Short post tonight because I'm reading senior seminar papers.
However, Democratic defenses of Nancy Pelosi's trip to Syria are just as ridiculous as the Republican criticisms.
Of course as the liberal bloggers claim, Congressional big-shots have travelled to countries with which the U. S. has questionable relations and done like Nancy Pelosi did in carrying messages from one country to another.
But liberal bloggers are forgetting that George Bush is a particularly weak president who wouldn't carry much weight in either Tel Aviv or Damascus. Bush leadership was repudiated by the voting public at the polls last November and that repudiation is repeated every week when new polling numbers come out. Bush's leadership was also repudiated by the foreign policy elites who participated in the Iraq Study Group. In fact, it's hard to find anyone outside talk radio, the conservative think tanks, and the 34% Republican base who doesn't communicate a sense of repulsion about Bush.
To the contrary, Nancy Pelosi is the leader of the majority party and the highest ranking person who actually represents public opinion in the U. S. When Pelosi travels to Damascus to communicate American concerns over Syrian support for Hezbollah and other issues, she does so with a lot more sense of political weight and responsibility than anyone associated with the Bush administration. As a result of Pelosi's visit, Syria knows that the whole American political establishment disapproves of his strategies not just the lightweight renegade George Bush. In this way, Pelosi's visit performs the crucial function of getting a government to take the United States seriously even if it can't take the Bush administration seriously.
Really, Nancy Pelosi should be taking more trips to assure foreign governments of American seriousness about Israeli-Palestinian issues, Iraqi security, the Pakistani-Indian situation, China-Taiwan concerns and the like.
And the Bush administration should encourage her. Perhaps the world will take the Bush administration more seriously if they're backed up by Pelosi.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
The White House controls foreign policy, that's the way it works, at least with respect to talking to terrorist states we are in conflict with. Pelosi is a total Dhimmicrat, and she made a fool of herself...
absurd thought –
God of the Universe says
overstep authority
undermine your government
talk to the enemy
.
Pelosi did fine and the White House makes fools out of themselves every day. That's the problem. Because the Bush administration has taken out a patent on incompetence and failure, they need Pelosi to reassure foreign countries that U. S. government isn't totally populated with unreliable jerks.
George Bush needs Nancy Pelosi like he needs another liberal blogger to berate him.
Article I Section 8 of the constitution enumerates the powers of the Legislative Branch. Nowhere does it mention the power of the Speaker or any other House member to conduct foreign relations without the permission of the President. The Logan Act states that, "Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both."
This act was passed after George Logan attempted to discuss foreign policy issues with the French Government under the Adams administration. Albert Gallatin, future sec. of treasury under Jefferson and NOT a supporter of strong executive power, stated that, "it would be extremely improper for a member of this House to enter into any correspondence with the French Republic . . . As we are not at war with France, an offence (sic) of this kind would not be high treason, yet it would be as criminal an act, as if we were at war."
Sound Familiar? What Nancy Pelosi did was amoral, unconstitutional, and illegal. Someone needs to remind Madame Speaker that she is not Madame President.
I've seen several references to the Logan Law in right-wing writing.
Tell you what.
If the Bush administration thinks Pelosi acted in a criminal manner, they should put their money where their mouths are. They should indict Pelosi and every politician who has visited Syria over the last four years.
I'm sure it's a long list.
If Bush was a competent president, the country wouldn't need Pelosi to act as a shadow president.
Unfortunately, however, Bush is not competent. In fact, it's because Bush is such a joke that Pelosi has to act in the way she does. Bush is the president of Dick Cheney, right-wing think tanks like AEI, talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh, and their listeners. But that's it. It's up to Pelosi to represent the rest of us. And she's doing a decent job of it.
When, at any point in history, has a Speaker of the House during a time of war (and yes we are in a time of war which your Hillary Clinton did vote to approve) gone to a country that was known to be funding our enemy? Does no one remember the last time we appeased a leader? Does Neville Chamberlin ring a bell? I guess liberals need to read their history books a little closer. Chamberlin came to Britain claming he had assured peace in our time, which allowed Hitler to take over all the buffer zones in Europe (most importantly the Rhineland). O yeah, and in case you don’t remember what happened after that, there was a World War. For the here and now, Pelosi is visiting a leader who has: 1) captured British soldiers for no apparent reason other than “they were in our waters” 2) had denounced that the Holocaust happened. 3) Openly supported terrorism. The sad thing is that you support this because Bush hasn’t “adequately represented the people.” There hasn’t been one terrorist attack in America since 9/11. That is a fact. There have been enormous efforts in the prevention of terrorism, but I forgot that liberals would rather see 3000 people dead before we can really do anything. Also, the constitution allows for the president to send someone as a diplomat as long as he approves. So yes, there have been other people sent to Syria for diplomatic efforts, but their efforts were known and discussed. Pelosi is making America look weak and scared. She is a moron who thinks she can run the country from a position of only slight power in one legislative body of a bicameral legislature. She is going to appease these psychos and open the door for other terrorist organizations to realize that liberals are willing to lose this war. She’s doing a decent job of making herself and the Democratic Party resemble party symbol, which Thomas Nast appropriately chose. So besides saying that Bush isn’t competent as an excuse for one of your party leaders to break the law, produce facts as to why Bush isn’t competent.
Thanks for that reply. You raise an important point about Neville Chamberlain. It turn out that, Bush is our Chamberlain. Like Chamberlain's appeasement policy, Bush's Iraq policy has failed. Just as Chamberlain was repudiated by the British public, Bush has been repudiated by the American public.
If you don't like the way Nancy Pelosi is acting these days, the best thing you could do is to write President Bush and ask him and Dick Cheney to resign. That's ultimately what Neville Chamberlain did. Bush should follow his example.
Thanks again for giving me the idea. If I get a chance, I'll post on that topic at greater length.
btw, Bush's incompetence has been illustrated by the campaign of deception that led to the war, the conduct of the war itself, Katrina, and the current fired prosecutor scandal. That's why the country no longer trusts Bush to conduct the war.
Post a Comment