Nancy Pelosi Gets the Crawford Treatment.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/washington/13pelosi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
San Francisco, meet Crawford, Tex.
Outside Nancy Pelosi’s home, an antiwar encampment features a big papier-mâché statue of Gandhi. Protesters say they will remain there until a coming Congressional vote on supplemental Iraq war financing.
Using a tactic usually trained on the home turf of President Bush, a group of protesters from Code Pink, a women’s antiwar group, have camped in front of the home of Speaker Nancy Pelosi here, bringing their message — and mattresses — to the doorstep of the nation’s highest-ranking Democrat.
The protest, which began Sunday afternoon with dozens of demonstrators, is just Code Pink’s latest effort to engage Ms. Pelosi, who the group feels has not gone far enough or fast enough to get the troops home from Iraq.
“The point is to keep showing our dissatisfaction,” said Toby Blome, 51, a protest organizer who sported a frilly pink apron and pink skirt. “It’s hard to do on our own, but I know I speak for millions of people.”
Posted by Christopher at March 14, 2007 03:56 AMChristopher, that's the kind of protest we need to happen across America. Camp out on their damn doorsteps until our soldiers come home. Good for Toby.
Posted by Judith at March 14, 2007 06:18 AMJudith,
Exactly. Change is possible when it begins at a grassroots level and spreads from there.
I'm so weary of hearing people say there's nothing we can do; Bush is president; our hands are tied; blah, blah, blah.
Posted by Christopher at March 14, 2007 06:44 AMDems worried about upsetting Israel
Oooops--looks like they did anyhow--bowing and scraping wasn't enough
News report:
Pelosi is booed at AIPAC
By Ian Swanson
March 14, 2007
Members of the preeminent pro-Israel lobbying group booed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) yesterday after she said that the Iraq war has been a failure on several scores.
The boos, mixed with polite applause, contrasted starkly with the reception House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) received minutes earlier. Most of the crowd of 5,000 to 6,000 stood and loudly applauded Boehner when he said the U.S. had no choice but to win in Iraq.
Posted by Don Bacon at March 14, 2007 07:36 AMDon - LMAO! That's a riot.
Posted by Christopher at March 14, 2007 07:53 AM"The political appointees were too loyal to the law and the public, not loyal enough to the president. So they got purged. And the message from Gonzales today is, so what." Quote from Bill Scher.
Posted by at March 14, 2007 08:58 AMDon, and there you have it. Israel running our policies and politicians.
Posted by Judith at March 14, 2007 09:00 AMOooops--looks like they did anyhow--bowing and scraping wasn't enough
Poor Princess Sparkel Pelosi. She is going to have to work doubly hard to fuck America and keep AIPAC happy. Or she could work to pass legislation disallowing any lobby or PAC that operates in support of a foreign government from offering anything more than advice to an elected official in America. No cash donations allowed.
Posted by phidipides at March 14, 2007 09:13 AMDon Bacon
Do you think Scalia has ever read Amendment IX? It appears he hasn't read IV and XIV,Section 1.
As phid describes AIPAC is actually the agent of a foreign power and their contributions to politicians should be disallowed.
AIPAC employees have been charged with espionage. I haven't kept up with it--probably Gonzales took care of it.
This is serious, as most of you know and appreciate. The latest event is the esteemed Senator Obama drinking the Zionist Koolaid (go to the AIPAC website). We've got to keep hitting on this.
Why was Pelosi in front of AIPAC in the first place? Okay, we know why. Pelosi won't talk to Code Pink ladies sleeping on her lawn but she'll talk to Zionist criminals. Money talks and BS walks, every time.
"The only difference between whores and politicians is that politicians make more money."--Edward Abbey
DANGER--POLITICIANS AT WORK--USE CAUTION
JohnT,
I appreciate your interest in the Constitution and your keying in on Amendment IX, and the other amendments.
I'm not a constitutional scholar, just a layman.
There are several schools of Constitutionalists, with different takes on the document. Scalia claims to take an "originalist" view of the Constitution, disputing the concept that it is a "living document" subject to change in interpretation as time passes. Thus I assume that he has read the passages you reference, and that he professes to enforce them as a Supreme Court justice. Do you have evidence to the contrary?