Nancy Pelosi: Un-merry maid; Update: Pushing March 21 Demcare deadline, no public option through reconciliation, Slaughter House horror
Scroll for updates…Pelosi pushes for 3/21 Demcare deadline, rejects public option via reconciliation…
Photoshop: Ray D.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s deficient cleaning service
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2010
“Maybe it will take a woman to clean up the House,” Nancy Pelosi boasted before the 2006 mid-term elections and over again. Looks like those XX chromosomes didn’t give her much advantage over the old cleaning crew. The swamp she was supposed to drain is overflowing. And less than four years after a sordid sexual predation scandal involving a creepy congressman rocked the Republican Party, a sordid sexual predation scandal involving a creepy congressman is now rocking the Democrat Party.
The same questions that dogged House leaders then are dogging House Speaker Pelosi now: What did she and her staff know and when did they know it?
On Thursday afternoon, by a vote of 402-1, the House overwhelmingly passed a privileged resolution offered by the Republican leadership demanding a formal House Ethics Committee investigation of Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her (mis)handling of harassment allegations concerning disgraced former New York Rep. Eric Massa. The soft-on-corruption ethics panel (see under “Rangel, Charlie”) had decided to shut down its investigation after Massa abruptly resigned on Monday.
But with reports piling up on how Massa kept a Capitol Hill playhouse filled with young, low-paid male staffers and how Pelosi’s office had fielded complaints of his bizarre and inappropriate behavior back in October, the House decided to pry the lid back open and put a stop to what the resolution calls the “public ridicule” that the seeming cover-up has invited.
Housecleaner Pelosi cannot be pleased by the second-guessing of her handiwork. Color her an un-merry maid. Even Democrat Rep. Patrick Kennedy, fresh from his raving House floor meltdown over media coverage of the Massa mess, voted for the GOP-initiated House resolution. Finally: Bipartisanship we can believe in!
With the exception of lone House Democrat Rep. Chaka Fattah who voted “no” and 27 members (including those who sit on the House Ethics Committee) who voted “present” or “not voting,” every other member of Pelosi’s House supported the petition to direct the Committee on Standards of Official to investigate fully “which House Democratic leaders and members of their respective staffs had knowledge prior to March 3, 2010 of the aforementioned allegations concerning Mr. Massa, and what actions each leader and staffer having any such knowledge took after learning of the allegations.” [The demand will now be referred to the Ethics Committee.]
The resolution stipulates that “numerous confusing and conflicting media reports that House Democratic leaders knew about, and may have failed to handle appropriately, allegations that Rep. Massa was sexually harassing his own employees have raised serious and legitimate questions about what Speaker Pelosi as well as other Democratic leaders and their respective staffs were told, and what those individuals did with the information in their possession.”
Democrat Rep. Barney Frank, who earned a House Ethics Committee slap on the wrist in 1990 after using his congressional office to fix parking tickets for male prostitute Steven Gobie, was one of those leaders in the know. After voting for the resolution, he disclosed for the first time that Massa had invited one of his young staffers to dinner. “Although this was not an ethical violation,” Frank said in a published statement, one of his senior staffers who was informed of the dinner alerted former Rep. Massa’s Chief of Staff, Joe Racalto.
In other words: Frank’s office knew it smelled illicit. And Barney Frank would know.
Racalto went on to contact Pelosi’s office directly in October. Tick, tick, tick. Five months later, in the wake of Massa’s own self-professed proclivity for tickle parties and victim/witness accounts of Massa’s alleged sexual assaults on his Navy underlings, Pelosi is pooh-poohing the scandal: “I have a job to do and not to be the receiver of rumors.” Translation: Don’t bother me with concerns about my members’ indiscretions. I’m busy. How quickly we’ve accelerated from the “most ethical” House ever to “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.”
There was a time when Pelosi the protector held House leaders to the highest standards and expectations in guarding young people working on Capitol Hill. During the GOP Mark Foley scandal, she inveighed: “The children who work as Pages in the Congress are Members’ special trust. Statements by the Republican Leadership indicate that they violated this trust when they were made aware of the Internet stalking of an underage Page by Mr. Foley and covered it up for six months to a year.”
Yet, she remains silent on the plight of the twentysomethings whom Massa was keeping house with under circumstances that rate an Ick Factor of 10+. Massa’s alleged targets are someone’s children, too.
Deflecting accountability for her own office’s violations of trust, Pelosi feigned sympathy for Massa and attributed his impaired ethical judgment to his medical condition (he has cancer). “Poor baby,” she said through gritted teeth. He’s “a very sick person.” So, what’s Pelosi’s excuse?
***
Update 11:30am Eastern. Pelosi made a brief press appearance to appear in command of the health care reform debate. She said the House would take as long as it needed…and then floated a March 21 deadline, on which she said she was happy Obama would be in attendance to sign a bill. Says public option will not be in this bill. Addressed parliamentary debate tussle from yesterday and asserted that “once we pass the Senate bill, it will be law.” Talked about student loan nationalization as part of reconciliation package. “In order for the Senate to do reconciliation, President must first sign the bill.”
More from Daniel Foster at NRO:
It is looking increasingly likely that Pelosi will employ the “Slaughter Rule,” a complex legislative maneuver that could allow the House to avoid a direct up-or-down vote on the Senate bill.
In a conference call with reporters, including NRO, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) commented on the House’s plan.
“It doesn’t solve their political problem,” McConnell said of the maneuver. “The Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, Gator-Aid. . . .Every member of the House of Representatives who votes for the Senate bill will have voted for all these things.”
McConnell continued, saying the employment of the Slaughter Rule would at best reveal House Democrats as flip-floppers. “It’s not solvable. . .. And even if by some hook or crook or maneuver or parliamentary device some of [the special deals] will be removed, then the position they will be in is that they will have voted for these measures before they voted against them.”
“The reason all this arm-twisting and parliamentary maneuvers is going on is because people hate this bill,” McConnell said.
But CongressDaily reports that, despite a key ruling from the Senate parliamentarian that the reconciliation process cannot start until the Senate bill is passed by the House and signed into law, the House is undeterred in pursuing the rule as a means of passing health-care reform.
And from Allahpundit:
Precisely because of the Slaughter strategy, it’s not the Senate bill that the House will be voting on. They’ll be voting on the reconciliation “fix,” which will be deemed to include the Senate bill but which hasn’t even been written yet. Will that be ready 72 or 48 or 24 hours before the vote on? No one knows. Although honestly, at this point, I hope it isn’t. I’d prefer to see them finish the bill an hour before the vote, or else to pass a completely blank reconciliation bill and then fill in whatever provisions they like at a meeting with Obama afterwards. That’s the only truly fitting way to end this fiasco — that, or having the bill fail narrowly during the House vote, at which point Pelosi would rise and somehow simply “deem” it as having passed. The more illegitimate this thing is, the greater the (admittedly small) chance that the GOP can roll back parts of it later. So here’s to Democrats getting really, really crazy with the cheese whiz.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Choosing Life and Beating the Odds
February 11, 2012 11:50 AM by Doug Powers
31 CommentsObama’s fraudulent abortion mandate “accommodation” Updated: Prez condemns “cynical” opposition
February 10, 2012 10:05 AM by Michelle Malkin
244 Comments‘To Stop the Multiplication of the Unfit’
February 10, 2012 09:06 AM by Michelle Malkin
152 CommentsNancy Pelosi Explains Why Obama Flip-Flopped on Super PACs
February 9, 2012 10:08 PM by Doug Powers
50 Comments
Report: Solyndra Sold Assets Cheap to Entity with Close Ties to Investors
February 9, 2012 10:08 AM by Doug Powers
49 Comments
Former Democrat Rep. Regrets Vote for Obamacare Due to Contraceptive Coverage
February 7, 2012 03:40 PM by Doug Powers
75 Comments
How to Make a Liberal Politician Stand Up Against Intrusive Government
February 6, 2012 04:28 PM by Doug Powers
95 Comments
Your Friday IRS regulation dump: Obamacare’s job-killing medical device tax
February 3, 2012 04:21 PM by Michelle Malkin
58 Comments
Categories: Corruption,Health care,Nancy Pelosi
JustOneMinute
» I Guess I'm Still Stuck On StupidRiehl World View
» Whitney Houston: If I should stay I would only be in your wayPatterico
» Rick Santorum and the two playbooksRiehl World View
» Romney's Blood Is Blue, Not ConservativePundit & Pundette
» King Barack vs. the Nonconformists
Botox on the brain.
Pelosi is losing what few marbles she still had. Meltdown!! Stocking up on more popcorn. She makes good theater.
“Poor Baby?”
Eeewwww… I’m getting an image of a diaper-clad “Fingers Massa” crawling up to that top bunk in full-on grope mode….
Brava, Michelle, BRAVA!!!
Does anyone know if there are hard and fast rules concerning rumors? Should every rumor concerning 535 (not to mention staff) people be investigated? What tips the scales? Hearing the rumor once, twice or three times? Knowing that it is only a rumor and it is not acted on, is that cause for action against the person that hears it?
[Note: You know it is a rumor because the person who tells you the story begins by saying, 'I heard about . . . " and ends with, " . . . did you?"]
What about speculation? Should speculations be investigated?
In no way should this specific investigation be stopped. It is about the next call for an investigation. What rises to the level requiring an investigation? What are the rules?
Does anyone know if there are hard and fast rules concerning rumors? Should every rumor concerning 535 (not to mention staff) people be investigated? What tips the scales? Hearing the rumor once, twice or three times? Knowing that it is only a rumor and it is not acted on, is that cause for action against the person that hears it?
[Note: You know it is a rumor because the person who tells you the story begins by saying, 'I heard about . . . " and ends with, " . . . did you?"]
What about speculation? Should speculations be investigated?
In no way should this specific investigation be stopped. It is about the next call for an investigation. What rises to the level requiring an investigation? What are the rules?
Amazon.com Sales Rank: #326,071 in Books…pretty pathetic….san fran nan is just plain looney tunes….
Amen!
Pelosi: “But we have to stop the investigation so that you can find out what this poor baby did, away from the fog of the controversy”
I don’t thing Pelosi’s referring to a homosexual man as “sick” is going to sit well with her base.
Easy enough. If it’s a Republican, you make up the rumor, publicize it, then investigate it until the person resigns. If it’s a Democrat, you need a body, a smoking gun, a confession and at least one vote against the Pelosi agenda.
I have found that as I get older, time seems to go by faster; hard to believe, for instance, that it’s almost mid-March already.
That being said, it still feels like a long, long time until November. How much more damage can the donks do until then? The mind shudders.
Younger voters tend to be very idealistic, and they have little (or no) tolerance for liars and hypocrites.
Internet videos comparing the words of Democratic Congress members then (when Republicans were in control) to now clearly reveal the lies and hypocrisy.
Young voters are more “plugged in” than ever, and they are not ignorant about what is going on.
Note to Democrats: The reason you’re losing those young voters is because of your lies, corruption, and hypocrisy.
Interestingly, the Open Borders groups have also pegged 21 March as the day they will stage public marches in support of Amnesty.
On March 12th, 2010 at 11:38 am, Regulus said:
And, assuming that they lose the House (and maybe even the Senate) in the November elections, how much damage will they do between then and when they are required to leave office in January?
ETHICS,we ain’t got no stinkin’ ETHICS, we don’t got to show you no ETHICS!!! Quote from SAN FRAN NAN 2010…
On March 12th, 2010 at 11:34 am, txvet2 said:
You can say that again.
Pelosi is going to have to face a primary challenger who has the backing of the Lyndon LaRouche organization (Summer Shields), as well as a general election challenge from both an even farther-left Socialist (Gloria LaRiva) and a Tea Party Republican (Dana Walsh).
Not only will Pelosi lose her job as speaker, she may even lose her job as Congresswoman.
On March 12th, 2010 at 11:46 am, PhredE said:
I realize that March 21 is not May 1, but maybe they had to move the protest up to maximize their hopes for both Obamacare and Amnesty.
Flashback:
Probably thought Massa was trying to get a freebie.
Good point. Especially when I recall the “scorched earth” behavior of the Clintonoids between November of 2000 and January of 2001.
Next month, I’m taking my first trip to the island of St Croix. I’m doing it now because I’m convinced that by the time Pelosi/Reid/Obama get done wrecking what’s left of our poor country, I’ll never be able to do this again!
Here is what I don’t understand:
BHO wants a bill passed by March 18;
Pelosi said the House has its own timetable;
BHO decided to delay his Indonesia trip by 3 days to work on healthscare;
Yesterday, Megyn Kelly interviewed a spokesperson for healthscare, who told said the bill would be online for 5 days before a vote was taken;
This morning, Pelosi restated that the House has its own timetable and would take whatever time is needed to work on the bill;
Pelosi then stated she’s glad BHO is in town and hopes to have a bill passed while he’s in the states.
WHY ARE NO REPORTERS QUESTIONING THE INCONSISTENCIES IN WHAT SHE HAS BEEN SAYING FOR THE PAST TWO DAYS?
Hey Nancy, I want to thank you for the most ethical House ever! Now, go make me a sandwich, and don’t be chincy with the Yarlsburg!
Barney: “Hey Eric, you can host your tickle parties at my place if you want. Plenty of room now that all the male prostitutes have moved out!”
Madam Speaker has turned the swamp she vowed to drain into a fetid cesspool.
Who would have guessed radical liberalism would be so poorly received that the lowest of the low corruption would become part of the mainstream legislative process?
Well, lots of people actually.
I’m confused. Let’s see if I have this right. Rep. Massa asked a male member of Rep. Frank’s staff out to dinner. How is that suspicious? Because he was a closet homosexual? Does that violate House rules?
Obviously, there is a ton of information being withheld. I am ashamed to say that I can’t look away from this ongoing train wreck.
***
I remember the photo of SanFranNan and other Kalifornia “democrats” / liberals / socialists / statists / marxists / communists walking in front of a GLBTwhatsis banner at the Frisco Gay Pride or Folsom St. Fair event. If she calls someone “sick” she is making a really “nuanced” call. Something like calling the Hiroshima A-bomb explosion an “unfortunate event”!
***
What culture of corruption? It could have been a lot worse–Massa could have been a republican “toe tapping” in a Minneapolis Airport restroom stall.
***
Just wait until the full details on this come out. The House (un!)”Ethics” Committee got the vote to “investigate” only to help whitewash their party–or as a “red herring” to take the spotlight off the ObamaCare cramdown vote.
***
John Bibb
***
LOL. I appreciate the humor. Thanks.
On March 12th, 2010 at 11:39 am, ITookTheRedPill said:
… and abortion …
Stupak and other pro-life Democrats, DON’T CAVE!
There is nothing Pelosi can offer you that is worth a human life.
Oberstgruppenführer Pelosi will be a victim of her own “Night of the Long Knives” if Massa eventually does confirm himself to be a homosexual.
The Castro District SA and North Beach SS will not tolerate her dissing the enlightened.
Pelosi shouldn’t use the phrase “very sick person.”
That’s her power base.
He was cutting into Barney’s private stock. That’s reason enough.
Pelosi’s attitude reminds me of a news item I read years ago, about a home-invasion robber who was in the midst of raping a woman in the house when the police arrived outside and called on him to give himself up.
“Just a minute,” he yelled back, “I’m almost finished.”
That’s when the police, equally dismayed and enraged by his chutzpah, kicked in the door and dragged him off.
Pelosi knows that she’s forcing donkey-care on an unwilling public, and she knows that her party is going to go down for it; but she seems determined to go through with it no matter what.
Come November, there are going to be a lot of donks getting dragged off by the voters, equally dismayed and enraged by the chutzpah they are experiencing and witnessing.
It’s okay as long as he doesn’t break the seal.
Wrong kind of stock. Down here, it used to be a hangin’ offense to steal somebody else’s heifer.
Mark Levin seems to think Slaughter violates the spirit, if not the letter, of Article 1 Section 7, and from my reading, Republicans could demand a recorded and published vote with just 20% of the total House via Section 5.
Levin says a Bill passed with only one chamber actually having voted on it will trigger a Constitutional Crisis not seen since the 1860s.
The House passing bills without votes by fiat of the rules committee is the path to the end of representative democracy, and as a willful violation of at least the spirit of the framers in the US Constitution, is the end of our republican (small “r”) form of government.
Again, Pelosi must know she loses the gavel, and with it, her swanky USAF sky limo, and it is a price she is willing to pay to advance Marxism.
She is also clearly willing to commit treason against her own country.
If she does trigger a civil war, I do hope she winds up on the losing end and faces Nurenberg style justice, her ugly death mask face unchanged except maybe a little purpler inside the hangman’s noose.
But I’ll settle, would actually prefer, hell care is defeated, she loses the gavel anyway for even trying an end run around the Constitution, and she lives out her miserable botoxed existence as a pariah in the House, loved only by her San Francisco sexual deviant constituents.
Good people, as well as traitors like Pelosi, will die in any violence.
Amazing that I am even thinking of that. I was not at all a Black Helicopter type, and while I despised Clinton, I never pictured him trying to destroy the Constitution, or make himself ruler for life, or the Dems a permanent Politburo.
That’s because all Bill ever really cared about, was getting laid.
Obowmao and company have a different lust.
In other words, if this is going back to the ethics panel, no wrong doing or unethical behavior will be found to have occured.
Wonder how many tickle parties the ethics panel had with Massa?
I do believe the Speaker is in way over her head-aka; she is dumb as a rock.
Nancy Pelosi; Yeesh, what a witch! She makes me absolutely sick to my stomach. How in the heck did our country end up with that crazy loon occupying such a high office? She is as mad as a hatter!
Where’s the PC police?! Sexist!
Whew! That’s a relief! For a minute there I thought nothing would happen.
“Unearned income” is the new Demonrat term for capital gains. Some guy who lights his fat, stinking cigar with rolled up $100 bills, and wears a top hat and tails, or any other person who invests in the free enterprise system, who exploit the working classes, well, they haven’t earned their income.
Off the Limbaugh site. The Slaughter Plan involves, after the House is deemed to have passed the Senate bill, a corrections bill that replaces the union Caddilac tax with a tax on stinking running dog capitalist lackeys.
From the Limbaugh web site.
Republican Congresswoman Virginia Foxx was on C-SPAN not long ago, speaking about this from the House Floor. She is one of four Republicans on the Rules Committee, and she made a point about how the 9 Democrats on the Rules Committee refuse to allow C-SPAN to cover their meetings.
On a separate but related note, read the letter that Congresswoman Foxx sent to speaker Pelosi.
This woman is a disgrace. There is nothing merry about her as Michelle points out. She is a bitter, washed-up, vapid waste of a female politician and shouldn’t be held up as an example for women to look up to or learn from. Yet, she has her defenders in the liberal, far-left establishment of the Dem party along with feminists who harken her Congressional reign as “progress” for women.
I’m sorry, but as someone who has studied women’s history and who counts women’s history as a content field, I’m not sure Elizabeth Cady Stanton or Susan B. Anthony would see Pelosi as a symbol of female empowerment. If liberal feminists want to hitch their stars onto this woman’s wagon, go for it. Don’t cry and wail when Pelosi’s tyranny becomes a step back for women.
On March 12th, 2010 at 1:08 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:
Be very, very careful about even considering a civil war,
even if you think Pelosi, or Reid, or Obama are “triggering” one.
There are many, many reasons why we really don’t want to see a civil war. Some are obvious. Some are not.
If you study the history of Soviet “active measures” (a.k.a. “Ideological Subversion”), you will find that the stages are:
1) Demoralization (a very long process, taking multiple decades)
2) Destabilization (also a long process)
3) Crisis
4) Normalization (happens very, very quickly, as in days or weeks)
There are two different methods that transition from stage 3 to stage 4:
- Civil War
- Invasion
For the U.S.A., invasion is unlikely, but not completely out of the question. The more likely scenario would be via civil war.
In other words, the die-hard Communists actually WANT the U.S.A. to degrade into civil war. That actually helps them achieve their real goal: Communist “normalization”.
Red Pill, I think you give young people a little “too” much credit. They may be “plugged in” but are their minds open to new ideas? Or have they been so brainwashed by our gutter popular culture and mediocre public and university school systems that the damage is irreparable? Do the younger generations really value the Constitution, honor, and integrity, or do they want to cash in and get what’s theirs such as free healthcare, education, housing, and jobs?
As a former educator, and someone who used to live in a college town for most of their life, I’ve seen amazing displays of arrogance, selfishness, self-centeredness, and the egocentric tendencies of people in their 20′s. The me me me culture is alive and well and invested in seeing Obummer succeed. They don’t care about the implications of debt, how much a huge social, welfare system costs for the taxpayers of this country, or even how to balance their own checkbooks.
Deficit? What deficit?
On March 12th, 2010 at 2:37 pm, emjem24 said:
Susan B. Anthony made me think about the women’s suffrage movment and the 19th Amendment:
Now, I know this is going to be controversial, but the 19th Amendment only mentions the right to vote. It does not explicitly ammend the Constituion to make any of the “he” references gender-neutral.
I am quite happy with Michelle Bachman, Virginia Foxx, etc., and I not don’t mean the above in any “sexist” way at all. It’s merely a statement of fact that the original Constitution is filled with references to “he” and “his”, and the 19th Amendment does not change the language of those references.
The 19th Amendment clearly gave women the right to vote, but it is not clear to me that it gave women the right to hold office in the U.S. Government.
I have no doubt that, if deemed necessary for any reason, a new ammendment could be quickly passed and ratified in order to give women the Constitutional right to hold elected office. But, if that were deemed necessary, would it mean that all women currently holding office would have to leave office until the ammendment was passed and ratified?
I’m not being sexist, just Constitutionalist. I’m quite happy with many of the women holding office, I’m just not sure the 19th Amendment covered that.
Please excuse the spelling and grammatical errors in my comment above.
Stupak to NRO Corner.
Death panels for the unborn.
And one can only guess what the Dems think of the handicapped and elderly.
If bin Laden is alive and watching all this, he must be enthusiastically stuffing his mouth with premium popcorn.
What joy to have none other Nasty PelNazi herself working as his agent of subterfuge, detroying for real what his jets could only scratch.
What a perfect title for her book! How did it ever come to this…a woman dumber than a box of rocks leading the House of Representatives? I bug could fly into one ear and right out of the other.
As a retired Navy man, I wonder how someone like Massa could become a Commander and actually hold command of a Naval vessel. Any schmuck can get elected to Congress.
Looks and speaks fidgety crazy, but cunning like a fox so we need to stay on guard. She is starting to show some rabid tendencies tho.
What I meant would likely get me banned from this good forum.
Nanny at the end of the clip finally comes to the cusp of “Know Your Power” Nan:
“Sometimes we really exagerate our own importance, you know.”
That’s ma girl!
Call me a RAAAAAAACIST if you will, but I believe any member of Congress who go along with this “Slaughter” maneuver should swing from a noose.
Is it time for the citizens of this country to convene a citizens grand jury to indict for impeachment Nancy Pelosi and others in Congress for High Crimes and Misdemeanors for deliberately conspiring as elected officials of the United States to subvert the supreme law of the land- our US Constitution in violation of their oaths of office?
Are they so blatant about disregarding the Constitution that they think they are above the law?
Are they deliberately forcing a Constitutional crisis?
The “Slaughter Solution” attempt of “deeming” legislation approved without actually voting on it a direct assault on our entire system of government and taking active steps to conspire with others to subvert our Constitution in this manner demands accountability to the people!
Maybe somehow it does not rise to this level legally, though logic dictates it does, but one thing is an absolute certainty as the primary Representative of “The Peoples House” she is an all time total disgrace.
I don’t think Laddy has jets–yet.
The woman is a turd. Pull the chain.
If they “deem” something into law without a vote, they will have abrogated any pretense of the consent of the governed, rule of law, or Constitutionality.
I will “deem” them illegitimate.
Agreed! The DEATH-O-CRATS are on the goose-stepping march.
The way to “flush” both Pelosi and Obama is fairly simple.
1) Pelosi swore under oath (to a Notary Public) that Barack Obama is legally qualified to serve as President under the provisions of the United States Constitution.
2) To be legally qualified to serve as President, under the provisions of the United States Constitution, you must have been a Citizen of the United States, and not a citizen or subject of any other country, since birth.
3) Barack Obama was born a subject of Great Britain, and became a citizen of Kenya when Kenya became independent. Obama’s own campaign web site admitted this. Regardless of whether or not “his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982″, the point is HE HAD KENYAN CITIZENSHIP. He had Kenyan Citizenship because he was born a British subject. That fact alone disqualifies Obama from the Presidency, regardless of where he was born.
3) Support and defend the U.S. Constitution. Obama is an ineligible usurper, and Pelosi fraudulently certified him. He has never legally been President, and anything with his signature on it is void. He should not be impeached, because impeachment is only for people who legitimately hold the office in the first place. Pelosi, on the other hand, should be impeached.
On the “Panic at the Team O” thread,
On March 12th, 2010 at 10:35 am, letget said:
I believe that was a trade-off to gain the support of the Democratic Socialist Progressives who were angry about having to give up on the “Public Option”. They gave up their preferred route to single-payer, but Pelosi assured them that the “exchanges” will accomplish the same objective (she said so herself in the press conference), and in exchange for giving up the Public Option, they get to take over another part of the economy: Student Loans.
BBBBBWWWWWAAAAAHHHHHHAHAHAHAHA!!!
This Congress as a group is obviously too stupid to realize that they do something on a daily basis that invites — no, demands — public ridicule. By Monday, tickle fight hijinks will have been surpassed by some other even more ludicrous (or should that be lewdicrous) behavior.
I don’t see how deeming, legislative anything, squares with the Constitution.
It doesn’t. What we are watching is the death of our representative republic at the hands of an out of control radicalized Democrat Party. This has always been a possibility but I never thought I’d see it in my life time. I fear Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul is correct, we are sinking rapidly toward civil war.
Good column, Michelle! Disturbing, but enlightening.
I hope everybody joins me from this day forward in referring to election day in November as America’s Slaughter Solution.
Operative words: “roll back parts of it later”.
That’s the problem. This can’t go through!
Heading off to a 3 hour class on the constitution. Hope this issue comes up.
November 2, that’s civil war.
He’s a Dem but I sure like Bart Stupak.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzU0MDYxMWEyOTdiNGU1OGU3ZjYzYmE3Y2ZlZDQ5NTY=
In our history how many times has the government rolled anything back? This must be stopped. These people are out of control, acting in their version of Bizarro World.
We’re looking at freedom being held hostage and awaiting execution.
I fear we may not make it to Nov 2nd.
The March 21 deadline for Obamacare coincides nicely with the planned march by citizens of other countries illegally in our country DEMANDING rights from our government.
The health care overhaul is mainly to benefit them anyway.
Its all democratic now.
Well, you know what they say: a slice off a cut loaf is never missed.