Say Anything Blog

Here’s Nancy Pelosi reacting to news that President Bush may temporarily halt troop withdrawal in July on the basis of the recommendations of his “top war commander Gen. David Petraeus”:

And that’s why we want the president to manage this war better, answer the questions to the American people, and, again, I agree with Leader Reid—he is just dragging this out so he can put it at the doorstep of the new president of the United States.

And may I add, if he doesn’t change his economic policy, he will be leaving a failed war policy and a failed economy at the doorstep of that new president.

Note the words:

dragging this out so he can put it at the doorstep of the new president

Nancy Pelosi thinks that if Bush doesn’t do something right away, he will leave a failed economy for the “next President” (Nice of her to be so considerate of President McCain! )

But is Nancy consistent in her wishes?

WASHINGTON—Defying the White House, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Wednesday the House will change its rules to avoid a required vote this year on a free-trade agreement with Colombia.

Pelosi, D-Calif., said the change would remove the timetable that says Congress must take up trade bills within 90 legislative days after they are received from the White House. She intended to bring the rule proposal to the full House on Thursday.

So, she wants Bush to act right away to fix the economy while she simultaneously changes the rules to avoid and delay a vote on Columbian Free Trade for more than 90 days, which could help the economy, but might force one or both of the Democrat candidates for president to cast a less than popular vote!

What’s the matter, Nancy? Don’t you want the economy to be fixed now instead of leaving it “at the doorstep of that new president”?

Nancy carps that the president stalls while she leads Congress in stalling a Free Trade agreement!

You can’t have it both ways!

What’s the matter, Nancy? Afraid of how Hillary or Barack might vote? Or are you afraid of how some voters might respond to those votes, which is why you want to delay the votes until after the election, so your candidates won’t be held accountable?

Hypocrisy, Thy Name is Nancy!

Cross posted at Proof Positive

Update: Here's at least one good reason Hillary doesn't want this issue to come to a vote:

PITTSBURGH, Pennsylvania (CNN) – Hillary Clinton used her trademark laugh Thursday to deflect a question about the $800,000 her husband earned in 2005 giving speeches for a Bogota-based group that supports the Colombia free trade agreement — the same trade deal she currently opposes.

Asked by CNN if those earnings represented a conflict of interest given that she has dipped into her family's pocketbook to pay campaign bills, Clinton threw up her hands and laughed loudly for several seconds.

She publicly opposes it to pander to union voters. Her husband accepts over three quarter of a million dollars to support it.
She either ticks off Bill's gravy train or her voters with a public vote on the matter. No wonder Hillary wants to avoid going on the record!