Nancy Pelosi — Speaker of State?

62,040,610


224,017 + 148,435 + 400 = 372, 852

Nancy Pelosi — Speaker of State?
By: Joe Leonardi

The top number is the number of votes George W. Bush received in 2006, the bottom number is the combined number of votes Nancy Pelosi received in 2004 and 2006. Add another 400 or so votes from the U.S. House to elect her Speaker and Nancy Pelosi doesn’t even get a total of three hundred seventy three thousand votes. President George W. Bush received over sixty two million votes from all the American people. So, could someone please tell me where she gets the authority to go to a state sponsor of terrorism, Syria, and negotiate renewed relations between our two countries. I can not stop shaking my head at the unmitigated gall of this individual. I realize that Speaker Pelosi must think that she has the mandate of the people. But less than four hundred thousand votes, from a single Congressional District in California, does not grant your the title Representative of the United States of America! There may be a new Congress in town, but there is not a new President.

If Speaker Pelosi wishes to represent the entire United States of America, then she should seek the office of the President. This is not only a dramatic overstepping of her authority, it also provides a divided front to the people of Syria. One that can be exploited by Syria’s leaders. We have a Department of State whose role, under the President, is responsible for matters related to foreign policy. It is one thing for Senators and Representatives to visit other nations on fact finding missions, I will not begrudge them that, however it is a completely different matter when your stated intent is to influence relations between our country and another. This is not your role Madam Speaker.

If you have read anything I have written you are well aware that I am not happy with the direction of the Republican Party nor President Bush. However, if there is another factor you should also have taken away, is that I am a firm believer in our Constitution — this is a definite overstepping of Speaker Pelosi’s Constitutional role.

Through control of the budget the Congress may exercise indirect influence over foreign policy. However, the only direct role the Congress has is in the treaty ratification process and approving cabinet level positions and that is done with the advise and consent of the Senate, not the House. Speaker Pelosi has acted in a disgraceful manner. Not in her going to a foreign government, but in her statement that she ‘has great hope for reviving U.S. relations with Syria’. Madame Speaker, again, this is not your role. I’m not sure if the Botox has seeped into her frontal lobe or what, but this is flat out ridiculous and a gross overstepping of the Speaker’s bounds. Okay, the Botox crack maybe uncalled for and harsh, but I am looking for an explanation for her irrational behavior. And I can’t see how a rational person would think that frighteningly distorting one’s features is sensible.

It is fine for us to debate and disagree in our chambers of government and through our media, however, when we are dealing with foreign governments and their leaders it is imperative that we proceed with a single, unified voice. The Secretary of State, nominated by the President and approved by the Senate, is that voice. It is an appalling signal to send that there maybe other individuals representing our nation to the world.

Perhaps some republicans in the House can muster up a little backbone, stand up to the Speaker and demand her resignation. I doubt that they do or will, it is as I said when I was running for Congress — I’m glad I wasn’t going to the U.S. house to be a Chiropractor, there aren’t that many spines there.

Joe Leonardi

Advertisements

36 Comments

Filed under Congress, Conservative, Democrat, Iraq, Nancy Pelosi, President, Secretary of State, Speaker

36 responses to “Nancy Pelosi — Speaker of State?

  1. The State Department should revoke her passport.

  2. Joe,

    What’s the big deal with Nancy taking a Mideast trip?

  3. hobo

    Joe
    Thanks for taking the time to throw some light on Pelosis’ tour/intent. I can’t help but reply to your statement asking who she thinks she is for attempting to bridge some gaps in the US foreign affairs department. Maybe if she were President, our country wouldn’t be in the mess it is in at the present. I would stake my life on the assumption that Bush is trying to figure out which foreign he wants to attack next. It is my opinion that he believes that if we fall too short on ground forces, a position at which we have already arrived, he will be justified to use nuclear munitions to bring the [rest of] the enemy to their knees. Remember Japan? Long ago, but still in the minds of many. Honest, I used to respect Bush, but now wish he would just fade away. He may as well because the longer he hangs around, the worse legacy he leaves. Cheers.

  4. Hi Hobo,

    “Maybe if she were President, our country wouldn’t be in the mess it is in at the present.” The problem I have is she isn’t. She received a minsicule number of votes compared to the President. If you read anything on this site you are aware I am not a fan of President Bush or the NeoCons, but he is our leader at this time not Mrs. Pelosi. I think if Newt had done something like this when President Clinton was in, the Dems and Liberals would not have been as kind as I.

    Thanks for the comment, and Keep up the Dialogue

    Joe

  5. Hi Steve,

    It is not the trip, it is like I said her stated purpose and the Constitution. All in my opinion.

    Thanks for the comment and Keep up the Dialogue

    Joe

  6. Don

    All very good points.

    Further commentary here:

    http://www.liberallyconservative.com/?p=1811

    DB at LC

  7. joe,

    i’m guessing you’re aware of the republican delegation(s) also visiting syria, including the rep. from lancaster county.

    “There’s a Republican trip going before her, and no one is criticizing that,” Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said. “So clearly the White House’s motives here are in question.”

    we can legitimately debate whether it’s pelosi’s “role” to meet with anyone, anywhere. i’d argue that diplomacy is preferable to the bush doctrine of “escalate and annihilate,” but that’s me. (here’s the thing: do you trust the bush administration to make any legitimate effort toward diplomatic resolution of any dispute in the region? if so, i’d love to see the evidence behind such a conclusion.)

    but let’s agree that pelosi isn’t the only member of congress visiting syria in lieu of diplomatic efforts on the part of our “elected leader.”

    while we’re on the subject, why do you go to such lengths to characterize pelosi’s visit as undermining the administration?

    Pelosi, in published reports, characterized her planned meeting with Assad as a “fact finding” mission through which her delegation can “hopefully build the confidence” between the United States and Syria.

    see? she’s fact-finding. surely a few facts can’t hurt anyone. especially if they’re lost and need finding. like the fact that the iraq study group recommended diplomacy with syria.

  8. Hi Spaceneedl,

    I have no issue with the fact finding aspect of her trip or anyone elses. It is when she was quoted as saying ‘has great hope for reviving U.S. relations with Syria’, is where I take issue. I understand many aren’t confident in the President, but I believe in our Constitution and I am the first to call out the President if I feel he oversteps and I am gonna call out the Speaker.

    Thanks for the Comment
    and
    Keep up the Dialogue

    Joe

  9. You’re exactly right, Joe. There’s a reason why the constitution gives authority to a single branch of government when it comes to liasing with foreign powers. Partisan politics can’t extend beyond borders, whether or not we agree with administration policy at the moment. Every advanced country in the world understands this and uses only one entity in international relations. Imagine if every country had to deal with representatives from all the major political parties of all the other countries. It’s imperative to unity and stability that we have our debates and squabbles all we want internally, but speak with a single voice when it comes time to deal with foreigners. If you don’t like it, then change things around the next election.
    And Pelosi is clearly conducting foreign policy, not simply fact finding. Her own statements represent this.

  10. joe and mike,

    ordinarily i’d agree with you both about the prerogatives of the executive and congress. i am all about the separation of powers, co-equal branches, and maintaining the integrity of the constitution.

    but this particular executive has not held up his end of the bargain. we’ll stipulate the many examples that you should know all too well by now. from a constitutional perspective, the administration is completely off the reservation.

    it’s irresponsible to acquiesce to the demands of this president, heedless of the consequences.

  11. Rich

    Joe,

    No doubt Speaker Pelosi has overstepped her role with the statement, “she has great hope for reviving U.S relations with Syria.” I think she is wrong. Period. I think some of the more liberal members of Congress are trying to rub Bush’s lame duck status in his face. I am not a fan of the president in any way, shape, or form but he does deserve the respect his positions comands. The constitution is very clear and I think this sends a dangerous message to leaders of other countries. Bush has done enough to blur lines in the Constituion, he doesn’t need any help from Nancy Pelosi.

  12. Jim

    Joe
    I have to agree with you! One thing you said actually a couple things tells you why she is there. Bush the Decider and purveyor of new world (dis)order refuses to break from his politics of deceit and bullying and to use any sense whatsoever as we both often agree to.
    The Republican delegation over there aside. the duly elected Dem Congress is frustrated at their impotency as Neocons vote for Bush’s mispolicies rather than those to help America and they will get nothing accomplished as long as Bush is around. As he pointed out,, the American people will not forget who is the problem and it is him. that is why Republicans will be defeated in 2008.
    Anyway in Bush’s own words, drastic times call for drastic measures. Bush has turned this into another Bush created crisis and it will very quickly get a lot worse. You will learn why the surge and it has nothing to do with Iraq.
    The middle east crisis Bush created by diverting from the war on terror to attack Iraq too get into the middle east and start the new middle east order in his own words you may recall God told him to do. No one will stop this now and it will spread throughout the middle east regardless but bush’s upcoming attack on Iran will blow it open then per Bush’s plan it will spread from there as he push’s to remain the Worlds only superpower.
    It is futile but somebody has to try to stop what is about to happen in the middle east. I will leave you a link to what I wrote today and you will see the futlity of anyone trying to stop Bush from his so called new order.
    http://anaverageamericanpatriot.blogspot.com/

  13. point of order…

    where does all this fall on the “undermining the president” scale?

    U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts and two other Republican congressmen did not undermine the Bush administration by meeting with Syria’s leader Sunday, despite going to Damascus against the president’s wishes, Pitts said Wednesday…

    Pitts and U.S. Reps. Frank Wolfe of Virginia and Robert Aderholt of Alabama met with Assad Sunday to talk about issues in the Middle East three days before Pelosi’s delegation arrived there on a similar mission.

    “Dialogue is not a sign of weakness,” Pitts said after returning home Wednesday. “It’s a sign of strength.”

  14. Hi Space

    Again, I don’t have problem with the trip it was Speaker Pelosi’s stated intent.

    Keep up the Dialogue

    Joe

  15. Pingback: Opinions are like Assholes…. at Conservative Times--Republican GOP news source.

  16. Glad to see I’m hardly alone in seeing Pelosi for what she is — a silver-spoon-fed narcissist with dangerously low levels of education about the world she wants to travel through. The Israelis are already upset with her speaking for them while she was in Syria. I’m upset with her for showing the world she has no grasp of Islam, and this just leads to the realization that most of Congress are still clueless to the dangers of Sharia that are already rising around the U.S. and completely swallowing Europe.

    What’s the trouble with Nancy taking a Middle East jaunt? There you have it.

  17. Hello Joe,
    Thanks for stopping over at the Elephant. I am sure you will find some kindred spirits over there, and we are alwaysopen to new patrons at the bar.

    My partner whit and I welcome guest posters so let us know if you have anything you want exposure on.

    BTW, I am quite impressed with the new eveneing Bulletin. I do not know how they will make money, but it an interesting local paper.

    Thanks,
    Deuce

  18. Good job, nice post. The problem is when the people who are supposed to be doing the job screw up as badly as W and Cheny have, it invites interlopers like Pelosi, all to the country’s grave danger– like when the police fail to protect a neighborhood, it invites vigilantes and protection rings.

  19. Jason Bo Green

    I’m pretty unhappy with the Bush Administration post-2002 onwards myself, Mr. Leonardi, and I agree that Pelosi had no business making this trip. She’s really embarrassed herself here.

    If she wants to challenge Bush for the Presidency, I have no problem with that – but she should just announce, “I challenge you to the Oval Office,” and not dart around making foolishly contrived state visits like this one.

    She should be replaced as Speaker.

  20. Durward

    She’d fit right in with Canada’s Liberals.
    I had thought that we in Canada had a monopoly on public servants under-mining the country but your Pelosi proved how wrong I was.
    Why do the leftists always seek to under-mine their own country in times of war?
    The Dems in the USA are becoming as juvenile as our liberal socialists up here.

  21. Readitforme

    Meanwhile, the Associated Press has a report that three Republican congressmen just returned from Syria as part of a separate fact-finding trip, supported the idea of members of Congress visiting Syria, despite Bush Administration protests.

    Three Republican congressmen who parted with President Bush by meeting with
    Syrian leaders said Wednesday it is important to maintain a dialogue with a country the White House says sponsors terrorism.

    “I don’t care what the administration says on this. You’ve got to do what you think is in the best interest of your country,” said Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va. “I want us to be successful in Iraq. I want us to clamp down on
    Hezbollah.”

    …”This is an area where we would disagree with the administration,” (Rep. Robert) Aderholt (of Alabama) said. “None of us in the Congress work for the president. We have to cast our own votes and ultimately answer to our own constituents. … I think there’s room that we can try to work with them as long as they know where we draw the line

  22. Hi Readitformem

    Mr. Wolfe may not care what the administration thinks but I hope he cares what the constitution says. If he is acting in a role reserved for the Executive Branch I have a problem with him also.

    Thanks for the Comment and
    Keep up the Dialogue

    Joe

  23. Jamey

    //I think if Newt had done something like this when President Clinton was in, the Dems and Liberals would not have been as kind as I.//

    Uh, Joe:

    Newt and Hastert BOTH visited foreign nations as a representative of US interests: Newty to China in ’97 and Hastert to Colombia that same year.

    In the case of Hastert, he was clear in stating his intent to bypass the White House: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/04/hastert-colombia

    Pelosi is Speaker, the highest-ranking position in the House. She is within the rights of that office to speak for that body in general. But even if we split it along party lines, would you care to add up all the voters who gave the Democratic Party a House majority? I daresay it eclipses Bush’s total from 2004.

    Thanks for keeping an open forum for civil debate

    Jamey

  24. Jamey

    PS, Joe:

    I grew up in NEPA–The Abingtons. My ma owned a card and gift shop in the Pittston Plaza, on the Bypass, and my dad worked in Duryea at the bubble-gum factory.

    Small world.

  25. Pingback: NoisyRoom.net » Blog Archive » Nancy Pelosi — Speaker of State?

  26. ReadtheConstitutionPLZ

    joe — the Constitution has been infringed upon by the executive branch repeatedly… hence checks and balances.
    Foreign Policy is something that the president dictates; however, the Constitution says nothing about ‘no other governmental figure is allowed to give their opinions to or speak to members of other countries’. It doesn’t matter if the President doesn’t like them or their practices. He cannot restrict members of Congress from meeting with anyone, nor can he say that it isn’t her job. Besides, Pelosi headed up an entourage of goverment officials, including a Republican (thereby a bipartisan group), all of whom agree that she did nothing contradictory to the President’s ideals. In fact, they all said she REITERATED it. Why is Pelosi the only one attacked? People say the Israeli President said she was wrong too, but NO HE DIDN’T. He underlined again his terms to Syria for opening talks… the same thing many people do when arguing with someone. ‘I won’t talk to you again until you do this and this and apologize for that!’ and reiterate only that notion until they do what you want or a compromise is achieved. That is hardly what politicians are painting as an affirmation that the Speaker gave the wrong message. If you are truly informed, then you would know that one must continually deconstruct BIAS and SPIN from all media outlets in order to find fact, whether the message be from your party or another party. You have not looked for either of these because of a party line. That speaks of your education, my friend. pot to the kettle. (just to clarify what you may think liberal to the point of stupidity, I am registered Republican)
    Pelosi may not be the best of individuals or have always made the best of choices, but she is clearly being singled out for an attack in this case, because of her party and the power her position holds (relative to her party). I don’t care what my party is, I think for myself and have read the Constitution over recently for clarity of meaning… and she hasn’t done a damned thing wrong here. sorry.

  27. You made some good points. However I have read the Constitution myself several times. I keep a copy at my office, in my home and in my car. When I ran for Congress I kept a copy on me at all times. Again, my problem wasn’t her meeting — it was her statement about reviving relations. In my opinion this is trying to steer foriegn policy. I don’t see that as her area, the constitution doesn’t lay this out and I also took republicans for task if they had the same intent.

    If you read the rest of my site you will see, that though I’m a Republican, I’m not a fan of this admin. nor the neocons. It also seems now, as reported to date, that she spoke for Israel. I think this could be a larger mess, if possible, waiting to happen.

    Also, just because 1 branch of gov’t may have infringed upon the constitution doesn’t give the other 2 the right to do it. 2 wrongs don’t make a right, simplistic but accurate.

    Again I invite you to read other posts on this site, I think you will find I take this admin to task more than not. And even in this case I not once defended the President. My critic was soley of the Speaker.

    If you think I take the party line based on one writing then I think you need to educate yourself about me. I rarely take the side of this particular adminstration. My education is in tact and we can agree to disagree without trading insults.

    Many times 2 opposing views can lead to finding the correct answer.

    Thank you for the comment, please feel free to post any time
    and
    Keep up the Dialogue

    Joe

  28. Good Blog, keep it up. While we must refrain from debating the proverbial how many Angels can dance on needle tips.

    I’m detecting a genuine dispute even amongst legal eagles on whether Speaker Pelosi could be charged with a crime under something called the logan act and the issue of her constitutional privilege to travel without hindrance under the separate but equal division of powers.

    Conservative lawyers are blogging she could and should be arrested for conducting foreign policy.

    While liberals claim it would be grounds for impeachment if the President interfered or prohibited her or any congressional delegation from traveling and since they control congress I guess they would do just that.

    I think the woman ought to let the Secretary of State handle the diplomatic overtures of the United States when the President decides we need to have dialogue with Syria

    However I concede the point liberals make, every civic and political science class I ever took pretty much stressed checks and balances depends on the equality of the divided branches irrespective of the duties and responsibility.

    While the President is a good Christian man to be sure I think perhaps he and those who came with him from his time as Governor of Texas have despite sincere efforts brought the troubles they have on themselves. I think maybe considering how things have gone at this point the President is looking forward to the time when he can return to Crawford.

  29. It’s totally daft to suggest that Speaker Pelosi is “negotiating” with Syria, when that was not her intent, it is not on the agenda, and Syria understands she has no power to negotiate.

    Your column is much more irresponsible than would have been an unauthorized trip by Pelosi.

    The calumny against this woman is amazing. It is clear that y’all on the conservative/Bush side would walk over your grandmothers, burn the flag, urinate on the Constitution and betray the American people to defend Bush from righteous scrutiny.

    Pelosi is Speaker of the House. Bush screwed up. No amount of calumny against Pelosi can erase the mess Bush created. It’s time for real action, for real talk.

    Get out of the way and let it take place.

  30. Hi Ed D,
    I must disagree with the premise that the Speaker is not negotiating. How do you “revive relations” without negotiating? And, according to reports, she made overtures that may have misrepresented Israel. My only disagreement arises from the Speaker’s stated intention and if she actually did try to represent not only our country’s view but another’s.
    I appreciate that you took the time to comment even though you strongly disagreed with me. But that is the point of our first amendment.
    If you think I am a Bushie — I invite you to read other columns on this site. But the unfortunate reality is he won the 2004 election. The R’s but no one else up, and let’s be real the D’s didn’t but up their best candidate. If Senator Kerry was their best, he would be running now when the D’s actually have the opportunity to win the White House.

    Thank you for the comment
    and
    Keep up the Dialogue

    Joe

  31. So, tell us, Joe — what was being negotiated? If you’re so certain that negotiations were being done (and remember, it took over five years of work with the North Vietnamese merely to get the shape of the table figured out for talking about setting up negotiations to end the Vietnam conflict), tell us how you’re sure, since you weren’t there, all participants deny it, and there is not an iota of evidence to support the claim from any credible source?

    And, have you seen the AP reports? The Pelosi trip was bipartisan — Republicans were along. And the trip was set up using a State Department airplane — the Bush administration approved the trip prior well prior to the actual travel. See here: http://preview.tinyurl.com/39owc4

    COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Two Ohio Republican lawmakers have conflicting views of whether U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Syria is an attempt to embarrass President Bush.

    U.S. Rep. Dave Hobson, the only Republican to accompany the Democratic speaker, said Pelosi “did not engage in any bashing of Bush in any meeting I was in and she did not in any meeting I was in bash the policies as it relates to Syria.”

    Hobson represents a portion of Ross County

    Who ya gonna believe, the testimony of a Republican who was there, or your own claims?

    Hobson, of Springfield, said the trip accomplished two things.

    “We reinforced the administration’s positions and at the same time we were trying to understand and maybe getting some voice to some things people wanted to say that maybe they were not comfortable saying to the administration,” Hobson said.

    The Bush administration has been highly critical of Pelosi’s trip. On Wednesday, Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council, said, “It’s unfortunate that she took this unilateral trip which we only see as counterproductive.”

    This is typical Bush/Rove-style ambush politics, accusing opponents of scurrilous behavior, and sticking by the charges even when all the facts suggest something contrary. Were Pelosi a private citizen, she’d have a good case for slander charges.

    Hobson also frowned upon complaints from Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, about the trip. He said the administration knew about the trip in advance and provided the delegation with a jet.

    “As far as I know, they never said a word to anybody until we were in the air,” Hobson said.

    Bush and Cheney would be ashamed of themselves, if they had any shame.

  32. Hi Ed,

    Actually I was going by her own words. In all the businesses I have been involved in if I am going to “revive a relationship” it takes negotiation. Again my problem is with her words. Perhaps she mis-stated, but I was commenting on her words. If she had stated she was going to seek information, gather information, fact finding etc… I would have no problem with the trip, I wouldn’t even care if it wasn’t bipartisan. Many on the left have stated that Newt and Denny had done the same thing and it was wrong then, but they don’t think it is wrong now.

    I stand by my opinion on her words, I never made a claim she was going to bash the President. I don’t have a problem with her meeting, I have a problem with her statement.

    While I admittedly do not like the Speaker’s politics, I personally would not have commented on her trip if not for the words that were attributed to her.

    And again if you think I like Bush/Rove/Cheney read the rest of this site. I do not mind you attacking my opinions, hell you can attack me if you want, but please do not group me with the NeoCons — I am not a fan, supporter or member.

    I get the feeling you and I will probably never agree on this or other topics, but I appreciate the civil conversation.

    Thanks for the Comments
    and
    Keep up the Dialogue

    Joe

  33. Republicus

    Here’s a couple of numbers you neglected to mention.

    President Bush’s Job Approval: 36.5%
    Approval of President Bush’s Handling of Foreign Policy: 45%
    Number of Congressional Republicans Visiting Syria With Pelosi or Within Days of Her Visit: 4

    “Perhaps some republicans in the House can muster up a little backbone, stand up to the Speaker and demand her resignation. I doubt that they do or will, it is as I said when I was running for Congress — I’m glad I wasn’t going to the U.S. house to be a Chiropractor, there aren’t that many spines there.”

    Demand her resignation? You call it spine; I call it reason.

    Two final points regarding your formula . . .

    (1) it would make Senator Kerry the second most authoritative voice on American foreign policy (I assume you would have no objection if he visited Syria)

    (2) I performed some advanced mathematics of my own:

    (a)
    #Votes Received by Speaker Pelosi: 372, 852 (I take you at your word)
    #Votes Received by Secretary of State Rice: 0

    (b)
    372,852 > 0

    (c)
    Authority to Represent U.S. Foreign Policy:
    Pelosi > Rice

    Best,
    R

  34. Hi R,

    I am no fan of the President, but I am a supported of the Constitution and I would have a problem with any legislator D or R stating their intent to ‘revive relations’. While Sec. Rice recieved 0 votes she is the representitive of the indiviual elected to President. We are not a democracy we are a representative republic and as a whole we elected the President.

    Your points are well taken
    Thanks for the Comment
    and
    Keep up the Dialogue

    Joe

  35. I do appreciate your commitment to open dialogue and constructive responses to commendation and criticism alike.

    In my view, a more-perfect union requires us to habitually challenge our assumptions and give meaningful consideration to divergent views.

    Well done, Republicus

  36. HelloWorld

    Peace people

    We love you

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s