Everytime Pelosi is mentioned, a picture of young Pelosi in a bikini:
Perhaps she's angry that she has lost her youthful looks.
We should be sensitive to this.
Cheers!
Posted on 03/28/2008 8:39:10 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sidestepped the superdelegate controversy as she opened the California Democratic Party convention tonight in San Jose, instead taking aim at likely Republican presidential nominee, John McCain.
Pelosi noted that McCain campaigned alongside Governor Schwarzenegger during the polarizing special election the governor called in 2005. Schwarzenegger tried to pass ballot measures aimed at weakening the power of public employee unions, changing teacher tenure rules and clamping down on state spending. Californians rejected those reforms and she predicted they'd reject McCain as well.
The gathering at the San Jose Convention Center continues through Sunday, when former President Bill Clinton addresses the delegates.
Must be tough for Juan, being attacked by someone from his own party.
McCain should pick up 15-20,000 every time Pelosi slams him.
Just wait until Obama takes 1/3 of their paychecks for "free" health care on top of it all. Of course the majority of Cali-fornicators which are queer leftist loons will vote for that without hesitation.
It will be amusing to see who they try to tax after all the rich liberal elite vacate their elaborate estates and move to cheaper country.
>>McCain campaigned alongside Governor Schwarzenegger during the polarizing special election the governor called in 2005. Schwarzenegger tried to pass ballot measures aimed at weakening the power of public employee unions, changing teacher tenure rules and clamping down on state spending. <<
>>Nancy working for Obama now?<<
Yes, she basically is working for Obama and against Hillary.
But if she keeps saying these positive things about McCain so much the better.
The incompetent Pelosi really needs to shut up. Everytime she opens her mouth, she comes across as a real ditz.
Nancy has no business even mentioning the Unions as none of her stuff is union (vineyards, restaurants etc)
McCain would be wise to admit he was wrong on this one and should have advised Arnie not to go forward yet. Better yet, to make it a non-issue, McCain should promise to the American people that will oppose future attempts to put ballot initatives before voters in non-regular election ballots, save when some kind of looming emergancy requires it.
(For example, quitely sneaking state tax increases through the electorate by making it a ballot referendum during a midterm primary with LOW voter turnout is a big time Dem campaign trick here in Illinois)
I'm all for reserving binding, major-issue ballot initatives for the regular, general election. Our side stands a far better chance under those circumstances.
I can never figure out how frauds like Pelosi manage to get elected to the RAT party and stay there after it becomes known her wealth comes from exploiting cheap, near slave offshore labor, basically in violation of everything a Democrat is supposed to stand for. Time and time again these wealthy elite Democrats work to ensure they legislate plenty of loopholes to protect their wealth and ensure all the social goodies they promise to the little people are paid for by the little people- the ones that have jobs that is.
Very true.
Everytime Pelosi is mentioned, a picture of young Pelosi in a bikini:
Perhaps she's angry that she has lost her youthful looks.
We should be sensitive to this.
Cheers!
Wow liberalism ages ‘em quick and horribly.
I thought that was just with my ex.
She hasn't lost them she just wrinkled em up
That's a *very* painful visual.
Off to find some pics of Gisele Bundchen or Marisa Miller (2008 Sports Illustrated Swimsuit cover) to make up for it.
...oh, you meant her face. That's why they invented Botox. Oh well, no harm done...
Cheers!
Oh yeah. She's been in the tank for Obama for quite a while now.
Memo to Pelosi:
Schwarzenegger won that election in a heavily Democrat state. Your boy Davis lost.
Look back on those numbers, and the most conservative item on the list -- a common-sense measure to prevent underage girls from getting abortions without their parents being informed -- came within an inch of passing and got nearly a million more votes than the most liberal measure on the list -- a proposal to massively increase government power over the free markets.
Results of Special Election Referendums
CLEARLY CONSERVATIVE MEASURES
Parential Notification for Minor's Pregnancy 3,129,340 votes, 47.4%
Public Union Dues Limitations 3,091,713 votes, 46.5%
Teacher Union Tenure Limitations 2,986,287 votes, 45.9%
LIBERAL-LEANING MEASURES
Redistricting done by judges 2,672,882 votes, 40.5%
Rx Drug Rebate handouts 2,523,419 votes, 38.9%
Electricity Big Government Regulation 2,188,786 votes, 34.3%
And what's even more interesting -- Arnold and the state GOP gave only lukewarm support to the scary conservative stuff like limiting abortion, and spent most of their time and effort campaigning for the half-assed "bi-partisan" proposals that made problems even worse, like handing over the power to decide Congressional seats to a bunch of unelected liberal activist judges. (The GOP would have almost certainly LOST seats under this proposal)
In short, had Arnold actually came out strongly for the well-written, excellent CONSERVATIVE stuff and used his clout to have it advertised BOLDLY across the state -- and had Arnold put these measures on the ballot during a more favorable climate with big voter turnout -- say the 2004 general election or the election where Brian Bilbray won on opposing illegal immigration, they would have almost certainly passed.
In hindsight, rushing these half-assed poorly written proposals out before they were throughly vetted and before they had proper time to be advertised to the public is clearly a major error on Arnold's part.
Should be easy for McCain to admit that he was on the wrong side on this one.
Memo to GVnana:
She's clearly talking about the 2005 election with Arnie's "reform" measures, NOT the 2003 election against Davis.
Your boy Arnie LOST the 2005 election for the GOP.
RNC deputy chairman demands apology from Dean
The Hill | 3/28/08 | Alexander Bolton
Posted on 03/28/2008 7:36:22 PM PDT by Jean S
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1993444/posts
Aw geez. You’re right. It’s late and that photo of the “young Pelosi” damaged my brain!
Who is that???
Pelosi... those eyes... the EYES... agh!
"Busted" in less than 12 hours.
FRee Republic knows *everything*.
Cheers!
She is afraid that Hitlary will beat her out in the power department. I love cat fights!
Politicians such as Pelosi receive the financial support and backing from the very unions she is speaking of.
Her hypocrisy and rebuke of Arnold and McCain (even if one does not like them) is unbelievable. She is defending the teachers union and public education when I believe her own children were given a private education.
Pelosi needs to go back to Washington and mind her own business and House.
Congress has very low approval ratings under her dismal leadership.
Hey, Nancy, A New Direction for America? Not.
Can you believe Mario Lopez cheated on her the night before they got married? WHAT A FOOL!!
...no way that’s Pelosi...
Oh, give me a break. There were EIGHT proposals on the ballot for that "special election", only ONE of which dealt with the teacher unions. Half of the measures that got on the ballot were touchy-feely liberal crap that rightly deserved to be defeated. By your logic, Pelosi is defending free markets for electricity and opposition to big government handouts on prescription drugs since electric regulation and drug rebates went down to defeat as well.
Calcowgirl studied these measures in detail and came to the conclusion that only three were solid proposals that wound guarantee good reforms (the proposals on teachers unions being one of the three)
Face it, GoldieLurks, many of Arnold's "reforms" were badly-written, ill-conceived "bipartisan" garbage that was rushed out to the electorate in a poor-timed, needless "special election" that accomplished nothing but waste taxpayer money. The few initiatives that were actually worth supporting could have been passed WITHOUT wasting taxpayers money if Arnold had simply put them on a ballot during a REGULAR election and actually campaigned for the scary right-wing stuff like parental notification.
Arnie should have never wasted his time on that "special election" in the first place and he got a public spanking for doing so. Everyone in California seems to realize this in hindsight except you. A stopped clock is right twice a day, and Nancy is right that the "special election" was a bad idea from the start and McCain erred in getting aboard the S.S. Arnie-tatic for this one.
Actually, only the parental notification was really a good proposition. The teachers’ tenure was one of those “can’t hurt” measures, but had a lot of weaknesses. The union contribution measure had a huge loophole and wouldn’t have done much in the long term. I voted for those three and against the rest.
Good analysis in #18, btw.
Amazing how many freepers here are having a knee-jerk reaction to Pelosi and still defending Arnie's "special election" after it clearly blew up in his face and every measure went down to defeat (though the parental notification stuff would have probably passed, had Arnold lifted a finger to campaign for it)
I don't see why freepers agree with Arnie Schwartzekennedy that taxpayer money needed to be wasted on an IMMEDIATE election when the same reforms could be enacted WITHOUT wasting additional tax money during a regular election. It's now 2008 -- would it have really made a difference in Arnie's career if teacher's tenure was limited in 2006 instead of 2005? Makes me question how many people here are truly "fiscal conservatives" Of course, many of these are the same freepers who relentlessly attacked Huckabee for being a "nanny stater" and then turned around and backed Rudy "Gun Control" Giuliani or Mitt "Hillarycare" Romney.
I'd like to know just how many millions of dollars were wasted on Arnie's "Special Election" that did nothing.
Q: How much will the special election cost?
Secretary of State Bruce McPherson has estimated the [2005 special] election will cost between $44.6 million and $80 million. The lower figure, released Friday, is derived from the cost of holding a November election in counties where one was not previously scheduled, whereas the higher figure includes the cost of holding elections in all counties. <<
Gotta hand it to "fiscal conservative" Arnold. I'm sure there was some really really important reason, unbeknownst to me, that justified pouring $80 million of taxpayer's money into a "special election" that changed absolutely nothing in the state of California. I mean the state has plenty of money just lying around to burn, right? There must be some matter of grave importance that required Arnie to blow $80 million on this when he could have submitted the same measures on the ballot free of cost a few months later in 2006's regularly scheduled statewide elections.
Shame on Nancy Pelosi for criticizing RINOld here, eh?
Freepers know *everything*.
Cheers!
I am so effin' speechless.
Cheers!
Did not say I agreed with Arnold or McCain?
Have a tendency not to agree/side with Syriana Nancy when she is a speaker at a Dem. fundraiser with Bill Clinton where she voices her support for the liberal led teachers union.
CTA is the most powerful union in the state of CA and they actively work against any Conservative or Republican with their wad of cash they collect from membership dues.
Pelosi like so many other liberals support the teachers union but enroll their children own children in private schools.
You see no hypocrisy in her actions?
You either agree with Nancy Pelosi that it was a colossal mistake that wasted taxpayers money and accomplished nothing, or you agree with RINOld and McCain that there was some immediate urgent matter that required them spent $80 million of taxpayers money to present all these measures, and that they were great, sound ideas that votes should have enacted en masse.
Like many mootbats, Pelosi is a screwy communist nut on about 95% of the issues, and takes the right side the other 5% of the time. This is one of the times she was right and the freepers getting on Arnie/McCain's bandwagon at the time were wrong. The "special election" was a poorly conceived idea, and its proposals weren't all that great. It should not have gone forward in November 2005 and was a waste of valuable time and money.
I said so at the time , when the consesus on FR was overwhemingly in favor of Arnie's "special election", and my comments were dismissed during the Arnie love fest. You'd think in hindsight, freepers would realize that spending $80 million in Nov. 2005 and having nothing to show for it afterwards was a bad idea, but it seems alot of people here are still hellbent on defending Arnie's folly because Pelosi opposed it.
Now as to the specific issue of teacher's tenure (Prop. 74), Pelosi said absolutely nothing about it in her remarks attacking McCain. As such, I see nothing "hypocritical" about her statements since she didn't address the issue at all. She might have directly addressed it at the time (3 years ago), and opposed it being enacted. I would disagree with Pelosi on that teacher's tenure, but as Calcowgirl said, "The teachers’ tenure was one of those “can’t hurt” measures, but had a lot of weaknesses." It was quite clear that those Prop's weren't throughly vetted and were presented to the voters prematurely.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.