Time for Nancy Pelosi to go away?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Some people just don't know when to call it quits - and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is looking like one of them.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/11/08/art.pelosi.jpg caption=""]
Despite her party being crushed in last week's midterm elections - despite her party losing control of the House of Representatives - Pelosi wants to stay on as the Democrats' minority leader in the House.
But a growing number of Democrats are having none of it.
Fox News is reporting a group of defeated Democrats has written a letter urging Pelosi to step aside.
The draft letter suggests that with Pelosi in charge, "the hangover of 2010 stands no chance of subsiding."
Other Democratic House members have said they will vote against Pelosi if she insists on running for minority leader.
The Republicans couldn't be happier. They're positively giddy at the prospect of Democrats keeping Pelosi as their leader in the House. It's generally agreed that Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid drove the Democrats off the cliff.
An analysis of TV ads shows more money was spent and more commercials were run against Nancy Pelosi in the midterms than against any other congressional leader since Newt Gingrich. More than $65 million was spent on more than 161,000 ads targeting Pelosi.
Is she oblivious to this?
A poll taken right before the midterms showed Pelosi with an anemic 26 favorable rating and a 53 percent unfavorable rating.
Here’s my question to you: Isn't it time for Nancy Pelosi to just go away?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Should Pelosi be allowed to push health care through House without a vote?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Just when you think you've seen it all in Washington... along comes something like this:
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/03/16/art.pelosi.jpg caption="House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may call for a vote on a rule that would simply 'deem' the Senate health care bill passed."]
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may try to pass the controversial health care reform bill without making members vote on it. Unbelievable.
Pelosi says she might use a procedural tactic where the House will vote on the package of fixes to the Senate bill... and then that vote would signify that lawmakers "deem" the health care bill to be passed.
Politically speaking, this is beyond sleazy. It's meant to protect Democrats - especially those up for re-election in November - from having to make a tough vote. Pelosi says of this process, "I like it... because people don't have to vote on the Senate bill." In Nancy Pelosi's world, accountability is a dirty word.
The Senate bill, of course, contains many provisions that are unpopular among some House Democrats - including language on abortion funding and taxes on high-cost insurance plans.
This tactic has been used in the past - but never for something as big and important as the nearly $900 billion health care reform bill.
Republicans are jumping all over this - and rightfully so. They're painting it as a way for Democrats to avoid taking responsibility. Some even suggest it's unconstitutional.
Meanwhile President Obama is campaigning relentlessly - calling on lawmakers to pass health care reform, "I want some courage. I want us to do the right thing."
The irony here is if Nancy Pelosi gets her way, it won't take much courage at all on the part of our so-called representatives.
Here’s my question to you: Should Nancy Pelosi be allowed to push health care reform through the House without a vote?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Why does House Speaker Pelosi still defend Rep. Rangel?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says Congressman Charlie Rangel's actions don't pass the "smell test"... yet she refuses to force him out as chairman of the powerful ways and means committee.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/03/01/art.rangel.pelosi.jpg caption="Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi."]
However the pressure is mounting. Some Democrats are now joining with Republicans in calling for the New York congressman to be removed. The New York Times says the "arrogance" Rangel showed after the ethics committee ruling gives one more reason for Pelosi to "stop protecting him."
Pelosi acknowledges that "what Mr. Rangel has been admonished for is not good"... but that he didn't "jeopardize our country in any way." Pelosi says she's waiting for the ethics committee to finish its investigation before she makes any decisions.
This is the same Nancy Pelosi who vowed to "drain the swamp" in Washington when she became speaker; and the same Nancy Pelosi who years ago called on Republicans to remove the "ethically unfit" Tom Delay as their majority leader.
The ethics committee admonished Rangel for taking two corporate-sponsored trips to the Caribbean. And there's a laundry list of other issues they're investigating that involve Rangel's personal finances - like not reporting hundreds of thousands of dollars on income and assets... They're also looking into Rangel's fundraising efforts, his use of several, rent-stabilized Harlem apartments, and his failure to pay taxes on a vacation home in the Dominican Republic.
Here’s my question to you: Why does House Speaker Nancy Pelosi continue to defend Rep. Charlie Rangel?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Should Pelosi have to explain her trip to Copenhagen?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Hundreds of thousands of dollars.
That's how much it cost for a delegation of 59 people - led by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi along with members of Congress, staff and in some cases spouses and kids - to go to Copenhagen, site of the Climate Summit, just before Christmas.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/01/26/art.pelosi.copenhagen.jpg caption="House Speaker Pelosi attends a press conference at the Copenhagen Climate Summit."]
CBS News reports that for 21 Congressmen, food and rooms for two nights cost $4,400; and the Total hotel bill - including meeting rooms - was more than $400,000.
Pelosi used two military jets for herself and her party at a cost of more than $100,000 dollars in flight time.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money. This has nothing to do with the Obama administration officials who went to Denmark to actually attend the summit.
Pelosi filed the required expense report - but so far has failed to explain why it was necessary for her and her colleagues to make the trip to Copenhagen in the first place. Her arrogance is absolutely breathtaking. As for the high hotel charges, Pelosi's office says those who stayed two nights were charged a six-night minimum at the five-star Marriott. Information that was probably available before Pelosi and the freeloaders made their vacation plans.
Note to the House Speaker: We have skyrocketing deficits and national debt in this country. The President is talking about reigning in discretionary spending. I wonder if that would have included this junket by Pelosi and her colleagues. I would be curious to know where Nancy Pelosi gets her sense of entitlement to simply blow hundreds of thousands of dollars of our money at Christmas time so she and her colleagues can take a little trip to Copenhagen.
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Would Obama be better off with congressional leaders other than Reid & Pelosi?
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi at a news conference in which the Democratic leaders discussed the first 100 days of the Obama Administration and their legislative accomplishments. (PHOTO CREDIT: CHIP SOMODEVILLA/GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
President Obama has had a lot of success early in his term. But it could be even better.
Democrats control the House, and if Al Franken becomes the 60th Democratic senator, they will have a fillibuster-proof majority there. But as usual, when it comes to the Democrats, all is not well. And the problem starts with the leadership in Congress.
A new CNN/Opinion Research corporation poll shows House Speaker Nancy Pelosi with only a 39 percent approval rating - 48 percent think she's doing a terrible job.
And Pelosi is not doing herself any favors by the way she's handled the torture debate. There's reason to believe Pelosi knew about waterboarding as early as 2002 but she refuses to admit it. Instead she accuses the CIA of lying to Congress.
A Mason Dixon poll taken in Nevada for the Las Vegas Review-Journal shows Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's approval rating is even worse: A meager 38 percent - about half of the state's voters have a negative view of Reid. In fact, there's a question whether he'll even be re-elected. 45 percent of those polled say they'll definitely vote for another candidate in 2010.
Here’s my question to you: Would President Obama be better off with congressional leaders other than Harry Reid & Nancy Pelosi?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Time for Pelsoi to step down as House Speaker?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The pressure is mounting on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi when it comes to the debate over torture - what she knew and when she knew it. Top Republicans are calling on the Speaker to come clean about all this and either apologize or possibly lose her leadership post.
Newt Gingrich says Pelosi has "defamed everyone" in the intelligence community by claiming they misled her. He says he can't see how Pelosi can serve as speaker if it turns out she lied about national security to Congress and to the whole country.
House Minority Leader John Boehner says that if Pelosi is accusing the CIA of lying or misleading Congress, she could come forward with the evidence so these officials can be prosecuted. If not, Boehner says she should apologize to the intelligence community.
CIA Director Leon Panetta weighed in on all this last week and challenged Pelosi - saying it's not the agency's "policy or practice to mislead Congress. That is against our laws and our values."
Gingrich suggests that Panetta's comments put "strong, clear pressure" on the House to start a formal investigation of the speaker - who is third in line to be president.
Meanwhile, Pelosi responded to Panetta by shifting her criticism from the CIA to the Bush administration. She also continues to insist she was briefed on interrogation techniques only once and that she was told the techniques weren't being used.
But critics say Pelosi was fully briefed on waterboarding in 2002 and 2003.
Here’s my question to you: Is it time for Nancy Pelsoi to step down as Speaker of the House?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Do you believe Nancy Pelosi or CIA on waterboarding?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Nancy Pelosi seems to have a new story every day when it comes to the debate over torture. In fact, more focus is now on Pelosi than on the Bush administration, which authorized the use of waterboarding in the first place.
Cafferty: House Speaker Pelosi's story keeps changing regarding what she knew about so-called enhanced interrogation techniques.
The Speaker of the House is now claiming that the CIA misled her during a September 2002 briefing by telling her waterboarding hadn't been used yet on detainees. She says the CIA briefers gave her inaccurate and incomplete information when asked if they lied to her - Pelosi nodded her head 'yes'.
That's a pretty serious accusation. The CIA says: "It is not the policy of this agency to mislead the United States Congress." A former senior intelligence official says it's inconceivable that the CIA would not have talked about interrogation methods already being used.
Republicans insist that Pelosi and other Democrats knew waterboarding was being used all along, but said nothing. House Minority Leader John Boehner says Pelosi's comments "continue to raise more questions than provide answers." Rep. Peter Hoekstra calls Pelosi's account: "Version 5.0 from Nancy on what happened" in that 2002 meeting.
Meanwhile Pelosi finally admitted she learned waterboarding was being used in 2003, but says she wasn't personally briefed on it at the time.
Here’s my question to you: When it comes to waterboarding, whom do you believe: Nancy Pelosi or the CIA?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Do you believe Pelosi when she says she wasn't told about torturing prisoners?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
There's a new chapter in the saga over who knew what - and when they knew it - when it comes to the ongoing torture debate. The Obama administration just released records that show House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was briefed in September 2002 about the enhanced interrogation techniques that had been employed against al Qaeda prisoners. Past tense - had been.
House Speaker Pelosi maintains she was not told that so-called enhanced interrogation techniques were used.
The documents don't list the specific methods covered during that briefing. However, during the preceding month, the CIA apparently waterboarded Abu Zubaydah at least 83 times.
This doesn't exactly match what Pelosi has been telling us. Pelosi has previously acknowledged being briefed on the CIA's program, but says she only knew about methods they were considering - not about ones they actually used.
As recently as a week ago, Nancy Pelosi said: "We were not - I repeat were not - told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used."
With the release of these new records, Pelosi came out with a carefully worded statement: That she had been briefed only once; she was told the techniques were legal but that waterboarding had not yet been used.
Republicans have been accusing Democrats, like Pelosi, of hypocrisy for getting all outraged about torturing terror suspects - and calling for investigations. They say the Democrats have known about it for years and are only now causing a row because suddenly the information was made public.
Former CIA director and Former Republican Congressman Porter Goss describes these lawmakers' claims as "a disturbing epidemic of amnesia."
Here’s my question to you: Do you believe Nancy Pelosi when she says she was never told about torturing prisoners?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Nancy Pelosi: Enforcing some immigration laws "un-American"
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Nancy Pelosi doesn't think enforcing some of our immigration laws is a good idea. I guess we don't need the Justice Department; just ask Pelosi what laws she thinks we should enforce.
Is it is un-American to enforce our immigration laws?
The House Speaker was condemning raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents at an immigration event in San Francisco last weekend. Here's what she said: "Who in our country would not want to change a policy of kicking in doors in the middle of the night and sending a parent away from their families? It must be stopped… What value system is that? I think it's un-American. I think it's un-American."
In case you had trouble understanding her, Nancy Pelosi was telling a largely Hispanic audience that enforcing America's immigration laws is un-American. This is called pandering.
Yesterday Pelosi said she was standing by her statement. She added that we have to enforce our laws, control our borders, protect our workers and create a path to legalization for those who aren't fully documented; but repeated that doesn't mean kicking in doors in the middle of the night. Pelosi said what we really need is comprehensive immigration reform.
Here's my question to you: Nancy Pelosi says enforcing our immigration laws is "un-American." Is she right?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Would Pres. Obama’s life be easier without Pelosi as House Speaker?
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been the subject of criticism from Republicans and some Democrats. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
From CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Politico calls it the love affair that wasn't meant to be. They are talking about President Obama and Congressional Republicans.
Republicans are still whining about being shut out of the crafting of the stimulus bill. Just like they shut the Democrats out when they controlled Congress.
The President has been trying to smooth things over behind closed doors and even said late yesterday that he'd be willing to make changes in order to address some Republican concerns. For one thing he told Democrats to remove the money for contraception that was part of the package, which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended just the day before.
The GOP has been careful not to criticize the new President who everybody is in love with at the moment. Perhaps they know where to draw the line. But that doesn't mean they can't complain about Pelosi, and they are. This is not first time Madame Speaker has been the subject of criticism, and not just from Republicans. Some in her own party are less than thrilled with her. There is a quality about Nancy Pelosi that, for want of a better word, is just plain annoying.
Here’s my question to you: Would President Obama's life be easier without Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments