Here’s the “bi-partisan” speech given by House Speaker Nancy Pelsoi just minutes before the vote on the important bailout bill. She said “$700 billion is a staggering number but only a part of the cost of the failed Bush economic policies to our country.” Then she went on to bash the Bush administration and the Republicans and blame them for the whole problem.
What a way to rally the troops to get this essential legislation passed. She was awful.
Here’s the link, listen for yourself: http://www.breitbart.tv/html/184803.html
I’ve seen this several times in the past few days, mostly from high-ranking Democrats: they bash the GOP and Bush or McCain again and again, then they proclaim that they need a “bi-partisan” solution. Weak.
I’m not saying that the GOP is spotless, but doesn’t Pelosi read her own speeches? And anyone else catch that she spoke for over 5 minutes when given only 1 minute to talk? No wonder these people cannot hammer out a deal.
Comment by Dan — September 29, 2008 @ 1:31 pm
Pelosi is such a poor leader that she could not rally her own party to pass this legislation. Skip whether it is good or not the Dems are in the majority. They could pass anything they wanted. But they have no cohesion. I think many of them fully recognize their parties collusion in cementing this quagmire and want to distance themselves from mainstream Democratic ideals ASAP. It is rather fun to watch them unravel. There are so many internet sites posting the Barney Frank, et al videos that the Dems cannot avoid that well deserved spotlight. Then of course there’s Barack himself with his arm up to his shoulder in the FNMA and Freddie Mac cookie jar. Ooops!
Comment by Wallypog — September 29, 2008 @ 2:06 pm
The partisan folly is sports for the uncoordinated, but there is something at stake here. I was really delighted to see both sides of the aisle come out either in favor or opposed to this bill based on what they heard from back home. THAT is bi-partisan and it’s doing what’s good for the country. It’s ugly, but it’s how the system worked. That’s why I wish Pelosi would have stuck to the issues instead of doing the MoveOn.org thing and dragging in Bush and the GOP. Ms. Nancy made some excellent points during her 5 minute 1 minute speech, stuff that I agree with it. The partisan rants did nothing to help her . . . or the country.
Comment by Dan — September 29, 2008 @ 2:14 pm
The Dems had 94 NO votes on their side. What’s with that? Why couldn’t they get their own to vote for this bill?
Comment by mary — September 29, 2008 @ 3:25 pm
Karl Rove Reacts to the No Vote on the Bailout!
Comment by Pariah — September 29, 2008 @ 5:59 pm
Finger-pointing Starts
Comment by Pariah — September 29, 2008 @ 6:36 pm
Dan has an excellent point, Pelosi’s comments did nothing to move this nation forward. Speech like hers’ and others on both sides have made it ooze down into nothing more then a schoolyard fight. Both sides are becoming increasingly more interested in one upping each other and it needs to stop. We saw many of our elected officials, as Dan points out actually listen to their constituents and vote accordingly. We need to make sure that we elect more of them and fewer or Pelosi’s type regardless of party.
Comment by Milo Bloom — September 29, 2008 @ 9:57 pm
nah milo you miss the point, it is the money for some not personalities. see the ny times today http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/business/28melt.html?ex=1380340800&en=39f686dd31af8cbd&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink and realize that the money trail matters. the divide is between those lining their pockets via inside connections and those who protest that.
Comment by TheWiz — September 30, 2008 @ 4:38 am
Milo Bloom,
I think we all agree that we would like our elected and appointed public officials at all levels to listen more closely to us, their constituents. That imposes an obligation on us to make sure we let our public officials know how we feel. That obligation includes doing the best we can to inform ourselves about issues and candidates, then composing our thoughts with precision, brevity, and clarity, and then communicating them effectively with the officials. If we fail to communicate to our public officials, we accept some responsibility for their uninformed decisions.
That does not relieve the public officials of their equal responsibility to communicate with their constituents. They bear as much guilt for failure as we do.
Comment by Bill — September 30, 2008 @ 9:42 am