Nancy Pelosi’s First 100 Days (Video)
The NRCC produced a somewhat amusing YouTube video of Nancy Pelosi’s First 100 Days.
I’m glad to see the GOP getting into the viral video game, if a bit late. I’d say that cutting the thing down to less than 2 minutes, 16 seconds would be a good next step.
And to quit using the tired “Democrat” adjective to refer to the Democrats.
And not provide easy fodder for rebuttal by including things that happened months before Pelosi became speaker (i.e., the William Jefferson bribery scandal) as proof that the first 100 days has been a failure. In their defense, though, Pelosi did appoint the clown to the Homeland Security Committee.
Of course, the job would be easier if the Republican Congress under Denny Hastert hadn’t been guilty of the exact same things the Democratic Congress under Pelosi has done. It’s hard to get excited about $5 million for tropical fish, for example, after the Republicans spent $231 million on a bridge to nowhere.
Still, the public has a short memory and Pelosi and company came to town promising to clean up the mess the GOP made. So far, they’ve been just as irresponsible.
The 110th has done the 1 thing that the public mainly cares about: put a withdrawal date on the occupation of Iraq. That’s a 70% issue with the public and growing.
It would be nice to have the perfect Congress but I’ll settle for one that gets the big issues right.
Even that bill is going nowhere once it is vetoed. The veto pen is mightier than the Democratic Congress right now.
They’re building it anyway? Quick… Call the WaPo.
THe problem congressional Democrats are having, getting their agenda into law, are the same two problems the Republicans did a short while ago;
* Paper thin majorities with people more devoted to their own gain than to the agenda
* too many views of what the agenda really consists of.
In the case of the Democrats, personally, I’m just as happy they’re unable to move.
Stormy70: The majority doesn’t need to override Bush’s veto, if he vetoes the bill. Congress is in no way required to pass this supplemental spending bill. They could simply decline to pass another one, pass an identical bill again, or pass a bill with even more restrictions.
jeff b,
Congressional leaders have already said they will not play more games with the funding. Sure they could but they see this as a losing strategy with the American public.
I don’t think the American public wants what you say it wants. Some do but a majority believe we should continue with the task and complete it.
I agree with bithead except one further. I like to see gridlock whoever is in power. Except for basic funding issues what they do create more laws that we don’t need.
Steven Plunk: LA Times/Bloomberg poll from April 10th. “If he vetoes the legislation, 43% said they think Congress should fund the war without any strings attached, while 45% want Congress to hold firm on mandating timelines, withholding funding until Bush is forced to sign.”
So it seems that public opinion is the opposite of what you think it is, although the margin is narrow.
http://www.latimes.com/media/acrobat/2007-04/28957478.pdf
I came home from Vietnam to find Kennedy and the Democrats submitting legislation to reduce funding for the war I just left.
I changed my affiliation to the Republican Party and have never looked back.
The Republicans took a winning hand and lost badly I have doubts about the Republicans and their refusal to back our President. I don’t think he was wrong in Iraq. Except for the difference in numbers gassed, killed or tortured Saddam was a make over of Hitler. Anyone denying my statement is seriously flawed. Eighteen months into his administration he was using intelligence left to him by Clintoon. If Clintoon felt bombing an aspirin factory was justified then how was Bush wrong for relying on the same intelligence
Where to go next. The media have corrupted the election process, the reporting process and left a population sadly bereft of honest daily news.
Drop out????? At 76 years I am feel sorry for my grandchildren.