Nancy Pelosi Should Listen to Karl Rove

[kpete]

Nancy Pelosi Should Listen to Karl Rove

by Medea Benjamin Page 1 of 1 page(s)

http://www.opednews.com



Karl Rove might be a nasty guy, but he's no dummy. In a press interview as he left office, he gave the Democrats some free advice. He described his politics as building on the energy of the base of the Republican Party and expanding it outward. He mentioned that the Democrats could build on the energy of their base, like the "Pink Ladies", he said, referring to the Code Pink women who dogged him until the day he left office.

Instead of courting the "Pink Ladies" and the energetic peace movement that helped put the Democrats in power and turned Pelosi from Minority leader into Madam Speaker, Pelosi has alienated CODEPINK and most of the peace movement. It started the day she became Speaker, when she said that defunding the war and impeachment were off the table. It worsened when she compromised with the conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats on an Iraq funding bill instead of supporting the Progressive Caucus. And it totally fell apart in May 2007 when she allowed Congress to give Bush another $95 billion for war with no timetable for withdrawal. While Pelosi herself voted against the bill, many anti-war activists held her responsible since she failed to put pressure on the conservative Democrats to form a united front against another blank check for war. They also pointed out that in the case of both the unrestricted war funding and the expanded FISA wiretapping, she had the power to just keep the bills off the floor.

With a Bush Administration request for even more war money looming in September, CODEPINK and a coalition of 1,300 anti-war groups called United for Peace and Justice have been pushing for a meeting with the Speaker to see what her strategy will be this time around. If she really wants to end the war, as she insists she does, what lessons did she learn from the Spring defeat that will ensure a different outcome this Fall? How can the peace movement work together with the Speaker to make sure her new strategy works?

Despite countless requests, Pelosi has refused to have either a private meeting with the peace community or a public Town Hall meeting in her district. The last time she held a Town Hall meeting was in January 2006-almost two years ago!

more at:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_medea_be_070905_nancy_pelosi_should_.htm

[ComerPerro]

1. there is no value in a meeting with Code Pink

it is well established what they want, and all they seem to want to do when they interact with members of Congress is shout about immediate defunding of the war (great way to get even more soldiers killed) and how the blood is on Pelosi's hands.

Why meet with a group who isn't going to want to actually discuss or negotiate, but instead shout you down and call you a mass murderer for publicity purposes?

[rfranklin]

2. "Great way to get soldiers killed?" That's a repub talking point...

You defind the war and fund withdrawal, what's so hard to understand?

[ComerPerro]

3. because Bush won't send soldiers to their death just to prove a political point

I mean, hell, its not like he has ever sent troops into battle without adequate equpiment or funding before, right?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

18. You don't think that's a valid argument, do you?

You're saying Bush is a crazy maniac, and if we cut funding he'll do something horrible to the troops.

Therefore, we should give money to Bush to do what he wants?

Did that make sense to you the first time you heard it?

[ComerPerro]

21. I am saying you can cut funding, but can't pass withdrawal

go ahead. Refuse to fund any more war. Good for you. But that won't end it.

BushCo has taken money from other areas and used it for their own purpose in the past. There was a whole mess with funds that were supposed to be for Afghanistan and hunting Osama that got somehow spent on Iraq, for example. So even if he doesn't have funds expressly for the war, he will get the money and probably be called a hero by the media for doing so.

Add to that months of Repig grandstanding about how we can't leave our troops in harms way unfunded, and you have free attack ads against Dems and liberals all the way until next election.

So now not only does the war continue and the death toll keep rising, but now Dems are seen even more as anti-troop and Republicans walk with the next election.

Did this scenario seem ideal to you?

[truedelphi]

58. Sure it makes sense

Just like fighting in Iraq in order to remove the Iraqi Army (rated Fourth most powerful army in the world before January 1991)

And now that it is removed, our troops have to stay in Iraq until - you got it- the Iraqi Army can rebuild (With our help and training) and then prove to us that it is strong and competent.

Sheesh!!

[robinlynne]

45. You forgot to put a sarcasm thingie in your post.

[bigtree]

9. it's a typical republican notion that they own concern for the safety and well-being of the troops.

they don't own the rhetoric or the sentiment.

What I don't understand is why so many folks think Bush would notice or care enough about some funding shortfall to cause him to pull back from his mindless sacrifice of our nation's defenders and the squandering of our defenses in Iraq

[ComerPerro]

22. exactly. 3500 deaths on 9/11 didn't mean shit to him, the same number in Iraq doesn't phase him,

why would he care if a few more thousand die?

[lonestarnot]

4. Damn you sound like a pug.

[ComerPerro]

5. they have nothing constructive to offer. They just want to assign blame

[lonestarnot]

8. You know that is bullshit! I know plenty of pinkers who would make

a better pretzel than bushitler! What is so fucking hard about "end the war?"

[ComerPerro]

10. anyone would make a better anything than Bush.

[OzarkDem]

44. Their POV is very mainstream

especially among Dems and moderates. Any good leader knows to reach out to such groups, if nothing else to reach out to their base. Embracing and respecting someone's POV isn't captulation. Pelosi has only succeeded in alienating herself from voters who are tired of the Iraq war and want it to end.

[Swamp Rat]

30. Exactly like one.

Word for word.

[Forkboy]

40. Nothing new there.

[The Wielding Truth]

11. It takes a push to open any door. I say" yes" to code pink.n/t

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

15. You realize that Saddam wasn't responsible for 9-11, right?

Just checking.

[ComerPerro]

16. no. I am as politically uninformed and naive as members of Code Pink

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

17. Code Pink aren't the ones that are so naive and uninformed.

You've got it backwards.

[ComerPerro]

19. they don't know much about political processes

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. They understand the process perfectly well.

They think it's being mismanaged.

[ComerPerro]

24. thinking that a narrow majority can pass much with a Repig president is hopelessly naive

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

25. Not attempting it is cowardice.

[ComerPerro]

26. empty rhetoric and a setup

they don't attempt and you call them cowards, they attempt and fail you call them failures

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

27. They are cowards.

Gutless, spineless cowards.

"they attempt and fail you call them failures"

What attempt?

[eridani]

54. That doesn't stop the Repigs. Why should it stop us?

Privatizing Social Security is one of the most unpopular initiatives ever, but The Repigs are ALWAYS putting it back on the table! They haven't gotten everything they want that way, but they've gotten most of it. What in fucking hell is stopping the Dems from using the same kind of persistent tactics?

[Swamp Rat]

29. "immediate defunding of the war great way to get even more soldiers killed" - FUX Noise

I have heard Sean Hannity say everything you just said, almost verbatim.

[ComerPerro]

32. Hannity knows that Bush is a sociopath who won't end the war because of defunding

[Swamp Rat]

34. Why are you repeating FUX Noise, neocon talking points on DU?

If you are interested in analysis of neocon rhetoric, maybe you should state that explicitly so that DUers won't miss construe your modus operandi for continually repeating propaganda-speak.

[ComerPerro]

35. I am not the one tearing down the Democratic party here

[Swamp Rat]

37. Ok

On the other hand, we Americans should question ALL our leaders, especially our own party.

"tearing down the Democratic party" can also be a good thing if the results are put to use in a constructive way.

:hi:

[ComerPerro]

38. here's what I am reading in this thread

Dems are cowards, Dems are weak, Dems are spineless, Dems don't care about the troops, Dems are too elitist to listen to the people.

None of those statements were made by me.

And they all sound like Repig talking points.

[stimbox]

59. If the shoe fits...

And lately it does.

:argh:

[ComerPerro]

60. no, you're completely right. I've never seen or heard right wingers trash Pelosi and Dems

while giving praise to Karl Rove.

Ever.

[stimbox]

61. Whatever...

:crazy:

Better just keep up the cheerleading!!!!
Rah, rah, rah!!!! Go Team!!! The Democratic Leadership is doing a great job!!!
:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[bigtree]

6. Does anyone else see the problem with this?

the criticism of our party from this individual has become in sync with the logic of Rove.

The strident criticism of Democrats always has had an element of appeasement to the opposition. If the constant critics just took a moment to listen to the echo of many of their criticisms coming from the republican party they might reconsider their rhetoric . . . or, maybe not.

[lonestarnot]

13. Yeah, the problem is that Nancy has no intention of listening to her

base. To her they are "crazy" and that has nothing to do with Red Rover.

[ComerPerro]

23. and they have no intention of listening to Nancy. Respect goes both ways

[Trillo]

7. sorry Rover, no bones for you.

The pawl of the democrats must be preserved for the sanctity of the political parties ratchet effect.

[The Stranger]

12. If the Democratic leadership continues to abandon the Party Base, they will pay in the elections.

[Zodiak]

28. I have a feeling they will already pay in the elections.

The FISA bill sent a lot of supporters packing.

Once you lost their trust, they do not come back. Ask Bushco because it is the same phenomenon he experienced with his diminishing base.

[cali]

14. Shorter Medea: Me, me, me, me. n/t

[Disturbed]

33. Is the Dem Party in self destruct mode?

If the Dem Party does not stand against Busholini en mass within this month there is a possibility that they will lose a lot of seats in the House & Senate & the Pres. in '08. What the Dems see as a strong suit, keeping the US Occupation going, is actually their weakest Achilles heel. Impeachment being off the table was the first big mistake Pelosi made. This empowered Busholini & Cheney. Funding the "Surge" was the 2nd big mistake. Three strikes & they will be out.

[cali]

36. They may or may not be in self-destruct mode but

there's no doubt the repukes are.

[robinlynne]

46. We, the people of the Dem party are doing our job. Congress/senate are NOT.

[KharmaTrain]

31. So We Take Rove's Endorsement Of Code Pink???

Now whose zooming who here?

[OzarkDem]

42. Rove realizes its safe to give Dem leaders honest advice

because he knows they're still going to focus on "keeping their powder dry".

I see Rove's statement as taking a shot at Dem leaders, humiliating them by giving them good advice that he knows they'll ignore.

[mzmolly]

49. Sorry, I don't think the man is looking out for the Democratic Party.

Call me crazy. ;)

[Hydra]

50. Rove makes me queasy whenever I see him

But your point is well made. Rove knows that the Dems are trying to distance themselves from the "anti-war loons" they know will vote Dem(that would be me) in favor of sweeping up indep. votes and disaffected Repubs.

In the process, they are making it clear that people like me don't matter.

Why should I support people who are supposed to be representing me...who treat me in that manner?

[Hawkowl]

39. Pelosi's the weakest Dem speaker ever

Really. Here accommodating, compromising stance with this dictator of a president is outrageous complicity in the subversion of our constitution. She is supposed to be the check and balance part of our government, not the appeasement branch.

[cali]

41. You may dislike her but she's by no means

the weakest dem speaker ever.

[ShortnFiery]

43. Pelosi's great at fund raising, but she, IMO, is worthless in a leadership capacity.

:shrug: The best think that woman can do is resign and focus on Fund Raising. :(

[Kahuna]

47. Uh huh. Karl wants the Dems to repeat the convention of '68 where

a lot of left wing whack jobs showed their royal behinds on national TV and cost the Dems the election. I don't think Pelosi will be taking any advice from rove. Thankfully.

[mzmolly]

48. Rove's strategy has led to the demise of the Neo-cons. They've been figured out.

I'd rather have a long term solution.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

51. LOL Now We're Condoning The Advice Of Karl Rove? That's Too Rich!

No thanks. I think Nancy's alienation of the code pink harassers and abusers is perfectly fine.

[ComerPerro]

57. no kidding, and they are telling me I am the one sounding like a repig. People endorsing Karl Rove

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

52. Rove gave his party great short term victories but the extreme divisiveness of his methods have

caused the country grievous damage that may last a generation or more.

Furthermore, the very methods Rove used that have given the Republicans such short term victory have screwed their party over the longer term.

I think the Democrats have been too "centrist" and conciliatory and downright accomodating, but Rove is no model to emulate. The only attribute of Rove that is worthwhile is dogged determination to win, but not the ugliness, dirty tricks and lack of ethics. Those are not the same thing.

[Generator]

53. C o m pli city (you can hum a few bars)

Really. It's THAT simple. Your "reps" don't give a shit about you or unfunding or ending the war. The base of the country wants what most of DU wants. Maybe not gay marriage and never ever having another war-especially if we are attacked-MOST of the country was FOR attacking in Afghanistan as I was.

But they want this damn war OVER. They want this DAMN president gone. They do NOT want a war with Iran. They do not want a draft and endless war. But that is the necessary endgame in all of this. And one more terrorist attack, false flag, propaganda war and THAT's it. The Democrats will cave on that too. (hey it was all based on lies, on propaganda, on smearing CIA agents..and the consequences are???????-they have set it up for them to do it again-why not? Why wouldn't they?)

But MOST of the Dems and almost all of the Republicans(save your usual suspects like Kucinich) don't REALLY want anything to change because if you are willing to CHANGE you are willing to LOSE your job. The Dems aren't even willing to give up their nice offices. Going into the waste bin of history.

And NO I will not vote for Hillary if she is the nominee. Since every fucking thing is about 2008. That's all they care about. Four more dead or forty thousand more dead it doesn't matter to the likes of Hillary Clinton and her ilk.

We have been had. The Democrat party no longer represents the majority of Democrats.

[Disturbed]

55. Rove didn't plan on the Iraq Invasion being a loser & so many

Repugs getting caught in scandals. That is what generated so many Repugs losing in '06. Without a clear majority in the Senate it is almost impossible for Dems to get much Legislation through. Even when they do Busholini can veto & there won't be enough votes to over ride.

Dems could refuse to fork over another $50 Billion for the Iraq Fiasco. They could try the Nancy Raygun approach and "Just say, no."

[defendandprotect]

56. Wow! As Pelosi returns to Congress her views are even more depressing --- !!!!!