Comments on: Party on Madam Speaker!

By: Shinequa in Detroit

Shinequa in Detroit — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 07:16:02 +0000

Lynn
You one of the most ignorant know nothing white girls ever to post a thought on the blogs
Thoughtful peoples here trying to smack some sense into you in a nice way and you completely missin’ the points they makin…
You need to listen more and write a whole lot less of the stupid crap you believe is goin’ on…
Corruption is cancer
You want to see corruption? You come here to Detroit and check it out. Democrat politicians one and all ruined this place in 50 odd years. Begun with small stuff and got bigger and bigger. There be no hope…But we Negro’s keep votin’ them in ’cause they say they gonna help us..?? Just bulldozer the whole mess and start over.
Others here be nice and polite to you, but I don’t pull no punches wit nobody who show no common sense.. you don’t got a f**kin’ clue, girl…

By: Robert S. Siegel

Robert S. Siegel — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 23:12:55 +0000

Do you mean, if she allowed herself to be taken on this trip by a corporation? That is selling influence.

By: Greg

Greg — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 17:05:49 +0000

Open Question: What if Pelosi did all this luxury travel but some corporation(s) footed the bill instead of We The People?

By: Lynn

Lynn — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 15:23:17 +0000

I’m not disagreeing with that, but it’s also a political tactic to attack people on these issues to make it harder for them to govern rather than meeting them head-on on the legislative agenda. I don’t have sympathy for Pelosi–she left herself open for it, but I don’t live in her district and I’d much rather take her to task on substantive legislative failures. (Right-wing playbook #423: Let’s try to neutralize her in case she tries to become conciliatory and actually govern…”)But this is more fun, until we find another Tiger Woods mistress or something.

By: Marty

Marty — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:10:12 +0000

& Lynn
If you really understood it, you would not say the things you said.
I think to point was the corruption begins with small items and a sense of entitlement…Ending with using Fannie and Freddie as governmental piggybank, doling out cash to suporters in the search of votes
No matter who you vote for, I’m sure you would want them to be honest when dealing with the public trust…

By: Lynn

Lynn — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:25:54 +0000

@Marty: I know the theoretical difference between private and public, but with TARP as a great example, perhaps you’d like to explain the practical difference. We get so angry about Peolosi’s (the taxpayer’s) plane, but big businesses have their hand out to our government constantly. We can’t regulate financial institutions, oh no, because that’s none of our business! They don’t seem too private to me when they get free money from the treasury (that’s beyond TARP) and all we can do is just wait 5-7 years to bail them out again. Sheesh!

By: Lynn

Lynn — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:15:04 +0000

@Juno: Please connect the dots between the Airforce plane and Fannie and Freddie. Again, I don’t love it, but it’s probably a reaction to outrage over legislators riding around in corporate jets being influenced by corporate lobbyists. It’s legal, doesn’t violate any rules, and from what I can tell, she didn’t try to conceal it. I’d love to see the money spent better (and I’m writing this from a nonprofit educational institution that could definitely put the money to better use), but Fannie and Freddie Mac don’t get fixed by having us tisk tisk about this issue. Bring it up during the election as a character issue, of course, but let’s tackle more substantive issues now.

By: JUNO

JUNO — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 17:59:12 +0000

Lynn

I don’t think, we as taxpayers should have to put up with corruption on any level, by people we elect to oversee the public trust, be they D or R. Integrity and competency should be demanded.

But when the small items, such as the controversy involving Mrs Pelosi, are condoned of ignored, they (the Pols) go to the next level and the next…Pretty soon Fannie and Freddie are corrupted.

By: Lynn

Lynn — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:54:09 +0000

I’m not happy with the Airforce party jet. But while 2 blogs have now been devoted to it (Oh my gosh, politicians live large on the public payroll, who knew?), the administration is fighting to try to put regulations in place to prevent the next financial crisis, so we don’t have the boom and bust every 5-7 years, along with bailouts for too-big-to-fail institutions. How much money does that waste? I don’t know where this story came from, but it sure does make a nice distraction from what’s happening legislatively.

By: Marty

Marty — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 08:55:42 +0000

Someone here commenting, is confused between the concept of Private vs Public.
A Private Sector VP flying on a corp jet is none of our business because a private entity is footing the bill. Not the taxpayers.

When Nancy Pelosi flies her friends and family all over on government jets, drinking premium adult beverages, on non -governmental occasions, you and me are paying. That’s abuse. Pure and simple. Plus she and her husband are wealthy, and could easily afford to charter a plane for their friends.
This kind of thing may fly with her sycophantic lawyers, but the voters will think differently come Nov ’10