If Nancy Pelosi could only confine herself to stating her opinions and desires, your concern would be valid. However, what she’s making clear is that she makes the life of anyone who opposes her opinions or desires, or whom she perceives as an enemy, a living hell when given the opportunity.

Nancy Pelosi has made a career of exploiting her gender to cover up unacceptable public behavior. I think it far more equalitarian for GPW to call her out and demand of her the same standard of behavior as he would a man than for you to excuse her actions based on her gender.

Your comments embody the real potential poison – patriarchal notions of what constitutes “feminine” behavior. If a man aggresively states his opinions and desires, he is seen as tough and forthright — a woman that does the same is labeled a conniving, manipulative, cat-fighting bitch.

Welcome to 21st century gentlemen…your 1950′s notions are a long-dead anachronism.

Gheez, I didn’t think a woman existed that could make me pine for the days when the Dems’ female lead was poster-grrrl Mrs Hines-Kerry. Those were the good old days… bitch slapping the unruly Edwards’ kids, making fun of now-Chief Justice Roberts’ son, taking cheap seat pot shots at the Bush twins. Hmmmm.

I happen to think Veruca Salt could have been quite the catch (were it not for the fact that I already had a crush on Willy Wonka).

After a long time waiting in the wings and learning the ropes of politics –the “ropes” that can enable like loyalty earned, the “ropes” that can constrain and choke like the image of a harsh, unyielding, driven, power-mad woman bitching up the Capitol… and the ropes that are just pure, flat out fun… bigger staffs, nicer office, new drapes and, oh I don’t know, dashing policy initiatives just because you can (like Rangel’s draft, Conyers’ Downing St Memo-Impeachment panel, Frank’s repeal of DADT, etc).

I think most Hill observers will tell you the new Speakers and Sen Maj leaders make lots of mistakes in the first 100 days. Some are forgivable if it happens to a member; some are not if it happens to a media personality; some are easily forgotten by voters. But all are rich with mistakes until a professional staff finally gets them under control. Kind of like the First Ladies and all the changes in hair styles, wardrobes, PC charities, speaking in the 3rd person, using the royal “We”, getting some pets for the WH, and giving the TV tour which is now mandatory. They make lots of mistakes until a professional staff can ride herd and bring the doggie to barn.

NancyP is a caricature of a powerful politician in DC –it’s her, 100%; she should be the postergrrrl for “Women Inside the Dome”. It’s exactly why the Democrats will cease being in the majority in 2 years and why Hillary is harmed by every moment NancyP is on the stage, front and center, reporting for duty. Most Americans don’t know her yet… but she’ll engender that same level of passionate DISlike that has become Hillary’s hallmark.

If Hillary and Bill were smart, they’d have NancyP off’ed like they did to Vince Foster (just kidding).

There’s a disconnect somewhere, as if a whole bunch of people don’t comprehend how loyalty works. Extending loyalty is good. Demanding loyalty is bad. Portraying the person you support as demanding loyalty is… it says something.

For a while I hung around romance writers… some of them believed absolutely that normal social interaction included vindictive bitchiness if you offended the wrong person and worried they’d destroy their careers before they even started if they didn’t play that game. Some of the others looked around and tried to see that world and even though they could see that a couple people had bad manners, couldn’t even concieve of that kind of interaction being the norm or any sort of thing worth being worried about. A bit like parallel dimentions interposed on top of each other with half the people in one reality and half of them in an entirely different reality.

I can’t say that’s not how their world works, only that I’m looking in from the outside, glad I’m not part of it.

I think he worked the GOP House caucus like a policy leader, not a partisan hack. Was he a bully? Nope; but don’t expect him to hold his temper if you suggest he exit through the back door of AF1.

I really *can’t* see a conservative suggesting that someone, anyone, be given a particular position *because* they are female or a minority or whatever, because conservatives tend to believe that women and minorities actually can make it on their qualifications. To point out that Harmon is not *only* qualified, but female to boot, is to point out liberal (and certainly *feminist*) hypocracy. What they *say* they want is equality in representation… many more women in positions of power.

What seems to be the reality is that women don’t play nice together. The social dynamics don’t seem to resemble “leadership” at all, but rather the strictness to conform of the high school clique. Pelosi wants a posse.

The fact that her “leadership style” seems to be so warped isn’t nearly so weird to me as the fact that her partisans freely share anectdotes about her determination to rule with an iron hand, passing out favors and punishments for those who don’t support her. As if it’s a good thing. Yeah, Nancy is going to rule with an iron hand… she’s a *strong* woman, tough and capable.

You tell me… Gingrich was probably the most influential house speaker in history. Was he a bully?

Furthemore, I’m surprised at a conservative suggesting that Harmon deserves her committe chair because of her gender:

But you are of coure all in favor of Alcee Hastings getting his seat because he is a member of The Congressional Black Caucus. Pelosi set herself up much as Kerry did. Kerry beat us over the head in 2004 with his (lackluster) military service, then complained when the quality and or veracity of that military service was called into question. Pelosiy starts out by stating she wants to have the “most ethical and moral house” and starts out by supporting Abscam Unidicted Co-conspiritor Murtha. Then she follows is by nixing Harmon in favor of bribe accepting, impeached, Carter-appointed Alcee Hastings. WHOM SHE PUTS IN CHARGE OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE! I wonder what those secrets will sell for.

All evidence points to her bowing to pressure from the CBC (the group that helped give her the position she currently has as Democratic Leader) and trying to appoint Hastings. Here’s hoping she could just do what she SHOULD do and appoint Harmon; regardless of how qualified Reyes is, he’s not the senior member of the Committee nor is even close to the top of the seniority list.

But I guess this is the most transparent Congress we’re going to get. They’ll bypass the logical and customary choice (for personal reasons), and knowing she would be beaten by the House if she tried to appoint Hastings, she’s going to go deep and pick Reyes. So I see pettiness won’t be beaten but the thought of loosing a vote from her own caucus is what will do it to pick a minor member of Congress who is against actually protecting the border.

Apparently you think I’m a lemming, however, I for one understand the difference of having a great chance and being qualified.

So… someone trying to take money from convicted felons is a gentleman? If that’s your definition of a gentleman, then I now know why you call Nancy Pelosi a lady (even though I don’t think ill of her personally).

Word this morning out of Hollywood on the death of acclaimed director Robert Altman (M*A*S*H, Prairie Home Companion, The Player). No word yet on the manner of death, but it is so far presumed to be natural causes (Altman was 81 years old).

I detested the man’s politics, but I adored his work, especially “Gosford Park.” His artistry will be missed, and his work will continue to be a HUGE influence on my career.

Eric in Hollywood