« | »

More Dems Pushing Pelosi To Step Aside

From her loyal fans at the Associated Press:

Democrats pressing Pelosi to step aside

By Julie Hirschfeld Davis And David Espo, Associated Press Wed Nov 10, 2010

WASHINGTON – In a fresh sign of turmoil among defeated Democrats, a growing number of the rank and file say they won’t support House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a politically symbolic roll call when the new Congress meets in January.

"The reality is that she is politically toxic," said Illinois Rep. Mike Quigley, one of several Democrats who are trying to pressure Pelosi to step aside as her party’s leader in the wake of historic election losses to Republicans last week.

Pelosi startled many Democrats with a quick postelection announcement that she would run for minority leader. She has yet to draw an opponent for the post.

Hilarious. Ms. Pelosi is wildly unpopular even when she is running unopposed. And what does it tell you when the Democrats on the Hill have more sense than the people of San Francisco?

Party elections are scheduled for next week, although a postponement is possible.

In the interim, Pelosi’s critics have become more vocal in their efforts to retire her from the party leadership.

There’s "starting to be a sense that this may not be as much of a done deal as people might have thought," Rep. Jason Altmire said of Pelosi’s quest to remain the top Democrat.

"If enough people come out and voice a little discomfort with the idea of her continuing on, maybe she would reconsider," said the Pennsylvanian, one of a handful of Democrats who said he won’t cast a ceremonial vote for her.

Have the Congressional Democrats ever thought about asking for a re-count in Pelosi’s congressional district? After all, they are pretty good at getting the results they want from re-counts.

The election of a party leader occurs behind closed doors. A separate election for speaker to be held on Jan. 5, a few hours after the House convenes for the first time, is a very visible one. One member of each party is typically nominated, and each lawmaker is then called by name to stand and declare a choice. The event is customarily televised live.

It sounds a lot like ‘Card Check,’ doesn’t it? Isn’t it funny how thugs everywhere seek to avoid the secret ballot?

Defections from party discipline are rare in such circumstances, but several Democrats said they would not support Pelosi. They did not specify how they would vote instead…

Maybe they could take a page from their glorious leader and vote ‘present.’

Most of the Democrats who say they would not support Pelosi are moderates from conservative districts who have toiled to distinguish themselves from their liberal leader, and who watched dozens of like-minded Democrats go down in defeat after Republicans savaged them in TV advertisements as lapdogs of the San Francisco congresswoman.

Instead of "lapdogs" we prefer the terms ‘Nancy Boys’ — or even ‘Pelosi Whipped.’

Quigley stopped short of saying he would oppose Pelosi on a public vote, but others did not.

"You would find an unusual number of people not voting for the nominee of their party" if Pelosi were the choice, said Rep. Jim Matheson of Utah.

"There’s a growing number of people in the caucus saying, ‘Why’s she running for minority leader in the first place?’ We just got thumped in this election in a major way, and to act like we can just go back and do the same thing over again. It just seems like a very obvious situation when change is called for," Matheson said

We respectfully disagree. After all, when your party needs a face-lift, who better to turn to than Nancy Pelosi? And who better to lead them into a permanent minority?

(Even though in some ways Ms. Pelosi does seem more naturally suited to be the Minority Whip – if you know what I mean.)

Rep. Dan Boren, D-Okla., another conservative, said through a spokesman that he, too, plans to vote against Pelosi in public and private.

Rep. Mike Ross, D-Ark., strongly suggested as much in a statement in which he said he wouldn’t back Pelosi "for House Democratic leader or any other leadership position in the Congress." …

[Pelosi’s] decision to seek a new term as party leader has also set off a messy struggle between Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, currently the No. 2 Democrat, and Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina, the current No. 3…

[The contest] has taken on racial overtones in recent days with the decision of the Congressional Black Caucus to endorse Clyburn.

Democratic officials say Pelosi has urged Clyburn to bow out of the race and run for a lesser leadership job, with an additional promise of a newly created face-saving position on a key committee. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss private discussions…

We knew it! Ms. Pelosi is trying to push Mr. Clyburn to the back of the bus.

Other Democrats, eager for a smooth transition, note that if Pelosi were to withdraw, it would avoid a face-off between Hoyer and Clyburn

You would think she would step aside, if only to preserve ‘racial harmony’ and ‘social justice.’ Especially after she demanded that so many Representatives fall on their swords for ‘healthcare reform.’ (We’re just kidding, of course.)

Even the timetable for the selection of leaders has become embroiled in the controversy.

Two prominent liberals have called for a delay in the closed-door vote until next month.

"Following the loss of our majority, we should fully understand the causes of our historic losses before we begin the process of rebuilding," Reps. Peter DeFazio of Oregon and Marcy Kaptur of Ohio wrote fellow Democrats.

Is there anything that the Democrats won’t postpone?

Still, the truly scary thing is that Nancy Pelosi has been an effective Democrat House Speaker. Just as Mr. Obama has been an effective Democrat President. They have both gotten the Democrats practically everything they wanted.

The problem for the Democrats is that the American people just don’t want what their party wants. In fact, the only time the American people think they like the Democrat Party is when they aren’t getting what they want.

This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, November 11th, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

12 Responses to “More Dems Pushing Pelosi To Step Aside”

  1. NoNeoCommies says:

    They need to buy commercial time having “average” people telling her to “Please step aside.”

  2. proreason says:

    Sure, the Witch is dumb as a post. She probably still thinks the Dims won the last election.

    But certainly, all of the other Dims aren’t THAT stupid. They know Pelosi is like a red flag in front of a bull.

    The only way to make sense of the Witch retaining her position, is that it must be a clear signal that Dims with room-temperature IQ’s aren’t worried about the 2012 election in the least. Now, I’m pretty sure they don’t want to give up their empire, so what might they have in mind?

    • heykev says:

      The maybe betting the farm that by then entitlements will be so entrenched because of then the economy will be far worse and more people will be asking for their gov’t for assistance. Similar to what we see now in Europe.

    • proreason says:

      Could be, but they aren’t really into gambling.

      See the discussion below with tn for some other ideas and what Rush is wondering about.

  3. tranquil.night says:

    Nancy has to stay as leader for the same reason they were desperate to steal the election for Dingy Harry. They’re an integral part if not the pillars of the culture of corruption. If Pelosi and her allies go down then I wouldnt be surprised if it compromises the entire regime because of what we’d be likely to learn with Pelosi lacking the power to obfuscate effectively.

    At this point they’ve backed themselves into such a corner politically that they probably have to stay the course to, their party’s final shellacking in 2012, or risk losing control and all hell breaking loose imminently.

    Unfortunately we also know this means these lunatics have 2 years left to solidify their legacy of destruction. And behind the sqwakbox, all signs indicate they’re still all in.

    • proreason says:

      That doesn’t compute in my brain.

      a. These animals have no loyalty whatsoever
      b. The culture of corruption certainly can’t be dependant on a single individual
      c. They aren’t stupid enough to think she can help their cause. I mean really, she is the poster child of out-of-control socialism. Obamy spent his life hiding his marxism and he has still been outed. Pelosi is proud of hers.
      d. She is such a fringe lunatic that she grates on the nerves of even the most wild-eyed liberal.
      e. Now that she can’t be the straw boss, she has no useful function. You can’t even say her positives balance her negative. She has no positives outside her fothing queer followers in San Francisco.

      Rush may be dancing around the truth. The kookiest of the kooks may have taken over that party, and only now are the kooks who occasionally have a cogent moment waking up to the depth of destruction the K of Ks have wrought.

    • tranquil.night says:

      Very good points sir, here are my thoughts:

      The kookiest of the kooks (and the most corrupt) are currently in control. That’s Pelosi leading the enviros, the unions, the CBC. You’re right in that there’s certainly a power struggle happening currently within the ultra-lib clique (on top of the disaffected Blue Dogs) but theirs is less to do with why they got shellacked and more with who’s entitled to their greatly diminished power. That was Hoyer v Clyburn.

      All these libs sniping at Pelosi now are weenies, and most of the Blue Dogs are too or they’d just go Republican. Sure there’s no loyalty, but there’s also no courage. At the end of the day they’re not going to buck their infamous first woman speaker who worked maybe too eagerly to deliver legislative progress for the first black president. Think of what all their nag wives would do.

      Regarding them all being outed as socialists, I’m not sure that secrecy matters much anymore either. Same thing with general character. What matters to Obama is that no one gets control of the narrative of Democrat leadership that heaven forbid would actually compromise with the new conservatives, especially when it comes to the information that’s going to be coming out of congressional investigations.

      Pelosi’s hidden positives are that she’ll keep the party in line and blind, even if that means turning 300 seats over to Republicans. As long as the numbers hold up in the Senate, Obama’s safety net remains.

  4. JohnMG says:

    …….”Instead of “lapdogs” we prefer the terms ‘Nancy Boys’ — or even ‘Pelosi Whipped.’…..”

    Oh, Steve. That is sooooo rich! I wish I’d thought of it. :-)

    • tranquil.night says:

      Had to jump in agreement because this one had me rolling too. Steve is out of this world clever. It blows my mind and the laughter honestly keeps me sane in light of what we’re usually reading.

      I second Pro’s earlier comment that we got a lot of hilarious posters at S&L. Eat yout heart out Daily Show.

  5. Right of the People says:

    Pelosi startled many Democrats with a quick postelection announcement that she would run for minority leader. She has yet to draw an opponent for the post.

    Most sane people know the post is a lose, lose proposition. I mean who in their right mind would want to be the captain of the Titanic knowing what we know now? San Fran Nan is clinging to her socialist dream no matter how misguided. Must be the Botox.

  6. canary says:

    It’s taking some time for Pelosi to get her black book pages of dates & hotels to her fellow Democrats.
    Heard she just had a big social event party. That will make it easier to whisper in ears, and not over the phone or via-text, e-mail.

  7. Chase says:

    With the tangent on entitlements, one has to wonder about the withdrawals the Nancy must be going through with the loss of her airplane, size of staff, and the privileges, perks, and likely shady deals that have so enriched her life these past years.

    Just like her weening following, they are all addicted to their entitlements, and as we have seen with the Kennedys, Jefferson (D-LA), Bwarney and their ilk who cling to power even when their shame should see them stepping down – unlike the Reps who generally when caught or exposed quickly and neatly resign and disappear – but instead check themselves into rehab (while still getting paid or accruing time on their ‘service record?’) or excuse their behavior away with any number of rationalizations – all for the fingernail gripping and clawing at their seats of power and their entitlements. Without their political cushiony thrones, they are nothing, of worth to no one, cut out of the under-the-table graft that no doubt sends shivers up their thighs, and they know it is their end.

    It is pathetic that such little people with such small-mindedness develop such egos that draw them to politics and that people vote for them.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »