'The CIA is America's scapegoat'; Former officer: Pelosi 'should be thrown out of her job'

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | 5/16/09

[JohnHuang2]

Members of the CIA are most likely "seething and outraged" by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's claims the CIA misled her about its use of coersive interrogation methods, according to former CIA officer Larry Johnson.

"She was informed, the Congress was informed," said Johnson.

"This is not the first time Congress has developed a version of Alzheimer's disease in failing to remember what it was told about certain covert operations throughout history."

He spoke with Greg Corombos of Radio America/WND.

[SkyPilot]

What I want to know is how a moron became House Speaker?

In 2005, several Democrats were leaking to the press that Pelosi might need to be "jettisoned" as Minority leader. They knew her too well, and they knew her shortcomings were more like a chasm.

Well, in 2006 the Dims took the House, and there was no way the first "Woman Speaker!!!!!!" would be denied by the press, by interest groups, by feminists, and by Pelosi herself.

Since 2006, we have had a Speaker who is not only very dumb (I believe her IQ is well below 100), but is also a nasty and vindictive person.

Did you ever have a boss that was stupid, but also mean?

It isn't a very good combination.

During that press conference, you saw what insider Democrats have seen for years. An incompetent liar with a penchant for being so petty she will even blame others for simply allowing their own lungs to perform respiration.

[dixiechick2000]

You know I love you, but...

Larry Johnson?

[dixiechick2000]

Did I miss something?

[Enterprise]

"Pelosi 'should be thrown out of her job'

I'd throw her out - with one of THESE!

[Ann Archy]

OMG! This is the WORST day of my life......I am AGREEING with that HIDEOUS...ODIOUS.....LYING Larry (I’ve got this cool Hitler haircut) Johnson!!

[Enterprise]

We of course, don't know the full extent of the fighting going behind the scenes. Does Hoyer have the votes, independent of the Republicans, to force Pelosi out?

If he doesn't, then Pelosi need not step down, no matter how intense the political and media pressure.

If he does have the votes, it doesn't necessarily signify a good thing for the country, because how do we know if Hoyer is going to be anything other than a bun boy for Obama?

My hope would be that Hoyer would need to get the support of the Republicans and would have to make compromises with them, and that the Republicans would be able to mount serious opposition to onerous legislation. This might be a bit far out, but in a way, the Democrats might be starting to understand that they really do need the Republicans to have the ability to obstruct their agenda. If nothing else, they can complain about the obstructionism of the Republicans. But more subtly, the Democrats understand now that they are on a runaway train with their reckless spending and taxing, and someone, somewhere, needs to step in and bring order to their chaos. (I know, wishful thinking)

Otherwise, Pelosi or Hoyer - a distinction without a difference? What do yo think?

[Ann Archy]

“TRUTH COMMISSSION”....how THIRD WORLD we have become!! This is what AFRICA or South Americ countries do.....

[Ann Archy]

Oh PLease.....Nancy is NEVER....NEVER EVER leaving the Speakership!! She has her clutches on the drapes and she is NEVR letting loose. Besides, she’s a Democrat who LIED.....hey, that’s what they DO!

[csense]

...

[danamco]

Most of the pundits are wondering, Was Pelosi lying then or is she lying now? What I want to know is how a moron became House Speaker? Then again, there's B. Hussein.

See my next post, below....!!!

[danamco]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEnaAZrYqQI

[mazda77]

The Republicans would be VERY stupid (like it is the first time) to make any kind of deal with Democrat faction that wants her out. Making any deal with them will be quickly broken when it suits their needs. Remember, ultimate power is their goal and they are known for stabbing their “good friends” in the back at every opportunity.

I agree with an earlier poster that she does far more good for conservatives right where she is than to be thrown out. She needs to forever be the face of the Democrat Party in addition to her continued miss-steps will keep her making those rediculous news conferences like last Thursday while she tries to “remember” which lie she told when.

[Terabitten]

Pelosi is so stupid she didn't realize (until late in the game) that once you start slapping the "torture" label on EITs (Enhanced Interrogation Techniques) while admitting you kept quiet, the charge of complicity follows.

John, You're close, but there's a larger theme outside DC. What happens to the average leftist when they realize that their leadership actively encouraged / allowed EITs? Their entire "Bush is a criminal" meme falls apart, and suddenly they're forced to deal with the FACT that President Bush was right and they were wrong? That's earth shaking. Suddenly, the very foundations of the Democrat Party are shaken to the core.

It's as if we on the right suddenly discovered that President Bush had been paying off Al Qaeda to not attack us. It's literally that big. This issue has the potential to cause the same sort of rift between the base and the DNC as we currently have between conservatives and the GOP.

[Senator John Blutarski]

SkyPilot wrote: “Since 2006, we have had a Speaker who is not only very dumb (I believe her IQ is well below 100), but is also a nasty and vindictive person.”

..... Nasty? Yes. Vindictive? Absolutely. Dumb? I doubt it.

It behooves us not to underestimate the intelligence of people like Pelosi and her ideological ilk. I personally consider her a vain, preening, arrogant political bully with a terminally over-developed sense of self-importance and entitlement. But I don’t think she is stupid by any measure.

[Terabitten]

I agree with an earlier poster that she does far more good for conservatives right where she is than to be thrown out.

But what's best for the COUNTRY? I'd say that not having her as House Speaker is best for the nation, political factions be damned.

[maica]

Pelosi or Hoyer - a distinction without a difference? What do yo think?

#####

The only difference is the hyena laugh. Steny is as idealogical as Nancy.

[kellynla]

"This is not the first time Congress has developed a version of Alzheimer's disease in failing to remember what it was told about certain covert operations throughout history."

BRAVO!

[maica]

I second your opinion of Ms Pelosi. She is all that you say, including intelligent.

Her lifetime of devotion to the democrat party and to personal power has superseded her practice of critical thinking, and now has her mired in barnyard droppings.

I wish that pundits tomorrow will play the clip of her excuse "I had a war to fight." Say what, ---- a democrat defends herself by claiming that she was fighting a war!? Whassup wit' that? Is that what all the Womyn in Black and Code Pinkos and Peace in Our Time Quakers want to hear?

[nathanbedford]

What do I think? I think you have some damn good questions and ones that are perplexing a lot of people on Capitol Hill on both sides of the aisle. I asked much the same question myself yesterday in a different context, how it is that functionaries for the administration who are carrying out the dismantling of our capital structure are going silently along. I think much of what I had to say in that arena applies to what you are asking about some Democrats in the House who, one would think, must be getting very nervous about the legacy they are leaving their children and grandchildren.

Here is part of the reply expressing these questions which you raise and applying them to the administration:

Your observation outlined as your last paragraph tells us why it is so difficult to estimate what this administration will do because you simply cannot trust Obama's motives or believe in his good intentions:

Sceneario 1 is most likely. It has the biggest short term gain for BO and the dems in congress. The economy will seem better for a while as inflation is cranking up. Dems will get elected and they can make the permanent changes they intend. At some point in this sceneario, I suspect a national emergency will make it very “difficult” for them to leave office.

This is the Hugo Chavez scenario and it is not at all as implausible as the Chris Matthews of this world would have the people believe. Those who suspect that this is the Machiavellian motivation behind Obama's otherwise inexplicable spending, are not paranoid right wing nuts. One must accept that accolytes of Saul Alinsky think of a world run by the likes of George Bush ( a democracy under capitalism) is worse than a tyranny imposed by themselves. Thus, they rationalize any reach which perpetuates themselves in power. One simply cannot trust the "patriotism" of the Saul Alinsky acolyte. He would actually believe he is leading his people out of slavery by leading them into Obamaworld.

I am otherwise at a loss to explain Obama's spending spree. The bulk of the spending, as you point out, will not actually occur until some fiscal years down the lane. Therefore, it is not rational to accept that the spending is a reasonable Keynesian stimulus to a current recession. The spending will not stimulate until it occurs and it will not occur now but in years hence. More, nationalization of one of every seven dollars which changes hands in America as it is spent on healthcare cannot but drive us further into deficit spending. Likewise, Cap and Trade can only prolong the recession by imposing additional taxes. Not coincidentally, these are all political power grabs of our economy. Monetizing the bankruptcy of car companies, banks, and insurance companies is to offer a political solution to an economic problem. It is this politicization of an economic problem that forces us to live out one of the three options outlined in your reply number 21. As politics gets us into the mess, one can hardly believe the Democrats will abandon politics to get us out of the mess. It is just too easy and too much in keeping with human nature to take the next political step, to double down, which is to step into tyranny. That is the ultimate political adjustment for economic dislocation.

Let us be intellectually honest. Obama does not act alone, he is surrounded and supported by a group of leftists many of whom are liberals in the sense that they are left-wing Democrats. They are not revolutionaries from the Saul Alinsky school. They include many people like Bernake and Gaithner They are not crying, "stop!" Why not?

Are they not as concerned about the apocalyptic consequences of mindless spending as we conservatives are? After all, finance guys do not see the world as liberals or conservatives, Republicans or Democrats, but with the gimlet eye of a man gauging the world from under a green eye shade. I do not believe that they are ideologues, although I readily accept that they are left wing Democrats. Surely one would speak up if he thought his government were hurtling over the Cliff. They do not need the jobs, they already have the fortunes, their reputations are far more important than their rank in government circles. Either they are at a loss to do otherwise or they have confidence in what they are doing. These are strong men with strong egos and it is difficult to believe that they would not speak up if events were running contrary to their convictions.

Perhaps they believe they can ride the tiger. Perhaps they believe there is no other choice. Perhaps they believe they can pull the process up short before we do go over the cliff. Perhaps they believe they can solve our problems with a whiff of inflation, just enough to make our debt tolerable but not enough to wreck the economy. Perhaps they believe in the good intentions of Barak Obama. Perhaps they are merely fighting for time and consider us to be in a welter of disaster which must be stabilized before the greater problems are confronted, or even can be confronted at all. Perhaps they believe that these expenditures and takeovers by Obama are not so great relative to our potential gross national product and these excesses will simply be absorbed by the growth of the country. Perhaps they are mortally scared but do not want panic the country.

At any rate, intellectual honesty compels us to consider why these men are going along. It is difficult for me to understand why they do not remonstrate with Obama over his cap and trade and health-care takeover before the economy is stabilized. One thing is sure, the world ordinarily does not operate as a conspiracy. It does often get blown along the path of a perfect storm, however.

Lock and load.

Since this is after all a political forum, we ought to acknowledge that if the checks and balances normally functioning in our constitutional system are not restored in the 2010 election, they may never be restored .

There might well be men in the House and Senate who are having second thoughts about the consequences of this Bolshevik revolution they are underwriting and maybe a few of them might be approachable with appeals to patriotism and common sense. Yet it must be said that there is no evidence that encourages us that in, fact, this might be the case.

[mo]

“At any rate, intellectual honesty compels us to consider why these men are going along...”

They honestly believe they are doing their job. Think about it. Much of Congress is basically “tenured” especially the Senate. Many have spent 15-40 years “fighting” with Constitutional limits to their “job” ....which is basically what their campaign donors pay them to do. they see a world of opportunity in dismantling those barriers to get things done for their clients.