{"id":300,"date":"2008-09-29T17:22:50","date_gmt":"2008-09-30T00:22:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.harmonicminer.com\/wordpress\/2008\/09\/29\/house-of-ill-repute-meet-madame-pelosi\/"},"modified":"2008-09-30T08:06:49","modified_gmt":"2008-09-30T15:06:49","slug":"house-of-ill-repute-meet-madame-pelosi","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.harmonicminer.com\/wordpress\/2008\/09\/29\/house-of-ill-repute-meet-madame-pelosi\/","title":{"rendered":"House of Ill Repute: Meet Madame Pelosi"},"content":{"rendered":"

Townhall.com::Blog<\/a><\/p>\n

Elections have consequences, and one of those is that Pelosi bears responsibility for the financial bill’s defeat<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Read it all<\/a>.<\/p>\n

And then there’s this extra commentary.<\/a><\/p>\n

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, the number two House Democrat in authority (behind only Speaker Nancy Pelosi), in defending his party from responsibility for the defeat of the financial stability bill today, delivered the all-time lamest excuse I’ve ever heard (my transcription from video on the PBS NewsHour; boldface mine):<\/p>\n

“No Democrat that we could get to vote for the bill didn’t vote for the bill.”<\/p>\n

Behind that tortured double-negative is a tautology. This is empty double-talk, delivered by the dishonest, intended for the gullible.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

More here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

UPDATE following here:<\/p>\n


\nUPDATE:\u00a0 Please understand.\u00a0 People for whom I have enormous respect say the bailout is critically necessary<\/a>, and should have been done today, even with the imperfections in the bill that the House rejected<\/a>.\u00a0 But, others, for whom I hold similar regard, say it isn’t so critical<\/a>, and that the form in which it was considered<\/a> today isn’t acceptable.\u00a0 And a few whose insight I have prized say it doesn’t have to be done at all<\/a>, the markets will recover, and liquidity will gradually return.\u00a0 It may well be that the first group is correct: I simply don’t know enough to be able to judge it.\u00a0 I don’t have a week to spare reading full-time to educate myself about it.<\/p>\n

Here is what I CAN judge, however:\u00a0 Nancy Pelosi, and the Democrats in general, do not ACT as if it is a crisis that demands instant action, despite the dire rhetoric.\u00a0 Does ANYONE believe she couldn’t have gotten vote switches from at least 12 of the 95 House Democrats who voted against it today?\u00a0 We all know that San Fran Nan is absolutely relentless in enforcing party discipline for anything she deems critical.\u00a0 Out of the 95 NO votes from Democrats, she could surely have pressured 12 into switching, by simply doing a nose count before the vote, and doing what was necessary in the way of carrots and sticks, in the time honored approach of all party leaders.<\/p>\n

Simply, MADAME Pelosi didn’t do what she could have to make the vote come out as she pretends to have wished.\u00a0 She can’t pretend surprise.\u00a0 It was pretty clear how many Democrats were going to vote, yet she did nothing to sway them, pressure them, or engage in a little old fashioned horse trading.<\/p>\n

What follows from this?<\/p>\n

Either:<\/p>\n

1)\u00a0 Pelosi and the Democrats don’t really believe the crisis is that bad, and are just posturing to affect the election.<\/p>\n

or<\/p>\n

2)\u00a0 Pelosi and the Democrats DO believe the situation is critical, but don’t want to actually solve it, thus preserving their ability to blame Bush and the Republicans for whatever happens (with the willing connivance of the major media), and to deflect any appearance John McCain may have of successful statesmanship in the matter.<\/p>\n

or<\/p>\n

3)\u00a0 Pelosi and the Democrats believe the situation is serious, but not quite critical, and so they choose to stall actually solving it until after the election, thus preserving it as an issue they can campaign on against the evil Bush and rascally Republicans.\u00a0 In this case, they don’t mind causing some pain for the markets and business and homeowners, because they plan to heroically step in at the last minute and “solve” the crisis with swift action AFTER they’ve used the issue to sway the election.<\/p>\n

or<\/p>\n

4)\u00a0 Pelosi and the Democrats think the situation is critical, but just thought they could get away with strong-arming the Republicans, all the while denouncing them, and still get the outcome of a bailout, thus allowing their own members to posture for local districts not in favor of the bailout.\u00a0 I think of this as the “dumb as a door” option.<\/p>\n

Maybe I have a blindspot:\u00a0 but I can think of no credible explanation for Pelosi’s behavior in this that is not a reflection of sheer irresponsibility, or stupidity, or both<\/a>.<\/p>\n

UPDATE:\u00a0 Thomas Sowell’s usual clarity here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Share this:<\/h3>