Pelosi Puts Her Foot In It

Question from the press during Pelosi’s capital briefing Thursday Morning: “Madam Speaker, in terms of the political tone, the tone of the debate, Hoyer said earlier this week he thought it was the most vitriolic since '93-'94. And around that time we also saw acts of domestic violence, domestic terrorism. How concerned are you about the tone of the political debate, in terms of people talking about anti-government rhetoric and so on and the possibility of violence?”

---

Speaker Pelosi: “Well, I think we all have to take responsibility for our actions and our words. We are a free country, and this balance between freedom and safety is one that we have to carefully balance. I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw this, myself, in the late '70s in San Francisco. This kind of rhetoric was very frightening, and it created a climate in which violence took place. So I wish that we would all, again, curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made, so that understanding that some of the people -- the ears that it is falling on are not as balanced as the person making the statement might assume. But, again, our country is great because people can say what they think and they believe. But I also think that they have to take responsibility for any incitement that they may cause.”

The question put before Nancy Pelosi wasn’t just leading, it came equipped with a complete halter setup. Take a look at the language in this soft ball, “the most vitriolic since…”, “acts of domestic violence,” “anti-government rhetoric…”. I have to wonder why the reporter chose that particular era. If you check back in history, we had a Republican administration and most of the anti-government rhetoric on the voters side was almost nonexistent. There was however a militia group called the Freemen. The Freemen, a group stationed in an almost completely unpopulated area of Montana were engaged in a Waco-style standoff with the FBI. You will notice that the Bush Administration did not have a Janet Reno heading their law enforcement agencies. Charles Duke, a Republican State Senator in Colorado, had spoken at rallies of far-right anti-government activists and had made supportive statements about the activities of militia groups. So the Freemen asked for him to act as a mediator during the standoff. Duke’s love of right wing revolutionaries made him a favorite whipping boy for the media. Wikipedia has this to say about the standoff:

“In late 1994 foreclosure proceedings were initiated against the farm that contained Justus Township. The Freemen refused to be evicted from the land. They had also conducted their own mock trials of numerous public officials, and issued their own writ of execution against a federal judge. The FBI investigated the group and initiated a sting operation aimed at one of the Freemen's financial programs, which led to the arrest of two members of the group in March, 1996. The FBI also had warrants for eight other persons suspected to be in the compound, but before they were able to arrest them an armed confrontation developed and the FBI withdrew to a safe distance in order to avoid violence. The similar standoff in Waco, Texas involving the Branch Davidians was still fresh in the public mind, and the FBI was extremely cautious in trying to prevent a recurrence of those violent and tragic events. After 81 days of negotiations, the Freemen surrendered to authorities.”

You have to ask yourself, is Nancy Pelosi equating anyone who disagrees with the Obama Administrations policies with groups like the Freemen? That group’s problem began when they started using fraud to steal from businesses by creating phony checks. Simply because they associated themselves with the far right means nothing. There have been and are more than enough lefty criminals out there to choose from. A lot of people are upset about the CFP column condemning Jimmy Carter’s bigotry. It seems to them that it is perfectly fine to espouse a hatred of Jews as long as you are an extremely liberal white guy. Sorry folks, bigotry is bigotry; doesn’t matter if you are white, black, yellow or plaid. Obama is a bigot, Carter is not only an economic moron, he is also a bigot. Pelosi is biased against heterosexuals and has a rabid bigotry against Christian white males. In fact the entire tone of her statement indicates that she believes the greatest danger this country faces is the prototypical angry white male. She is fearful that one of us who has a platform for our opinion will write or say something derogatory about Obama and one the members of our unstable redneck flock will sally forth to perform a heinous deed. Did you notice the little jib about being responsible for what we say? This is one of the typical talking points imbedded into the Democrat attack plan. They have continuously complained that the American public is having a problem digesting the Obama agenda because of all the discordant messages coming from the rightwing blogosphere and Fox News. They seem to really believe that if you do not believe in the liberal socialist philosophy you have an intellectual deficiency at best and at worst you are one seizure away from blowing up a train station. Being a student of history with more than my share of political experience, I have watched both the left and the right use the bully pulpit. I can tell you with complete sincerity that what is cited above did not come from Nancy Pelosi’s mind. She does not have the brain power to craft a thought that carefully. Most liberals do not. Remember, I have said this before and not one member of the left has rebutted it, liberals are reactionary. They cannot argue a point without their emotions getting in the way. Take away the talking points and the teleprompter and all they can do is stammer unintelligibly. Obama is a prime example of this. No, Nancy Pelosi put her foot in it and if the media were truly fair and balanced, this story would be front page for days. With what we have it will be buried by tomorrow.