Anyone remember this?

The date was August 1st, 2003. A little Oompa Loompa named Nancy Pelosi was castigating our President over the unemployment figures.

August 1, 2003

Washington, D.C. -- House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on the Bureau of Labor Statistics' announcement that 470,000 people abandoned their job searches in July and that 3.2 million private sector jobs have been lost since President Bush took office:

“The fact is that President Bush’s misguided economic policies have failed to create jobs. Since President Bush took office, the country has lost 3.2 million jobs, the worst record since President Hoover. And today we learned that in July nearly half a million people gave up looking for a job.

“Job losses are taking a real toll on the financial security of American families. While Democrats are fighting for opportunity, jobs, and economic security for working families, Republicans continue to focus on helping those who need help the least.

“According to today’s survey, while the national unemployment rate dropped slightly, it still stands at a near record high. In addition, the unemployment rate for African Americans was still over 11 percent in July, and the unemployment rate for Hispanics was 8.2 percent in July.

“It is time for President Bush and the Republicans to get to work for all Americans, not just the elite few.”

The unemployment rate in August, 2003 was 6.1 percent.

Today, it's still hovering around 10 percent, and it's only gone down slightly because hundreds of thousands of Americans have been out of work for so long that they're no longer being counted.

And today Nancy Pelosi has nothing to say today. Not to this President, anyway. Can anyone explain her silence?

Anyone?
Bueller?
Anyone?

Reporter asks Pelosi about constitutionality of her health care scheme

And Pelosi responded on Thursday...with an arrogant sneer. "Are you serious?" Pelosi replied. "Are you serious?" She then walked away, leaving her press secretary/toady, Nadeam Elshami, to tell everyone that it wasn't a "serious" question and therefore did not deserve an answer.

I can't make this stuff up, folks. This nasty little creature has deluded herself into thinking that we just exist to serve her instead of the other way around like it's supposed to be.

(CNSNews.com) – When CNSNews.com asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday where the Constitution authorized Congress to order Americans to buy health insurance--a mandate included in both the House and Senate versions of the health care bill--Pelosi dismissed the question by saying: “Are you serious? Are you serious?”

Pelosi's press secretary later responded to written follow-up questions from CNSNews.com by emailing CNSNews.com a press release on the “Constitutionality of Health Insurance Reform,” that argues that Congress derives the authority to mandate that people purchase health insurance from its constitutional power to regulate interstate commerce.

The exchange with Speaker Pelosi on Thursday occurred as follows:

CNSNews.com: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?”

Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?”

CNSNews.com: “Yes, yes I am.”

Pelosi then shook her head before taking a question from another reporter. Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, then told CNSNews.com that asking the speaker of the House where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandated that individual Americans buy health insurance as not a "serious question."

“You can put this on the record,” said Elshami. “That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.”

When pressed later by the reporter, Pelosi's office replied in an e-mail that Pelosi believes that the Commerce Clause gives Congress the power to force us all to buy health insurance, basically because just they've used it for so many other things.

Later on Thursday, CNSNews.com followed up on the question, e-mailing written queries for the speaker to her Spokesman Elshami.

“Where specifically does the Constitution authorize Congress to force Americans to purchase a particular good or service such as health insurance?” CNSNews.com asked the speaker's office.

“If it is the Speaker’s belief that there is a provision in the Constitution that does give Congress this power, does she believe the Constitution in any way limits the goods and services Congress can force an individual to purchase?" CNSNews.com asked. "If so, what is that limit?”

Elshami responded by sending CNSNews.com a Sept. 16 press release from the Speaker’s office entitled, “Health Insurance Reform, Daily Mythbuster: ‘Constitutionality of Health Insurance Reform.’” The press release states that Congress has “broad power to regulate activities that have an effect on interstate commerce. Congress has used this authority to regulate many aspects of American life, from labor relations to education to health care to agricultural production.”

The release further states: “On the shared responsibility requirement in the House health insurance reform bill, which operates like auto insurance in most states, individuals must either purchase coverage (and non-exempt employers must purchase coverage for their workers)—or pay a modest penalty for not doing so. The bill uses the tax code to provide a strong incentive for Americans to have insurance coverage and not pass their emergency health costs onto other Americans—but it allows them a way to pay their way out of that obligation. There is no constitutional problem with these provisions.”

Pelosi then compares it to forcing people to buy auto insurance, only she omits the fact that auto insurance, unlike her "Pelosicare", is not required of people who don't own or drive cars. If the Democrats' legislation is passed however, it be the first time in the history of our country that every single person is required to buy something as a condition of being a citizen of this country. Worse, it forces us all to buy something that they, Congress, will regulate and control.

And of course let us not forget that they still want to keep their own, better insurance. They have voted down multiple amendments which would have required them to joins us in this national heath care nightmare. Typical. Good enough for us, but not good enough for them. "Public servants" my ass.

This is not the America that our founding fathers set up. Nancy Pelosi and everyone else in Congress who have just voted to pass this bill without ever letting us read it, and in most cases, without reading it themselves, need to be dragged out of the Capitol, coated with tar and feathers, and kicked out of the District of Columbia permanently.

I toldja so! Momma Moonbat was only spinning us when she claimed to be giving it up.

When I saw this story, I couldn't have been less surprised.
A couple of months ago, Cindy Sheenhan--the First Lunatic--bid us all a tearful "farewell"and claimed that she was tired of playing "hey, look at me!" She held a press conference and sold her Crawford house, known to most of America as Camp Nutter. I told you all then that she was only faking, and that she wasn't about to give up her claim to fame as a professional victim and media whore. And I was right. Here she is again, staging yet another march on Washington DC and holding yet another press conference to announce that she plans to run for office against her one-time hero and friend, Liberal Democrat Nancy Pelosi.

Ahhh, Cindy, Cindy, Cindy.... You never cease to amuse us.

And never let it be forgotten that Cindy disowned her son Casey when he enlisted in the army that she hated so much. She was totally estranged from him--by her own choice--until the day that he died. And with his death came Cindy's long-awaited shot at fame and the limelight. Suddenly the woman who refused to even speak to her son was "heartbroken" over his loss, and by virtue of press releases, staged media events, and gullible legislators like Pelosi, Cindy catapulted herself straight onto the front pages where she was finally able to find a receptive audience for the anti-war drivel that she'd spouted for so long.

I knew that she wasn't going away that easily. I think most of us did. But as usual, we've all been forced to play her silly little attention-whore game again. I just wonder who'll be backing her now that she's bitten every liberal hand that ever fed her.

Troop spending bill exposes Democrats' true motivation

This story in today's Washington Post touches on the mater, but the Post's liberal bias downplays or ignores two important facts concerning the Dems' spending bill.

First of course is the fact that the bill is supposed to be about providing funds for our troops so that they can win the war and come home. But typical of the Dems, they added over twenty billion dollars for their own pet projects, or into the districts of other legislators that hadn't been inclined to vote for the bill before. (Anywhere but the Capitol, that would be called "a bribe".) Some of those "emergency war expenditures" covered things like $74 million for peanut storage, $25 million for spinach growers and $100 million for citrus growers. It also includes $16 million to convert the old Food and Drug Administration building in southwest D.C. into more office space for the Capitol. That "emergency" expenditure comes at a time when taxpayers already shell out $600 million "more than double the original estimate" for a mammoth expansion of the Capitol, which includes 160,000 feet of new office space.

None of that is related to the war at all and shouldn't have been tacked on, especially by the party that's been screaming that the war is costing so much. Well one reason that it costs so much is that certain members of congress are inflating the cost and funneling they money back into their own pork projects.

The second thing that's critical--and the Post completely omits this--is that the Dems are claiming that they want to stop the war and pull our troops out. They put a provision into the bill requiring our troops' withdrawal from Iraq, but they aren't to be withdrawn now. Oh no. The bill calls for them to be withdrawn in August, 2008--in the middle of the next electoral campaign. You see, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi and Senator Harry Reid and their followers want to use the pullout for political advantage, and they intend for our troops to stay in Iraq until election time, at which point they'll be forced to leave so that Dems running for election or re-election can scream: "look at the failure of the Bush Administration's war!" That's appalling on so many levels and if there were really justice in America, citizens from all over the country would converge on the Capitol and just start moving the furniture and possessions of legislators like Pelosi and Reid out to the curb. They should be evicted from office for this massive breach of the public trust.
If they really wanted the troops out of Iraq, they could have called for them to be removed tomorrow. But they aren't interested in that. They want our men and women to stay over there and fight a war that they claim is wrong, and continue to take casualties that they say our troops should not be suffering for 18 more months so that the pullout can help them politically in their efforts to seize control of our nation not based on Democrat accomplishments but on the perception of Bush failure which they the Democrats, are contriving to bring about...but not until it's to their benefit, of course.

I as an American call "foul" and demand that every Democrat against the war say so and either vote to pull our troops out immediately or just shut up about it forever.

Cindy Sheehan arrested again

Cindy Sheehan is at it again, according to this story from Fox News.

She was arrested again yesterday, this time for throwing a bunch of petitions over the White House fence, apparently angry because the Secret Service officers would not take them from her and give them to the President.

God forbid that the news not be all about her, she had to find some way to horn in on all of the election hoopla so she showed up at the White House with petitions aimed at affecting US policy in Iran (Is there any country of conflict that she does not claim to be an expert on now?) and when no one jumped to take her petitions, she threw them over the fence.

Throwing things over the White House fence is a guaranteed arrest. Cindy "It's all about me" Sheehan had to have known this, and what better way to become a media martyr again and get the newspapers to forget the elections and write about her again than to engage in a juvenile act like that and get arrested in order to claim the sacred mantle of "victimhood" once again?

What a sad pathetic woman. Someone needs to take custody of her and medicate her until she accepts the fact that her fifteen minutes of fame are well past up and few people outside of the whack-fringe left find her fascinating or credible any more.


And on a related note, they say that you can tell a lot about a person by looking at their friends and associates. Well this picture taken from her own web site speaks volumes about Nancy Pelosi, the woman who wants to run Congress now:



That's Nancy Pelosi on the right and Cindy "Hey everybody look at me!" Sheehan on the left. Nancy's proud to be seen with whack-jobs like Cindy. She makes no secret of their common agenda. If you're like me, you're a good bit more worried over the immediate future of our country than you were three days ago.