Saturday, October 21, 2006

The Post Crowns Pelosi Speaker of the House

Hey sit-this-one-out conservatives, check out the what the world will be like under Speaker Pelosi, according to the Post. Let us walk our way through their assessment of the situation when she becomes the Speaker of the House. Let's enter their alternative reality where Democrats have a veto proof majority (otherwise, how do they get their agenda past Bush, oh right, they plan to impeach him).

She rose from the ashes of her defeat and got good advice to bash Bush from Kos and his kids:

On election night 2004, Nancy Pelosi faced a painful reality: Her party was again a big loser, failing to win the presidency and losing three more House seats. Pundits were suggesting Pelosi should accept her fate as the leader of a permanent House minority.

But the California legislator had a different idea. Instead, she reached out to advertising executives, Internet moguls and language specialists to ask how Democrats could rise from the ashes and challenge President Bush and the Republicans. The advice that came back was unabashed: "You must take him down" and then hammer away at the differences between the two parties, Pelosi recalled.

To go on and win this year's election by her brilliant strategy of bashing Bush and offering no alternative solution to Bush's faults:

Today the Democrats appear capable of taking back leadership of the House after 12 years in the minority, for reasons largely beyond Pelosi's control: an unpopular war, an unpopular president and a series of scandals that have left the Republicans highly vulnerable.

Nevertheless, if the Democrats win, experts say, much credit is due this 66-year-old woman, whose notable fundraising abilities (she raised $50 million this election cycle) and scorched-earth strategy of refusing to negotiate with the GOP have put her on track to become the first woman to be speaker of the House.

Rising above the charge of liberal by the evil Republicans, she proves she can get along with the conservative heartland by eating pork with them and promising them oil. I'm not sure from where, maybe Venezuela because you know she isn't going to allow us to drill anywhere in the US. No, it's better to harm the environment somewhere else. Why sully our land with drilling. Let those third world nations suffer from their drilling so that we can have oil. But I digress:
This summer, as Republicans were demonizing Pelosi as a liberal liability, Peterson invited her to his rural district -- where she looked comfortable eating a pork chop on a stick and vowed to direct energy money to the Midwest, instead of the Mideast.
She is viewed as obstructionist by the evil Republicans but it's just good management style. Keeping a Stalinist grip on her party leads to unity so that they can be one voice in their liberal demands:
Dismissed by her critics as too liberal, too elitist and too lacking in gravitas, Pelosi, serving her 10th term, has proved to be a tough-minded tactician who has led her caucus from the political center and kept the fractious House Democrats in line. Pelosi and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) rarely work together, and the Democrats voted along party lines 88 percent of the time last year -- the most unified voting record in 50 years -- according to a Congressional Quarterly study. By hanging together, the Democrats have thwarted many GOP initiatives, including the centerpiece of Bush's second-term agenda, restructuring Social Security.

That approach, while emboldening the Democrats, has earned Pelosi the enmity of House Republicans, who claim she is an obstructionist. Pelosi, who is married to a wealthy San Francisco businessman and wears designer suits, is a favorite target of conservatives. Throughout the campaign, Republicans have sought to scare voters by portraying Pelosi as a liberal extremist who would be weak on national security and prone to raises taxes if her party were back in control.
And the evil Republicans are scaring the voters into not voting for her, claiming she'll undermine our national security and will raise taxes:
Throughout the campaign, Republicans have sought to scare voters by portraying Pelosi as a liberal extremist who would be weak on national security and prone to raises taxes if her party were back in control.
But she isn't undermining our national defense, she plans to improve our defense by removing our troops from Iraq. Even though that would be viewed by the terrorists as a victory (just look at Lebanon if you don't believe me) and would embolden our enemies (read the NIE report if you doubt that):
But as the new minority leader, Pelosi knew she could not impose her views on her caucus and instead initially took the position that it was the Republicans' war, for the Republicans to fix. Privately, however, she spent months conferring with Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), a decorated Vietnam War veteran and prominent voice on military matters, who had voted for the war but was now souring on it. Pelosi knew that her voice would not be as credible as Murtha's.

The two planned Murtha's surprise turnaround a year ago, when he demanded immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops. Two weeks later, Pelosi followed his lead.

Should the Democrats win in November, Pelosi said, their new majority will push for the immediate start of a phased withdrawal of troops, to be completed by the end of 2007.
And as to the evil charge that she will raise taxes, you have to go elsewhere because the Post isn't admitting to that. But here's a clue:
Pelosi has signaled that she would not rely totally on seniority in appointing committee chairs. She has, however, told ranking members on the most powerful panels, Ways and Means, Rules, Energy and Commerce, and Appropriations, that she supports them.
That would include Charlie Rangle who has already said he will reverse all of Bush's tax cuts and will even add to our tax burden.

So, even though the Post has crowned her Speaker, do you think we might want to wait until the election to see if she will be Queen? Maybe enough of us I'd-rather-be-sitting-at-home-but-I'm-voting-for-the safety-of-my-kids Republicans will be able to offset your protest vote.

Notice how similar Scott Ott's spoof sounds to the Post piece:
With Republican electoral prospects dimming by the hour, Congressional Democrats today offered to forego "the embarrassment of counting the votes" from the upcoming national elections, but to let the GOP keep some of its seats in the House and Senate.

"It's kind of like an out-of-court settlement,‚" said presumptive House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-CA. "We'll let our friends across the aisle avoid the humiliation of a public thrashing by our strong, attractive Democrat candidates, but we'll demonstrate mercy by conceding a few seats, so that Republicans have at least a token voice in national affairs."


Meanwhile, Democrats ride a wave of public adoration due to the party's clear, positive vision for protecting the civil rights of foreign terrorists, retreating from Iraq so that rival Muslim sects can work out their differences without American interference, and restoring the Clinton era "spirit of cooperation" with North Korea.

While some critics have suggested that both parties wait until the American people speak at the ballot box before declaring winners and losers, Rep. Pelosi called that kind of thinking "a quaint relic of ancient history, made obsolete by political pollsters and media pundits."

"After all," she said, "just because we're the Democrat party doesn't mean we have to be slavishly democratic. Some things are better decided by a few smart people behind closed doors."