congress is going to get scrutiny, particularly with large amounts of money and prominent members."

It is illegal for members of Congress to hire family members to work on their official staff, but hiring relatives to work on a campaign or PAC is legal.

To be sure, many political action committees employ or work with family businesses. Last year, CREW found that 19 members of Congress used campaign committees or PACs to purchase services from a family member between 2002 and 2006.

Mrs. Pelosi's PACs have been in trouble before. In 2004, one of her political action committees, Team Majority, was fined $21,000 by the FEC for accepting donations over federal limits. It was one of two PACs she operated at the same time. The Team Majority PAC was closed shortly after the fine was levied.

Nope. Most voters won't know. The other day at work, one of the clients had on an Obama T-shirt. She's an African American woman and I didn't want to offend her but I told her, "Let's talk". I went on line and printed off an article about Obama and gave it to her. It was written by an African American coalition of christians that basically was saying for blacks to vote for the moral candidate on to not base their vote on color. After she read it she came back to me and said, "Ya know, I've never voted before. This will be my first time." The article made sense to her and she said that her brother was for Obama and she was going to ask him why. Of course this encouraged me so when I got home I printed of some of our articles posted here and took them to her yesterday. I hope that at least one uninformed family can change their minds and see the truth.
I also have to share that when I was going to work yesterday I was stopped by a couple on the side walk with either a petition or wanting to register foks to vote. Their line to me was had I heard about the planet? I told them that I knew all about the planet. They wanted to know if I had joined Green Peace yet. I told them no. Then they said "Why? You just haven't had a chance yet?" I told, them, "Let me tell you something. Global warming is a terrible joke and lie perpetrated by a con man." And I walked off. Would've loved to have stayed and debated and let my mouth run like I'm so fond of but I had to get to work!

Quote from: blackeyedpeas on October 01, 2008, 07:29:11 AM

Can anyone remember a time of such open corruption? Could it have anything to do with the reign of the WICKED WITCH OF THE WEST?

I thought it was the "Wicked witch of the east. ;)

By the way, anyone else remember this song??

By the Munchkins

Ding Dong! The Witch is dead. Which old Witch? The Wicked Witch!
Ding Dong! The Wicked Witch is dead.
Wake up - sleepy head, rub your eyes, get out of bed.
Wake up, the Wicked Witch is dead. She's gone where the goblins go,
Below - below - below. Yo-ho, let's open up and sing and ring the bells out.
Ding Dong' the merry-oh, sing it high, sing it low.
Let them know
The Wicked Witch is dead!

As Mayor of the Munchkin City, In the County of the Land of Oz, I welcome you most regally.

But we've got to verify it legally, to see

To see?

If she

If she?

Is morally, ethic'lly

Spiritually, physically

Positively, absolutely

Undeniably and reliably Dead

As Coroner I must aver, I thoroughly examined her.
And she's not only merely dead, she's really most sincerely dead.

Then this is a day of Independence For all the Munchkins and their descendants

If any.

Yes, let the joyous news be spread The wicked Old Witch at last is dead!!

(http://bestsmileys.com/wink/2.gif)

(http://bestsmileys.com/lol/4.gif)

New Evidence of Nancy Pelosi Associate Supporting Chavez, Marxists, & Terrorists

A Colombian associate of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is once again linked to FARC terrorists and Marxist Dictator Hugo Chavez with the revelation of damning new messages concerning Colombian Senator Piedad Córdoba that are currently being investigated by Colombian military officials. Once again we have a powerful American politician, this one the Speaker of the House of Representatives, linked to those attempting to institute Marxist regimes to our South. Why does the U.S. media steadily ignore the ties Speaker Pelosi has to Chavez and the terrorist group FARC through her association with Senator Córdoba? Isn’t it awfully big news that the Speaker of the House supports a foreigner that wishes to give more power to one of our biggest enemies in this hemisphere and to further the efforts of a decades old terror outfit?

Córdoba, who has worked closely with Pelosi on Colombian and Venezuelan issues, has been linked to terrorists and Marxists in the past and has been a key player in helping undermine her own government. Senator Córdoba is prominently mentioned in these emails and documents as attempting to create a “friends of Chavez” style movement in Colombia. This movement was also organized with the assistance of leaders of the Bolivarian Movement, a FARC sponsored terror group.

Some may remember that back in July Nancy Pelosi had illicitly stepped outside her role as Speaker and attempted to institute her own foreign policy by communicating with Colombian Senator Córdoba, telling her that she and Representative Jim McGovern (D-MA) were ready to help them arrange swaps of captured terrorists for hostages held by FARC terrorists. (Foreign policy is the exclusive role of the president and not the legislative branch)

So, why does Pelosi get a complete pass for aligning herself with this Colombian Senator that aids terrorists and is a chief booster of one of our biggest enemies in Central America? What else but that the U.S. media does not discuss this subject much. But, why doesn’t the U.S. media want to expose Pelosi’s support of a foreign enemy? Perhaps it is for the same reason that the U.S. media doesn’t want to talk much about the true nature of the close ties that Barack Obama has to American terrorist William Ayers? To do so would discredit Pelosi and Obama both and that is the last thing the media wants to do. So, the truth remains unspoken in the press.

ChristiansUnite Forums

Entertainment => Politics and Political Issues => Topic started by: HisDaughter on August 07, 2008, 12:11:49 PM