Thursday, January 26, 2012

The silliness of Nancy Pelosi

Unbelievably--well, maybe not that unbelievably--Pelosi's stupidity continues to get coverage in the media. For those unaware, Pelosi claimed she knows "something," a something that for some reason would prevent Gingrich from ever becoming President.

Truth be told, I'd bet many people on Capitol Hill are walking around with dirt on other people there. But not knowing who has dirt on them, they probably aren't willing to risk saying anything. Though I should clarify, here. When I say "dirt," I mean gossip that may or may not be true. I'm quite certain that if a politician had hard evidence that would bring down an opposition leader, they wouldn't hesitiate to use it.

So now we have Pelosi, threatening to "dish" on Gingrich. If she had something real, she'd have already run with it. Unless. Unless whatever it is she knows might be equally damaging to someone maybe herself. There's a secret she could actually have! Pelosi and Gingrich were secret lovers, or maybe they had a three-way with Rahm Emmanuel. That would, I think, end Newt's campaign.

To Newt's credit, he's challenged Pelosi to say what she knows. And he makes an excellent point about her veiled threat:
If she doesn’t know something, she ought to quit saying it. But this is baloney. I don’t think any Republican is going to be threatened by Nancy Pelosi, and frankly, I’d rather have her threaten me than endorse me, so I feel pretty good about it.
The Pelosi camp, perhaps sensing how badly she looks, is backtracking and claiming that the "something" she knows is just her opinion that Newt won't be President:
In a statement, Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill said Pelosi was not alluding to any confidential knowledge with the comment that knows "something." 
"The 'something' Leader Pelosi knows is that Newt Gingrich will not be President of the United States. She made that clear last night," Hammill said. "Leader Pelosi previously made a reference to the extensive amount of information that is in the public record, including the comprehensive committee report with which the public may not be fully aware."
Of course, it's more than an opinion, it's an adamant prediction of the future. A simple look back in time, however, demonstrates how bad Pelosi's powers of prognostication are, as she insisted--time and time again--that the Democrats would maintain control of the House after the 2010 Elections. She insisted she would be back as Speaker. She didn't hope it would happen, she knew it would. Right.

Cheers, all.


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. If I were a Democrat with high visibility, I'd hold whatever damaging information I had until Newt had the nomination sewn up. Hinting that it existed and thereby lowering his chances of getting the nomination would be to risk defeating my longer-term interest. Or so it seems to me. But I certainly don't think like Nancy Pelosi, so you can take all that with a large grain of salt.

    Edited to add: My validation phrase when I went to post my comment was "ACheat." I wonder if BlogSpot and Nancy are privy to the same information?