Pelosi: Remember The Victims of the "Tragic Accident" in Tucson

RealClearPolitics - Video - Pelosi Calls Tucson Murders A "Tragic Accident That Took Lives"



Oh, ok. So, Jared Loughner went to an event with Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in attendance and "accidentally" pulled out a semi-automatic and "accidentally" shot 20 people and killed six of them, including a 9-year-old girl born on 9/11 and an Arizona judge.

Why would she try to minimize this tragedy? This wasn't an "accident" it was an act of lunacy and a senseless massacre. What alternative reality is she living in?

Luckily, Rep. Giffords, who was the main target of the attack and was shot "point-blank" in the head, is expected to pull through and live a relatively normal life. I don't think that her, the other victims, or their families appreciated that Pelosi downplayed the tragedy.

Pelosi Reportedly Asks Steven Spielberg for Help Turning Around House Democrats’ Image

Via Fix, It looks like Nancy Pelosi might be getting a little extra help to rebrand the House Democrats:

Lawmakers say she is consulting marketing experts about building a stronger brand. The most prominent of her new whisperers is Steven Spielberg, the Hollywood director whose films have been works of branding genius. Lawmakers said Spielberg has not reported to Pelosi with a recommendation.

Apparentlly, Pelosi sees a similarity between ET/Indiana Jones and politics.

Pelosi, House Democrats Re-Take All Americans Hostage, Deny Vote on Obama's Tax Compromise

The Democrats in the House won't even entertain the idea of passing Obama's tax compromise. It was strongly rejected by the Democrats in a House vote, today:

Defying President Obama, House Democrats voted Thursday not to bring up the tax package that he negotiated with Republicans in its current form.

"This message today is very simple: That in the form that it was negotiated, it is not acceptable to the House Democratic caucus. It's as simple as that," said Democratic Congressman Chris Van Hollen.

"We will continue to try and work with the White House and our Republican colleagues to try and make sure we do something right for the economy and right for jobs, and a balanced package as we go forward," he said.

The vote comes a day after Vice President Biden made clear to House Democrats behind closed doors that the deal would unravel if any changes were made.

"Wow did the [White House] mishandle this," a senior House Democratic Source told CNN. "Breathtaking. Members have major substantive concerns and they should have gently guided people to the finish line."

This has been mishandled very badly by the president. Why in the world did Obama not get the Democrats in a room and explain to them why this is a good deal for them and the country? Could he not set aside sometime to sit Pelosi and Reid down and convince them to back this deal? This whole left-wing revolt could have been avoided, if he would have made a little effort to do that.

It is also interesting that, after years of labeling the Republicans as the party of no and uncompromising their ideals to appease their base, it is now the Democrats that are taking this hardline stance to appease their hard-left base.

This will be a disaster for all, if some sort-of compromise isn't reached in time and everyone's taxes go up in January.

House Passes "Chicken Crap" Tax Bill That Will Likely Die in Senate, Update :Max Baucus St to Introduce His Own "Chicken Crap" Bill in Senate

Here's John Boehner expressing his displeasure with the bill that Pelosi introduced and was passed by the House. The vote was split largely on partisan lines:



This "chicken crap" bill was just a form of posturing and a drawing a line in the sand by outgoing Speaker Pelosi. The Republicans in the Senate and maybe some moderate Democrats will no doubt filibuster this to death in the Senate, and Pelosi knows it and did anyway:

This bill is as dead in the Senate as the Democrats’ chances are of taking back Congress in 2012, but Madam Speaker wants to remind her base that she’ll be fightin’ for the cause next year after having led the party to utter ruin last month, so here she is forcing a meaningless vote to give Democrats a few days of “party of the rich” talking points. I wonder if, when the inevitable deal is struck extending all the cuts temporarily, she’ll be willing to bring that new bill to the floor or if she’ll refuse out of spite and force Boehner to do it himself when he takes the gavel next year. That’ll be a bureaucratic hassle for taxpayers and the IRS, but Nancy’s got to prove her worth somehow.

Basically, Pelosi just wasted everyone's time, today, so she can get some good talking points for 2012. What she needed to do is focus on a bill that she knows will pass both the House AND Senate.

Update:

I just saw this, right after I hit post. It looks like Sen Max Baucus is set to introduce a similar bill in the Senate, but as I said before, it has very little chance of passing.

Government Inefficiency At Its Finest: Women Finally Get Restroom in Congress

emale representatives in Congress a bathroom that they don't have to walk a mile (not literally) to go potty:

Incoming House Speaker John Boehner is tearing down the Parliamentarian's office to build female members of Congress a restroom.

Currently, only male lawmakers are afforded the ability to walk steps from the House floor to use the restroom. Women must walk across Statuary Hall to the Lindy Claiborne Boggs room, but the 71 women who will serve in the 112th Congress will be able to walk out the Democratic side of the chamber straight to the bathroom.

Why didn't Pelosi do this? It took her over three years just to pass the Potty Parity Act, which was supposed to ensure that this was done back in March. Now, it is getting close to a year since then, and it still she still hadn't done anything to get it built. This type of inefficiency is exactly why the people don't want to see DC in charge of anything.

Pelosi Has New Mission in Life: Stop Obama From Compromising With Republicans

Here’s further proof that the message that should be learned from the election hasn’t been received by the Democrats. Over the next two years, Pelosi has, apparently, made it her mission in life to keep President Obama from being able to reach any form of compromise with Republicans:

But Pelosi's mandate is diverging from the president's at a critical time, with potentially damaging consequences for Obama's ability to cut deals with Republicans in the new Congress.

Their partnership is strained after an election in which Pelosi and many Democrats feel the White House failed them by muddling the party's message and being too slow to provide cover for incumbents who cast tough votes for Obama's marquee initiatives.
Pelosi will lead Democrats "in pulling on the president's shirttails to make sure that he doesn't move from center-right to far-right," said Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif., a co-chair of the liberal Progressive Caucus in the House. "We think if he'd done less compromising in the last two years, there's a good chance we'd have had a jobs bill that would have created real jobs, and then we wouldn't even be worrying about having lost elections."

Behind Democrats' decision to keep Pelosi as their leader after historic losses lies intense concern among liberals who dominate the party's ranks on Capitol Hill: They fear Obama will go too far in accommodating the GOP in the new era of divided government, and they see Pelosi as a counterweight.

That’s rich. Nancy thinks that they compromised with Republicans too much over the past two years, and that’s why they lost in a tsunami this past November. Republicans ran successfully against her nationwide. She was in campaign ads in districts where she had probably never even stepped foot in her life. She has become a symbol of hyper-partisanship everything that is wrong with Washington today.

Heath Shuler to Symbolically Challenge Pelosi for House Minority Leader

Earlier today, Blue Dog Democrat, Heath Shuler (NC), has announced that he will challenge Nancy Pelosi, if she doesn't step aside and let someone else lead the House Democrats:

North Carolina Rep. Heath Shuler said Sunday he would challenge House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for the leadership of the Democratic minority in the next Congress although he acknowledged that he does not have the votes to win.

"We've just come off the largest ... loss for the Democratic Party in almost a century," Shuler said on CNN's State of the Union. "And to be able to put Speaker Pelosi as minority leader is truly ... unacceptable for our party."

"If she doesn't step aside then ... I'm going to press forward," he said. "I can add and subtract pretty well. I don't have the numbers to be able to win, but I think it's a proven point for moderates and the Democrat Party that we have to be a big tent. We have to be all-inclusive. We have to invite everyone into the party."

Considering that almost half of the blue dogs were voted out last week, the Congressional Democrats will become increasingly liberal than before. Therefore, he will definately be an uphill battle for him to win over Pelosi, unless the liberal Democrats wake up and realize that they need to change leaders, if they want to come back anytime soon. I'll set the odds at 100-1 that Democrats will wise up and move back to the center like they did in 1994.

Pelosi Buries Head in Sand: Red Tsunami Wasn't My Fault

More proof that Pelosi doesn't get it:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she has the “overwhelming support” of fellow Democrats in her bid to become minority leader in the next Congress, and says she’s not to blame for the Democrats’ mid-term debacle.

“We didn’t lose the election because of me,” Ms. Pelosi told National Public Radio in an interview that aired Friday morning. “Our members do not accept that.”

Instead, the California Democrat attributes the loss of at least 60 seats to high unemployment and “$100 million of outside, unidentified funding.”

“Any party that cannot turn (9.5% unemployment) into political gains should hang up the gloves,” she said.

Even though many political ads used Pelosi as a albatross around the neck of Democrats across the country, Pelosi's approval rating is around 6% nationally, and the bills that she rammed through are extremely unpopular, it still isn't her fault. It must be Bush's fault. Mmmmk.

Among those rooting for Ms. Pelosi to stick around are Republicans, who are giddy at the prospect of reprising in 2012 the attacks they used in the past election cycle, tying Democratic incumbents around the country to the liberal from San Francisco.

Ms. Pelosi’s reply: Bring it on. “The reason they had to take me down is because I’ve been effective in fighting special interests in Washington, D.C.,” Ms. Pelosi said, citing the health insurance and financial services industries. “I’m effective. They had to take me out. I’m also the most significant attractor to support for the Democrats.”

“So, I’m not looking back on this,” Ms. Pelosi said. “They asked me to run, I’m running. We don’t let the Republicans choose our leaders, and again, our members understand, they made me a target because I’m effective, politically and policy-wise.”

She was "effective" because she had such a huge majority in the House. Will she have as much of a hold on the blue dogs that are left? No, the few blue dogs that survived the election will be scared to death to back anything that would be even close to liberal.

The only shot she has is if she can move to the center and work with the Republican majority. Unfortunately, I don't think that she has it in her. She doesn't even think that she does anything wrong. So, she won't feel any need at all to change course.

Considering that the Democrats that are left are hugely liberal, I could see her winning the post, again, but it would not be wise for the Democrats to repeat history because they haven't learned from it.

Good News for Republicans: Pelosi Announces Her Desire to Become Minority Leader of House Democrats

Pelosi was being coy about it yesterday, but this really shouldn't a huge shocker to anyone. With the House Democratic Caucus being more liberal than before, there really isn't much shot that she'll be replaced with a more moderate Democrat:

WASHINGTON — Despite steep losses for her party in Tuesday’s elections, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said on Friday that she would run to remain the leader of the House Democrats, even as some of her colleagues urged her to step down.

In a letter to her caucus, Ms. Pelosi, who engineered the Democratic takeover of the House in 2006 but became a favorite target of Republicans, said that many of the remaining House Democrats had encouraged her to try to stay on as the leader after the new Republican majority replaces her as speaker — an unusual move in light of the rebuke her party received at the polls.

“Based on those discussions, and driven by the urgency of protecting health care reform, Wall Street reform, and Social Security and Medicare, I have decided to run,” Ms. Pelosi wrote in her letter.

The announcement, made after days of deliberation by the speaker, was intended at least in part to stem a quickening revolt among more moderate and conservative House Democrats who wanted her to step aside. Several lawmakers went public with their opposition in recent days, and many others were expressing reservations privately.

But the party’s loss of 60 seats in the election — many of them held by moderates — has left the remaining Democratic caucus more liberal than before, giving her a good chance of retaining her position if she chooses.

Of course, since her approval ratings are so low, the Republicans are more than "jubilant" over the prospect of Pelosi reprising her role as the face of the Democratic party:

"Given that there are now 60-plus defeated Democrat House members urgently seeking jobs due to Nancy Pelosi’s failed leadership, we welcome her decision to run for House Minority Leader based on her proven ability to create jobs for Republican lawmakers," said National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) communications director Ken Spain.

Pelosi: Unemployment Benefits Is the Best Way to Create Jobs

Nancy Pelosi an interesting claim that handing out unemployment benefits is not just a great way to create jobs but the best way evah. Ed Morrissey breaks this absurdity down nicely:



The entire clip with the reporter’s question and her full answer can be found here.

Pelosi to College Graduates: Don't Worry About Healthcare Anymore Because We Passed ObamaCare

In an interview done in front of a graduating class of college students at a small women's college in California, yesterday, Pelosi doubled down on her previous statement that people should not have to worry about quitting their jobs to "pursue their passions" because Uncle Sam will take care of them, if they get sick. Now, she tells the Mills College's Class of 2010 that they don't have to worry about the cost of their family's healthcare because she's taking care of it:

(Healthcare reform)'s urgent for many reasons, one of which I said in the speech: it frees us up to be entrepreneurial, to take risks without worrying about the health of our children being affected by our personal decisions to pursue our passions. It's important in terms of our competitiveness internationally. If you're talking about competing with countries in the industrialized, developed world, they don't have healthcare costs. Their societies have that as a priority. Here, we won't have the same kind of healthcare availability because it's still a private sector initiative. But that's O.K. because it's facilitated to be made more affordable in a public way. So it is important now A): because it is long over due; B): it makes us more competitive; C): makes us a healthier and therefore stronger nation and it is specially important to women at this time because women are by and large the caregivers and they are going to inherit that role, it's important that healthcare be as accessible and affordable as possible. I'm very, very proud of it, it was very hard to do, it would not have happened without President Obama, but I never, never once thought that it wouldn't happen.

This comes off the heels of the story coming out Canada, the country who currently has a model of socialized healthcare that most closely resembles what ObamCare will look like, that the government is worried about how the current system will be able to pay for the increasing costs of taking care of their ever-aging population:

In some ways the Canadian debate is the mirror image of discussions going on in the United States.

Canada, fretting over budget strains, wants to prune its system, while the United States, worrying about an army of uninsured, aims to create a state-backed safety net.

Healthcare in Canada is delivered through a publicly funded system, which covers all "medically necessary" hospital and physician care and curbs the role of private medicine. It ate up about 40 percent of provincial budgets, or some C$183 billion ($174 billion) last year.

Spending has been rising 6 percent a year under a deal that added C$41.3 billion of federal funding over 10 years.

But that deal ends in 2013, and the federal government is unlikely to be as generous in future, especially for one-off projects.

"As Ottawa looks to repair its budget balance ... one could see these one-time allocations to specific health projects might be curtailed," said Mary Webb, senior economist at Scotia Capital.

Basically, the two main changes that they seem to be contemplating are new and/or raising taxes, of course, and "curtailing" their coverage of certain procedures that they don't deem "medically necessary" like leg, hip, and cataract surgeries. In fact, they're looking back to the private health industry to take care of those procedures. These don't seem like surgeries that anyone would feel is elective.

This is the road that we are about to embark on our way to socialized healthcare. It will only be a matter of time before our government will have to raise our taxes or cut corners on our healthcare, so they can attempt to make ObamaCare solvent.

So, don't worry about your healthcare, unless you have a broken hip, cataracts, or any other condition that Uncle Sam might possibly deem "medically unnecessary" in the future, because Aunt Pelosi's has you covered.

As a final insight, I'd like to point out that: it seems to me that the medical procedures that they are the most willing to call elective are most often the ones that are supposed to take care of ailments that plague our seniors, ie broken hips and cataracts. I'm just saying. Coincidence?!?

Pelosi to Artisans: Don't Worry About Working Ever. Taxpayers Will Take Care of Your Healthcare

I QUIT:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said this week that thanks to the new health-care reform law, musicians and other creative types could quit their jobs and focus on developing their talents because taxpayers would fund their health care coverage.

“We see it as an entrepreneurial bill,” Pelosi said, “a bill that says to someone, if you want to be creative and be a musician or whatever, you can leave your work, focus on your talent, your skill, your passion, your aspirations because you will have health care.”

That's great! Let us encourage all of our "artists" to quit their job and stop contributing to our economy. After all, it is those starving artists that make this economy go.

Hell, isn't blogging a form of art? Aren't I painting my masterpiece of the written word, right now? Maybe I should quit my job and blog all day long. I'll get food stamps and rent assistance. I won't have to work another day at that damn place ever again.

If people received this kind of assistance just because they claim to be an artist, there would be no stopping people who would not ordinarily care one hoot about painting, playing an instrument, or whatever to live off of the taxpayers just because they say that they are an artist. The potential for fraud would be enormous. Would potential recipients have to show some sort of proof of their status as an artisan? If so, what kind of proof would they have to give? Wouldn't any sort of "proof" be easily forged or manipulated to make them seem like they are something that they arenot??

This statement is so asinine that I cannot fathom why she said it. Does she actually believe that most Americans would agree with her? I guess her ultra-liberal, elitist base loved it, but the great majority of Americans wouldn't agree with it at all. I wish Rasmussen would poll people on whether they think that ObamaCare should be used for those "artists" who can work but quit their jobs in order to "focus on developing their talents". My guess is not too many.

Most Transparent Congress Evah Strikes Again: Liberal Democrats Hold Secret Meetings to Negotiate HCR Compromise

Pelosi made the promise, after the Democrats won a heavy majority in the House, that this would be "the most transparent" Congress of all time. Since then, Congress has been everything but transparent or post-partisan. In fact, things seem to have become worse.

Now, Pelosi and other liberal Democrats aren't just keeping the Republicans in the dark. They are keeping the more fiscally and socially conservative members of their own party from the negotiating table:

Despite their claims to the contrary, the way that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have handled the healthcare bill has been anything but transparent. And, if the left-wing blogosphere is to be believed, the two congressional leaders intend to keep the deliberations secret as they try to merge the House and Senate versions of the legislation into something that will pass both chambers.

The Talking Points Memo website reported Monday that Democrats in both the House and Senate are saying the process will likely follow the path of the House taking up the Senate-passed legislation, amending it and sending it back to the Senate, which will have to pass it again. "This process cuts out the Republicans," a House Democratic aide told TPM, indicating the congressional majority intended to make sure the Republican minority would "not have a motion to recommit opportunity."

It also, say those who are following the issue, allows Pelosi to avoid having to cut deals with problematic House Democrats like Michigan's Bart Stupak, who has promised to do what he can to scuttle the final bill if it provides for federal funding of abortions.

Henry Waxman, the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, is saying much the same thing, according to David Dayen at FireDogLake, another prominent left-wing website.

Dayen reported that the powerful California Democrat told constituents he would be coming back to Washington Tuesday to begin negotiations with Senate leaders and the White House about what a final healthcare bill will look like—even though the House doesn't come back into session until January 12.

According to Waxman, the process for moving will not include the standard House/Senate conference committee, because the motions to select and instruct conferees in the Senate "would need 60 votes all over again." Instead, whatever agreements made could be packaged in an amendment to the bills passed by the House and Senate.

By blocking out the Republicans—not to mention House Democrats who object to what the Senate passed—Pelosi and Reid are setting up a protracted game of "ping-pong," in which the legislation goes back and forth from the Senate to the House and back to the Senate again. They may be able to prevail as far as the legislation goes, ultimately, but at enormous cost to their majorities. And that may be the biggest secret of all as far as the healthcare debate is concerned, or at least the one Pelosi and Reid are most concerned about.

Now, I don't really have any problem with this game of "ping-pong" that Pelosi and Reid are playing. It'll, hopefully, keep this monstrous bill from becoming law. Then, we can start over and create a bill that'll really make health care more affordable and available without having a negative effect on the quality of that care or "bankrupting" the country.

Great News: New Report Shows Pelosicare Will Raise Costs, Lower Quality of Medicare

A new report that studied what impact Pelosicare will have on Medicare has come out, and the finding are not good for granny:

A plan to slash more than $500 billion from future Medicare spending — one of the biggest sources of funding for President Obama's proposed overhaul of the nation's health-care system — would sharply reduce benefits for some senior citizens and could jeopardize access to care for millions of others, according to a government evaluation released Saturday.

The report, requested by House Republicans, found that Medicare cuts contained in the health package approved by the House on Nov. 7 are likely to prove so costly to hospitals and nursing homes that they could stop taking Medicare altogether.

This gives "Throw Mama Off the Train" a whole new meaning. This is one reason why many seniors are against the bill, no matter what the AARP thinks.

Not only will it lessen the quality of their own healthcare and quality of life, but it, also, burden their children and grandchildren with the added costs:

In the face of greatly increased demand for services, providers are likely to charge higher fees or take patients with better-paying private insurance over Medicaid recipients, "exacerbating existing access problems" in that program, according to the report from Richard S. Foster of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

"This report confirms what virtually every independent expert has been saying: [House] Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi's health-care bill will increase costs, not decrease them," said Rep. Dave Camp (Mich.), the senior Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee. "This is a stark warning to every Republican, Democrat and independent worried about the financial future of this nation."

When will Pelosi and the Democrats realize or admit that the bill that they created is the worst bill evah and chunk it in the trash? I'm not going to hold my breath.

Hoyer, 2nd Highest Democrat: Um, Nancy, We May Not Have Voted to Pass Pelosicare After All, Sorry

Just yesterday, Pelosi said that she was confident that she would have the votes to pass her healthcare bill. However, the House Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer (D-MD) doesn't have as much confidence about the bill's passage as the Madame Speaker has:

A House leader says Democrats haven't yet lined up enough votes to pass their health care overhaul bill.

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland says the vote that House Democrats had scheduled for Saturday could slip to Sunday or early next week.

Hoyer acknowledged to reporters Friday that Democratic leaders don't yet have the 218 votes needed to pass President Barack Obama's historic health overhaul initiative.

He said he still expects passage Saturday night. But he added that some Democrats are still "looking to get a comfort level" with the bill. Republicans are unanimously opposed to the sweeping legislation.

As was reported earlier by various sources, health care funding for abortion and illegal immigrants are the main obstacles to the final passage of the bill in the House.

Since there is unanimous GOP opposition to the bill, Pelosi can only afford to lose 40 Democrats to pass the bill. At this time, there is a large enough pro-life and pro-illegal immigrant faction in the Democratic caucus that might "kill the bill". Apparently, it's large enough the even the 2nd top Democrat in the House doesn't believe doubts Pelosi's vote count.

Pelosi's Treat For Trial Lawyers, Trick For Everyone Else

The folks at the Big Government blog have found a provision buried in the almost 2,000 page healthcare bill that is treat for the lawyers and a trick for the rest of us:

Section 2531, entitled “Medical Liability Alternatives,” establishes an incentive program for states to adopt and implement alternatives to medical liability litigation. [But]…… a state is not eligible for the incentive payments if that state puts a law on the books that limits attorneys’ fees or imposes caps on damages.

So, you can’t try to seek alternatives to lawsuits if you’ve actually done something to implement alternatives to lawsuits. Brilliant! The trial lawyers must be very happy today!

Is this the type of tort reform that Obama promised back in the September speech in front of Congress, or did Nancy Pelosi try to sneak an Easter egg for her trial lawyer buddies?

There isn’t any specific number that can be attributed to tort abuse, but most believe the savings to be in the billions, if there were actual tort reform included in the health reform bill nationwide. Alas, this is not exactly the kind of reform that will be needed to drive down costs. By taking away the states’ right to limit lawyer fees or to put caps on how much can be won by the plaintiff, if they win the case, it could only raise medical costs and insurance premiums not lower them.

Pelosi To Blue Dogs: FU! Heath Care Trigger Is Out

After totally dismissing any Republican idea and calling townhall protesters "Un-American", Nancy Pelosi has, now, flipped a double bird to all of the Blue Dog Democrats, as well:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday shot down a healthcare compromise that has been viewed as the best chance for getting a bipartisan bill through the Senate.

Pelosi (D-Calif.) rejected the idea of a “trigger” for a public
option. That means that the government-run healthcare plan would be a fallback option, enacted only if other reforms didn’t make healthcare more accessible.

She didn't just say that she doesn't favor the trigger, but will still respectfully debate those who do want it. No, she said that it's out. Why? Because Momma....er....Pelosi said so. That's why.

“I don't even want to talk about a trigger,” Pelosi said at her weekly press conference. She said the “attitude” of her fellow Democrats is that “a trigger is an excuse for not doing anything.”

By dismissing a trigger, she also risks further alienating Blue Dog Democrats, who are angry at Pelosi's handling of the bill, particularly her push to include a public option supported by the liberal wing of the caucus. Blue Dogs at times have threatened to block the bill.

Not listening to her Blue Dog Caucus could kill her chance of getting re-elected to Speaker come 2010. Unfortunately, she'll probably won't have to worry about losing her San Francisco based district.

Fortunately, a plan with a mandatory public option will never gain massive GOP support, if any, even with the RINO Caucus. In addition, the many of the Blue Dogs, fearing their chances at re-election in their conservative to moderate districts, won't vote for it, either. As a result, a bill including the public option is going to have a very hard time passing in the House, but if it does, it will be dead on arrival in the Senate.

Democrats Are Playing Hide-N-Seek With Official Obamacare Charts From GOP House Committee Members

Is Pelosi trying to hide the truth about Obama's healthcare plan from the public? It sure seems like it:

House Republicans suggested Thursday that Speaker Nancy Pelosi is standing in the way of Republicans sending to constituents a chart that is in the official record of the House Ways and Means Committee.

The chart, recently submitted for the record during a Ways and Means hearing on the Democrats' health care reform bill, shows the Republican interpretation of the Democrats' proposed legislation. The Franking Commission, which is responsible for determining which mailings can be paid for with the congressional frank, or stamp, deemed the mailing unacceptable.

Is there something that they're trying to hide in it? Why are they making it so hard for the Republicans to send this out to their constituents?

Snort-Worthy: Pelosi Admits She Receives CIA Briefings, Won't Say If They're Still Lying

Let's keep the pressure on Captain Planet's accusations against the CIA:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) at her weekly press conference yesterday continued dodging questions about her accusations that the CIA lied to Congress about waterboarding terrorist detainees.

Pelosi was pressed by reporters on whether she continued to receive briefings and admitted that she is still receiving the CIA presentatoins.  She refused to answer when this humble correspondent asked whether or not she believes intelligence professionals are still lying to her.

This liberal blowhard still won't give any proof to her allegations against the CIA that they lied to her about waterboarding. She has just buried her head in the sand especially after Leon Panetta all but called her a liar.

For the most part the mainstream media is letting her get away with it, but it does seem to be the story that won't go away. I hope the GOP and the press keep pressing her to show proof or admit she lied until she does it. She should not get away with this egrgious lie.

Captain Planet Pelosi to Commitee Chairmen: Push Climate Change Bill Or Else

House Speaker Pelosi is determined to save the planet no matter if we want it or not:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday issued an ultimatum to her committee chairmen: move climate change legislation by June 19 or risk losing jurisdiction over the bill.

By imposing the deadline, Pelosi (D-Calif.) is asserting her authority over Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) and Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), among others, in an effort to unhinge her signature issue, which has been mired in intra-party politics.

The bill was approved by the Energy and Commerce Committee before the Memorial Day recess and was initially intended for a subsequent floor vote. But Rangel and Peterson objected, and Peterson even threatened to take down the bill if his committee didn’t have a chance to mark it up or have provisions in it significantly altered.

With the low poll numbers that climate change gets, Pelosi must be realizing that it is now or never for a passing of such a bill. The number of people that believe in man-made global warming continues to decline. When asked about issues that mean the most to them, voters consistently rank climate change dead last. Most people just don't care about it. If she hesitates any longer, there may be no way to get people to buy into passing climate change legislation anymore.