That’s not me saying that (though I agree). Nope, those are the words today from the Washington Post’s editors and influential columnist Claudia Rosett in the Philadelphia Inquirer.
“We came in friendship, hope, and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace,” Ms. Pelosi grandly declared.
Never mind that that statement is ludicrous: As any diplomat with knowledge of the region could have told Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Assad is a corrupt thug whose overriding priority at the moment is not peace with Israel but heading off U.N. charges that he orchestrated the murder of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq al-Hariri. The really striking development here is the attempt by a Democratic congressional leader to substitute her own foreign policy for that of a sitting Republican president. Two weeks ago Ms. Pelosi rammed legislation through the House of Representatives that would strip Mr. Bush of his authority as commander in chief to manage troop movements in Iraq. Now she is attempting to introduce a new Middle East policy that directly conflicts with that of the president. We have found much to criticize in Mr. Bush’s military strategy and regional diplomacy. But Ms. Pelosi’s attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it is foolish.
On this trip she made a point of showing how easy it is to interact with Syrians, with an itinerary that included a visit to a souk in Damascus – where she was photographed holding out her hand while a cheerful vendor gave her some nuts.
Unfortunately, that photo-op sums up the best that can be said about Pelosi’s trip: Nuts.
This is not just nutty politics; it is dangerous. For Pelosi, this may count as interaction. But for Assad’s regime in Syria, this amounts to chumps on pilgrimage. Damascus is infested by a dynastic tyranny in which “dialogue” serves chiefly as cover for duplicity and terror. These traits are not simply regrettable habits that Assad might be charmed out of. They are big business and prime instruments of power.
But Pelosi doesn’t care about America winning the World War III, she’s only concerned with destroying our Commander In Chief at every turn and doing well in the next election. Well, Americans don’t like defeat and they don’t like traitors. So good luck with your efforts, Nancy.
K-Lo at The Corner has this to say:
If Nancy Pelosi spoke truth to power about women who are really actually oppressed in the world, that would be one thing. But this is a woman who tries to act like American women are oppressed, and uses it as a cheap political tactic (remember her plane idiocy, as one example?). As I’ve written before, her being the first woman Speaker could actually be a great opportunity for human rights. Instead, she rather make a spectacle of herself conducting foreign policy.
Is there a provision to impeach the Speaker of the House? (Remember, she is “Not My Speaker”.)
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
UPDATE 4/6/07 (by John, AGJ): I hope Bruce doesn’t mind, but the criticism of Speaker Pelosi’s trip by many in the “MSM” continues as this editorial in USA Today shows (emphasis mine):
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. Syria has long meddled destructively in neighboring Lebanon and is widely seen as the bloody hand behind the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri. Syria has aligned itself with Iran and supports the violently anti-Israel groups Hezbollah and Hamas. It foments violence in Iraq by allowing suicide bombers and jihadists to cross the Syria-Iraq border…
Also along was House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos, D-Calif., who said the meeting was “only the beginning of our constructive dialogue with Syria, and we hope to build on this visit.” That suggested Democrats are going beyond unobjectionable fact-finding and getting-to-know-you conversation into something closer to negotiations, undermining U.S. diplomacy…
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.
“That’s not me saying that (though I agree). Nope, those are the words today from the Washington Post’s editors …”
Is that a pig I see flying overhead?
Julie the Jarhead
If a liberal moonbat barks at the moon, whilst in the forest, with no one to witness it, does it make the moonbat any less of a moonbat? Something to ponder.
Along with setting back womens rights 1000 years, by wearing that hysterical schmata on her head, she has given the enemy a whole century’s worth of “stupid American liberal woman” propaganda.
For once, I may have to agree with the enemy. The Arabs/Islamists, like the North Koreans, have fooled yet another stupid American liberal woman (Madeline “Not-so-bright” was Kim Jung Il’s “useful idiot”).
Assad had a very big smile on his face in the photo I saw. No doubt it was because he knows what a moron and embarrassment to America, Pelosi is. No wonder the enemy wants democrats to be in charge. Figure, they both have the same goal in mind.
Anyone would be hard pressed to remember a time when the democrats had America’s best interests in mind.
Impeaching an individual who serves for only two years is a pointless waste of time and effort.
However, leaving Nancy Pelosi in power will demonstrate to the world what the Democrat Party really represents:
1. Deliberate attempts to sabotage US troops in the field
2. Subservience to and cries for “dialogue” with countries that have made it clear that they a) support the use of global terrorism as a means to their end and b) will use their weapons technology to “wipe off the map” countries in which the inhabitants are of the wrong race or religion
3. Claiming that vicious anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism is justified
4. Screaming that illegal immigration should be unlimited and that illegal immigrants, even those under deportation orders for committing a crime, should not be arrested
In sum, we could remove Regina George from power….but leaving her there is a much better long-term strategy.
“schmata”
I just love those Yiddish words!
There’s no word in English to adequately describe that ridiculous rag.
Nor to describe the woman wearing it.
Julie the Jarhead
Right you are, Julie the Jarhead! When I saw the photo of her in that thing, I guffawed so loud, my boss came over to see what the ruckus was (can you describe the ruckus? – Breakfast Club). He can’t stand the libs either, so we both tee’d-off on the story. What a hot mess the dems are.
here come the democrats! here come the democrats! everyone watch out cus here come the democrats!!! sure makes the spiteful mouthed republicans look like dog turds. lol rotf. … r-e-s-p-e-c-t.
you mean “r-e-t-a-r-d”, markie. what a complete and utter silly moron you are!
Anyone see this? http://drudgereport.com/flash2.htm
Umm, to be a liberal has got to be really humiliating anymore!!
Bruce, a once great isolationist GOPer Senator from Michigan, Arthur Vandenberg, literally changed his spots when America was last confronted by a world-wide cabal bent on the murder, destruction and conquest of the West… back in 1941. He went from opposing FDR’s long slate of alphabet reform agencies and isolation from European misadventures to backing the Pres, his political opponent, without reservation in WWII.
A great lesson for NancyP and the Democrats, Vandenberg coined the phrase that foreign policy and politics “ends at the water’s edge”. He went on to say on the Senate floor in 1952:
“To me ‘bipartisan foreign policy’ means a mutual effort, under our indispensable two-Party system, to unite our official voice at the water’s edge so that America speaks with maximum authority against those who would divide and conquer us and the free world. It does not involve the remotest surrender of free debate in determining our position. On the contrary, frank cooperation and free debate are indispensable to ultimate unity. In a word, it simply seeks national security ahead of partisan advantage. Every foreign policy must be totally debated (and I think the record proves it has been) and the “loyal opposition” is under special obligation to see that this occurs.”
NancyP and the Democrats need to take a couple of pages from his playbook.
It is traitorous that the Bush Admin and the right wing spin machine would attempt to undermine the leadership of the 3rd most powerful figure in America in a time of WAR!!!
Republicans keep playing politics by lying to the public about Iraq and the lying about the real story behind Nancy P.
Why do you righties keep trying to Destroy America!?!?!
Stop ruining MY country with your political games and let the 3rd most powerful person in America, Pelosi, help lead America to a better future away from the dead-ender vision of the republican party.
Traitors!
This Just In:..LONDON (AP) The BBC reports that the family of one returned British sailor from Iran says a crew member had been held in solitary confinement.
LOL….keogh, people should be aware that Nancy Pelosi fully supports Hizbollah and Hamas, fully supports Assad, and has given him reassurance that she and her fellow Democrats will do everything in their power to block any sanctions or punishment against him and his regime for supporting the assassination of Lebanon’s prime minister and for terrorist attacks by Hizbollah and Hamas against Israel and Western countries.
The third-most-powerful person in the United States has thrown in her lot with a terrorist-supporting country and is using her power to force the United States to surrender and allow Assad/Hizbollah/Hamas to do as they want, which she calls “peace”.
What the Israelis realized — too late — is that Pelosi does not care if they are attacked by terrorists from Syria or if they are vaporized by Iran’s nuclear weapon. Pelosi is interested only in her own personal power and self-aggrandizement, and she will do whatever it takes, including her support of Assad and his terrorist allies.
Stop being a traitor!
She was elected to bring this country away from your dead-mindset. Now we find out the Bush Admin supports terrorism, beheadings and the like!
Bush is simply creating more and more Al Qaeda like organizations. What more can you Repubs do to DESTROY AMERICA?!?!?!
Only through Nancy P. and other dems will this country make any real progress in winning the WOT.
Live Free, Become part of the Democratic Party
“She was elected to bring this country away from your dead-mindset.”
Well, she wasn’t on MY ballot, 401k. And I daresay you weren’t saying that when Newt Gingrich was Mr. Speaker.
Checkmate.
Regards,
Peter H.
#4-5: You two will get a kick out of this, since we’re talking about SanFranNan’s “shmatta” and the babushka she wore: to me, she looked like she was about to break into a rendition of “Sunrise, Sunset” from “Fiddler on the Roof.”
In her case, it would be “Libtard on the Roof.” And she’s dangerously close to falling into the cow manure in the field.
While we’re all being yentas, I would think that Bela Pelosi would be about as welcome in Israel as Haman is at Purim. (I got that last line from a friend of the family.)
Regards,
Peter H.
LOL…what are you so upset about, keogh? The only thing happening is that Pelosi’s true beliefs are exposed.
Now stand proud and take credit for the fact that Pelosi has thrown in her lot with a terrorist-supporting country and is using her power to force the United States to surrender and allow Assad/Hizbollah/Hamas to do as they want, which she calls “peace”. She and her fellow Democrats like Lantos will do everything in their power to block any sanctions or punishment against him and his regime for supporting the assassination of Lebanon’s prime minister and for terrorist attacks by Hizbollah and Hamas against Israel and Western countries.
This is for what you stand. Why does it bother you to have it made obvious?
Mmmmm….hamantaschen.
(NDT = partnered to a sweet Jewish husbear)
Your comment shows that you are just spewing the same dead-ender junk that you always spew.
Lantos is the only person in congress to do something real to stand up to the bushes and protect Israel
It is the repubs who have proven helpless in the face of adversary with your failed policies.
Stop being a traitor. It is the Dems that will bring America Victory in the WOT
Stop prolonging it through the repub policy of act first think second.
LOL……and Lantos was standing right there just a few days ago as Pelosi expressed her support for Hizbollah, Hamas, and Assad, and made it clear that Democrats will block any attempt to hold these people responsible.
Pelosi supports the terrorist groups and Mideastern governments like Syria who claim that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is true and that Jews want to take over the world, who say that Jews like Lantos kill Christian and Arab children to get blood for Passover matzohs, who run gory television series showing the same, and who advocate wholesale genocide of Jews.
It should be a measure of how depraved and twisted Lantos is, especially given that he is a Holocaust survivor, to stand there and applaud as the Democrat Party legitimizes and expresses support for groups and governments with these attitudes. He shows clearly just how much Democrats will subvert any degree of decency for political power.
As someone who voted for democrats and was glad when they took over, I have grown further and further annoyed with my party. The “Iraq Funding/Bribe Bill” really got to me since I was hoping for a change in how things were done by the democratic party. I really dind’t get what the big deal about this was until a friend of mine started talking about it with me. I do think it was a stupid move, even if she had good intention in going but Israel even said they never gave her a statement to say to Syria.
She has meddled in the diplomatic relations of three countries at once, quite an accomplishment. I might not like Bush but I do think the executive branch should deal with foreign relations not various congressmen or women. I am just finding less of reason to belong to the democratic party the longer they are in power.
#6….You get respect when 1) you earn it and 2) when you give it. Neither of which, I have seen the Democrats do in a long time. One of the few on the Democrat side who has shown his respect is Sen. Lieberman and we see how well his fellow party members respected his views, didn’t we?
Ok, so when there is a Democrat President the opposition party can send it’s leaders over to subvert the administrations foreign policy. After 230 years this is the new way we are doing things. As long as we are all on the same page.
I find it incredible that the only time there is a consensus of opinion AGAINST a Democrat is when the NY Times or the Washinton Post come out with a critical story or opinion piece. It helps to explain why few, very few of the Democrat scandals get much play in the country. Some of the latest…Reids corrupt real estate deals Pelosi lying on her financial disclosures and Di Feinsteins corupt billion dollar contracts.
oh my, madame pelosi has more balls and more common sense than georgie bush and his trolley of fools could ever dream of having.
huh and her balls are displayed how? Did the Post mean her trip was nuts or she was nuts?
#19 – Got a link that shows that Pelosi and Lantos expressed support for the Hez?
Or is the just simply more classic rightist hyperventilating?
JERUSALEM – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit today to Syria – in which she called for dialogue with Damascus – was “brave” and “very appreciated” and could bring about “important changes” to America’s foreign policy, including talks with “Middle East resistance groups,” according to members of terror organizations here whose top leaders live in Syria.
One terror leader, Khaled Al-Batch, a militant and spokesman for Islamic Jihad, expressed hope Pelosi would continue winning elections, explaining the House speaker’s Damascus visit demonstrated she understands the Middle East.
Pelosi’s visit was opposed by President Bush, who called Syria a “state sponsor of terror.”
“Nancy Pelosi understands the area (Middle East) well, more than Bush and Dr. (Condoleeza) Rice,” said Al-Batch, speaking to WND from Gaza. “If the Democrats want to make negotiations with Syria, Hamas, and Hezbollah, this means the Democratic Party understands well what happens in this area and I think Pelosi will succeed. … I hope she wins the next elections.”
Islamic Jihad has carried out scores of shootings and rocket attacks, and, together with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group, has taken responsibility for every suicide bombing in Israel the past two years….
Al-Batch expressed hope Pelosi and the Democratic Party will pressure Bush to create dialogue with Syria and Middle East “resistance movements” and prompt an American withdrawal from Iraq.
“Bush and Dr. Rice made so many mistakes in the Middle East. Just look at Palestinian clashes and Iraq. But I think some changes are happening for the Bush administration’s foreign policy because of the hand of Nancy Pelosi. I think the Democratic Party can do things the best. … Pelosi is going down a good road by this policy of dialogue,” he said.
Abu Abdullah, a leader of Hamas’ military wing in the Gaza Strip, said the willingness by some lawmakers to talk with Syria “is proof of the importance of the resistance against the U.S.”
“The Americans know and understand they are losing in Iraq and the Middle East and that their only chance to survive is to reduce hostilities with Arab countries and with Islam. Islam is the new giant of the world.”
“Pelosi’s visit to Syria was very brave. She is a brave woman,” Jihad Jaara, a senior member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group and the infamous leader of the 2002 siege of Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity, told WND.
“I think it’s very nice and I think it’s much better when you sit face to face and talk to (Syrian President Bashar) Assad. It’s a very good idea. I think she is brave and hope all the people will support her. All the American people must make peace with Syria and Iran and with Hamas. Why not?” Jaara said.
Expressed support? She demonstrated support, didn’t she?
Cox and Forkum illustrated it quite well…
http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/001082.html
I can’t say I “liked” this quote toward the bottom of the commentary…
“Abu Abdullah, a leader of Hamas’ military wing in the Gaza Strip, said the willingness by some lawmakers to talk with Syria “is proof of the importance of the resistance against the US.”
Her actions are interpreted as a demonstration of support. And not just by evil righties in the US.
Quote her saying so? Actions, as they say, speak louder than words.
(And I disapprove of *any* congresspersons or Senators doing any sort of diplomatic traveling on their own accord. Not only is it wrong, it’s *expensive* and we’re paying for it. I’m pretty disgusted when governors do it too, though they at least can use the excuse that they represent their state and are trying to bring economic business to their state.)
I love how dumb the press is. Here’s from a press conf with the white house spokeslady
Q Dana, is there a fear — back on the Pelosi trip — is there a fear that Pelosi will go and meet with government officials there and show that there are two U.S. policies on Syria, versus one policy that the President has stated?
MS. PERINO: Well, I don’t know what she was planning to say in that meeting. I would believe that she agrees with us, in terms of the aspects that I’ve laid out. So I don’t know what she’s planning to say. We do think it sends the wrong message for U.S. officials to go and meet with him.
Q To follow up on that, is it a contradiction that the President is denouncing the trip, but, yet, is ready for a readout when she comes back?
MS. PERINO: I was asked this morning if she had responded — or if she had sent back any messages. I said, I don’t know, I’m sure that she’d be willing to. If she wants to share information that she found out from her trip to the Middle East, I’m sure we’ll be willing to hear it.
Q But isn’t that a contradiction, though? If you’re denouncing it, why do you want to hear about it?
MS. PERINO: April, that is not a contradiction. What I said is that if she wanted to share, I’m sure we will listen. Imagine if I had said the opposite, you’d be asking me much tougher questions. (Laughter.)
Vince –
First I wouldn’t take much the World net Daily writes too seriously..
Second from your the article that you cite you conveniently edit out the following:
“Pelosi is not the only lawmaker to recently visit Syria. A congressional delegation including three Republicans traveled to Damascus Sunday stating they believe there is an opportunity for dialogue with the Syrian leadership.”
So yes, It was hyperventilating…
Nice editing by the way!
#13
Bush is simply creating more and more Al Qaeda like organizations.
Such as….?
Read your post up there and tell me why it doesn’t reek of BS?
#10
It is traitorous that the Bush Admin and the right wing spin machine would attempt to undermine the leadership of the 3rd most powerful figure in America in a time of WAR!!!
Thank you for demonstrating that you have no idea what treaon means.
and let the 3rd most powerful person in America, Pelosi, help lead America to a better future away from the dead-ender vision of the republican party.
Yeah? When do you suppose she’s going to start? She’s been on the job 3 months and so far has only been successful in pissing off the kook base, sucked off a terrorist thug, loaded up pork into the military bill and driving down the congress’ approval ratings.
Let us know when she plans on doing that.
And about the three Republicans let us all say, in unison, “Idiots!”
I don’t know what it is about the refrain “but Republicans did it too!” Yeah? And we have to approve of what Republicans do for what reason? Or is it just that Republican behavior defines what is right and proper?
Frankly, I don’t see any reluctance to criticize Republicans but boy oh boy is it impossible to get the left to criticize Democrats. Face it, you guys refuse to do it. Take something completely beyond the pale, such as sticking all that pork in a war funding bill for the apparent purpose of purchasing votes and “the Republicans do it too!” Or this trip by Pelosi where she’s made statements representing Israel that they had to publicly refute. “Republicans do it too!”
Well, guys, it seems clear that *you* think that whatever Republicans do is the standard of good behavior.
keogh : I dont take you seriously. I dont need your reading tips.
Here’s what the White House has said about the very imporant issue of idiot republican house members going to syria
Q Republican Congressman Darrell Issa met in Damascus with Syria’s President. Does the White House have a comment on that?
MR. JOHNDROE: I think the administration’s position on members of Congress, Democrat or Republican, is very clear: We do not think it’s productive; we do not think it is useful; we do not think it is helpful. Syria knows exactly what it needs to do to be a helpful and constructive player in the region and the world. And it’s a few pretty well known issues: stop supporting Hamas and Hezbollah; stop letting terrorists into Iraq from Syria — terrorists who then go on to kill innocent Iraqis, coalition forces, including Americans; stop undermining the democratically-elected government of Prime Minister Siniora in Lebanon; and stop suppressing the activities of human rights activists and democracy advocates inside Syria.
So our position, as we have said for some time now, well before the most high-level visits that have taken place to Damascus, is that we just don’t think this is helpful. And I think history bears this out, that the Syrians still don’t change their behavior, and this only makes them feel validated.
I don’t understand what all the fuss is about. As elected leader of the Congressional Retreat and Surrender Caucus, Ms. Pelosi is simply fulfilling her duties as Kowtower-in-Chief.
Say,
Where’s Ian Merkwürdigeliebe to explain the virtuosity and moralaciousness of whoring your wife’s illness for campaign contributions and taking a bump up in the polls?
Us ignoramooses need him to explain the nuances of marriagerial exploitation to win friends and influence people.
BTW, can you imagine the bump in the polls Edwards would get if he channeled his wife’s soul and determined that she’d rather starve to death? After all, we were told not long ago how compassionate it was to let a woman starve to death. Edwards could call it an ultra-late term abortion.
Hillary & Obama, lacking a spouse to exploit would be obliterated in the polls. Edwards could use the magic of his hair and St. John F.You Kerry, who served in Vietnam, could lay his hands on her and maker her walk again, meanwhile sowing up the votes of those Red State hicks. What could be better than that?
Netherlands: Call to ban the Koran
An article in a Dutch party newspaper calls to ban the Koran, and cites verses showing how intolerant it is. The Koran might be violent, there might be more such citations, but it is not the book which is the cause of violence, it is the believers. Such citations can be taken from the Bible as well. No religious believer in the bible today would understand an “eye for an eye” in its literal form. The Koran has quotes supporting tolerance as well. It is up to the believer to decide which quotes he’d rather cite and how he prefers to live his life.
—
A writer writing under the pseudonym H.S.M. Frankenvrij wrote in the VVD party newspaper Liberaal Reveil that spreading the Koran in its current form should be a crime. Frankenvrij claims that spreading the Koran or making it public involves discrimination and incitement. As a solution the author suggests making a legal version by “Islamic editors”. All calls to hate and violence must be eliminated. The bible, according to the author, is a much more tolerant.
The author calls the Koran “primitive, unbalanced, intolerant, aggressive and resentful, especially towards those who think differently” and cites a verse from Sura 4:56 “Surely, those who disbelieve in our revelations, we will condemn them to the hellfire. Whenever their skins are burnt, we will give them new skins. Thus, they will suffer continuously.”
Dupuis, chairman of the editor committee, defends publishing the article under a pseudonym. “The reason for it is right in front of us. It was our advice, not a condition of the author. Better safe than sorry.”
He added that experts in Islamic theology looked at the article and found it ok. “Also by Muslims it is a much heard opinion.”
“The acts that stem from religion also fall under public moral and the law. In the end it depends on what people do with it.” Adding that the VVD is not calling to ban the Koran.
Umm, keogh, have you any idea what “treason” means, or what a “traitor” is? No? Look in the mirror, dippy. Also – is it common practice for liberals to gleefully display their ignorance and lack of sense on just about everything that matters? That’s actually a rhetorical question, because your spew is proof positive! You silly little thing, you!
I guess congressional Dems really do support the troops. They support Syria’s troops. They support Iran’s troops. They support Al Qaeda’s troops…
#37 and #38 – Umm. Wow. You’re just mean at this point aren’t you, TGC? Clearly you don’t like Edwards, but to accuse him of exploiting his wife’s illness for political gain is really just sick.
#42. Well, to me the fact that if you sent well wishes to Mrs. Edwards off her husbands campaign website, you got a solicitation to donate to his campaign in return. Seems like a perfect example of exploitation to me.
Oh, and LNC, you ROCK!!! Will you marry me? 🙂
#43, of course that’s what happens. The website is probably coded to send that solicitation out for any comment or inquiry. That’s not exploitation – that’s online campaigning. Applying some sort of intelligent filter to avoid the solicitation based on submission content isn’t cost-effective.
Oh, hey….meant to say on topic as well….Bruce, thanks for making a note of this story and the fact that the WaPo carried the opinion piece. Although I think we all realize the Post does usually have a liberal bent, the opinion and editorial pages have been carrying more conservative voices the last few years under new leadership. It’s been good to see the balance, even if it’s only in those sections of the Post.
***Oh, and LNC, you ROCK!!! Will you marry me?***
jon, you’re a sweetie, but alas, you probably aren’t femme enough for me. Do you have a sister?? 😉 KIDDING!!!!
This seems to fit the democrat party to a “T”.
From http://dictionary.reference.com
trea·son – 1. Treason, sedition mean disloyalty or treachery to one’s country or its government. Treason is any attempt to overthrow the government or impair the well-being of a state to which one owes allegiance; the crime of giving aid or comfort to the enemies of one’s government. Sedition is any act, writing, speech, etc., directed unlawfully against state authority, the government, or constitution, or calculated to bring it into contempt or to incite others to hostility, ill will or disaffection; it does not amount to treason and therefore is not a capital offense.
In case there’s any confusion (deliberate or otherwise), “treason” and “sedition” are similar in that they both undermine the nation, but are not the same, as far as how each should be punished. As the definition states, “sedition” is not a capital crime (though it should be during a time of war). Both acts are deplorable, and those who committ one or the other, have nothing close to resembling the nation’s best interests in mind. Again, this describes the democrat party perfectly.
and now another delusional wingnut: the honorable (gag gag) richard cheney:…”This is Al-Qaeda operating in Iraq, and as I say, they were present before we invaded Iraq…rotf, that out to have sadam rolling in his grave.
markie – in comment #7, refer to the part about your moronic silliness. Nothing’s changed, I see.
I think markie is a conservative, pretending to be a liberal, purely for entertainment purposes. I mean, c’mon, no one could be that much of a tool – could they?
Pelosi reminds me (dangerously!) of my president(Zapatero, Spain). Vicious antiamericanism and devotion for terrorists and thugs. Is the enemy at home.
Also, it is quite possible that Nancy Lugosi has also broken the law, though nobody in the MSM is covering it.
Yes, there is a law that prevents the Congress from usurping the Executive Branch’s ability to conduct foreign affairs. It’s called the Logan Act.
The Logan Act was created in 1799, and reads as follows:
§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
The Act was named after George Logan, who in 1798, went to France without President John Adams’ permission to try and settle the Quasi-War.
With that in mind, there seems little doubt that Pelosi might have made the same mistake Logan did, and could be, at the very least, investigated for doing so.
Yet nobody in the Drive-By Media is so much batting an eye.
Hmmm…okay, let’s consider the following:
What if in September 1996, just days after America launched a missile strike on Baghdad to expand the “no fly zone,” Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R-GA) met with Saddam Hussein to discuss foreign policy matters without the permission of President Clinton?
Bias? What media bias?
Regards,
Peter H.
Hi Juan Otero – what on God’s earth ever possessed your fellow countrymen to vote for a leftist, defeatist, “let-the-terrorists-screw-you-up-the-anus government??? I know why certain portions of my country did (out of sheer stupidity), but Spain is so much more vulnerable. Since Europe is already over-infested with Islamists, one would think more Spaniards would understand leftism only serves to encourage the enemy. Weakness encourages the enemy, which is a notorious leftist characteristic. Then again, Israel has a dimwit lefty running the show, too, which is perplexing, in and of itself!! If there’s any nation on this planet that needs a real leader, and not some moron like Olmert, it’s Israel!
I think it is counter productive to start throwing out the term treason and calling people traitors. I don’t seriously think that any democract or republican does anything to hurt the country or to turn it over to our enemies. Nancy Pelosi did what she did with good intentions, I would like to hope, even though I think she did a good deal of it to undermine the president.
People have different views on what we should do with Syria and other outlaw countries, some believe in isolation and some believe in opening up talks. I think it was stupid of her not to talk with the president though, she could have discussed it with him and maybe affected policy. She undermines him and her own credibility.
#53, Constitutional Scholar and Know-It-All:
Newt didn’t just discuss foreign matters, he went overseas and openly undercut Clinton’s policies in the Mideast and China and conservatives like GOP House Leader John Bohner supported him. I guess IOKIYAR.
LOL…so leftist Ian admits that the Clinton regime was going to do nothing if China invaded Taiwan.
Furthermore, Gingrich’s trip to Israel was in support of our allies, rather than our enemies, as was Pelosi’s trip to Damascus.
I admire your commitment, Ian; it always amazes me how Democrats like yourself will defend Pelosi even as she publicly comes out in support of terrorist organizations and the governments who back them. But the simple fact of the matter is that “Madame Speaker” made it clear that she is willing to make kissy-face with any regime and any group, no matter how vile, as long as they’re anti-Bush.
Actually, I’m amazed at the spinning of the whole blogosphere AND the Dem Party. You’d think a Holocaust survivor like Lantos would be smarter than to let the leader of his party go show her support for a regime that actively promotes anti-Semitism, including claiming that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is true and that the matzohs the Jews were eating this week were made from the blood of Christian and Arab children.
A blog I’m recommending:
http://islamthreat.blogspot.com/index.html
LNC,
in Comment #51, Conservative satirists are much better than that. If you venture over to Town Hall, try to find some posts by Loyal Democrat. A lot of people are hoping he comes out with a book or a blog.
Hey Mike!
but to accuse him of exploiting his wife’s illness for political gain is really just sick.
Unless, of course, you’re Howard Fineman, Matt Lauer et al., right?
Applying some sort of intelligent filter to avoid the solicitation based on submission content isn’t cost-effective.
And we all know how much the dirt poor libs worry about cost-effectiveness. I’m sure Edwards could get some of his buds to tack on a few billion more on the defense spending bill.
It was also illegal–not that the administration will grow the testicles to prosecute her for it. After all, Kerry, Fonda, Specter, Jackson, and others all violated the same law and were never prosecuted.
#57 – Thanks, ND30. I was just going to bring up the same items for IgnoAndNaus for his consideration.
I believe the phrase “casting pearls before swine” is a propos in this context.
Regards,
Peter H.
#54 – And I’m surprised that the Spanish don’t recall the occupation of their country circa 1453 by the same type of Muslims who were later defeated by Ferdinan e Isabel, los reyes de Aragon y Castilla.
And what did Boabdil, the Moorish dictator of Granada, say upon surrendering the Alcazaba to the Spanish in 1492? “We shall return.”
Some viruses never die.
Regards,
Peter H.
#61 Thanks for having my back, TGC. I just now read Mikes response. They must have found some money somewhere for their filter as they now give you the option to receive a campaign Email when you send the good whishes.
Hilaire Belloc (1938):
“Will not perhaps the temporal power of Islam return and with it the menace of an armed Mohammedan world, which will shake off the domination of Europeans — still nominally Christian — and reappear as the prime enemy of our civilization? The future always comes as a surprise, but political wisdom consists in attempting at least some partial judgment of what that surprise may be. And for my part I cannot but believe that a main unexpected thing of the future is the return of Islam”.
Check out this comment by a Lebanon paper.. it’s brutal.
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=5&article_id=81211
well gees, wonder what the conservative guy who was there had to say about it. but then again he must not be a true republican or he’s lying or something. oh that’s right he’s from ohio. go figure. http://www.columbusdispatch.com/dispatch/opencms/local_news/stories/2007/04/05/boehner.ART_ART_04-05-07_A1_QU69U7R.html
Yeah, he’s from Ohio *sigh* That does explain a lot.
Jut shows that no matter what your party, you can be an idiot.
LOL…..it’s amazing what thirty pieces of silver will do, isn’t it, markie?
Pelosi is used to bribing and buying peoples’ opinions; I’m sure Hobson’s is no different.
Furthermore, note how carefully he chooses his words….”any meeting I was in”. Well, he wasn’t in every meeting — and what we know is that Pelosi reaffirmed her and the Democrat Party’s support for Hizbollah, Hamas, and the Assad government and its policies and said that she would force Israel to accept “peace” terms from Syria without Syria having to give up terrorist support.
ya, lol. thirty pieces of silver.–that’s it!!!! you mean: hobson is a liar and a traitor.
TGC, in #61 you said:
Unless, of course, you’re Howard Fineman, Matt Lauer et al., right?
I must have missed what you’ve read or seen. If either of them accused Edwards of milking his wife’s cancer, then shame on them as well.
***…Nancy Pelosi did what she did with good intentions…***
No, she didn’t. She went to there to intentionally undermine our foreign policy. She, like the democrat party in general are a bunch of spoiled babies, who will stomp their feet, take their toys and go home, when they don’t get what they want. Or, they shake hands with a dictator and turn their backs on those he oppresses (like women, for example, who are 2nd class citizens in a cesspool like Syria). Yeah, great intentions, indeed. Typical liberal. They stand on their heads and tell you you’re upside down.
oh, the right is so wrong again. again. again. thank god we have leaders like pelosi, who’s willing to do the hard work. unfortunately, this charlatan administration is so inept and ineffective at anything and everything, that they’re just lame-ducks with no political power any longer. gone are the days of bush spending his political capital; gone are the days when bush was relevant. this lying hypocrite will spend the next two years trying to dodge subpoenas and investigations into all their criminal activity. will the right ever wake up and see what’s happening? doubtful, as they’re the same idiots who thought nixon was a leader. ha. face it, bush is done. the fork is stuck in him and his relevance is going down the drain, and he’s taking conservatism with it.
you on the right in this blog are dinosaurs. you’re eventual extinction is at hand. quick, go to confession while you still have hope!
LOL….and in swoops rightiswrong to explain to us again why his leftist leader was right to sell him out to terrorist organizations and Islamists who hang gays on sight.
The world now knows what those of us in San Francisco have known for years; Nancy Pelosi will make deals with terrorists to get what she wants, and she doesn’t care who or what gets hurt in the process.
#75 – And ND30, in light of Nancy Lugosi’s oft-exclaimed quote that unethical politicians would no longer be promoted under her watch, then she should herself be recalled because of her violation of the Logan Act.
Then again, with Dhimmicrats you can get away with lying under oath, extramarital sex, operating gay escort services, driving while intoxicated, negligent homicide, vehicular manslaughter, embracing foes of the USA…but don’t you dare question their patriotism! 😉
Regards,
Peter H.
really rotf, pencildick. 200 years of the logan act and nary a prosecution with scores of so-called violations. get a grip dude. give us something of substance.
“Something of substance?” That’s the funniest thing you ever said, marxist. Especially in light of all of your insubstantial comments on this board.
Regards,
Peter H.
[Comment deleted for violating community terms of conduct.]
oh ya pencildick?? like post #77. man, you are a gaytrad.
Okay, marxist, I’ll play your little game. Name ONE violation of the Logan Act that passed your beady little eyes and didn’t get prosecuted. Go ahead, name just one.
We’ll be waiting.
Regards,
Peter H.
[Comment deleted for violating community terms of conduct.]
What’s wrong, marxist? Can’t handle the heat when put on the spot? I asked you to name ONE person who violated the Logan Act and was not prosecuted, and you are asking ME to look it up?
Looks like you’re the loser. Like any typical Kool-Aid Kozby Kid, you throw out accusations and can’t back them up.
Match, set, game. You lose. Now go sit in the corner until you are able to joint the grownups at the big table.
Regards,
Peter H.
[Comment deleted for violating community terms of conduct.]
lemme see – talking with a syrian dictator is good – but talking with bush about funding the troops is bad – the troops the democrats ‘support’