Pelosi’s Paranoia
By now, most people have seen the video of Speaker Pelosi tearing up about the violence that visited San Francisco 30 years ago, then expressing her worries that TEA Partygoers would resort to violence. While I’m willing to believe that it’s possible she still grieves over the City Hall slayings, I don’t buy into her schtick that she’s worried about TEA Partygoers committing acts of violence.
Jim Hoft suggests that, if Speaker Pelosi wants to curb violence at the rallies, Speaker Pelosi should put SEIU thugs on a shorter leash:
Although he was too weak to speak after his beating on Thursday, black conservative Kenneth Gladney attended the SEIU rally. Kenneth was beaten, kicked and called racist names by Russ Carnahan’s SEIU supporters after a town hall meeting on Thursday.
Speaker Pelosi’s worries about violence are justified…if those worries were directed at the SEIU thugs that got their marching orders from President Obama’s staff:
Top White House aides gave Senate Democrats a recess battle plan on Thursday, arming the lawmakers with tips for avoiding disastrous town hall meetings while showing them polling on popular aspects of the reform effort.
Senior White House adviser David Axelrod and deputy chief of staff Jim Messina told senators to focus on the insured and how they would benefit from “consumer protections” in the overhaul, such as ending the practice of denying insurance based on preexisting conditions and ensuring the continuity of coverage between jobs.
They showed video clips of the confrontational town halls that have dominated the media coverage, and told senators to do more prep work than usual for their public meetings by making sure their own supporters turn out, senators and aides said.
And they screened TV ads and reviewed the various campaigns by critics of the Democratic plan.
“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” Messina said, according to an official who attended the meeting.
There is a violence problem at the townhalls that problem doesn’t exist at the TEA Parties. That’s because, unlike Democratic politicians who don’t like being challenged on the facts, TEA Party activists don’t import SEIU thugs to intimidate people at their events.
Fortunately, Rep. Pete Sessions, chairman of the NRCC, is standing up to Speaker Pelosi’s paranoid rantings:
Rep. Pete Sessions (Texas), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said Pelosi crossed the line when she related the rhetoric of anti-gay protesters in San Francisco in 1978, the year Harvey Milk, the first openly gay member of the city’s board of supervisors, and his political ally, Mayor George Moscone, were killed by former supervisor Dan White, to that of contemporary conservatives while answering a question about the protests against President Obama’s health-care proposals.
“The Speaker is now likening genuine opposition to assassination. Such insulting rhetoric not only undermines the credibility of her office, but it underscores the desperate attempt by her party to divert attention away from a failing agenda,” Sessions said in a statement. “During one of the most important policy debates of our time, the American people have been completely abandoned by those elected representatives under her control. Voters are justifiably frustrated with Washington, and the Speaker’s verbal assault on voters accomplishes nothing other than furthering her reputation for being wildly out of touch with the American people.”
That Speaker Pelosi can’t or won’t differentiate between passionate policy disagreements and acts of violence speaks more to her disengenuousness or his paranoia than it speaks to the nature of the TEA Party activists.
Speaker Pelosi’s reaction might be proof that a little paranoia often goes a long way.
Technorati Tags: TEA Parties, Violence, SEIU Thugs, Assassinations, San Francisco, Nancy Pelosi, Democrats, Kenneth Gladney, Activists, Conservatives, Pete Sessions, NRCC, Election 2010
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
September 18th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
I’m coming to the conclusion that anyone who disagrees with Queen Nancy is a dangerous extremist and potential murderer, at least according to her rhetoric.
If she wishes to see less violence in the debate about health care she needs to call off her union/Acorn thugs, or at least train them in vocal-but-peaceful protest before sending them out to intimidate people.
And I’m confused by this. She certainly didn’t squirm at being a colleague and associate of a murderer, and even praised him at his funeral.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
She’s loosing it. This woman has had things go her way for so long, she doesnt know how to handle it when things go south. She cant handle opposition, she cant handle free discussion, she certainly canty handle criticism, so she’s lashing out, like any spoiled brat would.
September 19th, 2009 at 11:15 pm
Physically she’s 69 years old. Emotionally, typical of leftists, she’s also 69 - months old, hasn’t been to kindergarten and grew up playing with imaginary friends whose behavior was subject to her every whim.
Of course she’s lashing out like the spoiled brat she is.