I guarantee you there are a couple hundred Democratic members of the House of Representatives scratching their heads this morning, wondering why in God’s name they ever cast a vote for Nancy Pelosi as the public face of their party.
She just made an appearance on “Meet the Press,” and it was a disaster. Worse than that, it was a lasting embarrassment for any progressive-minded viewer hoping to see something other than a profile in stuttering, stammering, defensiveness, vacillation and evasion. I haven’t felt that uncomfortable since watching Roger Mudd ask Ted Kennedy about his day.
She said nothing with conviction, sitting instead visibly trying to recall her talking points cleared by a horde of nervous, focus-grouping advisers. As one sad example Tim Russert gave her the opportunity three times -- three times -- to pledge she would honorably and proudly work to repeal Bush’s inane tax cuts as Speaker, and she responded with empty, circumlocutory nothingness on each occasion.
Her answers concerning Iraq were almost unintelligible but clearly contradictory; her solution to the energy crisis was stilted, bumper-sticker pabulum having something to do with shifting our focus from the Middle East to the Midwest -- get it? clever, huh?; her demotion of “investigations” to only “hearings” into White House crimes was a bizarre and muddled distinction; and the rest of what she didn’t say with excessive strain wasn’t worth hearing, either.
Were I a Democratic congressional candidate I would be running away from Nancy Pelosi as fast as I was running against George W. Bush. Her projection of party timidity and uncertainty was that bad.
In 1994 Republicans had Newt Gingrich, a slick, bold, convincing, walking promise of real changes to come, whether real or not, smart or not. In 2006 Democrats are stuck -- or are they? -- with the gutless Nancy Pelosi, a quivering reed of unpromising fear and paralysis.
She’s regarded by the opposition as its secret weapon. But you know it, I know it, even rank-and-file Democrats know it, which makes her something less than a secret force of internal destruction. So why can’t professional Democratic strategists figure it out?
If you doubt my assessment of her agonizing appearance on “Meet the Press” you can read the transcript here (yet to be posted as of this writing), though I would suggest you first take a slug or two of fermented fortification. It’ll rattle you. Really.

Amen Brother.
Posted by: Wm. J. McGowan, II | May 08, 2006 at 08:44 AM
Your an idiot. Tim Russert is an asshole! If he had any balls he would have had Steven Colbert on instead the Bushie impersonator.
How may times did Father Tim ask about TAX Cuts, Tax Cuts, Tax Cut. Him and his ilk are the only ones that got TAX CUTS.
Quit falling into the Repugs Traps.
Posted by: phastphill | May 08, 2006 at 08:54 AM
If only we could get some Democrats willing to forgo their focus group polling and just stand for something.
If we could come up with some strong 3rd-party candidates in time for November, I'd be willing to vote for one of them.
Posted by: Alan Charles | May 08, 2006 at 08:57 AM
Pelosi didn't look impressive. She had very little attack in her and equally little spontaneity. I'd have thought that as the leader of House Democrats she would be after Bush like a pitt bull. She wasn't. It all seemed so befuddled, so scripted. There is a thundering critique of Bush's failings but Pelosi will not be the one to mount it.
Posted by: robert freeman | May 08, 2006 at 10:00 AM
Totally agree. Pelosi is worse than an embarassment. Watching Meet the Press on Sunday, I was thinking...She must be a Republican mole, she can only hurt the Democrats.
Posted by: Audrey | May 08, 2006 at 10:07 AM
I watched too and find the venom surprising. Once again the Republicans have no need to attack a Democrat, their own party does it for them. I am an Independent and wonder if either party is worth voting for.
Posted by: KenoshaMarge | May 08, 2006 at 10:15 AM
democrats are a big party. plenty o room or diverse views.
its the repugs who march lock step.
stop atacking dems, the media needs soem special atention. bush's impersonator? lol
adn you complain aobut pelosi..
we need fewer "leaders" and more free thinking voters.
Posted by: george rather | May 08, 2006 at 10:33 AM
I vote for Barack Obama. He has broad appeal, he's a gifted orator, he's intelligent, articulate, progressive and untouched by scandal.
Posted by: Anthony Myers | May 08, 2006 at 11:23 AM
There is a new breed of Democratics brewing within the DNC under the leadership of Howard Dean. We all know how much he is hated by Pelosi, Reid, Biden, Kerry, Clinton and the rest of their "Repbulican Light", lobbyist friendly ilk.
Dean's 50 state strategy will help to bring in new blood to the party. They will lead the charge to take back the Democratic Party, as well as to take back the country.
Gore/Dean 2008
Posted by: KEVIN SCHMIDT, STERLING VA | May 08, 2006 at 12:27 PM
That's you're an idiot and just because Russert is an asshole doesn't mean that Pelosi can't be one as well.
"Once again the Republicans have no need to attack a Democrat, their own party does it for them."
Was this comment meant as sarcasam. Nancy has been one of the worst offenders in this regard.
Posted by: henk | May 08, 2006 at 01:18 PM
In an era where viewers expect TV show plotlines to be resolved in an hour or less, why am I not surprised that voters seek instant gratification from their politicians?
It has been common knowledge for quite some time that Nancy Pelosi can be terribly wooden on the stump. That really doesn't concern me, because it's not immediately relevant. Ms. Pelosi's key skills that she brings to the table as the House Minority Leader are primarily organizational.
It has often been said that keeping Democrats united is like herding cats. Well, in the face of the relentless GOP agenda she has for the most part managed to keep her caucus relatively united in a fashion that her predecessors Dick Gephardt and former House Speaker Tom Foley could only dream of. For that, she should be applauded.
So, let's cut her some slack for a less-than-spectacular performance on "Meet the Press," and instead hold Tim Russert and the rest of his Beltway media brethren to account for their willingness to shill so baldly for the Bush administration and the GOP congressional leadership.
I'm willing to let Democrats work out their differences. Howard Dean and the Netroots are not going to go away, so the professional Democrats in DC best seek with them a mutual accommodation.
That being said, I do wish that congressional Democrats would stop playing the institutional enabler, and show more spine in confronting this completely amoral administration and its compliant allies in the GOP congressional leadership.
I just heard Sen. Dianne Feinstein on NPR this morning talking about Bush's nominee to replace Porter Goss at the CIA, and she sounded as sweet as ever, telling the audience that (I'm paraphrasing here) "Gen. Hayden is a fine administrator who previously managed two large organizations, and he will bring those much-needed skills to the agency."
I respect Sen. Feinstein immensely, but she thinks that the Bush crowd will eventually be won over by her show of civility and compromise. Unfortunately for her (and the rest of us), the reality is that the Bushes view etiquette and decorum as exploitable signs of weakness.
Perhaps we can someday restore common decency, good manners and genuine compromise as the traditional standards of American political behavior, but as of this moment we need to be resolutely and passionately confrontational in our opposition to the insidious criminality of the Bush Cartel.
Aloha.
Posted by: Donald from Hawaii | May 08, 2006 at 01:53 PM
The Democrat's should elect Conners or Rangel as House Leader,they both sound off and take no B...S...
Posted by: hobojo | May 08, 2006 at 02:01 PM
Nancy Pelosi probably should step down from her position and let someone who is stronger on issues become the House Minority Leader! The Democrats need an enforcer type person to keep the House membership in line! Nancy recently allowed 8 Dem Reps to break ranks voting YES for a bogus lobbying reform bill! An enforcer would have chewed them out and cut off all election funds to them or told them to resign from the party! Side note about Sen. Feinstein: she voted for Porter Goss for the CIA and she intends to vote for Gen. Hayden too, so she must resign from the Senate ASAP in shame!
Posted by: Jay Randal | May 08, 2006 at 02:58 PM
I agree with what you say about Nancy Pelosi but I don't stop with her. The Democratic leadership in general is something just short of pathetic. You know the ones I mean (Biden, Reid, Finestein, Joe Mo, Hillary Clinton) the "'fraidy cats" I call them. As disturbed as the country is with this thoroughly corrupt administration the "opposition party" especially in DC doesn't provide much of a beacon to rally to. Personally I'm hoping for more of the Howard Dean stradegy. Power and ideas from the bottom up, not the top down.
Posted by: Rick W | May 08, 2006 at 03:42 PM
I am no fan of Pelosi's, but I didn't think she did so badly in the face of Russert's sycophancy. You are right. She ducked the tax question. However, I liked the nascent message she was pushng. Dems will....without deficit spending, with honesty and transparency and with a sense of civility. She came out for federal campaign financing and was for rapid withdrawal from Iraq. The message sounded right to me, if not yet fully developed and slickered up for campaign consumption. She may be damamged goods but she is generally on the right track. Blogs will not unseat her, so let's give here some slack.
Posted by: K Mueller | May 08, 2006 at 04:17 PM
Yes, Pelosi was quite weak when visiting the giant pumpkin in his patch this Sunday.
She let herself become frustrated. You could tell in her voice and in her hand gestures. At one point she interrupted the head as he tried to equate Cynthia McKinney's recent hot flash with Jack Abramoff's buying and selling of the U.S. Congress.
However, Pelosi's abilities as a politician and communicator should not be discounted wholesale based on this single televised appearance. Her opposition to the war has been constant and her message clear, even when it was a terribly unpopular message trivialized and mocked by the hawks of the day.
Pelosi's appearance on MTP was a failure, but her constant fight for congressional oversight and change in our Iraq policy are two shining examples of competency amongst a virtual sea of bribed zombies and reactionary blowhards in Washington.
For those who would point to this a sign as proof the Democrats have no clear message, need only look to Howard Dean's appearance on "This Week" (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/05/07.html#a8195)
Posted by: Truant Duck | May 08, 2006 at 05:37 PM
Nancy Pelosi is a perfect example of what is wrong with the DNC. They won't talk about the elephant in the living room (no pun intended). They shouldn't be doing it to make political hay, but because somebody has to talk about it for the good of the country. They are really letting down their country in a time of need. By not speaking up against the crimes and treason of the bush administration, they are abetting it. And all the while they keep wondering how the republicans keep framing the debate. Until they call the republicans on the fact that the emperor is wearing no clothes, they will keep snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Posted by: D McDonald | May 08, 2006 at 05:55 PM
Like I said before Pelosi is in over her head. Clearly she should be replaced if, god wills it, the other party takes over. I vote for John Conyers as Majority Leader and Impeachment of the WORST PRESIDENT IN HISTORY sitting atop a stinking pile of corruption, imcompetence and lies that is his administration.
Posted by: US PERSON | May 08, 2006 at 09:17 PM
If Pelosi goes, who do the Dems get? The egregious Steny Hoyer?
I think that Pelosi said the right things, but was not forceful enough. Russert was trying to bait her into making statements that could be twisted and would be harmful for the Dems this year.
As for Obama, he is a senator and could not take Pelosi's place. As far as Obama being a progressive - well, there is increasing doubt about that. About a month ago, at the AP annual luncheon, he stated that Dems "all too often are defending a social safety net that was constructed in the 1930s and '40s. My argument to Democrats has been that we need to cling to the core values that make us Democrats, the belief in universal health care, the belief in universal education, and then we should be agnostic in terms of how to achieve those values."
Obama was instumental in destroying a grassroots candidate in IL-06, insuring a narrow victory for Tammy ("A Photo-op, Not a Candidate") Duckworth. He recently stated that he tends to support the expansion of the Hb-1 visa program that will, no doubt, allow companies to replace American tech workers with lower-priced imports.
Posted by: Alta | May 09, 2006 at 08:15 AM
Don't be too terribly surprised if this November the Republicans pull an "up-set." True to form, the establishment Democratics are finding ways to fumble and bumble a sure victory away. And don't be surprised if the GOP keeps control of the US House on the wet back of "illegal" immigrants.
Posted by: ets | May 09, 2006 at 02:26 PM
Nancy Pelosi, like Hillary Clinton and other "strong" women are what you get whenever you vote for someone because of what they have between their legs rather than between their ears! But then, no one can tell anyone in this fucked-up NEW Millenium anything, because they already know it!
Posted by: Ralph DeMattia | January 26, 2008 at 04:17 AM
Ah did NOT have sex with that woman, Monica lewinsky. She had sex with ME! And was it good! She could teach old Thunder-Thighs a thing or two. HUH HUH HUH HUH!
Posted by: William Jefferson Clinton | January 26, 2008 at 04:20 AM