Nancy Pelosi — tough and confused about principles

David Axelrod’s talk yesterday included a shout-out to the lovable Nancy Pelosi, whom he feels is unfairly maligned by the Rushes of this world.  Per David, Nancy is not an effete San Francisco liberal.  Instead, she’s a tough political operative — for all the right, i.e., Progressive, reasons, of course — who was trained in her Dad’s old-fashioned, rough-and-tumble ward rooms.  He described with affection Nancy ramming her finger repeatedly in his chest when she felt he’d failed to deliver on something or other.

What a charmer.

I can readily believe Axelrod’s talk about Nancy’s toughness and finger strikes.  The “principled” part, though, is a little harder.  Isn’t this the woman who recently castigated Catholics for having “this conscience thing“?  Hmmm….  Conscience?  Principles?  They kind of seem like a matched set to me.

Just the other day, Pelosi again stumbled on her principles when she complained that Bishops who object to forcing Catholics to subsidize things that they think are morally evil (abortions, for example) are “lobbyists.”  The Anchoress has more on this one.  When I think of Nancy Pelosi and principles, I keep getting a mental image of Jon Lovitz doing his compulsive liar shtick.  “Yeah, principles.  That’s the ticket!”

Be Sociable, Share!
  • jj

    She isn’t confused about principles, she just doesn’t have any.  She wouldn’t recognize a principle if it bit her in the ass.

  • Americas 1stSgt

    Ramming your finger repeatedly into my chest is a great way to get me to ram my finger into your eye hole. That is all, carry on.

  • Bookworm

    I’ve always imagined that eye holes are squishy and slimy. I know how to strike them, but don’t ever actually want to.

  • Danny Lemieux

    Book, it’s easier to rake them with a up-down tiger claw or swipe them with a praying mantis side whip. Very effective.

    On that happy note…. 

  • Gringo

    SanFranNan is very principled. Her leading principle is the same as Al Davis, the late owner of the Oakland Raiders: “Just win, baby.”
    While I dislike NObama, my dislike for SanFranNan is as strong, or stronger.
    I do like SanFranNan’s high quotability quotient. Such as her saying that natural gas was not a fossil fuel. Or when she said that we needed to pass Obamacare in order to find out what was in the bill.
    Her quotes make her the walking, talking prototype of the brain-dead liberal.
    To be fair to SanFranNan, her main political function  is not making profound statements about policy. Her main political function is to get fellow Democrats to vote the way the Democratic leadership wants them to vote. She does that job very well. (That’s where the term “party whip” came into being: whip them cattle into line.)

  • Ymarsakar

    I think if she’s like that, it’s because she has black mail material on all those Dems. Boy fetishes. Girl fetishes. Prostitute rings. The works. She even gets Axelrod to do things her way. What does she have on him?

  • Gringo

    She even gets Axelrod to do things her way. What does she have on him?
    If Axelrod has something to hide, it is the steps taken to get the release of  sealed divorce records of Obama’s opponents in Obama’s 2004 run for the US Senate. That’s right, not opponent, but opponents. What’s the saying about lightning striking twice?
    From a followup story by the Tribune reporter who broke the initial story on Hull [Axelrod used to work for the Trib.]:
    Obama’s greatest challenge in the coming days is keeping his public comments in check as he watches Republican opponent Jack Ryan manage a political firestorm after the release of divorce files. They show Ryan’s ex-wife accused him of pressuring her to have sex with him in sex clubs while others watched.
    In the Democratic primary, Obama found himself the overwhelming beneficiary when the campaign of former securities trader Blair Hull crashed in the aftermath of Hull’s release of court files from a messy divorce. Though Obama has been a passive beneficiary of Ryan’s latest problems, the Democrat’s campaign worked aggressively behind the scenes to fuel controversy about Hull’s filings.
    While Axelrod denies involvement in getting those divorce records unsealed, the above quote from the reporter who broke the original story on Hull certainly implies involvement.
    At this stage, it is no surprise that Obama plays hardball with his domestic opponents. Perhaps it is only of historical interest if one can definitively prove  Obama  got to the Senate by the above underhanded method- getting sealed divorce records unsealed to destroy an opponent. While this sounds like typical Chicago politics, I doubt that Axelrod would like publicity shined on his part in the affair.
    If there is any blackmail Pelosi has on Axelrod, this would be my suggestion.

  • Mike Devx

    Be thankful for Ms. Nancy, and her effectiveness at controlling “her” Democrats in the House.

    Her ramrodding of her extreme far-left agenda upon the nation – and the people’s rejection of it – is one of the main reasons we won so big in 2010.

    “We have to pass this bill, to find out what is in it.”

    Has there been any one better expression in the modern era of the old “Let them eat cake” sentiment?