Why does the the right hate Nancy Pelosi?

[Nicholas Carey]

liz chaney seems to be smart, competent and ethical.

Only by comparison with the real whackos like MTG and Boebert. And the entire rest of the party except Kinzinger.

One big difference -- Liz Cheney actually seems to have functional belief system. And she appears to actually believe in democracy.

She's hard right, but she appears to be a functional adult, unlike MTG, Boebert, McConnell, etc.

[Joe (SoCal)]

Uh... Trump was impeached a second time. You seem to share the all-too-common confusion regarding impeachment vs. conviction.

Tom

Sorry lets get technical

The house impeaches, the Senate convicts.

Liz Cheney a solid ‘no’ vote on impeaching Trump the first time, but I believe she voted to impeach him the second time.
My bad.

[Canoeyawl]

"Hate is Fear"

[John Smith]

i would add that, as a group, male liberals are not more chivalrous than conservative males. plenty of ugliness directed at right wing females, using whatever tool is available, which is frequently a sexist pejorative.

There is a contrast between Pelosi and right wing females, not a comparison. She's not crazy. She's effective.

[Dikhaut]

^
She is way too effective a Democratic Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Yes. Same reason the lefties hate Mitch McConnell. He’s good at what he does and they don’t share his goals.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dikhaut]

Aren't you the guy that said that Walker and Warnock are the same?

Are water and rocks the same to you?

I never said Walker and Warnock were the same. I said they are both poor candidates and they would both vote their party’s line 100% of the time. Warnock has been in office for 2 years and he’s batting 1.000 on this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paul Pless]

Warnock has been in office for 2 years and he’s batting 1.000 on this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

you say this as if its a bad thing

[sandtown]

Yes. Same reason the lefties hate Mitch McConnell. k

Bull Pucky Both Sidesism fractal wrongness . . . .

The progressives to not weaponize hate and threats . .

Quote from John Boehner . .

"Congratulations Speaker Pelosi on a remarkable, historic run of service in the People's House. We were able to disagree without being disagreeable. You've been unfailingly gracious to me and my family."

Nowadays your side tries to kill her at the Capitol, jokes about an assassination attempt on her husband, and calls her an "animal".

The "same" ??? Hardly

[skuthorp]

She would have made a good President…………………….., but obviously had more sense.

It's a sh** of a job, it's a wonder you get any decent ones at all.

[Dikhaut]

Bull Pucky Both Sidesism fractal wrongness . . . .

The progressives to not weaponize hate and threats . .

Quote from John Boehner . .

"Congratulations Speaker Pelosi on a remarkable, historic run of service in the People's House. We were able to disagree without being disagreeable. You've been unfailingly gracious to me and my family."

Nowadays your side tries to kill her at the Capitol, jokes about an assassination attempt on her husband, and calls her an "animal".

The "same" ??? Hardly

My side? I don’t have a side. But did you forget about the guy from your side who shot up the Congressional softball game?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bamamick]

I am nowhere near 'the right' and I have never cared for her, or any of the long-term politicians, to be honest. I guess We the People are never going to get the term limits that are so desperately needed to keep 'these people' from harnessing too much power in these spots.

To me, and I know very little about it all, it just seems that she wore out her welcome. I didn't elect her to anything, yet she is always in front of a camera telling me the way things will be. McConnell is the same. I honestly felt that when Biden was elected it would have been a good idea for her to step away, and it probably would have been, but I guess the Democrats felt like they needed a strong voice until they figured out if we had a strong president?

This whole thing is fatiguing, but I guess it has to be. If Biden is the nominee in 2024 he will most likely lose, and it'll be the Orange Genius or DeSantis running the show, and then the Democrats WILL most certainly need a strong voice, to try and protect what they can of our fragile democracy.

Mickey Lake

[John Smith]

Bull Pucky Both Sidesism fractal wrongness . . . .

The progressives to not weaponize hate and threats . .

Quote from John Boehner . .

"Congratulations Speaker Pelosi on a remarkable, historic run of service in the People's House. We were able to disagree without being disagreeable. You've been unfailingly gracious to me and my family."

Nowadays your side tries to kill her at the Capitol, jokes about an assassination attempt on her husband, and calls her an "animal".

The "same" ??? Hardly

Am I the only one who remembers the Hastert (?) rule? Boehner and Ryan only brought to the floor bills the Republicans wanted brought to the floor. Bills that would have passed never got a full vote.

Pelosi is a woman who did the job of Speaker quite well. Many of those on the right, the ones who want to pass laws on abortion, seem to not like women succeeding.

[John Smith]

I am nowhere near 'the right' and I have never cared for her, or any of the long-term politicians, to be honest. I guess We the People are never going to get the term limits that are so desperately needed to keep 'these people' from harnessing too much power in these spots.

To me, and I know very little about it all, it just seems that she wore out her welcome. I didn't elect her to anything, yet she is always in front of a camera telling me the way things will be. McConnell is the same. I honestly felt that when Biden was elected it would have been a good idea for her to step away, and it probably would have been, but I guess the Democrats felt like they needed a strong voice until they figured out if we had a strong president?

This whole thing is fatiguing, but I guess it has to be. If Biden is the nominee in 2024 he will most likely lose, and it'll be the Orange Genius or DeSantis running the show, and then the Democrats WILL most certainly need a strong voice, to try and protect what they can of our fragile democracy.

Mickey Lake

I believe that if we get the lies out of politics, by politicians and 'news', elections would be term limits when needed.

[sandtown]

My side? I don’t have a side. But did you forget about the guy from your side who shot up the Congressional softball game?

Did Nancy or any other prominent Dem paint that Congresscritter as the personification of evil, or joke about the attack ??

Hell no

Fact is that the US Reich has weaponized political threats and violence.

[sandtown]

I believe that if we get the lies out of politics, by politicians and 'news', elections would be term limits when needed.

All the US has to do to clean up its politics is look around the planet at (mostly parliamentary) countries that have mostly solved problems with democracy.

The real answer is to tightly regulate money (including foreign money), have free TV/radio for candidates, and outlaw gerrymandering.

[CWSmith]

I'm going to take back something I said. I said that the leadership of the right does not hate Pelosi and that it's just a tactic to motivate the base.

When I look at the face of Marjorie Taylor Greene or Lauren Boebert, I see hatred and rage. I have no idea where it comes from, but I do believe they are poisonous.

Most are smart enough to know that it is a game and they lack any trace of sincerity, but those two and a few others buy into all of it.

[Dikhaut]

I believe that if we get the lies out of politics, by politicians and 'news', elections would be term limits when needed.

Did you happen to see Biden’s recent Bottomless Pinocchio award? Straight from the notorious right wing Washington Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...recent-gaffes/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[David G]

I am nowhere near 'the right' and I have never cared for her, or any of the long-term politicians, to be honest. I guess We the People are never going to get the term limits that are so desperately needed to keep 'these people' from harnessing too much power in these spots.

To me, and I know very little about it all, it just seems that she wore out her welcome. I didn't elect her to anything, yet she is always in front of a camera telling me the way things will be. McConnell is the same. I honestly felt that when Biden was elected it would have been a good idea for her to step away, and it probably would have been, but I guess the Democrats felt like they needed a strong voice until they figured out if we had a strong president?

This whole thing is fatiguing, but I guess it has to be. If Biden is the nominee in 2024 he will most likely lose, and it'll be the Orange Genius or DeSantis running the show, and then the Democrats WILL most certainly need a strong voice, to try and protect what they can of our fragile democracy.

Mickey Lake

There certainly are issues re. our elected 'leaders'.

Einstein once said, "When the solution is simple, God is answering." And there are times when he might be correct. Whether it's god, or our own intuition/genius.

But no matter which issue you choose, Term Limits are the wrong answer. Tempting, I understand. But they fit into a different adage. I think it may have been from H.L. Mencken: Every complex problem has a simple solution... that doesn't work.

So, why not Term Limits? I've answered that question before, but here it goes again --

I have watched up close how government works. And there are certainly dangers to people becoming too entrenched... and benefits to new blood. But, for the most part, those dangers and benefits do not outweigh the downside.

What's the downside?

Legislators, even the most hardworking, and those with large competent staffs, can't know everything about everything. And yet, they are called upon to make judgements and develop/approve legislation about an amazingly wide array of topics.

So what do they do? They lean on their staffs, of course. They know their capabilities, and trust their loyalties, and honesty. But that's not enough. They also have to lean on the technical expertise of various agencies involved. All of which have their own perspectives, momentum, agendas, and levels of integrity and competence. And they rely on lobbyists. From Public Interest lobbyists (paid and unpaid), all the way to highly paid industry lobbyists. ALL of whom can be helpful, and all of whom have their own agendas. All Of Which... takes time for a legislator to get straight. Who can be trusted, and on what issues? Who will tell you the whole story, or something close to it? Who are the venal, ruthless, spin-doctors? Who are the ambitious back-stabbers?

A good staff, especially a savvy experienced chief-of-staff, can help. But it's really NOT until the legislator develops their own sense of things that they really start to realize whatever potential they have as a leader.

And that takes years. Yes... years. And the best of them continue to improve decade after decade.

And until they do - the lobbyists, the agencies, and even their own staffs, have too much influence. WAY too much influence at times, and in critical ways. The elected official is too easily confused, manipulated, or misled. I've been a bit of an activist since 1966. My view of the various governing bodies has ranged during that time from 'cursory/distant' to 'full-tilt/fully engaged'. And during that time... I've watched this pattern play out again and again. No matter the source of the turnover - aging, election loss, etc. Turnover is unavoidable, of course. But it is costly. I can not advocate deliberately building it into the system as a regular feature.

It's just not worth the tradeoff.

[sandtown]

A good staff, especially a savvy experienced chief-of-staff, can help. But it's really NOT until the legislator develops their own sense of things that they really start to realize whatever potential they have as a leader.

And that takes years. Yes... years. And the best of them continue to improve decade after decade. .

Correct, countries and US states with rigid term limits have found themselves governed by lobbyists.

The US right continuously puts forward term limits as a distraction whenever the topic of money limits comes up.

They fear the latter, not the former.

[Kevin T]

Hmmm... I wonder which president she didn't enjoy working with?

Tom

The one that shall remain nameless unless hung with a name of derision and contempt like the Cheato Jebezus, or Fraudo Baggins, or The Court Jester of Scam-a-lot.

[John Smith]

All the US has to do to clean up its politics is look around the planet at (mostly parliamentary) countries that have mostly solved problems with democracy.

The real answer is to tightly regulate money (including foreign money), have free TV/radio for candidates, and outlaw gerrymandering.

Can you do any of that as long as lies are accepted as free speech?

[John Smith]

Did you happen to see Biden’s recent Bottomless Pinocchio award? Straight from the notorious right wing Washington Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...recent-gaffes/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's not a 'party' thing. Lies are lies, and we deserve better.

[sandtown]

Can you do any of that as long as lies are accepted as free speech?

One would hate to mess with the First Amend,

so existing defamation, libel and slander laws will have to do.

I really hope that Dominion bankrupts those lying liars at FAUX.

And maybe bring back the Fairness Doctrine

[WI-Tom]

Correct, countries and US states with rigid term limits have found themselves governed by lobbyists.

The US right continuously puts forward term limits as a distraction whenever the topic of money limits comes up.

They fear the latter, not the former.

I worry far more about regulatory capture than term limits for legislators, which are probably a bad idea as David G describes.

Tom

[David G]

I worry far more about regulatory capture than term limits for legislators, which are probably a bad idea as David G describes.

Tom

Yes, there are a lot of ways to address the very real issues. Ending dark money. Outlawing people taking jobs in the industries they've regulated for X # of years. Public funding of all campaigns. Limiting private donations for strictly. Etc. Etc.

[robm]

A hypothesis: The core of the US right wing is evangelical Christians (For convenience, I'll lump the most conservative Catholics in with them; not quite accurate, but close enough.) There are a LOT of them, partially in the ex-Confederacy and rural areas (sound familiar?) Among the reactionary social ideas they believe in is the deep-down idea that men should be in charge of things, and that a powerful woman, with power in her own right and her own ideas, is somehow illegitimate, unnatural, against God's order, actually evil. They didn't like Obama or Bill Clinton, Biden they disagree with, but the actual hate and venom gets directed toward women. Why do you think Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a not-terribly-influential Representative from New York City, gets so much crap? Being female tends to turn their disagreement into loathing.

+1. They hate competent women.

[Durnik]

I am nowhere near 'the right' and I have never cared for her, or any of the long-term politicians, to be honest. I guess We the People are never going to get the term limits that are so desperately needed to keep 'these people' from harnessing too much power in these spots.

To me, and I know very little about it all, it just seems that she wore out her welcome. I didn't elect her to anything, yet she is always in front of a camera telling me the way things will be. McConnell is the same. I honestly felt that when Biden was elected it would have been a good idea for her to step away, and it probably would have been, but I guess the Democrats felt like they needed a strong voice until they figured out if we had a strong president?

This whole thing is fatiguing, but I guess it has to be. If Biden is the nominee in 2024 he will most likely lose, and it'll be the Orange Genius or DeSantis running the show, and then the Democrats WILL most certainly need a strong voice, to try and protect what they can of our fragile democracy.

Mickey Lake

Being a lefty/liberal/libertarian who considers the Democratic Party (& very much H. Clinton) to be too right wing conservative, I approve Mr. Lake's post.

ftr, I consider one who supports *business/economy over quality of life/environment to be right wing conservative. Things such as race/sex/gender/religion are little more than ways to stir up and divide people - to illustrate, see esp Condoleeza Rice & Ms Graham. Further, HRC was a young Republican in her college years - and has done little but change the letter after her name. This makes some sense as the base of the R's has followed the dividers over the edge of sanity.

Yes, I did just allow as HRC is not quite as insane as righties to her right - damned by faint praise & all.

*which very much means esp Predatory Capitalism

however, this country/world considers collecting/exercising capital/power to be 'the proper way' to satisfy the animal urge to dominate/excel over other beings.

“When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.” ― Jimi Hendrix

- and he wasn't wrong..

tho neither was Karl Popper with his seemingly paradoxical - “in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.”

so it goes..

[skuthorp]

Yes, there are a lot of ways to address the very real issues. Ending dark money. Outlawing people taking jobs in the industries they've regulated for X # of years. Public funding of all campaigns. Limiting private donations for strictly. Etc. Etc.

Hah! You expect politicians from either side, bar a few idealists, to agree to these conditions? That's the cream on the cup after their years as representatives of the same industries in congress.

[Dikhaut]

ftr, I consider one who supports *business/economy over quality of life/environment to be right wing conservative.

I don’t think it is quite this simple. Quality of life depends on the economy growing and thriving. The economy is the goose that lays the golden eggs. How the golden eggs are distributed is another discussion with no simple answers. Impacts to both need to be carefully considered. People who are far to the left or right seem to discount the importance of one or the other.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sandlapper]

Right wing hates Pelosi because she is smarter than any collection of them.

[Nicholas Carey]

Right wing hates Pelosi because she is smarter than any collection of them.

Well, that's certainly a low bar!

[David G]

Hah! You expect politicians from either side, bar a few idealists, to agree to these conditions? That's the cream on the cup after their years as representatives of the same industries in congress.

I have questions for you. What life experience has formed such a pessimistic view? How closely involved have you personally been in the political process? Have you been an activist of some sort? A lobbyist? A volunteer in a political campaign? A legislative staffer? Worked in a govt. agency?

I've done several of those. And I've paid attention since 1966. And... unless Australia is WAY more corrupt than the U.S.... I can tell you that there are plenty of Dems who would agree to some or all of those changes. And maybe even a few R's.

[David G]

Being a lefty/liberal/libertarian who considers the Democratic Party (& very much H. Clinton) to be too right wing conservative, I approve Mr. Lake's post.

ftr, I consider one who supports *business/economy over quality of life/environment to be right wing conservative. Things such as race/sex/gender/religion are little more than ways to stir up and divide people - to illustrate, see esp Condoleeza Rice & Ms Graham. Further, HRC was a young Republican in her college years - and has done little but change the letter after her name. This makes some sense as the base of the R's has followed the dividers over the edge of sanity.

Yes, I did just allow as HRC is not quite as insane as righties to her right - damned by faint praise & all.

*which very much means esp Predatory Capitalism

however, this country/world considers collecting/exercising capital/power to be 'the proper way' to satisfy the animal urge to dominate/excel over other beings.

“When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.” ― Jimi Hendrix

- and he wasn't wrong..

tho neither was Karl Popper with his seemingly paradoxical - “in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.”

so it goes..

Approve, eh? Including the notion of term limits?

[Durnik]

Approve, eh? Including the notion of term limits?

so how do you feel about presidential term limits?

as to term limits in Congress, perhaps yes, certainly eliminate federal retirement for elected positions.

one counter to your anti term limits argument is the so -called deep state, all the Hired people who know how the system works and keep it going. as to lobbyist 'writing laws', ALEX anyone? it's already that way... so I call strawman.

meanwhile, people like esp McConnell learn the system too well and warp it to their - not our - benefit.. so term limits are looking better all the time.

[sandtown]

people like esp McConnell learn the system too well and warp it to their - not our - benefit.. so term limits are looking better all the time.

Sure if you want government by lobbyists. I do not.

https://www.vox.com/polyarchy/2016/1...mp-term-limits

"Since 15 states do have term limits, we actually can know something about their effects. And the political science literature here is pretty unequivocal. Term limits are the surest way to weaken the legislative branch and empower the executive branch. Term limits are also a great way to empower special interests and lobbyists."