Thank goodness they asked Kevin McCarthy for his opinion on Speaker Pelosi, heâs a fantastic unbiased source of info. SMDH
New, News, read all about it, Republicans make false statements about Nancy Pelosi . . . In other news, rain tends to be wet.
Why write a pile of garbage of what Repiblicans think.
They blew the chance when Dems were pragmatic. It was called the Obama years.
Now is the time to destroy the republican party.
Time to write the wrong of Obamaâs biggest mistake.
Being pragmatic to a bunch of bigoted traitors.
Good for her. The over-reaching publicity for the new members especially Ms.Ocasio has this democrat worried. There are more moderates in the party and they should be heard even though they have a nickname or a brand.
The Republican vilification of Pelosi and H. Clinton was an attempt to discredit the opponents they feared the most. Luckily they werenât 100% effective. Like fellow Californian Jerry Brown, may she do great things in her second go-around.
I think thereâs value in having a high profile member like AOC draw Republican fire -which she can easily disarm through her intelligence and savviness on social media -while allowing Pelosi to quietly work on issues important to Democrats and look relatively moderate in comparison. The PR for Pelosi has been remarkably positive thus far, and not just because of her incredible skills as Speaker.
I like the fresh ideas and high energy emanating from the Progressive wing of the Party. While those ideas wonât get the time of day under Trump, they should be ready to go for the next Democratic President. Meanwhile, Republicans have nothing to offer Americans than yet more tax cuts for the extreme wealthy and dismantling of social programs.
I donât know for sure, but I think people are ready for a fresh approach. Trump claimed he was that guy, but heâs nothing but a grifter, liar, and plutocrat; but that yearning for something different and better is still out there.
AP article.
Itâs called the art of the possible.
And why is it a bad thing if Republicans are now walking back their Pelosi derangement? Itâs like giving permission not to hate and vilify her. To me, thatâs a win. Especially in a political landscape where sheâs wiping the floor with their president.
But letâs not fall into the trap of vilifying her on this side by using the Republican walkback to say see? Sheâs too centrist or too corporatist or too whatever other ist is floating by in the air. Sheâs always worked to save entitlements and absolutely refused to compromise at points where others on our side would have. She simply also understands the art of the possible and she shouldnât be faulted for that. She wouldnât be the supremely effective speaker that she is if she didnât.
She is the sharpest tool in the Democratic Houseâs tool shed.
The Republicans can say what they want about Nancy, but she doesnât separate babies from their parents.
Sheâs providing cover for the newer, more progressive members to widen the Overton Window. Donât think sheâs not on-board. She is. She just recognizes how government works, and that it takes time for the pendulum to swing. Slow, incremental change you can believe in, folks. Itâs how it was designed. (Doesnât make it any less frustrating, though.)
I think youâre absolutely right.
Social Security and Medicare arenât entitlements. Iâve been paying in since the mid â60âs.
Right back atchya.
Donât mean to offend you. Itâs just an easy basket term to use.
Reminds me of that time in the early Sixties when the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King, Junior (to use his full name and style) was one of two prominent Black leaders, the other being Malcolm Little/El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz aka âMalcolm Xâ. King would be villified by confederates as a radical. He would point to Malcolm and say, you can either talk to me or you can talk to him. They ended talking to King.
I think Malcolm was in on the gag. But today, we remember both of them.
All of which verbosity leads merely to confirming what others have said, AOC gives Pelosi plenty of cover, and a good, hard tug.
So being immoral is âpragmaticâ and âresults oriented.â Voila the Democratic Party, not just since the 1960s, but since the Civil War, when such explanations were part and parcel of it in its century-long Dixiecrat incarnation.
Indeed, but we could use another term, re the discussion about framing the argument.