Archive for the ‘Nancy Pelosi’ Category

Nancy and Joe on abortion

Wednesday, September 23rd, 2015

2015-09-23 10.46.43Nancy and Joe on abortion? Anything but Catholic.

Read my article here.

Hillary Clinton: No Limits on Abortion, Not Even In the Ninth Month of Pregnancy

Carly Fiorina is especially being battered by these “misleading’ claims horseshit, because she gave such a riveting accounting of the videos, daring people to watch them.

Well, the media is very insistent that you not do that. That’s why they tend not to run the tapes when they claim they’re misleading — the public would see the media’s claims are bullshit.

Well, Fiorina’s PAC is running them in their response to these bullshit claims.

CONTENT WARNING — contains the upsetting footage the media doesn’t want you to see.


Cuba: Nancy at the Saratoga

Friday, February 20th, 2015

Ah, for the optics!

My friend Silvio Canto, Jr. was keeping track of how many times the Hotel Saratoga, where Nancy Pelosi stayed during her Havana junket, had been expropriated by the Communist regime. He found out it was expropriated twice: once in 1959, and again in 2011:

in 2011, Castro confiscated Coral Capital’s minority stake in The Hotel Saratoga.

And for giggles, he had Coral Capital’s two senior executives in Cuba, Amado Fahkre and Stephen Purvis, imprisoned in the notorious torture facility known as Villa Marista (akin to Moscow’s infamous Lubyanka).

Fahkre and Purvis spent nearly two years arbitrarily imprisoned, had all their assets confiscated and were finally expelled to Britain.

Purvis, as you may recall, does not hold fond memories of the sixteen months he was jailed, and Coral was contemplating suing the Cuban regime for the $20+million it seized.

Indeed, the Saratoga ought to be an object lesson to all who contemplate investing with the Cuban regime; a lesson lost on Nancy.

Argentina: SCOTUS rules for the creditors

Monday, June 16th, 2014

Two, not one, rulings regarding the 2001 defaulted bonds, upholding U.S. contract law; As I had mentioned earlier,

This is an interesting case, not just because Argentina initially had to issue the bonds with a guarantee that they would pay them in full because the country had already defaulted, but also because it may set a precedent for any future sovereign debt or municipal debt restructurings.

High Court Sides With Holdout Creditors in Argentina Debt Case
The U.S. Supreme Court handed Argentina a pair of legal setbacks in cases stemming from its 2001 default, a major blow for the country in its lengthy battle with holdout creditors

The first,

In one highly anticipated case, the justices rejected Argentina’s request that the high court intervene in litigation with holdout hedge funds that had refused to accept the country’s debt-restructuring offers.

The Supreme Court, without comment, left in place a lower-court ruling that said Argentina can’t make payments on its restructured debt unless it also pays the holdouts.

And then there’s the disclosure case,

In a second related case, the high court ruled that bank records about Argentina’s international assets can be made available to one holdout creditor seeking to collect on court judgments stemming from the default.

To add to the double whammy, the decision was 7 to 1; Lyle Denniston of SCOTUS blog explains,

Besides refusing to hear Argentina’s plea that U.S. courts had no authority to command how it, as a sovereign nation, deals with holders of its external debt, the Court silently turned aside a plea by Argentina to get an interpretation by New York state courts of just what legal obligations of equal treatment Argentina has undertaken in selling the now-defaulted bonds.

In contrast to the simple denial of those issues, the Court issued a full-dress opinion on the separate question of how wide an opportunity the holders of defaulted bonds would have to gather information from two banks about the location of Argentina’s financial assets overseas.

In an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Court rejected Argentina’s argument that those bondholders could only seek information about assets that that country keeps in the United States. Argentina had relied upon a 1976 U.S. law seeking to insulate foreign governments from some legal obligations in U.S. courts.

For one thing, Justice Scalia noted, Argentina had given up its immunity to demands for information about its assets that could be used to cover its obligations on debts. But, in addition, Scalia wrote, the 1976 law on foreign immunity simply says nothing at all about giving foreign governments immunity to demands that they produce information that may be necessary to satisfy a debt obligation they had undertaken.

This means the investors can get access to a wide number of bank records to locate financial assets overseas that they might be able to seize as compensation.

Argentina had sent a delegation to meet with Nancy Pelosi last week to discuss the debt,

Hours earlier, the Argentine delegation had lunch with former US solicitor-general Paul Clement — a legal adviser for the Argentine position against the hedge funds that have refused to restructure the country’s defaulted debt — and representatives from the Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton law firm.

Justice Sotomayor had recused herself.

You can read the decision in full here.

Related headlines:
Argentina debt crisis fears grow after US supreme court ruling
Share prices fall 6% as US court refuses appeal against decision in favour of creditors who bought up debt worth $1.3bn

Argentina’s bond drama: pathway to peace or a new Falklands?

Argentina Loses US Supreme Court Appeal In Key Hedge Fund Case, Now In Its 12th Year

Cristina Fernández will address the nation on television at 9 pm local time tonight.

Nancy admits to hallucinatory episode while in office

Saturday, August 11th, 2012

Inmates in charge of the asylum (h/t Betsy),

In the video Pelosi says, “He’s (Bush) saying something to the effect of we’re so glad to welcome you here, congratulations and I know you’ll probably have some different things to say about what is going on–which is correct. But, as he was saying this, he was fading and this other thing was happening to me.”

“My chair was getting crowded in,” said Pelosi. “I swear this happened, never happened before, it never happened since.”

“My chair was getting crowded in and I couldn’t figure out what it was, it was like this,” she said.

“And then I realized Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, Alice Paul, Sojourner Truth, you name it, they were all in that chair, they were,” said Pelosi. “More than I named and I could hear them say: ‘At last we have a seat at the table.’ And then they were gone.”

They probably went to hang out with Eleanor Roosevelt.

Video below the fold, since it starts right away,

Pelosi’s latest: Democrats should skip the convention

Wednesday, July 18th, 2012

A sign of desperation?

Nancy’s so optimistic she doesn’t want Democrats to attend the convention; instead, she wants them out on the field:

“I’m not encouraging anyone to go to the convention, having nothing to do with anything except I think they should stay home, campaign in their districts, use their financial and political resources to help them win their election,” Pelosi said in an exclusive interview for POLITICO Live’s On Congress, a new weekly show to be streamed live on POLITICO’s website and broadcast on NewsChannel 8 on Wednesdays.

After all,

“We nominated a president last time. We have an incumbent President of the United States. We’re very proud of him. There certainly will be enough people there to express that pride, but I’m not encouraging members to go to the convention no matter what the situation was, because they can be home. It’s campaign time. It’s the first week in September,” she said.

In addition, Pelosi also wouldn’t commit to serving in the leadership of the 113th Congress.
“I wouldn’t assume anything,” she told POLITICO editor in chief John Harris and reporter Lois Romano. “I would just assume that Democrats would win and we would stop the obstruction of the President’s agenda. I think it’s fair to say that most people don’t have the faintest idea about leadership races in the Congress.”

Does that mean she’s worried that the Senate will be in play? Are the internals that bad?

Will she help out Wiener Weiner on his comeback?

Or is she going to focus her attention on her outsourced investments?

will she go to the Convention, or is she going to “stay home, campaign in her district, use her financial and political resources to help them win their election” instead?

Weiner goes to rehab, Nancy wants him out

Saturday, June 11th, 2011

After Patterico (herehere and here) broke the story of Anthony Weiner’s talking dirty to underage girls and the mainstream news media picked up the story, Nancy Pelosi wants him to quit.

He’s going on leave and will check himself into a treatment center instead, for treatment of The Weiner Syndrome,

You would think that Nancy would know better than to expect that a guy who had Bill Clinton officiate at his wedding would quit.


Tanks for Hugo, bankrupt states, the Supremes, and the roundup

Tuesday, January 25th, 2011

J. E. Dyer looks at the topography affecting those tanks Hugo Chavez is receiving from Russia:
Bridges to Bogotá.

Mary O’Grady reports that The U.S. Defends Democracy in Haiti
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice backs the OAS’s report of fraud in Haiti’s presidential election.

James Pethokoukis asks, Did Wall Street nix GOP push to let states go bankrupt?

Bipartisan seating for the SOTU address tonight? Not for Nancy Pelosi: Pelosi not sitting with Cantor, despite his invitation. Tweet Of The Day: Don’t Wait To Ask The Girl To The Prom Edition. Since she won’t be sitting behind the President, we shall be spared the sight of Nancy as cheeleader-in-chief to Obama’s every word:

Thank goodness for small favors.

Justice Scalia says he hasn’t “gone to the State of the Union in at least 10 years, and I’m not starting tomorrow night either.” Roger Kimball also has the State of the Union Blues. I think I’ll head out to meditation class.

Over at MSNBC, [Chris] Matthews Ties Tea Partiers to ‘Nazi Stuff’ Moments After Bashing [Glenn] Beck for ‘Violent Rhetoric’. Beck is in hot water with Liberals and the New York Times for pointing out Frances Fox Piven’s calls for violence. At the Wall Street Journal, James Taranto uncovers the real Advocate of Violence
Frances Fox Piven and the New York Times’s dishonest campaign for “civility.”
American Power has video of Beck’s follow-up,

Matt Keller ponders The Most Useful College Class I Ever Took, or: “Everyone Loves Raymond, unless Raymond owns more land than you and his Livestock eats your feed” Via Pundette, Mark Steyn writes about the Danish show trials,

The Danish Member of Parliament Jesper Langballe commented on the Hedegaard case and was himself charged with “racism”. While preparing his defense, he was also told by the court that “defendants in cases brought under Article 266b are denied the right to prove their case”.


That’s why these are heresy trials, and only the first of many. The prosecutors think Hedegaard, Langballe, Wilders, Mrs Sabbaditsch-Wolff et al are apostates from the new state religion of multiculturalism. Thuggish Muslim lobby groups, on the other hand, consider them heretics against Islam. In practice, it makes little difference, and multiculturalism is merely an interim phase, a once useful cover for an Islamic imperialism so confident it now barely needs one. The good news is that European prosecutors are doing such a grand job with their pilot program of show trials you’ll hardly notice the difference when sharia is formally instituted.

Back in the USA, just because you’re a Cabinet member doesn’t mean the POTUS can spare any time with you, and just because you are First Lady doesn’t mean you can get good tailoring.

Last but not least, Artsy And They Spared Us the Speedos


A brief roundup on a busy evening, with tango VIDEO

Thursday, January 6th, 2011

Been busy all day, but found time for a roundup,

Bookworm lost her patience and now explains Attitude is everything . . . or why I yelled at my 88 year old mother

Play me the world’s smallest violin for Barack Obama and Robert Gibbs, but James Warren shows No Pity for Robert Gibbs and His ‘Modest’ Salary, and neither do I.

NPR exec who fired Juan Williams follows him out the door. Juan Williams rips NPR, for good reason. Tammy Bruce has video and transcript.

Doug Ross has the Great News: U.S. Department of Education helping to teach educators about Alinsky, Cloward-Piven and the Need for State-Run Media. Just what we needed.

Ace has the skinny on Liberals Reacting To Reading The Constitution In House Pretty Much Exactly As You Expected They Would.

Could somebody please tell John Boehner to stop crying? It’s unmanly, and annoying. Heck, the girl in True Grit would have smacked him on the side of the head for doing this,

Happy 80th Birthday to The Mighty Robert Duvall, and may he tango on for many more years,


Dems and their tax fallacies UPDATED

Friday, December 3rd, 2010

The first fallacy the Democrats repeat over and over is to call the proposed Obama tax increases as repealing the Bush tax cuts. The so-called “cuts” were cuts back in the year when GWB was president and Congress passed the tax reductions. At this point, there are no tax cuts, there are proposed tax increases. The Dems assume you are willing to suspend reason in order to push through the largest tax increase in US history, during a recession.

The Washington Examiner looks at other ways ‘Pelosi-nomics’ requires willing suspension of reason

For one thing, they assume that a tax cut is a gift from the government to the taxpayer rather than government choosing not to take something away that the taxpayer already possesses. Otherwise, to be logically consistent, the assumption must be that the money in taxpayers’ hands is actually government property, which we are allowed to keep until the tax collector demands that we return it in the form of taxes.

Another way of understanding the fallacious nature of the Pelosi argument that tax cuts must be “paid for” by government is to focus on the $700 billion she says will be added to the deficit if all of the Bush measures are extended. Where does Pelosi think those 700 billion dollar bills currently reside if not in the hands of those who will have to pay higher levies if her position is accepted?

Also at the Washington Examiner, Mark Tapscott writes that Washington is why the economy is not growing

On every front, the federal government is creating more investment-killing tax uncertainty, issuing endless pages of new bureaucratic regulations on the economy, and preventing firms from taking actions that could create hundreds of thousands of new positions and kick-start a muscular recovery with real legs.

Political grandstanding by President Obama and Democratic leaders of the lame-duck Congress like Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York on extending the Bush tax cuts is only the most obvious example of how Washington is why the economy is at a standstill.

The same Obama who now says he doesn’t want to extend the Bush tax cuts for “the rich” said last year that “the last thing you want to do is to raise taxes in the middle of a recession because that would just suck up, take more demand out of the economy and put businesses further in a hole.”

The recession is officially over, but with unemployment barely below recession levels and virtually no new jobs being created, it should be clear now is not the time to raise taxes and “put businesses further in the hole,” either, whether by letting the Bush tax rates on upper incomes expire, or adopting Schumer’s demagogic idea of raising taxes on “millionaires.”

As the Wall Street Journal pointed out yesterday, at least 80 percent of the income received by Schumer’s rich villains is from business investments, so increasing their taxes will, as Obama said, put them into deeper holes.

The Bush tax cuts are only one front in this debate. Obama is also tightening the federal bureaucracy’s regulatory straightjacket on economic growth. As the Heritage Foundation reported a week before the election, the hidden tax of regulation costs at least $1.75 trillion annually. That’s twice as much as the government collects in taxes on individuals.

Then there is the Obama Permitorium on energy exploration and production here in the United States, which threatens even greater long-term damage to the economy’s ability to generate new jobs and growth

Creating uncertainty, raising taxes to individuals and the private sector, and creating more regulation is the sure way to cripple an economy.

There’s also this,

Take a look at the no-drill zone:

To please the environmentalist lobby, the administration is walking away from 7.5 billion barrels of oil and almost 60 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Media reports indicate that only a portion of the seas that are now off-limits contain enough crude to fill up more than 2.4 million cars with gasoline and natural gas to heat 8 million homes for 60 years.

Increasing dependency on foreign oil, and adding more government programs will keep the economy in dire straits for decades to come.

At Protein Wisdom, “Unemployment Rises to 9.8% as U.S. Adds Just 39,000 Jobs”

So. Unemployment is increasing. The Fed is printing money. And what is the Pelosi House doing? Passing tax increases on small business owners and the “rich” (families that make over $250k) — and then pledging to spend $4.5 BILLION on another layer of bureaucratic oversight added to school lunches at the behest of the First Lady, who it appears is now the unelected Czar of the country’s food policies.

Couple this with Obama’s recent reversal on offshore drilling — a move that will damage the economies of several states and serves as a boon to foreign competitors — and his backdoor affront on internet freedom, and there no two ways about this: we must conclude at this point that, as the markets brace for a potential crash, the “progressives” are intentionally out to sabotage the economy.

Mere stupidity no longer explains it.


Welcome back, Nancy

Wednesday, November 17th, 2010

Here you have it, the best clenched-fisted, botoxed-forehead House Minority Leader the Republicans could ask for:

Pelosi Elected House Democratic Leader

Democrats in the House of Representatives voted 150-43 Wednesday to keep House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as their leader in the new Congress, a number of lawmakers said as they emerged from the caucus meeting.

It wasn’t all paved with rose petals for Nancy, though:

The vote still amounts to a rebuke of Ms. Pelosi because she was running against Rep. Heath Shuler of North Carolina, who never campaigned for votes among his colleagues.

All the same, it’s the best thing the Republicans could hope for.

More at The Hill.