Reply
Inspired Bibliophile
thewanderingjew
Posts: 2,247
Registered: ‎12-18-2007
0 Kudos

nancy pelosi

much ado has been made about mc cain's age. is there anyone out there who would like to see an enhanced photo of what nancy pelosi would look like without her extensive cosmetic surgery? it would make the playing field a lot more even.
she was born in 1940 and that makes her 68 1/2.

if mc cain is old than she is too, plus she is so far left "that reaching across the aisle would be an impossibility" (a quote from mc cain about obama which seemed apropos here).
fact: she is one heartbeat more than palin and biden away from the presidency, no matter who wins.

twj

Scribe
debbook
Posts: 1,823
Registered: ‎05-03-2008
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

Right now she would be third in line, if both the president and vice-president were to not be in office at the same time. Honestly, I wouldn't want to be president at either of their ages. All presidents seem to age rapidly by the time they leave office because of the stress.

Do you really think Obama is too far to the left to reach across the aisle? I actually think both candidates have a better chance of bipartisan policies that we've seen in years.

A room without books is like a body without a soul.~ Cicero...
"bookmagic418.blogspot.com
Inspired Bibliophile
thewanderingjew
Posts: 2,247
Registered: ‎12-18-2007
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

if you check obama's voting record you will find that 96% of the time he either votes with his party or doesn't vote at all or votes present. this is very advantageous for him since he essentially has no voting record to even criticize. also he has very little experience because he has campaigned almost his entire time in office. he feels that has given him experience. i guess how you feel, depends on how you feel about him.
it is hard to pin him down on anything. he can pretty much say anything he likes and get away with it since there is no history to check.
he can promise you anything but "give you arpege!" there i go dating myself.
john mc cain's voting record is lengthier so more varied and more easily attacked. he votes with his party about 88% of the time but has reached across the aisle often. it is all there for anyone who wants to find out.

the problem is that many people do not want to find out anything that doesn't agree with the opinion they already have because they vote party not person. in this election, it breaks down in even stranger ways,
twj
debbook wrote:
Right now she would be third in line, if both the president and vice-president were to not be in office at the same time. Honestly, I wouldn't want to be president at either of their ages. All presidents seem to age rapidly by the time they leave office because of the stress.

Do you really think Obama is too far to the left to reach across the aisle? I actually think both candidates have a better chance of bipartisan policies that we've seen in years.


debbook wrote:

Right now she would be third in line, if both the president and vice-president were to not be in office at the same time. Honestly, I wouldn't want to be president at either of their ages. All presidents seem to age rapidly by the time they leave office because of the stress.

Do you really think Obama is too far to the left to reach across the aisle? I actually think both candidates have a better chance of bipartisan policies that we've seen in years.


 

Scribe
debbook
Posts: 1,823
Registered: ‎05-03-2008
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

The voting record doesn't tell the whole story for either, because many times senators will not vote for a bill because of what is attached to it, not the bill itself. Both of them have to vote with their constituents and the voting record doesn't tell that. When McCain votes with the dems he may have been voting for what the majority of his constituents want. As they both should be doing.
A room without books is like a body without a soul.~ Cicero...
"bookmagic418.blogspot.com
Frequent Contributor
Timbuktu1
Posts: 1,572
Registered: ‎12-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

WJ, thanks!  That really is revealing.  Instead of debating they should just recite their votes.  

 

I so wish Giuliani was running. 

Frequent Contributor
Timbuktu1
Posts: 1,572
Registered: ‎12-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

Hmmm, hadn't thought of that.  Sigh... so complicated!:smileytongue:
Inspired Bibliophile
thewanderingjew
Posts: 2,247
Registered: ‎12-18-2007
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

i think mc cain has been known as a maverick because he is supposed to vote his conscience and march to the beat of a different drummer, but i can't vouch for that. i also believe that it is generally accepted by most people, that he and bush are not the greatest of allies. however, in the interest of winning the election, the democrats will try to make him his clone. i thought mc cain should have gone to the debate with a mask on, of president bush. it would have been good for laughs and it would have stopped the comments coming from the democrats and obama, that night, comparing him to bush.

when obama doesn't go to washington for the hearings about what he calls "the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression," he is glorified for multitasking. on 9/11, when bush did not show his emotions and jump up and leave the room, because he was dealing with school children and didn't want to frighten them, it isn't called multitasking it is called ineptitude. is there a double standard???? i think so. granted the two events are worlds apart. i use them merely to cite an example of how judgment is often misjudged.

it doesn't matter to me whether or not people like president bush. what matters to me is that people don't give him enough credit for getting this country through events like 9/11 and katrina. i believe the debacle of katrina was also due in part to the louisiana government which has been known for years to be a bit corrupt. yet the people of louisiana keep on voting in, the same old, same old, because they vote for the party, not the person. in the interest of fairness, i don't think any administration, democrat or republican could have done better in those crises. there was no blueprint for handling them. it was trial and error and there were a lot of errors.

bush had an unbelievable number of unusual events to deal with during his presidency. no one gives him credit for anything he does because they are preoccupied with the war. when history is "rewritten" down the road, in hindsight, there may be a decidedly different view of the younger bush. only time will tell.

i do believe that we have to win the war. what worries me is the talk from the democrats about increasing the size of the armed forces. can that be accomplished without a draft? it is a hard word to say. it has been said by democrats but it hasn't been publicized. there are so many side issues to be concerned about in this election.

twj

 

Scribe
debbook
Posts: 1,823
Registered: ‎05-03-2008
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

I think the issue with McCain and Bush is that McCain was very critical of Bush when he didn't agree with him, but since this campaign, he has seemed to change his mind.His campaign people probably think if he criticizes Bush, he will look like he is too close to Obama. But I don't think he agrees much with Bush and he shouldn't be afraid to say that. He doesn't need Bush's endorsement.

As to 9/11, I personally thought Bush was stunned. I know I was. Even after the second plane hit the towers, I still thought it was some sort of bizarre pilot error. Terrorism didn't occur to me,nor did highjacking as a lot of that happened in the 70's, when I was little. Now I think everything is a terrorist attack until determined otherwise.

 

A room without books is like a body without a soul.~ Cicero...
"bookmagic418.blogspot.com
Frequent Contributor
Timbuktu1
Posts: 1,572
Registered: ‎12-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi


thewanderingjew wrote:

i think mc cain has been known as a maverick because he is supposed to vote his conscience and march to the beat of a different drummer, but i can't vouch for that. i also believe that it is generally accepted by most people, that he and bush are not the greatest of allies. however, in the interest of winning the election, the democrats will try to make him his clone. i thought mc cain should have gone to the debate with a mask on, of president bush. it would have been good for laughs and it would have stopped the comments coming from the democrats and obama, that night, comparing him to bush.

when obama doesn't go to washington for the hearings about what he calls "the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression," he is glorified for multitasking. on 9/11, when bush did not show his emotions and jump up and leave the room, because he was dealing with school children and didn't want to frighten them, it isn't called multitasking it is called ineptitude. is there a double standard???? i think so. granted the two events are worlds apart. i use them merely to cite an example of how judgment is often misjudged.

it doesn't matter to me whether or not people like president bush. what matters to me is that people don't give him enough credit for getting this country through events like 9/11 and katrina. i believe the debacle of katrina was also due in part to the louisiana government which has been known for years to be a bit corrupt. yet the people of louisiana keep on voting in, the same old, same old, because they vote for the party, not the person. in the interest of fairness, i don't think any administration, democrat or republican could have done better in those crises. there was no blueprint for handling them. it was trial and error and there were a lot of errors.

bush had an unbelievable number of unusual events to deal with during his presidency. no one gives him credit for anything he does because they are preoccupied with the war. when history is "rewritten" down the road, in hindsight, there may be a decidedly different view of the younger bush. only time will tell.

i do believe that we have to win the war. what worries me is the talk from the democrats about increasing the size of the armed forces. can that be accomplished without a draft? it is a hard word to say. it has been said by democrats but it hasn't been publicized. there are so many side issues to be concerned about in this election.

twj

 



What I don't understand (among other things) is why, when Bush has succeeded at his number one job of keeping the country safe for seven years, no one seems to notice.  Sometimes the country reminds me of a spoiled child who has been given the most important things,  but is angry at his parents for not being given everything.  I don't think anyone would have thought, in 200l that he could have managed to prevent another attack.  His success has been his undoing.  Instead of the thanks of a grateful nation he's gotten criticized for not being kinder to the people who want to murder us.  
I think you're right, it will take fifty years to determine just how good or bad a president he was.  But why doesn't he get credit for keeping us safe?  That's the one undeniable thing he's done and as far as I'm concerned it's a president's main responsiblity.

 

Inspired Bibliophile
thewanderingjew
Posts: 2,247
Registered: ‎12-18-2007
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

well, didn't nancy do a fine job yesterday in bringing down the "house"? the media will make sure the republicans get the blame for her thoughtless "blame" game comments and then we the people, will pay the price.

this election will go down in history as one that has been hijacked by the "beautiful people" and the biased media even if the man that wins proves, in the end, to be the best one for the job, regardless of who he is, republican or democrat.

when i was growing up, i was taught that "my good name" was the most important thing but today, character is almost a detriment.

we aren't having an election so much as we are having a "soundbite" contest. we blindly accept as fact any statement from the party we prefer, no matter how outrageous, and then we broadcast it over the internet until the lie told so often, becomes the truth. have we dumbed down society so much that we are no longer capable or desirous of learning the facts on our own and then making a real educated judgment/decision?

twj

Inspired Correspondent
Maria_H
Posts: 791
Registered: ‎07-19-2007
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

We might ask that question of those in the Congress who had initially pledged to approve the plan, until they heard Speaker Pelosi's remarks and then chose to behave like petulant children.

 


thewanderingjew wrote:

have we dumbed down society so much that we are no longer capable or desirous of learning the facts on our own and then making a real educated judgment/decision?

twj


 

 



Looking for a discussion? Find a Book Club for all your interests!


Inspired Bibliophile
thewanderingjew
Posts: 2,247
Registered: ‎12-18-2007
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

i tend to think that the 68 year old nancy pelosi behaved like a child as well. this time of crisis was not the time to grandstand. she lost one third of the democrat's support as well. i don't know if they were going to sign on before or not but the democrats did not need the republicans to pass this bail out. they had enough votes on their own.
the blame game is inappropriate at a time when bipartisan support is needed. there is plenty of blame to go around. much of this started with bill's that bill clinton signed when he was in office. the repeal of the glass-steagall act is also said to have precipitated this. i am not an economist so i can't speak that well to the issue, but i have tried to educate myself as best i can.
yes, we are having an election and the economy favors the democrats so it is in their best interest to make this a horror show but it is inappropriate. if the media was not so biased, this would be the general feeling in the public sector. as it is, only one viewpoint is presented so she is going to get away with her inexcusable conduct and true investigation of the root causes of this problem will not take place. no one wants to learn about it, they just want to elect their candidate.

if there was a national security threat, the worm would turn 360 degrees. the public is capricious in their support. let's hope, however, that there isn't one even though it would probably change the course of this election.

we need to demand much more explicit explanations and much fewer "pretty" soundbites from our candidates. 

twj

 

 

Frequent Contributor
Jon_B
Posts: 1,893
Registered: ‎07-15-2008
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

[ Edited ]

I'm not sure why you think only one view point is being presented, I have seen many articles from mainstream media both supporting and criticizing the bailout and many politicians interviewed on either side of the issue... and there have certainly been articles criticizing Pelosi.  Which viewpoint do you think is not being expressed?  

 

What's really funny is that many of the people I've heard complaining that the media isn't saying this or that are members of the media themselves.  There's nothing like reading a column in the New York Post decrying that "the media won't tell you X" when that column is, itself, the media telling us X. 

 

It's interesting - and frustrating - that people have this strange idea that the media is a singular entity with one opinion and one point of view.   Many members and outlets in the media disagree with one another sharply and are often in conflict with one another.  

 

Message Edited by Jon_B on 10-02-2008 06:30 AM
________________________________________

Need some help setting up your My B&N profile? Click here!

Looking for a particular book, but can't remember the title or author? Ask about it here!
Inspired Correspondent
Maria_H
Posts: 791
Registered: ‎07-19-2007
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

There has been plenty of grandstanding since the fall out.  Remember the declaration to suspend the presidential campaign last week to ride into DC like the great hope?  

 

You say that it's in the best interest of Democrats to make this a horror show.  The presidential campaign?  The rescue plan?  Do you think the Democrats have done so and, if so, in what ways?

 

You mention that a national security threat would change the course of the election.  What direction do you think the election is going in?  

 


thewanderingjew wrote:

i tend to think that the 68 year old nancy pelosi behaved like a child as well. this time of crisis was not the time to grandstand. she lost one third of the democrat's support as well. i don't know if they were going to sign on before or not but the democrats did not need the republicans to pass this bail out. they had enough votes on their own.
the blame game is inappropriate at a time when bipartisan support is needed. there is plenty of blame to go around. much of this started with bill's that bill clinton signed when he was in office. the repeal of the glass-steagall act is also said to have precipitated this. i am not an economist so i can't speak that well to the issue, but i have tried to educate myself as best i can.
yes, we are having an election and the economy favors the democrats so it is in their best interest to make this a horror show but it is inappropriate. if the media was not so biased, this would be the general feeling in the public sector. as it is, only one viewpoint is presented so she is going to get away with her inexcusable conduct and true investigation of the root causes of this problem will not take place. no one wants to learn about it, they just want to elect their candidate.

if there was a national security threat, the worm would turn 360 degrees. the public is capricious in their support. let's hope, however, that there isn't one even though it would probably change the course of this election.

we need to demand much more explicit explanations and much fewer "pretty" soundbites from our candidates. 

twj

 

 


 

 



Looking for a discussion? Find a Book Club for all your interests!


Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

Which viewpoint do you think is not being expressed?  

 

One viewpoint certainly not being expressed by the Democratic speakers in Congress, at least as far as I have heard, is that this mess was really caused in very large part by the Democratic Congress demanding that banks loosen up their lending standards so that people who did not meet the lending requirements for mortgages could purchase homes that they could not afford.  Congress assumed, stupidly, that housing prices could only go up, and that therefore it was safe for banks to make mortgages with minimal security to people of marginal income because if they got in trouble, they could always sell the house for more than they paid for it and get out from under. Of course, as usual, Congress tries to pretend that economics will fulfill their fantasies.  It didn't, and here's the mess we're in.

 

Promises of bread and circuses, but the bread is stale and the circus tent was built too weakly and has fallen down on us.

 


Jon_B wrote:

I'm not sure why you think only one view point is being presented, I have seen many articles from mainstream media both supporting and criticizing the bailout and many politicians interviewed on either side of the issue... and there have certainly been articles criticizing Pelosi.  Which viewpoint do you think is not being expressed?  

 

What's really funny is that many of the people I've heard complaining that the media isn't saying this or that are members of the media themselves.  There's nothing like reading a column in the New York Post decrying that "the media won't tell you X" when that column is, itself, the media telling us X. 

 

It's interesting - and frustrating - that people have this strange idea that the media is a singular entity with one opinion and one point of view.   Many members and outlets in the media disagree with one another sharply and are often in conflict with one another.  

 

Message Edited by Jon_B on 10-02-2008 06:30 AM

 

 

 

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Distinguished Bibliophile
KathyS
Posts: 6,893
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

New media coverage

Jon, I have to agree with what you say.  In this day and age of every known media, there is no way you can't be informed of both/all sides of these issues.  Yes, at one time, when the media sun rose and set on the opinions of major city newspapers, or few TV stations, and no internet, there was biased reports.  It's still there, but you can't limit yourself to reading/hearing just a few reports on any situation/issue. 

 

Everyone has to have their own opinions, and the more that can challenge those opinions, the better off we are.  I, personally try to take everything, at first, at face value, then I weigh all of it against each side.  Being naive is not an excuse, these days. 

 

Mostly my problem is hearing so much information, it does overwhelm the senses at times.  You are constantly weighing issues in your mind.  And it can come down to emotional evaluation, at times.  I think the more people that realize that every bill that is passed, or not passed, there are more than just one reason.  And I think these reasons need to be seen.  So much is contained in what seems like simple issues/bills, I don't think the general public wants to really know what's being hidden within those bills.  So many ads on TV give hard sides to these issues, it then becomes an emotional issue.  That's the appeal by these political groups, to sway the public with emotion.


Jon_B wrote:

I'm not sure why you think only one view point is being presented, I have seen many articles from mainstream media both supporting and criticizing the bailout and many politicians interviewed on either side of the issue... and there have certainly been articles criticizing Pelosi.  Which viewpoint do you think is not being expressed?  

 

What's really funny is that many of the people I've heard complaining that the media isn't saying this or that are members of the media themselves.  There's nothing like reading a column in the New York Post decrying that "the media won't tell you X" when that column is, itself, the media telling us X. 

 

It's interesting - and frustrating - that people have this strange idea that the media is a singular entity with one opinion and one point of view.   Many members and outlets in the media disagree with one another sharply and are often in conflict with one another.  

 

Message Edited by Jon_B on 10-02-2008 06:30 AM

 

Frequent Contributor
Jon_B
Posts: 1,893
Registered: ‎07-15-2008
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

[ Edited ]

Everyman wrote:

Which viewpoint do you think is not being expressed?  

 

One viewpoint certainly not being expressed by the Democratic speakers in Congress, at least as far as I have heard, is that this mess was really caused in very large part by the Democratic Congress

 


 

I was referring to viewpoints being expressed in the media.  twj was saying that we only "hear one point of view" and yet I see articles from major media sources blaming the Democrats and Pelosi for the current mess every day (and plenty of articles blaming Republicans and everyone else as well.  In fact its hard to think of a group who hasn't had fingers pointed at them in this).  

 

I was mostly commenting on this idea that "the media isn't telling us" these points of view, which is rather ironic given that most of the people commentating on what "the media won't tell us" are members of the media themselves.   It's rather amusing to see political columnist after political columnist refer to the media as some vague "they" that somehow doesn't include themselves.  


Message Edited by Jon_B on 10-02-2008 08:44 AM
________________________________________

Need some help setting up your My B&N profile? Click here!

Looking for a particular book, but can't remember the title or author? Ask about it here!
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

It's interesting - and frustrating - that people have this strange idea that the media is a singular entity with one opinion and one point of view.   Many members and outlets in the media disagree with one another sharply and are often in conflict with one another. 

 

This is partly true, but only partly.

 

Yes, there are outlets in the media that have disagreements with each other.  Yes, there are outlets on many sides of the issues. 

 

But study after study has shown that the major media outlets, the most influential newspapers (New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, and others) and news magazines (Time and Newsweek) are predominantly staffed by journalists of the more liberal persuasion.  Yes, there are certainly exceptions, but it is by no means an equal division.   Newsweek, for example, has a few token conservatives among its columnists, but the substantial majority of its columnists are liberal.  There is no attempt here to strike and equal balance.  

 

When you think about it, this isn't surprising.  Journalism is for the most part, excluding the TV anchors and talk show hosts (assuming you call those journalism, which is a dubious proposition)  is not a well paid profession.  Those who go into it tend to do so not for the money but for the passion to make a difference in the world.  (And the colleges and universities from which these jouralists emerge are for the most part predominantly staffed by liberal professors.)  

 

And for the most part, those who want to make a difference in the world and are willing to accept lower pay for it are those of a more liberal persuasion. Those of a more conservative persuasion tend to be more concerned with going into more lucrative professions, into business, into opening their own businesses, etc.

 

This is, of course, far from monolithic or universal.  There are certainly numerous exceptions.  But as a general rule, it is well established by numerous studies that where journalists on the major media are registered to vote they are overwhelmingly registered Democrats.  And if you look at the political endorsements of the major newspapers, you will find that they endorse Democrats far more frequently than they endorse Republicans. 

 

Yes, you can hear all positions if you make an effort to.  But those who limit their information intake to the major media sources -- the three major networks and the newspapers and magazines I have mentioned -- I think it would be hard for you to argue that they are getting a fair and equal representation of all points of view.  

 

Do you really want to argue that?  


Jon_B wrote:

I'm not sure why you think only one view point is being presented, I have seen many articles from mainstream media both supporting and criticizing the bailout and many politicians interviewed on either side of the issue... and there have certainly been articles criticizing Pelosi.  Which viewpoint do you think is not being expressed?  

 

What's really funny is that many of the people I've heard complaining that the media isn't saying this or that are members of the media themselves.  There's nothing like reading a column in the New York Post decrying that "the media won't tell you X" when that column is, itself, the media telling us X. 

 

It's interesting - and frustrating - that people have this strange idea that the media is a singular entity with one opinion and one point of view.   Many members and outlets in the media disagree with one another sharply and are often in conflict with one another.  

 

Message Edited by Jon_B on 10-02-2008 06:30 AM

 

 

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.
Frequent Contributor
Jon_B
Posts: 1,893
Registered: ‎07-15-2008
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

[ Edited ]

Everyman wrote:

 

Yes, you can hear all positions if you make an effort to.  But those who limit their information intake to the major media sources -- the three major networks and the newspapers and magazines I have mentioned -- I think it would be hard for you to argue that they are getting a fair and equal representation of all points of view.  

 

Do you really want to argue that?  

 

 


 

I would say that if one include in "major media sources" networks such as Fox News and papers such as the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post - which are indeed very widely read and influential media sources - then yes I'd argue that many conservative view points are indeed  represented in mainstream media.

 

Futhermore I think looking at the media as "right" or "left" is far too simplistic.  Journalists don't necessarily structure their opinions along party lines any more than normal voters.  There are members of the media who, for example, are pro-life but against the kind of defense spending typically favored by Republicans (and vice versa), and members of the media who agree more with Democrats on how education should be handled and funded but agree with Republicans on how the war on terror should be conducted (and vice versa).  Most people I know personally have mixed opinions such as this (as I do myself) - and some of them are involved in the media.   Simplistically labelling such people as "liberal" or "conservative" doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. 

 

But that's getting away from the main point, which is the representation of viewpoints.  There might well numerically be more "left-leaning" than "right-leaning" news outlets but that certainly doesn't mean that the "right-leaning" news outlets are harder to find or that their views aren't being exposed.   I live in an area that is generally considered quite liberal and yet every day I get on the subway and see people reading columns by self-described outspoken conservative columnists like Michelle Malkin.   So I don't think conservative viewpoints are exactly hidden or hard to find - they're right out there in the open for everyone to see and hear just like their liberal counterparts.  It's certainly not the case that the media is a singular entity with one opinion or one agenda.

 

Message Edited by Jon_B on 10-02-2008 09:14 AM
________________________________________

Need some help setting up your My B&N profile? Click here!

Looking for a particular book, but can't remember the title or author? Ask about it here!
Distinguished Wordsmith
Everyman
Posts: 9,216
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: nancy pelosi

It's certainly not the case that the media is a singular entity with one opinion or one agenda.

 

I agree with you there.  But that doesn't mean that one point of view doesn't predominate in the mainstream media.  

 

_______________
I think, therefore I drive people nuts.