April 3-5, 2007
Apr 03 10:36 Prove Them Wrong, Governor Apr 03 10:56 Media Alert Apr 03 20:52 Reid Playing Chicken With Bush Apr 04 01:23 A Spine ISN'T Detected Apr 04 03:10 Taking It to the Airwaves Apr 04 09:27 Transportation Slowdown Apr 04 09:46 British Hostages 'Pardoned' Apr 05 02:58 Hillary's Downfall? Apr 05 12:03 Pelosi's Blunder
Prior Years: 2006
Prove Them Wrong, Governor
According to this article, Larry Pogemiller thinks that Gov. Pawlenty's promise to veto major tax increases is just talk. He's in for a big surprise:
Although Gov. Tim Pawlenty has repeatedly pledged to veto any tax increase, Minnesota Senate leaders said Monday that they're optimistic the governor will change his mind and agree to fund "investments" in education, transportation and health care, and will reduce property taxes.This is simply empty rhetoric from Pogemiller. He knows that Gov. Pawlenty won't sign some of the biggest tax increases in Minnesota history into law. When Pogemiller talks about funding "investments in education, transportation & health care", it's really just code for spending like a drunken sailor. Just remember what Deb Hilstom said:
Senate Majority Leader Larry Pogemiller said the Senate didn't spend 2+ months working on bills to have them vetoed.
And, Pogemiller said, Pawlenty said he would "govern differently" this term than he did the previous four years when he abided by his no new tax pledge which resulted in a "disinvestment" in the state.
As long as Loud Larry & Tiny Tarryl are running the Senate, taxpayers should be afraid. They should be very afraid. We'd be wise to remember the DFL didn't run on increasing taxes like this. The truth is that she couldn't have won had she hinted that she supported raising taxes to this extent. She certainly wouldn't have gotten elected had she said this during the campaign:
"We're not trying to pick on them," said Assistant Senate Majority Leader Tarryl Clark, DFL-St. Cloud, adding that Minnesotans who are well-off have benefited from federal tax cuts. The proposed Senate tax increase would require those same people to "pay their fair share," she said.The "them" that she's referring to are small businessmen & women who'd get shoved into the highest income tax bracket in the nation. The truth is that they lost about 20 percent of their own caucus on this income tax increase. I'm not convinced that Pogemiller & Clark still seriously think that they'll prevail on this issue. In fact, I suspect they're trying to put a ton of lipstick on that pig after they read these quotes from small businesses:
The owner, Ed Gorman, said he couldn't think of any other way to pay the restaurant's property tax bill, nearly double last year's. "We work on budgets around here; it's not like going to the store and buying $1,000 worth of hamburger and selling it for a profit," he said.Pogemiller & Clark can't think that these extravagant tax increases are playing well with Minnesotans. Another group is weighing in on the issue of 'taxing the rich':
--------------------
"It was harsh and unexpected [and] wasn't budgeted for," said Thomas Loome of Loome Antiquarian Booksellers, a downtown Stillwater business that he said will close as a result.
The Senate tax bill, likely to be heard before the end of the week, will contain an increase in business property taxes of $222 million in FY 2008-2009 and $467 million in 2010-2011. It is clear that property tax relief is a priority for legislators, however, businesses should not pay for homeowners property tax relief. This priority should be funded out of the $2 billion surplus.Think of this as proof positive that the wheels are coming off the DFL's taxaholic bus. This is proof positive that the DFL is aggravating some major interest groups, groups that have the wherewithal to fight their tax increases & fund future opponents to these tax-mad DFLers.
BUSINESS PROPERTY TAX BURDENS ARE ALREADY THREE TIMES THAT OF HOMES!
Call your Senator today. Tell them not to penalize Minnesota 's job providers and slow the economic engine of this state by raising your business property taxes.
Both Pogemiller and Clark said they want to forego politics and work with Pawlenty on legislation because the governor has plenty of "good ideas."They don't believe that Gov. Pawlenty has "plenty of good ideas." If they think that Gov. Pawlenty has "plenty of good ideas", why are they totally defunding JOBZ? Pogemiller & Clark work on the Senate side of the Capitol but why aren't they working hard to get Gov. Pawlenty's education initiatives enacted? The House stripped the education bill of every Pawlenty recommendation. The House wouldn't adopt anything that Gov. Pawlenty put into his proposal.
The truth is that Pogemiller & Clark don't have a nonpolitical bone in their bodies. They should be ashamed of themselves for saying something that outrageous. Their quote is typical 'Pinnochiocrat-speak'. Frankly, Clark & Pogemiller are sometimes truth-challenged. This is one of those times. Here's one last quote from Pogemiller:
If Pawlenty does eventually veto the tax increase it would be "a failure of leadership on his part" and "Minnesota would suffer," said Pogemiller.Actually, vetoing these irresponsible tax increases is true leadership. Pogemiller's claims are simply a strained attempt to sell a very unpopular policy. My advice to Sens. Pogemiller & Clark is that they should think of this as just the start of a long, hard uphill slog against some major demographic groups. Just because Education Minnesota & the bureaucrats at MnDOT think that these ideas are great doesn't mean that working folks like them.
Don't take my word on it. Just listen to Ed Gorman & Thomas Loome.
Posted Tuesday, April 3, 2007 10:36 AM
No comments.
Media Alert
I'll be a guest on the BBC's 'World, Have Your Say' program again today. We'll be talking about Nancy Pelosi's trip to Syria.
Follow this link to listen to the programme.
UPDATE: Thanks to the good people at the BBC. The thing that they do best is foster an atmosphere of free-flowing, and sometimes free-wheeling, conversation. I look forward to the next time I'm asked to be a guest on 'World, Have Your Say'.
Posted Tuesday, April 3, 2007 2:06 PM
No comments.
Reid Playing Chicken With Bush
According to this AP article, Harry Reid is attempting to play chicken with President Bush on funding the war in Iraq. Anyone thinking that that's a fair fight isn't thinking straight. Here's Reid's official statement:
The President today asked the American people to trust him as he continues to follow the same failed strategy that has drawn our troops further into an intractable civil war. The President's policies have failed and his escalation endangers our troops and hurts our national security. Neither our troops nor the American people can afford this strategy any longer.Since Sen. Reid accuses President Bush of having a "strategy for failure", perhaps Sen. Reid can tell us how abandoning our allies is a strategy for success. Perhaps he could explain what criteria he used in determining that cutting off funding for the troops was "a strategy in Iraq worthy" of the military's sacrifice.
Democrats will send President Bush a bill that gives our troops the resources they need and a strategy in Iraq worthy of their sacrifices. If the President vetoes this bill he will have delayed funding for troops and kept in place his strategy for failure.
Furthermore, what criteria did Sen. Reid use in determining that the Petraeus Offensive "endangers our troops and hurts our national security." Does killing or capturing thousands of Mahdi Army troops hurt our national security? Or is it Sen. Reid's belief that Muqtada al-Sadr's self-imposed exile in Iran endanger our troops?
Reid's statement is the worst bit of spin I've heard since I read Minnesota Democrats say that Gov. Pawlenty had "lots of good ideas."
Harry Reid shouldn't attempt spin like this again, lest he end the Democrats' control of the Senate after just one term.
Finally, Reid's heading for a defeat if he persists. As we've noted repeatedly, Americans were upset that President Bush's strategies weren't working but they weren't pro defeat. They certainly won't tolerate our soldiers being deprived of what they need. In short, if Reid persists, he'll cause substantial damage to the Democrats for at least a decade. If he persists, it's likely that he'll drive Joe Lieberman into the Republican Party.
Posted Tuesday, April 3, 2007 8:53 PM
No comments.
A Spine ISN'T Detected
Based on this NY Times article, Democrats still haven't developed a spine in dealing with their anti-war base. Here's Harry Reid quote that proves they're still following the anti-war fanatics:
"We represent the American people's views on this failed war," Senator Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader told reporters in his home state of Nevada.Sen. Reid, I dare you to keep pushing the Democrats' defeatist agenda. You aren't even close to representing the American people's view of the Iraq War because they aren't defeatists. If the American people truly support this legislation, why is it that you won't even get a majority in the Senate the next time you take this up? Why is it that you couldn't even get a majority last time until you bought enough votes with $20 billion worth of pork?
Reid, Pelosi and Murtha talk about representing the American people but they don't. If they did, this would be the easiest vote they'd ever cast. They'd get 250 votes in the House and 60 votes in the Senate if this were a popular measure.
Among the signs of Democrats fighting back is an online petition begun by the presidential campaign of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, which expresses opposition to the veto that Mr. Bush has threatened for the bills that would attach timelines for withdrawal to the release of the war funds. "Mr. President, please work with us," Mrs. Clinton said in a statement today. "Don't veto the will of the American people."Mrs. Clinton, if you're so interested in working with President Bush, show some leadership by working out something that actually funds the troops without undercutting their mission. Mrs. Clinton, you voted to confirm Gen. Petraeus both in committee and in the full Senate. Now you've voted to not give him the tools he needs to complete the mission he detailed to you. How can you support the troops if you don't support their mission?
As for President Bush working with Democrats, it isn't his job to deal with Democrats if they're listening to their lunatic anti-war base. Just because Democrats have caved into their demands doesn't mean that he has to. In fact, he shouldn't do anything except provide the military with the tools to win the war.
Instead of caving to MoveCongress.org, it's time Democrats showed a spine by telling them that they're going to support the troops and the mission. Of course, I don't expect that to happen. Rather, that's what they should do.
Posted Wednesday, April 4, 2007 1:23 AM
No comments.
Taking It to the Airwaves
Tim Pawlenty isn't hiding from the upcoming budget battle. Instead, he's hitting back at the DFL by hitting the airwaves with a statewide commercial. This can't help but give the GOP a major morale boost. Follow this link to listen to Gov. Pawlenty's ad. Naturally, the DFL is screaming foul:
The advertising campaign came under quick criticism from DFLers, who said Pawlenty's claims of not raising taxes fail to mention $2 billion in property-tax increases, $1 billion more in fees and tuition increases of as much as 83 percent for the state's colleges during Pawlenty's first term.Had Roger Moe gotten elected in 2002, he undoubtedly increased spending while raising taxes. The difference is that Gov. Pawlenty held the line on spending in 2003.
"Rather than having another political campaign over the airwaves, we should sit down and govern together," said House Majority Leader Tony Sertich, DFL-Chisholm.That statement comes from the most underhanded politician in the state legislature, with the possible exception of Larry Pogemiller. The truth is that Sertich & his DFL friends in the House rejected every education proposal that Gov. Pawlenty submitted in his budget. Sertich & his DFL colleagues rejected Gov. Pawlenty's plans to not raise taxes. When he says that "we should sit down and govern together", what he's really saying is that Gov. Pawlenty should cave to the DFL's demands. That isn't what's going to happen.
Assistant Senate Majority Leader Tarryl Clark, DFL-St. Cloud, said the ad misleads listeners into believing DFL income-tax plans increase taxes on all Minnesotans. The income-tax proposals would increase taxes on a small percentage but reduce taxes for the vast majority, she said. Eighty-two percent of those who would pay more under the Senate DFL plan earn over $500,000 a year, Clark said.How should he talk directly to you, Sen. Clark? What should he say? That he'll agree to increasing taxes even though Minnesotans know that they're already overtaxed? Isn't it time that someone told Tarryl that we don't care that the income tax increase only directly affects the highest wage earners. T he DFL's version of property tax relief might not even provide relief:
"It's unfortunate and disappointing that he's trying to talk to legislators through paid ads instead of talking directly to us," she said.
House Tax Committee Chair Ann Lenczewski says that everyone would benefit from the House DFL plan. The property tax relief isn't guaranteed, though:Here's what the DFL's plan includes:
However, that relief will not come if money is not available to fund it.
- $223 million to increase refunds.
- $133 million to lower school levies.
- $83 million to increase aids paid to local governments.
- $104 million to fill gaps while the property tax system changes.
"I'm not trying to fool anybody," said Sen. Steve Murphy, DFL-Red Wing, sponsor of the measure that would increase funding for roads and transit by $1.5 billion a year once it was fully implemented in the next decade. "There's a lot of taxes in this bill."I've also noticed that Sen. Clark isn't talking about the DFL's plan to increase commercial property tax rates while they're increasing the tax rates that small businesses pay. Here's what the St. Cloud Chamber of Commerce thinks of the DFL's plan to increase commercial property taxes:
The Senate tax bill, likely to be heard before the end of the week, will contain an increase in business property taxes of $222 million in FY 2008-2009 and $467 million in 2010-2011. It is clear that property tax relief is a priority for legislators, however, businesses should not pay for homeowners property tax relief. This priority should be funded out of the $2 billion surplus.For Sen. Clark to complain that Gov. Pawlenty is being misleading about the proposed income tax increase is disheartening. She isn't talking about all the other taxes that the DFL is planning to increase.
BUSINESS PROPERTY TAX BURDENS ARE ALREADY THREE TIMES THAT OF HOMES!
Call your Senator today. Tell them not to penalize Minnesota 's job providers and slow the economic engine of this state by raising your business property taxes.
Last week, the DFL-majority Senate approved a nearly $1 billion income-tax increase that would create a top tax rate of 9.7 percent for the state's wealthiest 93,000 tax filers. House DFLers have a similar income-tax proposal pending, although their suggested top rate is only 9 percent and is designed to fall mostly on incomes above $1 million.In other words, Gov. Pawlenty is right in using every tool at his avail to tell Minnesotans that the DFL's tax increase agenda must stop. They're just complaining that he's got the super-sized megaphone & they don't. They're also complaining that he'll win this fight because the GOP's budget plans make far more sense than do the DFL's plans.
Both chambers also have approved a dime-a-gallon increase in the gas tax and authorized a metrowide sales-tax increase to fund roads and transit.
Let's remember that Gov. Pawlenty's budget calls for a 9+ percent spending increase while not raising taxes. The DFL's budget calls for increasing a wide range of taxes while calling for an almost 15 percent increase in spending.
Finally, I'd bet the proverbial ranch that the DFL can't win this property tax debate because of these quotes:
A cod dinner at Gorman's Restaurant in Lake Elmo costs $9.05, and a bacon cheeseburger $6.60, since prices rose 40 cents in February. The owner, Ed Gorman, said he couldn't think of any other way to pay the restaurant's property tax bill, nearly double last year's. "We work on budgets around here; it's not like going to the store and buying $1,000 worth of hamburger and selling it for a profit," he said.Anyone want to bet that these businessmen will forget that the DFL wants to increase commercial property taxes the next time they vote?
--------------------
The tax increases puzzle Gorman and other Washington County business owners, who find themselves facing, in some cases, dramatic increases in the assessed value of their commercial property. " It was harsh and unexpected [and] wasn't budgeted for," said Thomas Loome of Loome Antiquarian Booksellers, a downtown Stillwater business that he said will close as a result.
The DFL is now trapped into defending the indefensible because they didn't realize that paying off all their special interest lobbies was actually overstepping their 'mandate'. The truth is that they didn't have a mandate to increase taxes since they didn't run on a tax increase agenda.
Posted Wednesday, April 4, 2007 3:10 AM
Comment 1 by Leo Pusateri at 04-Apr-07 08:53 AM
When Republicans propose tax relief, it is tax relief. Period. A lower rate of taxation is imposed. People pay less in taxes.
When democrats propose "tax relief," it is sleight of hand--a ponzi scheme. They merely pickpocket from the few to appease a greater number than are pickpocketed.
Much like a group being stranded on a desert Island--one of the men in the group has a wife, the others don't. So to "equalize" their situation and to 'correct' the 'unfairness', the others vote to take the wife away from the one and "share" her amongst themselves.
A rather graphic analogy, to be sure, but a fitting one.
Transportation Slowdown
The Transportation bill that had been speeding its way through the DFL-dominated legislature has hit a slowdown. I wish it was because Democrats were thinking twice about the tax provisions but it isn't. According to this article, it's intentional. The DFL is hoping that public sentiment builds against Gov. Pawlenty. I wouldn't be holding my breath on that.
That means a compromise could still be a few weeks from reaching Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who has promised to veto a bill with tax increases. "We shouldn't be changing it to his liking at this point," said Rep. Bernie Lieder, a Crookston Democrat who authored the House bill.Lieder's quote is proof of what conservative bloggers have known since the start of this legislative session started: that the bipartisanship that Democrats have talked about was pure spin. Lieder & the rest of the DFL is about to find out that Gov. Pawlenty has the biggest megaphone & the most popular proposal in this fight.
While it may take only two or three conference committee meetings to reach agreement, Lieder said there is no sense of urgency to get a bill to Pawlenty. In fact, he said, waiting could help bolster support from Minnesotans. "I would presume the public would be getting on the governor a little bit," Lieder said.Rep. Lieder will soon find out that the public pressure will be directed at the DFL because of their tax increases. They might buy into a gas tax but they won't tolerate a gas tax, a wheelage fee & various other taxes.
Assistant Senate Majority Leader Tarryl Clark, DFL-St. Cloud, said senators are prepared to negotiate with the House and Pawlenty and will compromise within reason. "We're not going to want something that will not provide the kind of resources we need," Clark said.TRANSLATION: The DFL undoubtedly told the DOT that they'd pass a big spending increase last year in exchange for their help with the GOTV efforts. Now they're fulfilling that promise.
The DFL shouldn't expect Gov. Pawlenty to fold his cards on this fight. Instead, they should expect him to ratchet up the fight. The intensity will go up, not down. The other thing that I predict will happen is that the public will turn against all DFL spending proposals because they all have major tax increases. Before the legislature adjourns, Minnesotans will be breathing fire on Ms. Kelliher. Sen. Clark & Mssrs. Sertich & Pogemiller.
I wouldn't want to be in their shoes.
Posted Wednesday, April 4, 2007 9:27 AM
No comments.
British Hostages 'Pardoned'
According to this article, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad is 'pardoning' the British hostages taken 12 days ago:
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says he has pardoned and will free the 15 British sailors and marines detained in the Gulf last month. Ahmadinejad also gave medals of honor to the Iranian coast guards who intercepted the 15 British sailors and marines in the Gulf, saying Iran will never accept trespassing of its territorial waters.This most likely is the end of the hostage crisis but I'll remain skeptical until we can confirm that the British sailors have been released. That said, I'm thankful for this potentially good news.
"On behalf of the great Iranian people, I want to thank the Iranian Coast Guard who courageously defended and captured those who violated their territorial waters, the president told a press conference.
Posted Wednesday, April 4, 2007 9:48 AM
No comments.
Hillary's Downfall?
Dick Morris thinks that he's spotted Hillary's worst enemy. The bad news for Hillary is that her worst enemy isn't the still unsubstantiated Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. Morris insists that it's Hillary herself, which I totally agree with. Her approval ratings took a major dive when she unveiled her HillaryCare package. They only rebounded when she disappeared for almost a year. If you look back over her political history, the only times her popularity rose was when she wasn't in the spotlight. Her popularity takes a major hit every time that she speaks out.
Basically, voters are seeing that Hillary is a phony. With her posturing on Iraq, and her evasions of her previous positions in favor of the war, she sounds as contradictory and dissimulating as she is. To watch her try to explain her positions on the war is actually amusing. She voted for the war, but now claims she only wanted to strengthen the hands of the U.N. inspectors. She even supported it after she learned there were no WMDs, but now wants a total withdrawal of our troops, except for those she would leave there to keep the Iranians out and hunt down al Qaeda. She voted to cut off funds if the troops are not pulled out, but she doesn't really want to cut off the funding, etc., etc...I've always believed that a candidate has several thresholds to clear. The first threshold that candidates must clear is that of competence, which Hillary clears to a certain extent. The second threshold they have to clear to win a presidential election is personality. Hillary has all the charm & personality of a freshly diced onion. The reality is that competence gets you in the door but personality and likability is what puts most candidates over the top.
No politician looks their best when they are evasive, and Hillary looks worse than most.
The Clinton campaign clearly is dying to switch Clintons, and feature the charismatic Bill and downplay the candidate herself. But the more they put the former president out there, the more people realize that Hillary ain't Bill. In effect, voters are echoing Lloyd Bentsen's famous put-down of Quayle in their 1984 vice presidential debate, when Dan tried to invoke the image of John Kennedy in his own defense. Americans this year are saying, "We know Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton is a friend of ours. And Hillary, you're no Bill Clinton."It'd be a mistake to think that Hillary isn't smart enough to win the presidential election. That isn't her problem. Her biggest problem is that she'll be forever compared to Bill. That's bad news for her because she doesn't have any of his political instincts or any of his likability.
Bill Clinton has an infinite range of poses to strike on a public platform: charming, ingratiating, determined, empathetic, committed, sincere, humorous, angry, self-righteous. He can turn on whatever affect suits the purpose. But Hillary has only two gears: park and straight ahead. She knows nothing but direct, strident, shrill advocacy when a microphone is in her hand.Anyone who's paid attention knows how shrill she sounds when she's handed a microphone. Her speeches to friendly audiences are anything but pitch perfect. When she cuts loose, she sounds like a total nag. There isn't a hint of nuance or introspection or thoughtfulness. That won't suit her well in this television age. Style matters and she doesn't have any. She's as appealing as a coiled up rattlesnake.
Her ace in the hole is the vast infusion of new single women voters she will attract to the polling booths on Election Day, who are voting for the first time. All current polling excludes these women from its sample because they do not now say they are likely to vote, or aren't even registered yet. But, by the time Oprah beats the drums for Hillary, they will realize a woman is running and will turn out to support her candidacy.Even this cohort won't put Hillary over the top. There's an old rule of thumb that says that candidates who have to rely on record turnouts of young people can't win. That's essentially Hillary's only hope. Remember the 2004 Iowa Caucuses? Remember reading all about the young Deaniacs and how they'd carry him to victory? The media had him cruising to victory. When the history books are written, they'll record the fact that Dean's campaign came to a screeching halt that night because the youth vote wasn't reliable.
Don't be surprised if that's what happens with Hillary, too.
Posted Thursday, April 5, 2007 2:58 AM
Comment 1 by MariesTwoCents at 06-Apr-07 11:51 AM
Fred Thopmson!!!
I want Fred Thompson, Draft Fred Enough Said!
This Country doesnt want Hillary.
Pelosi's Blunder
The Washington Post excoriates Nancy Pelosi for trying to play Secretary of State in this editorial. This is a major embarrassment for Ms. Pelosi. Here's the heart of the problem:
After a meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in Damascus, Ms. Pelosi announced that she had delivered a message from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that "Israel was ready to engage in peace talks" with Syria. What's more, she added, Mr. Assad was ready to "resume the peace process" as well. Having announced this seeming diplomatic breakthrough, Ms. Pelosi suggested that her Kissingerian shuttle diplomacy was just getting started. "We expressed our interest in using our good offices in promoting peace between Israel and Syria," she said.In other words, Ms. Pelosi's 'messages' to the countries didn't exist. She made the stuff up. This is the essence of appeasement. Pelosi's attempt to bring the parties together is based on a flight of fantasy. The fact is that she's just destroyed her credibility. The verdict that I've reached is that she's a foreign policy disaster and that President Bush was right in criticizing her for making this trip. In fact, I'd call it a major 'I told you so moment' for President Bush.
Only one problem: The Israeli prime minister entrusted Ms. Pelosi with no such message. "What was communicated to the U.S. House Speaker does not contain any change in the policies of Israel," said a statement quickly issued by the prime minister's office. In fact, Mr. Olmert told Ms. Pelosi that "a number of Senate and House members who recently visited Damascus received the impression that despite the declarations of Bashar Assad, there is no change in the position of his country regarding a possible peace process with Israel." In other words, Ms. Pelosi not only misrepresented Israel's position but was virtually alone in failing to discern that Mr. Assad's words were mere propaganda.
Pelosi has just given us verifiable proof that the Democrats are the party of appeasement and that they shouldn't be entrusted with this country's foreign policy. In her attempt at diplomacy, Pelosi left principle behind. She told a whopper. She took Assad's propaganda at face value instead of questioning his words. In short, she's made a fool of herself by singlehandedly undermining the Middle East policy.
Mr. Bush said that thanks to the speaker's freelancing Mr. Assad was getting mixed messages from the United States. Ms. Pelosi responded by pointing out that Republican congressmen had visited Syria without drawing presidential censure. That's true enough, but those other congressmen didn't try to introduce a new U.S. diplomatic initiative in the Middle East. "We came in friendship, hope, and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace," Ms. Pelosi grandly declared.This isn't a good moment for Democrats. It exposes them as basing their foreign policy on sheer fantasy rather than on reality. Pelosi can't get a do over on this. She can't take a mulligan.
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.
She'll have to live with this embarrassment for the rest of her political career.
Posted Thursday, April 5, 2007 12:04 PM
Comment 1 by MariesTwoCents at 06-Apr-07 11:41 AM
Isnt this a mess?
Nancy Pelosi has even violated the Logan Act out of this whole ordeal, but I doubt anyone will pursue it.
