Is this the moment Speaker Pelosi was born for?

[LisaM]

I have been impressed with her timing, her impeccable style, and her ability to rally the Democrats. The committee is fantastic. The witnesses are on point.

Fingers crossed, but she seems to be playing this just right.

[malaise]

1. The sweetest part for me is that the Speaker is female

For this uncouth, women hating, racist criminal piece of shit to finally face consequences at 73 under the gavel of a female Speaker is the gift of a lifetime for every decent person on our planet.

[LisaM]

2. Yes, it is.

That cartoon of her stepping on him with her Manalos was so energizing to me.

[Stargazer09]

3. She's the perfect person for that position

He’s not fit to be in the same room with her, and I’m looking forward to seeing her take him down.

[LisaM]

4. As am I.

This is a testament to experience. She so knows what she is doing.

[Scarsdale]

5. IF there were any members

of the gop with brains, they would be taking notes when Nancy Pelosi speaks. Cool, calm, collected and SANE. Unlike the opposing clowns. The gop seems to be competing to see which one of them can act the most childishly. No facts, just trying to get jabs in.

[Thekaspervote]

7. This!

[panader0]

12. Amen.

[dewsgirl]

6. I think so...she is🔥.

Also Rachel Maddow also born for this era.🔥

[Hortensis]

8. She can't control corrupt media, tho. PBS is unquestionably

on the long list of MSM, including NYT and AP, hauling water for the Republicans. The bias in the Evening News coverage last night was strong and blatant, as it often now becomes for these media when the giant battle for control of our nation is played out in big public events. Dangerous for their reputations, so I like to think that at least extra pressure is being applied when betrayal becomes that obvious.

[littlemissmartypants]

19. Really?

"PBS is unquestionably on the long list of MSM, including NYT and AP, hauling water for the Republicans."

Really??

Where did you get that impression?

Without question PBS is less liberal than it was in the not too distant pass, but most definitely, it is a liberal news organization.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/pbs-news-hour/

Media Bias Fact Check reveals:


?w=600&ssl=1

Follow the link for the complete report.

[Hortensis]

24. PBS's coverage has become very uneven. You can tell now when

lying to viewers is believed of critical importance to whoever's pulling the strings there now. Most of the most obvious and egregious deception involves very big stories damaging to Trump and/or GOP actions.

Look for everyday corruption of political news, though, in things such as frequently starting and ending with clips of Republicans making their cases, choice of people to come on to explain the issues, the standard false equalizations of us with Republicans when they can't be excused, and failing to include critical facts that are damaging to the Republicans. All not at all well hidden, but somewhat obscured, in a forest of proper reporting.

I read in the Columbia Journalism Review that bringing Norah O'Donnell to anchor CBS news is part of an upgrading and seriousing of their coverage, including reporting more information with less waffling of language to avoid offending anyone ("racist" instead of "racially charged" ). Initial evaluation was good, and yesterday's coverage finally convinced my husband to no longer record PBS and try that program. Imagine a close to worthless network news program becoming much more honest than a PBS that's come under the same corrupt influences as the NYT and AP. It comes around.

https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/norah-odonnell-cbs-evening-news.php

[Laura PourMeADrink]

20. What was the gist of it? Actually heard a couple good

points. That there are plenty of conservative constitutional scholars who think he committed impeachable offenses who could have been called. Personally, I would have liked to have seen someone actually drill down on Turdley. I think he was just saying there's not enough evidence? "Exactly what evidence do you think is missing? And would it help if the WH released all docs and freed up all to testify?". I doubt they want to because they don't want to lie on the record but it would have shown that WH is not letting them.

[Hortensis]

23. The whole orientation. They opened with a RW clip,

the LW "balance" was Prof. Karlan's baron/Barron under attack but without mention of the context of the constitutional point she was trying to make. In fact, the constitutional points made by 3 witnesses were ignored. Turley was featured, but not to point out the shocking twists and lies in his legal reasoning. Conservative Joe Scarborough and many others did, but not PBS.

Instead, Turley was inplied to be a real constitutional heavyweight brought in, more than a match for the others. No description of the heavily political slant of his rhetoric or that his argument was that the process itself was invalid, "rage" driven, that the case had not even been made for impeachment, our case is "wafer-thin," that Democrats lacked "limiting principles," we were treating impeachment like "impulse-buy Nike sneakers," that Trump's actions were "inappropriate" but not impeachable. (Those quotes were copied from a couple media summaries of his testimony.) And my favorite, his emphatic: "It's wrong because that's not how you impeach an American president." "That" being a list of ways we avoided seeking justice to railroad the impeachment, which are on the short video below.

Here's PBS's own YouTube video of Turley's closing remarks, also includes his "mad dog" remarks:

I think it makes my case. But note that Turley also began with that "mad dog" theme, more than implying that both parties have become so dysfunctionally enraged that it's come to the point that one of them, the Democrats, have abandoned duty, integrity, even decency to actually try to impeach without a case.

This is the kind of thing PBS is now pushing.

Oh, and we're losing. We held judiciary committee hearing to try to "bolster" our case.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

31. Jeez, hate to be the devil's advocate. But they found a shill, news wants to show both

sides. We didn't drill him, and when no one disputes what he says except to throw out some things he said years ago, what is the answer? One could think because he wasn't taken down, what he said was true. Is it PBS's job to do our job? Or for that matter, any degradation of any of our opposition? Could they have downplayed Turdley, yes, you are right on that.

[Hortensis]

33. PBS was created to inform the people.

Once we get power, at some point we're going to have to do some housecleaning. Or the conservatives who've been trying to destroy honest public-funded information sources are going to finish winning, because people who want honest information won't support taxpayer-funded misinformation sources. And should not a moment longer than it takes to realize they've gone rotten.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

35. You're right H !

[LisaM]

34. This is not on topic.

Please don't derail my OP.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

36. Sorry, Carry on with idolization! :)

[mcar]

41. What is wrong with an OP praising

our Democratic leader?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

47. It's not normal-like praise which we all would think was normal,!

[mcar]

49. Normal like praise?

Who gets to decide what that is?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

50. Me :)

[mcar]

51. ...

[LisaM]

68. Ummm....I just think she's been impressive. On point, sharp, and courageous.

I don't see how that's idolization. She seems the right person for the job. I'm glad she's Speaker.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

69. That's fine.

[Hortensis]

37. Lol, yes, sorry. Too much joy brings out my contrarian side.

But in my defense, I've always been a Pelosi admirer, no more wonderful today than when she was quietly and excellently running her caucus in the background while President Obama was leader of the party.

[Nature Man]

64. "Poster attempts to control small fragment of Internets. Film at 11"

LOL

[gademocrat7]

9. Speaker Pelosi is a very savvy politician.

Her intelligence, grace and dedication to our country is inspiring.

[NurseJackie]

10. Nancy Pelosi deserves our eternal gratitude. Thank you Speaker Pelosi!

She also deserves an apology from those who insulted her with ageist vulgarities, and who were "too big for their own panties" in their hot-headed, impatient and grandstanding attacks on her.

Nancy Pelosi is a national treasure. We are very fortunate to have her.

[we can do it]

11. Yes exactly.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

21. Upteenth time you have accused people of "insulting ageist

vulgarities". And yet still not provided any proof of who here said anything like that.

[NurseJackie]

22. I've made no accusations... I'm stating fact.

And yet still not provided any proof of who here said anything like that.

I've made no accusations... I'm stating fact. What makes you believe it's someone here?

Besides, even if it were, it would serve no good purpose for anyone to link to hidden posts. And "calling-out" members is against the terms, so that bait won't work. All I'm trying to say is that you'll have to do your own research... or just take me at my word that what I'm referring to is true.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

38. Then please just qualify it the next time you say it

On Twitter or wherever you saw it. And if it's not here then why even bring it up? I have never heard or read such a thing so it must be from some dark or redneck place.

[NurseJackie]

39. I can't be responsible for the things that you presume. I'm not Rachel Maddow...

Then please just qualify it the next time you say it

I can't be responsible for the things that you presume. I'm not Rachel Maddow... I don't have time to write a lesson or primer to provide a thorough review and background to catch everyone up to speed at the beginning of every post. Except for the odd exception, most of the regular posters, participants and readers here do have a shared experience here and a common history, and as a result I've always found it much easier to presume that the anyone who reads my posts possesses enough intelligence to do their own research or to take me at my word. I really fell no obligation to spoon-feed anyone information who regularly accuses me of, or implies that I am, lying.

And if it's not here then why even bring it up?

The awful things that were said about her were cheered-on and excused by many Pelosi haters. I hardly think it's your place to critique and censor my comments. Just because you've never heard or read such things doesn't mean it's not true or that it didn't happen right under your very nose.

it must be from some dark or redneck place.

I wouldn't know about that. I just know that the comments (and those who defended them) were ugly and hateful and sexist and ageist.

[mcar]

43. I saw it here

and elsewhere. People need only look back to January.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

46. What in the world are you talking about?

[ehrnst]

53. +1000. (nt)

[ehrnst]

57. Thank you for sharing your opinion!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

58. You are very welcome !

[George II]

26. Yes she does. She was lambasted by inexperienced members of her own caucus who felt....

....she was too old, she was too slow, she didn't have it anymore, she was too "establishment", she was too "centrist", and a whole batch of other "toos".

She's there, on top, running the House and this important process, and thankfully they're silent.

[ehrnst]

30. Indeed. I'm grateful that she is where she is at this time in our history. (nt)

[mcar]

42. This!

[IronLionZion]

13. "For those who think a woman can't beat Donald Trump

Nancy Pelosi does it every day." Amy Klobuchar said that in the last debate.

Stormy Daniels also spanked him in a different way.

[Roy Rolling]

14. Remember One Thing

Just one year ago Democrats were elected in Congress insufficient numbers.

They only started working in January, 2019. In just a few months here we are.

Color me impressed.

[ehrnst]

15. Actually, they only really started in February - the government was shut down for a month.

Even more impressive when you take that into consideration.

[aikoaiko]

16. It seems like we had to pull her along, but once she's in, she's all in.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

17. Agree! Took a long time, but at least the calls to make,

it as quick as possible took.

[George II]

25. No, neither "we" nor anyone else had to pull her along. She knows what she's doing, and she knows...

....a LOT more than we do about what evidence is there, what documents are available, and probably most important, HOW the House of Representatives operates.

I never doubted her judgement one second.

[Hortensis]

29. I have to agree. Competence requires not being influenced

to do something foolish by impatient people who have no idea what they don't know. Not that I think Pelosi et al (including our senate leaders) ever came close to it. They didn't enter congress yesterday.

[ehrnst]

28. It's clear she was and is leading, not following. She has the strength not to be railroaded

into something prematurely, and that's why she keeps getting selected by House Dems as their leader.

It's a good thing that you're finally on board with her shrewd judgement.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

48. Huh?? Millions

upon millions of Dems were way ahead

[ehrnst]

52. Now those millions are on the same page with the person who knew what she was doing.

And what was best in terms of when to move forward. She wasn't railroaded by many who wanted things to proceed prematurely.

Is that clearer?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

55. Thanks for sharing your opinion!

[ehrnst]

56. You're welcome, and I look forward to history confirming it! (nt)

[ehrnst]

60. History didn't take as long as I thought it would to honor her courage and smarts

Link to tweet

The award was presented by Caroline Kennedy, the former U.S. Ambassador to Japan and the daughter of President Kennedy. Kennedy celebrated Pelosi during her introduction, calling her the “most consequential woman in American political history.”

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/nancy-pelosi-john-f-kennedy-award_n_5ce243d6e4b00e035b930887?fbclid=IwAR0wltoAusC7-YAd4-7R1p-tX9ztLg0WFl4ZwNk15oCTFDgBAuIAQal-hsw

[Laura PourMeADrink]

61. That is pretty revisionist for sure. Too bad we will

never know. Don't see numbers changing so not sure that's anything to applaud about. But, in the big scheme of things....glad she finally stood up with the majority for what was the right thing to do!

[ehrnst]

62. No, not revisionist. She knows what she's doing, and is ahead of the curve.

So many now realize what her Democratic colleagues have known for years.

She delivers the goods, when and where they need to be delivered, no matter how many rant against her.

Are you familiar with the Profiles in Courage Award? It's given to politicians who follow their conscience, and do what is right for the country despite public pressure to do otherwise. Pelosi won it this year.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/nancy-pelosi-john-f-kennedy-award_n_5ce243d6e4b00e035b930887?fbclid=IwAR0wltoAusC7-YAd4-7R1p-tX9ztLg0WFl4ZwNk15oCTFDgBAuIAQal-hsw

[Laura PourMeADrink]

63. No never heard of Profile in Courage Award! :)

Obviously we will never agree. I personally don't think ignoring crimes for months and months (i.e. Mueller findings) despite Democratic support to do the right thing, waiting for trump to do something worse is a profile in courage. I will never change my mind. Just glad it finally came to be! And very thankful for that.

I can repeat that a thousand times. You can repeat your take a thousand times. Neither of us will change our minds. But both of us are entitled to our opinions.

[ehrnst]

65. I guess saying that it's all just opinion absolves one from providing facts or evidence

and promotes the idea that your opinion is as fact based as anyone elses.

Here's some helpful reading on this.

Secondly, I say something like this: “I’m sure you’ve heard the expression ‘everyone is entitled to their opinion.’ Perhaps you’ve even said it yourself, maybe to head off an argument or bring one to a close. Well, as soon as you walk into this room, it’s no longer true. You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to what you can argue for.”

A bit harsh? Perhaps, but philosophy teachers owe it to our students to teach them how to construct and defend an argument – and to recognize when a belief has become indefensible.

The problem with “I’m entitled to my opinion” is that, all too often, it’s used to shelter beliefs that should have been abandoned. It becomes shorthand for “I can say or think whatever I like” – and by extension, continuing to argue is somehow disrespectful. And this attitude feeds, I suggest, into the false equivalence between experts and non-experts that is an increasingly pernicious feature of our public discourse.

https://theconversation.com/no-youre-not-entitled-to-your-opinion-9978

[Laura PourMeADrink]

70. I'll give you that one - know you have none - other than it actually

heappened - trump did something worse.

[ehrnst]

71. I have no idea what you wrote.

Are you OK?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

72. Great diversion and projection. Not gonna argue with u anymore!

[ehrnst]

73. So does that mean you're OK?

And that you are putting me on ignore? I sincerely doubt you would refuse to respond to any post I made in response to yours unless you put me on ignore.

[MrsCoffee]

32. Lol. The pawns are always eager to jump out and attack.

The Queen plays the long game.

[mcar]

44. Yes, because of course the most powerful woman in government

needs to be "pulled along" by random internet posters.

[BootinUp]

18. Make it So

Says Captain Picard.

[karynnj]

27. One of many moments

The moment that she led the House to pass - in 2 bills - the ACA was an incredible leadership effort where she needed to craft a path to getting the Senate bill AS IT WAS (because the Senate no longer had 60 Senators) and to add some of the changes the House would have added via a conference bill in a second bill that met the criteria of what could be passed under reconciliation.

It took many people, working very hard and well, to get that bill passed in both chambers and signed by Obama. It is worth considering that Rahm Emmanuel, Obama's then CoS, was publicly saying after Scott Brown won, that they should pass something much smaller. Pelosi was the one who had the position to make the decision to go with the messier passage of the entire ACA.

Even after Republicans, including Rubio, who defunded the catastrophic insurance that allowed insurance companies to offer lower rates knowing that they could pass to the government catastrophic costs if they ended up insuring the sickest people, to enduring through the two years where Trump and the Republicans controlled both Houses.

While ACA has been damaged, a Democrat elected in 2020 starts with the structure of ACA and people using that insurance for 10 years. The design easily allows a public option (medicaid, medicare or whatever program is created) to easily be added to the private insurance plans. If we can add that public option, I predict that the REPUBLICANS will insist on the catastrophic fund be replenished because the insurance companies would demand they do it.

Pelosi, would be there - with all her experience - to design a bill that could pass the House. She will then have been instrumental in its creation and its protection and its recreation making it better.

[mcar]

40. She is brilliant!

[MFGsunny]

45. Emphatically YES is my answer to your OP question. She's an American gem.

Born to love.

Born to lead.

Born to shine.

Born to succeed!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

54. Abso-fuckin-lutely!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Takket]

66. I don't think she wants to be remembered for this

This is something she feels obligated to do because it is her job to defend the country, but I think she’d much rather be doing legislative work. Instead she and her caucus are expending an incredible amount of time and resources trying to convince 20 Senators to give a flying fuck about something other than pleasing drumpf and Putin.

[Caliman73]

67. No.

Nancy Pelosi is a decent person whose family has been in public service for decades. She is an outstanding politician who is likely one of the top 3 if not the top Speaker of the House in history. She was born into politics with her dad being in the house of Reps and Mayor of Baltimore and her brother being Mayor as well. Pelosi's mom was also active in politics. She was born to serve and born to lead, but I am almost 100% positive that she would have preferred NEVER to have to deal with this. Pelosi wants to govern. She wants to improve people's lives. She doesn't want to be dealing with a corrupt ass.

Given that, she has absolutely done a spectacular job navigating this treacherous situation. She has done almost everything perfectly. Were it not for a consolidated right wing media environment, Trump would likely have already resigned or have been removed. This situation would have resolved itself much quicker and easily than Nixon's impeachment process but we have an entire media system that is feeding about 30 to 60 million people complete garbage and they have absolutely no idea what is really happening. Another large chunk of people are just tuned out because again, the right wing media has so poisoned the waters that people think that this is just "normal back and forth politics" rather than the Republican Party and conservatives actively promoting anti-American ideas.