You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Pelosi backs Murtha as majority leader
2006-11-13
Endorsement adds to power struggle, as other Dems support HoyerÂ’s bid

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, in line to become speaker of the House, stepped into a postelection power struggle among fellow Democrats on Sunday with a letter of support for Rep. Jack Murtha in the race to pick a majority leader. “Your presence in the leadership of our party would add a knowledgeable and respected voice to our Democratic team,” Pelosi, D-Calif., wrote Murtha. The Pennsylvania lawmaker is widely viewed as an underdog in a two-man race with Maryland Rep. Steny Hoyer in this week’s leadership elections.

Murtha issued a statement saying, “I am deeply gratified to receive the support of Speaker Pelosi, a tireless advocate for change and a true leader for our party and our country.”

Hoyer has been second-ranking in the Democratic leadership behind Pelosi the past four years. He issued a statement saying he was confident he would win the race. “Nancy told me some time ago that she would personally support Jack. I respect her decision as the two are very close,” Hoyer’s statement said.

Pelosi and Hoyer have long been rivals within the party caucus, while she and Murtha are allies of long standing.
Rest at link.
Posted by:ed

#7  Aside from this disgusting love fest, Murtha and Pelosi have their political differences. But they have something in common: they must have the lowest IQs in the House. They are literally too dumb to know what they don't know. Remember Polosi's remarks on the SCOTUS Kelo decision:

Q: Later this morning, many Members of the House Republican leadership, along with John Cornyn from the Senate, are holding a news conference on eminent domain, the decision of the Supreme Court the other day, and they are going to offer legislation that would restrict it, prohibiting federal funds from being used in such a manner.

Two questions: What was your reaction to the Supreme Court decision on this topic, and what do you think about legislation to, in the minds of opponents at least, remedy or changing it?

Ms. Pelosi: As a Member of Congress, and actually all of us and anyone who holds a public office in our country, we take an oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Very central to that in that Constitution is the separation of powers. I believe that whatever you think about a particular decision of the Supreme Court, and I certainly have been in disagreement with them on many occasions, it is not appropriate for the Congress to say we're going to withhold funds for the Court because we don't like a decision.

Q: Not on the Court, withhold funds from the eminent domain purchases that wouldn't involve public use. I apologize if I framed the question poorly. It wouldn't be withholding federal funds from the Court, but withhold Federal funds from eminent domain type purchases that are not just involved in public good.

Ms. Pelosi: Again, without focusing on the actual decision, just to say that when you withhold funds from enforcing a decision of the Supreme Court you are, in fact, nullifying a decision of the Supreme Court. This is in violation of the respect for separation of church -- powers in our Constitution, church and state as well. Sometimes the Republicans have a problem with that as well. But forgive my digression.

So the answer to your question is, I would oppose any legislation that says we would withhold funds for the enforcement of any decision of the Supreme Court no matter how opposed I am to that decision. And I'm not saying that I'm opposed to this decision, I'm just saying in general.

Q: Could you talk about this decision? What you think of it?

Ms. Pelosi: It is a decision of the Supreme Court. If Congress wants to change it, it will require legislation of a level of a constitutional amendment. So this is almost as if God has spoken. It's an elementary discussion now. They have made the decision.

Q: Do you think it is appropriate for municipalities to be able to use eminent domain to take land for economic development?

Ms. Pelosi: The Supreme Court has decided, knowing the particulars of this case, that that was appropriate, and so I would support that.
Posted by: KBK   2006-11-13 14:31  

#6  Well at least Kitten With A Whip tries to be loyal.
And she does owe the scumbag.
Posted by: tu3031   2006-11-13 12:22  

#5  "I salute your courageous leadership that changed the national debate and helped make Iraq the central issue of this historic election. It was surely a dark day for the Bush Administration when you spoke truth to power," she wrote. "Your strong voice for national security, the war on terror and Iraq provides genuine leadership for our party, and I count on you to lead on these vital issues."

Murtha responded, "I am deeply gratified to receive the support of Speaker Pelosi, a tireless advocate for change and a true leader for our Party and our country."


The country asked for it and now we've got it. Unbelievable. Okinawa, get ready.

I hold Rove responsible. Clearly, Bush believed the Republicans would hold Congress, and he was blindsided. Changes could have been made to forestall this travesty.
Posted by: KBK   2006-11-13 10:40  

#4  "Let's put FIVE bullets in the revolver!"
Posted by: mojo   2006-11-13 10:32  

#3  This reminds me of the time I was walking down my street and those two dogs were stuck together....
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2006-11-13 06:24  

#2  Just shows what a sicking c*&t Pelosi is.

Just a reminder, when you negotiate with evil, evil alway wins.
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom   2006-11-13 03:50  

#1  Interesting. Ploy to placate the nuttier base elements - while the fix is in for Hoyer to win on party votes?

If Murtha does gain the job, the Dhimmi position will be a match to its rhetoric, a political rarity... and solid proof that the military disaster we've been anticipating is on the way.
Posted by: .com   2006-11-13 03:20  

00:00