Wednesday, April 04, 2007

Queen Nancy's State Visit to a Terrorist State

With her visit to Syria, Nancy Pelosi continues to impress SWNID with her inability to perceive how her actions give off an air of regal hubris unfitting her role as Speaker of the Lower Chamber. She admits that the visit will produce nothing of diplomatic import.

It produces plenty for Assad, of course, namely, plenty of legitimacy for his oppressed domestic constituency, not unlike the effect for Ahmadinejad of seizing his British hostages.

And it does the same for Queen Nancy. She can now be hailed by her left-wing netroots base as the Alt-President they believe her to be.

Such are the schemes of those whose claim to power lacks legal and constitutional legitimacy.

UPDATE: On 04/07 the WaPo's editorial board pastes Queen Nancy without mercy for her faux shuttle diplomacy. It seems she "carried a message" from Israeli PM Olmert that he immediately denied having given. Even the MSM must now admit that its hopes for a New Day with the Dems have been dashed. Wake up, Madam Speaker. You're not in the Bay Area any more.


coffeeandbiblegirl said...

I couldn't agree more. I saw her picture in the Enquire and said to myself, "What is she doing there?" Women seeking power and recognition always makes me cringe. If we would stick to our orginal plan/purpose the world would be a much better place!

Saint Jamie said...

Concerning the previous comment: what's the difference between women "seeking power" and men seeking power? And is trying to sew seeds for peace "seeking power"? Women, in my opinion, do a better job at negotiating peace than do men.

As to the blog on Queen Nancy: note that the bi-partisan Iraq Study Group (chaired by (Rep) James Baker and (Dem) Lee Hamilton concluded with recommending that the US open talks with Iran and Syria but that Bush elected to turned down their studied opinion and preferred to pursue another path.

Nancy Pelosi is pursuing a course of action recommended by this political study group.

But is Pelosi doing this on her own? Last week Virginia Republican Frank Wolf, Pennsylvania Republican Joe Pitts and Alabama Republican Robert Aderholt all met with Syrian President Bashar in Damascus. But when Nancy Pelosi does it (and she has much more of a political mandate to do so), it's met with derision by the republican leaders and their minions.

What Pelosi and the republicans who have gone before her are doing is initiating peace through discussion. It is only the pompous dictatorial disposition of the current Washington leadership that refuses to enter into such a strategy. And look where we are today because of the inability of this administration to engage in dialogue: more enemies, less security, less peace.

Cheney's attitude of censuring other heads of state for what in this case he calls "bad behavior" has NEVER worked because it fails to take them seriously as heads of state (regardless of what we might suspect of them . . . we recently suspected Sadam had WMDs!). It's this sort of wild arrogance which forces other heads of state to react badly to the US. Pelosi and the forward thinking republicans are trying to sooth tensions between the US and another head of state through appropriately respectful dialogue. Only though such a path will actual peace be gained.

The reason Washington does not pursue this time tested and Christian path to peace is because (A) it's not a Christian organization and (B) it defines peace as everyone else getting out of the way so we can do what we like with their stuff and ensure that we get to live the privileged life we currently have at other people's expense. It does not define peace in terms of human and social equality. It certainly does not define peace in anything even remotely related to a Christian ideal (ironically, Pelosi is pursuing a path which is “more” reflective of Christian ideals). All Christians should be vigorously supportive of Pelosi and the forward thinking republicans.

cookie said...

May I gently suggest that saint jamie get her facts right? The republicans that visited Syria were not there to "negotiate" as Pelosi is clearly trying to do. They were there on a fact-finding mission; asking questions not, trying to determine policy.

How any Christian could ever defend democrats or the democratic party is beyond belief. It is a cardinal doctrine of the democratic party to defend a women's right to choose. Choose, to murder children in the womb. This is immoral in every Christians definition. Therefore, the democratic party is immoral.

Jim Shoes said...

Pay attention, please! The objection is not to diplomacy versus confrontation but to the Speaker of the House acting like a head of state herself.