Fire Nancy Pelosi

Well done, RNC.  

Get the embed codes for more widgets here.

0
Your rating: None

Comments

Wouldn't firing John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Michael Steele,

Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh make more sense, given that they are the ones who failed?

The Republicans have been trying to get traction by demonizing Pelosi since 2006. Can't really see that it has gotten them anywhere thus far.

Coakley by 10

That was one of the last things you said before you disappeared for a couple of months, John.

Go back to DailyKos.

Lake Chapala

was great, thanks for asking.

How is my interpretation of last night wrong - how was it a sign that the Republican leadership is doing a good job?

219

The bill passed with a three vote margin.

(And now you'll say: But they still won. To which I will reply that there were so many Dem no votes because they know the politics of this bill will suck in November)

Doing the right thing vs political expediency

Doing the right thing vs political expediency. Like Newt Gingrich, you don't understand that one is better than the other.  washingtonindependent.com/79960/gingrich-walks-back-civil-rights-comments

You still haven't clarified why it is Nancy Pelosi, not Michael Steele, John Boehner, and Mitch McConnell, who need firing.

John McCain threatening "no more cooperation!" today - HAH!

The incoherence on the right continues to dazzle.

Oh well, so long as there are enough ejits to send in money every time the magic words "Nancy Pelosi!" are uttered, they all get to keep their jobs and redecorate their offices at your expense.

Grandstanding is not governing. Yet another basic concept that Michele Bachmann doesn't understand.

It's called compromise...

If all the Democrats voted for it, then the bill would have had to appeal to the most-right Democrat, meaning that they didn't get a bill that is as far left as they could have.  The same thing happens when the Republicans are in the majority with a Republican president.  If there were a Republican president and the Senate had 52 Republican members, would you let the left-most senators from Maine decide how left the bill would be, or would you write a bill that they would think is too far right and still pass it with 50?  Is this just willful ignorance, or the old fashioned kind of straight up ignorance? 

"a sign" is more Dems voted "No" than Repubs voted "Yes"

And it took several Senator appointments in 2009 to get it thru the Senate......Not elected Senators, but Appointments by Governors to get a Senate Majority on HC.
Need any more signs ? How about State AG Constitutional Lawsuits by the Dozen ?

two better signs

I've got two more significant signs for you: the 2006 election, wherein Dems picked up 6 senate and 31 house seats, and the 2008 election, wherein Dems picked up 8 more senate and 21 more house seats - campaigning on the issue of health care reform.

Congress has done what it was elected to do.

Pelosi's 11 % approval rating is Zero Traction

Pelosi just bet the House, and like Stupak, she is a Loser. California spending back at home is Pelosi's Canary in the Coal mine for her new HC bill.
She's fired in less than a year from Speaker, and so is Reid....at least that would be my best Guess. (I could be wrong)
But she could go the way of Charlie Rangel, sooner.
BHOle will throw her under his Bus as soon as the Constitutional lawsuits hits her HC in the bunns.
Meanwhile.... more good news...(remember to add 7 pts to CNN polls to get to Rasmussen reality)

For the first time since inauguration day, liberal news outlet CNN is reporting that more Americans disapprove than approve of the job Barack Obama is doing as President of the United States. The January and February polls saw a statistical tie between approval and disapproval but the March report saw the President's approval up, now 51 percent of respondents disapprove of Obama's job performance and 46 percent approve.

Why would there be "No More Madam Speaker?"

This seems to suggest that the Republican congress would not be open to appointing one of their own women to the role.  I guess sex(ism) sells...  And don't tell me that this wasn't intentional, 'cause I'm not buying it.  I thought this was the "Next Right."  This sounds like the Good-Old-Boys Right to me.  Why is this being endorsed here? 

Oh yeah, this site has simply become another mouthpiece for the GOP lately.  Once again, talking points over substance. 

Perhaps we should attack Pelosi like the media attacks Palin ?

Never attack your enemy when they are committing Suicide.

I think Palin is more popular among Alaskan Moose than Pelosi is among DC Jackass's.....or is it Donkeys ?

I don't get the Dem's fascination with Palin either...

Neither should be the focus of the opposing party. They'll both go away on their own, and it just looks petty attacking them with no real gains to be had.

Watch Fox News point out to Michael Steele

just how stupid this ad is and how pointless Republican rhetoric on this top is: http://video.foxnews.com/v/4119156/fallout-from-health-care-vote

Armageddon? Seriously?

Steele then whines in response - obviously not expecting flack from Fox News!

 

I can't wait...

...until November when the lefty trolls disappear again like they did after Scott Brown won in Mass.

Any substance to offer?

Any substance to offer about the topic at hand?

keep dreaming rbill troll

 

so, in what case would you disappear?

oh, i see you you kept showing up even as Obama kicked your ass two novembers ago.

 

Complete with flames in the background

So that's "fire" as in sack, right?  Let go?  Shitcanned?

Not like "fire" as in "fire the village."  Right?

 

Yes RNC... Well done.  :/

What a waste of money

The GOP will not take enough seats to assume the majority and elect a Republican Speaker.  Pelosi will not lose in a district where she takes 75% of the vote.  She is a hero in Democratic congressional circles, and no one will challenge her for the speakership.

Pelosi is a given for the next term, and getting used to that fact and working on a plan to deal with it would be a lot more productive than publicly complaining about it while failing to offer any alternative beyond "hope and change." 

Taking out an attack ad on Pelosi right now is about as productive as yelling at clouds.  Was there a voter somewhere who didn't know that the GOP opposed the Democrats?  This ad money would be better spent on publicizing the actual PLAN (other than "NO!") the GOP majority would put into place should it be by some miracle elected this fall.

 

 

 

 

The point of the ad is to raise money to continue to pay

Michael Steele's salary and decorating bills. It has as much to do with legislative effectiveness as a Hannity concert has to do with helping veterans.

I believe it is also part of a ploy to deflect attention from the massive FAIL of the Republican leadership.

It's more than the Party of No at this point.

The Republicans have become (or remain?) the party of no substance.  That "ad" is utterly ridiculous and pathetic.

Man, oh man, do I remember when we could have real, substantive debates with Republicans.  It's less and less since Reagan, though, and at this point I know very few with whom I can have substantive conversation.  I was so hopeful when The Next Right started up.  Ruffini's one of the decent ones, but he's surrounded by too few of his weight.