It continues to baffle me why headlines like these are even written and the woman continues to get so much grief for her vist to the middle east :confused: This sort of treatment by a country that is supposed to be civilized but crucifies it's subject when they say something negative about the president or decide not to be part of the namby-pamby group of nincompoops that just want to continue tanishing the image of that country overseas.

This sort of behaviour doesn't happen in most European countries, and am sure if the dixie chicks had been Canadians and said what they did about Harper, they won't have been lynched the way they did?

Here is a quote from an editorial that I believe is in the US today...By Jerry Zeifman
Apr 7, 2007

Nancy Pelosi has persistently violated her duty to exercise her speaker powers in accordance with the Constitution and the current "106th Congress House Rules Manual" (House Document 106-320). In short, she has fostered what is known as "tyranny by the majority" — and violated House Rules that give her the duty to maintain order, civility, and decorum, and to foster "comity" (a word rarely used these days, meaning "mutual respect").


Nancy Pelosi Should Resign

The "House Rules Manual" includes Jefferson's "Manual of Parliamentary Procedures," originally drafted by the founder of the Democratic Party when, as vice president, he presided over the Senate from 1797 to 1801.

In 1837 the House, provided that the provisions of Jefferson's Manual should "govern the House in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with [subsequently adopted rules]."

Jefferson's manual, which is still in effect, was a codification of 18th century "common law" and re-affirms that House Rules are "the only weapons by which the minority can defend itself . . . and by a strict adherence to which the weaker party can only be protected from those irregularities and abuses which these forms were intended to check, and which the wantonness of power is but too often apt to suggest to large and successful majorities."

Currently, Pelosi, who is second in line to the president, often describes herself as a partner in his power — a higher role than the Constitution grants to the vice president, who is first in the line of secession — and whose only official duties are confined to presiding over the Senate.http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_272612593.shtml

Syria is a "nice" place to visit , but I am sure you or Nancy would NOT want to live there:eek:

How does your post answer the questions asked?

I'm sure a case could just as easily be made positing that GWB should resign for his mistreatment/ignoring of the tenets of the constitution.

Pelosi goes to Syria and the right wingers go nuts. A delegation of Republican lawmakers goes to Syria only one week before her and the right wingers don't utter a peep.

I'm afraid your error is that you've assumed the USA is a civilized nation! Seems to be a common affliction in the UK, to actually look up to the USA for some strange reason I've never been able to fathom.

From this article (http://www.lewrockwell.com/margolis/margolis74.html):President George Bush charges that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s trip last week to Syria was undermining US foreign policy. He’s absolutely correct.

If ever there was an administration whose foreign policy needed undermining, it’s the Bush/Cheney diumverate.

...

Congress was created as the premiere branch of government to express the voice of the American people. Its leaders have the duty and every legal right to intervene when they see the executive branch leading the nation over a cliff and repeatedly violating the Constitution, be it at home or abroad.

Nancy Pelosi was quite right to ignore Bush’s narrow-minded refusal to talk to Syria. She went to meet President Bashar al-Asad in Damascus. Interestingly, Pelosi was joined by some of the leading members of the pro-Israel lobby in Congress.

Whether she was carrying secret messages from Israel to Syria remains a question of considerable debate. But the US Congress, dominated as it is by lobbies aligned with Israel’s right wing parties, is a vital player in Mideast politics, and should have an active voice in any moves towards peace.

England, it is all partisan politics. The Dems are just as big a pile of Spinners with regards to everything the Reps do that it all just cancels itself out.

Dixie Chicks??? In my opinion, they deserved the slam they got. Entertainers are paid to, ah, ENTERTAIN. Leave the politiking to politicians and the lobbyists.

And not to stir the pot but "you" bringing up stuff about the middle east and blaming the USA only is calling the kettle black. The "Empire" was/is responsible for more of the current geopolitical situations in the world than any other country or government. Yes, the USA has not been doing a lot to help itself since the cold war ended but the reality is that they decided to try to fix the messes that they and the UK created over the last 75 to 100 years.

I'm afraid your error is that you've assumed the USA is a civilized nation! Seems to be a common affliction in the UK, to actually look up to the USA for some strange reason I've never been able to fathom.
I used that loosely.....we don't look up to the US, I think this country does that pretty well. Anyway back onto the topic at hand

Pelosi made a fool of herself in Syria. She told Assad that Olmert told her he was ready to negotiate, and only a few minutes later, Olmert issued a statement saying they would NOT negotiate!

Besides, why is the Speaker of the House sticking her nose in this? Imagine if Peter Milliken would do the same (fly around the world pretending to act on behalf of Canada)!

The US Speaker is not comparable to the Canadian speaker. The US Speaker is essentially the government leader in their house. The position is more equivalent to our Prime Minister, while their President is more equivalent to our Governor-General and Queen. Of course, there is a different division of power, with there being more power asserted by their president, than our GG.

But the GG and the queen are more educated than that buffoon in the WH :D

It is naive to expect that anything we hear from the press, the politicians, and the power holders bears much relation to reality. Pelosi, Olmert, Assad, and others may actually be discussing other matters, while this PR is being spun to suit the required "public image" process in each of their constituencies. Always remain cynical of any politician, from school board member to president, from alderman to regal figurehead. Question authority, and question the press.

But the GG and the queen are more educated than that buffoon in the WH

I'd say more than many of the past in the WH in the last 75 years!

Dixie Chicks??? In my opinion, they deserved the slam they got. Entertainers are paid to, ah, ENTERTAIN. Leave the politiking to politicians and the lobbyists.
Huh? Are you saying that no one is entitled to express themselves or voice an opinion if they are "entertainers"? I guess all those filmmakers should go back to making movies like "Garfield" and songwriters should go back to singing "My Bonnie" with empty smiles on their faces.

I prefer the "free" society, thank you very much, where artists are permitted to question things and have an opinion. Everyone is a citizen of this planet (even entertainers!) and has a stake in what these clowns are doing. The reaction against such an incongruous comment was ridiculous and as embarrassing as the "Beatle burnings" of the 60's and only highlighted once again how utterly stupid and slack-jawed some people are.

Yeah, let's persecute these women for making a comment (yes, women have brains and have thoughts on things, too; they aren't just there to look pretty and make you a sandwich) while excusing the man they criticized, a twit who is killing thousands of innocent civilians over what has been proven time and time again to be a bunch of lies. And that's just the start of the list.

If we're going to be outraged and indignant, let's focus on the true perpetrators here.

Another person blasted for going to the middle east, what is wrong with the US in dictating where people can go :mad:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/10/the-daily-show-blasts-mccains-baghdad-visit/

Like I said to the custom official at buffalo when he was asking me ridiculous questions about my day trip, "you couldn't pay me to live there", although I have been visiting the US for the past 30yrs yearly, and I don't intend to stay now. :rolleyes:

McCain is being criticized for his idiotic claim that "there are neighborhoods in Baghdad where you and I could walk through those neighborhoods, today", despite the fact that on his casual stroll he was wearing a bullet-proof vest and he was accompanied by "100 American soldiers, with three Blackhawk helicopters and two Apache gunships overhead".

See also this article (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/03/29/couricandco/entry2622835.shtml).

Huh? Are you saying that no one is entitled to express themselves or voice an opinion if they are "entertainers"?

Yes I am actually.

How is it that a bunch of people that are so self absorbed (For the most part) and that are so rich that they generally have no idea what REAL life is like for people in their own country, let alone other countries, in any legitamate position to say anything truly informed?

They do it because it is vogue and cool and that is about the only reason. Therefore, I deem all entertainers opinions as useless. Even those that may be in line with what I believe or feel.

Well....some entertainers do vote don't they, and therefore have a right to comment on things like that. Now do you feel the same about Bono, Bob Geldolf?

...a bunch of people that are so self absorbed (For the most part) and that are so rich that they generally have no idea what REAL life is like for people in their own country, let alone other countries...An excellent description of most - if not all - high-level politicos.