Pravda On The Potomac

2:57 pm EST April 5th, 2007 | News | 15 Comments

The Washington Post was laughably, horribly wrong when they agitated in favor of the Iraq War, and they’re similarly wrong in their attack on Nancy Pelosi (cheered on of course by their allies in stupidity).

>> Washington Post Misleads, Contradicts Own Reporting, To Attack Pelosi

Topic:

Related Posts

«
»

15 Responses to “Pravda On The Potomac”

  1. Jay says:
    April 5, 2007 at 3:02 pm

    Actually the Post was 100% right and this guy’s screed does ZERO to refute anything the Post wrote.

    Do you always link to such half-assed shit simply because the person reflects your point of view?

  2. Oliver says:
    April 5, 2007 at 3:44 pm

    From the mere fact that you think the Post was right is clear and present evidence of their stupidity.

  3. Jay says:
    April 5, 2007 at 3:57 pm

    There you go again. He who whined the other day about being insulted resorts once again to insults.

    The fact is Oliver, neither the clown you linked to in the entry nor Think Progress actually refuted anything the Post said. Think Progress writes the following:

    Pelosi said yesterday that she gave Syrian officials the message that Israel is “ready to engage in peace talks.” The Post falsely claims, “The Israeli prime minister entrusted Ms. Pelosi with no such message,” misinterpreting a statement from the Israeli Prime Minister’s office that simply reiterated its position that talks with Syria will not take place until Syria has taken steps to end its support for extremist elements. There is no evidence that Pelosi failed to communicate this message.

    Excuse me? The evidence is as plain as day. Israel did not say, “We’re ready to engage in peace talks.” The Post wrote nothing false and they didn’t ‘misinterpret’ anything. Israel being ‘interested’ in peace talks is not the same as ‘ready to engage in’ because they’re not ready. Not even close.

    In addition, their ‘shadow presidency’ remark was not contradicted by their own reporting. Think Progress writes:

    This claim is directly contradicted by the Post’s own reporting this morning, which states, “Foreign policy experts generally agree that Pelosi’s dealings with Middle East leaders have not strayed far, if at all, from those typical for a congressional trip.”

    Think Progress, probably aware that most of their fanboy readers, would be too lazy to click over and read the rest of the story (why let facts get in the way of a little press bashing that is critical of Democrats?) which says:

    But in a nation deeply divided over America’s role and standing in the world, the Democratic-led Congress’s push into foreign policy has prompted a ferocious reaction from a White House doubly protective of its turf.

    “Arguably for the first time since World War II, the U.S. is as polarized on foreign policy as it is on domestic policy, and that makes it all the more significant when a member of the opposition is engaged in direct contact with foreign governments,” said Charles Kupchan, professor of international affairs at Georgetown University.

    The only ones who are stupid are the ones who think what Pelosi did was a good thing. You can’t get past your own Bush hatred to see that the Speaker of The House has no business mucking around in foreign affairs.

  4. Oliver says:
    April 5, 2007 at 4:43 pm

    She’s not mucking around, she’s got standing to meet with foreign leaders because we the people elected her as Speaker, and that’s a fact no matter how much you dislike it.

    The Israeli position is essentially as the Speaker stated it. She didn’t say Israel had conceded anything.

    Do you wonder why our foreign policy is now so polarized? Why after more or less having consensus for years, suddenly things are so tilted? It rhymes with George W. Bush.

  5. Jay says:
    April 5, 2007 at 4:57 pm

    She’s not mucking around, she’s got standing to meet with foreign leaders because we the people elected her as Speaker, and that’s a fact no matter how much you dislike it.

    No, ‘the people’ did not elect her as Speaker. The majority of Democrats in the House did. Nancy Pelosi is still a Congressional representative that oversees one of 54(?) districts in the state of California. She does not hold an executive post and therefore has no business representing herself as some kind of decision maker in foreign affairs because she’s not. That’s a fact, no matter how much you dislike it.

    The Israeli position is essentially as the Speaker stated it.

    How? She said “Israel is ready.” Israel is not even close to ready. Because Syria is not close to not being a country that openly sponsors terrorism.

  6. Oliver says:
    April 5, 2007 at 5:43 pm

    The people elect the House. The House elects the Speaker. She’s in the line of presidential succession. Only a conservative could pretend that this isn’t true.

  7. Jay says:
    April 5, 2007 at 6:22 pm

    The people elect the House. The House elects the Speaker.

    Yay. You’ve started reading your ‘Government for Dummies Book.’ Not sure what your point is.

    She’s in the line of presidential succession. Only a conservative could pretend that this isn’t true.

    I didn’t pretend it wasn’t true. And who gives a shit if she’s in the line of presidential succession? So is the Secretary of the Interior. It doesn’t mean I want the guy who runs the national parks in our nation taking trips to Syria.

    Besides, Pelosi’s role as Speaker of the House does not give her standing to conduct foreign policy. That is a role reserved for the executive branch of our government. When you get further in your Dummies book you’ll learn that.

  8. Oliver says:
    April 5, 2007 at 7:04 pm

    Dummies, nice. The president has no idea how to conduct diplomacy, it isn’t her fault that Speaker Pelosi has to clean up the messes.

  9. JSVB says:
    April 5, 2007 at 8:46 pm

    You’d think an ardent defender of this particular president would be a tad more reluctant to use “Dummy” when describing anything.

  10. mikefromtexas says:
    April 5, 2007 at 10:12 pm

    same ole trolls, same ole crap arguments.

  11. merlallen says:
    April 6, 2007 at 7:34 am

    the 28%ers are a bunch of pathetic fucks, aren’t they?
    kind of like president pissy pants.

  12. william says:
    April 6, 2007 at 10:49 am

    “Khaled Al-Batch, a militant and spokesman for Islamic Jihad, expressed hope Pelosi would continue winning elections, explaining the House speaker’s Damascus visit demonstrated she understands the Middle East.”

    “Abu Abdullah, a leader of Hamas’ military wing in the Gaza Strip, said the willingness by some lawmakers to talk with Syria “is proof of the importance of the resistance against the US.”

    “Pelosi’s visit to Syria was very brave. She is a brave woman,” Jihad Jaara, a senior member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades

    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3385140,00.html

  13. Duros62 says:
    April 6, 2007 at 1:38 pm

    ….the House speaker’s Damascus visit demonstrated she understands the Middle East.”

    And Bushies don’t. Never have, never will. It’s really that simple.
    Talking is a whole lot better than shooting.

  14. midderpidge says:
    April 6, 2007 at 3:05 pm

    It is certainly a knock on Bush’s supposed leadership ability. Pelosi is leading by default because nature abhors a vacuum.

  15. william says:
    April 6, 2007 at 4:04 pm

    When a dilettante takes on Hizbullah -

    http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=5&article_id=81211