White House’s Pelosi criticism still doesn’t make sense

April 4, 2007

The [tag]Bush[/tag] gang’s criticism of Speaker [tag]Pelosi[/tag] for leading a congressional delegation to [tag]Syria[/tag] was exposed several days ago as being misguided and hypocritical. I’d hoped that reality would deter the White House from any additional nonsense on the subject.

I should have known better.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi arrived in Syria on Tuesday for a visit that is seen as part of an attempt to sway Bush administration policy on Iraq and the rest of the Middle East.

At the White House, President Bush criticized Ms. Pelosi’s visit, saying it sent mixed signals to the Middle East and to President Bashar’s government.

“Sending delegations hasn’t worked,” Mr. Bush told reporters. “It’s just simply been counterproductive.”

The president’s criticism, which follows similar comments made by other White House officials over the last several days, leaves out a few pertinent details.

First, there was a Republican congressional delegation in Syria immediately before Pelosi. Asked if the White House was equally concerned about their trip, spokesperson Dana Perino dodged the question. You think it’s possible that politics is driving Bush’s criticism?

Second, if diplomatic outreach is a mistake, why did Bush’s State Department recently initiate some tentative discussions with Syrian officials?

And third, there’s some evidence that the Bush administration helped facilitate the Republicans’ trip at the exact same time it was criticizing the Democrats’ trip.

Greg Sargent noted that the chief of staff to Rep. Joseph Pitts (R-Pa.), part of a three-member delegation sent to Syria, said that the Republicans’ trip “was done in cooperation with the administration.” As Greg put it, “That would be the very same administration that has spent days and days attacking Pelosi for doing the same thing — attacks that the big news orgs have eagerly spent a great deal of time and resources amplifying.”

Indeed, conservative media has been all over this, with wildly misleading reports. CNN’s Glenn Beck characterized Pelosi’s trip to Syria as “unauthorized negotiation with our enemies” and referred to it as “Nancy’s little play date in the Middle East.” Fox News’ on-air personalities claimed that Pelosi is “helping out terrorist sponsors.”

And in a surprise twist, it appears that Pelosi may be doing more than just diplomatic outreach — she may be helping deliver a message from Israel.

Bush remonstrates dastardly Nancy for her passage through Damascus, at the very time the Israelis are reportedly using her to pass a message to Bashar Assad to help avoid a possible conflagration with the Syrians. Soon, Bush will be telling Bibi Netanyahu or Avigdor Lieberman they’re wimps, and to hang Crawford tough against the ‘Palis’ or such. This is all so pitiable, isn’t it? How many more months left of this bungling amateurism and fake machismo do we have left? 22, is it? Sigh.

One last thought. The White House has insisted for days that diplomatic discussions are counterproductive and won’t produce any progress. Here’s my question: does anyone think the administration’s existing policy is working?

If there’s even one angle to this story that conservatives have gotten right, I don’t see it.

Since when has anything coming from this White House “made sense”, least of all its approach to either public relations or international diplomacy?

  • If there’s even angle to this story that conservatives have gotten right, I don’t see it.

    Is there any aspect of government over the past 6 years that the Republicans have got right? From the budget, to disaster response, to foreign policy, to the wars they’ve launched, ALL OF IT has been disastrously, 180 degrees wrong.

    The only thing they’ve managed to accomplish on purpose was to create a windfall for the top half of one percent of the income scale.

  • Yes these guys rarely make sense on diplomacy.

    Shrub has about as much credibility on middle east diplomacy, as Mark Folely has chairing the missing and exploited childrens’ caucus.

  • Front page of the Washington Post –

    Bush criticizes Pelosi: “Sending delegations doesn’t work. It’s simply been counterproductive.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040400309.html

    Hidden deep inside the Washington Post –

    GOP delegation to Syria: “We came because we believe there is an opportunity for dialogue. We are following in the lead of Ronald Reagan, who reached out to the Soviets during the Cold War.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/01/AR2007040100314.html

  • Pelosi is doing the one thing that can politically castrate this administration—she’s doing the job that Bu$hCo should have been doing for the past 6 years.

    And she’s doing it better than they ever could have done.

    The question of the day—How do you think George likes “getting waxed on the global stage by a girl?”

    So much for the puffed-up bravado of artificial machismo—and a presidunce with marshmallows for cojones….

  • NPR this morning repeated Bush’s BS a couple of times, with no mention of the Republican delegation, and no mention of the Iraq Study Group recommendations to open discussions with Syria and Iran.

    CPB, PBS and NPR will need to be hosed out after Bush is gone to remove the dipshits who have been put in place by BushCo. I really look forward to that day.

  • This story is infuriating. Why hasn’t it been debunked in the MSM? It’s all been laid out in the blogs?
    Our “Liberal” Media. HAH!

  • Racerx, excellent point – our problem is not the BS that comes out of the white house – its the way the MSM “catapults the propaganda!”

    If you have been paying attention – it is clear that the chimp and his gang of theives are not competent leaders that orchestrate the MSM. Rather, the fools in the chimperor’s administration take their marching orders from the same interests that OWN AND CONTROL the MSM.

    If you want REAL change – we need to quit talking about the tail and talk about THE DOG! Follow the money trail. I, for one, am getting sick of all this mindless chatter about what the chimp does – LET’S TALK ABOUT OUR REAL PROBLEMS and that will require talking about the economic interests that hide behind the smirking chimp!

  • Charlie Tuna’s right, the media just reports the White House line at the top of the hour, and five seconds later goes on the the latest about missing white women. I heard NPR this morning too and heard exactly what Bush and Rove want the voters to hear about Pelosi. The news isn’t journalism anymore, it’s just bullshit.

  • Mark Kleiman gets it exactly right:

    Another thought on the Pelosi trip

    It seems to me that the White House has blundered, once again, by forgetting, once again, that the Democrats aren’t helpless anymore in the face of slander.

    When Pelosi gets back from her trip, the House Foreign Affairs Committee ought to hold a hearing at which Pelosi and the Republican visitors to Damascus are invited to speak. If the Republicans show up, they should be asked about the White House role in setting up their trip. If they don’t show up, so much the better. …

    Every time the Democrats are hit, they should hit back, hard. It’s time to rub the Bushies’ noses in their lies, along with the noses of the journalists who supinely transmit those lies.

  • “NPR this morning repeated Bush’s BS a couple of times…”

    I have stopped giving to NPR. Not a dime anymore. Ever. And any complaints sent into them are answered with smarmy comments that they do in fact bring up all ‘interesting’ points and delve into all ‘interesting’ issues. Too bad their opinion of what is interesting does not align with the thinking world. they have effectively lowered their standards to that of the below average morning talk shows. Rubbish.

  • If you don’t know the backstory, Bush’s criticism once again sounds as if it makes some sense. If an administration was pursuing a reasonable policy, it would be reasonable not to want some freelance congressperson meddling and possibly mucking up the works. Even though congress members are free to meet with foreign officials, I think most understand that undermining the efforts of the administration is out of bounds.

    Nothing that I’ve seen indicates Pelosi is doing anything wrong here, but by criticizing her and ignoring republicans who have done the same thing, Bush implies that he does have a reasonable strategy and that she is interfering.

  • Well said Carpetbagger.

    Of course it’s OK if Republicans go to Syria to meet with officials… but not Democrats. This is absurd!

    Kinda reminds me of that old Seinfeld joke where the only thing that matters is the team uniform. It’s not the person playing that matters but the uniform he/she’s wearing.

    Make sense?

  • “… it sent mixed signals….”

    Thank god or fate or Nancy that something‘s finally getting mixed in with the pile of liquid shit the Bush Crime Family has been spewing on us and the rest of the world for six years now.

    This isn’t a fascist state, however much the Bush gang of thugs wishes it might become one. It’s a democracy, and healthy democracies send mixed signals. Intelligent, thoughtful people send mixed signals.

  • Folks, please remember that Speaker Pelosi is not just a congresswoman — she is Speaker of the House of Representatives, a constitutional office. While I think that it is cool and hopefully constructive that she is having one on one discussions with the President of Syria, this event is far more significant than any similar discussion that some minority party member of Congress might have.

  • In the wingnut mind-set, it’s real simple:

    Nancy Pelosi is a latte-sipping, Left-Coast, hippy liberal woman, who would get walked all over by Assad, and she would be only more than happy to sell out our national security just to stick it to the Bush White House.

    Red-meat-eating-gun-loving Republican lawmakers, on the other hand, are all about national security and military might, and would talk tough to Syria, using the threat of force to back up negotiations.

    See? There’s a perfectly good reason what it’s okay for GOPers to negotiate, because they’re “real men”. Pelosi, on the other hand, is just another wimpy woman liberal.

    “…We are following in the lead of Ronald Reagan, who reached out to the Soviets during the Cold War.”
    Didn’t Reagan also sell weapons to the Iranians in an attempt to get American hostages released?
    I wonder if the White House is thinking “hmmm…..if the Gipper did it….”

  • I was curious about one sentence in the report about Perino “dodging a question” about the Republican delegation to Syria.

    Why didn’t ANY member of the press follow up? Why didn’t anybody force her to answer? Why didn’t the press “press”?

    You’d think that by now the smarter media would realize the tide is turning against the Bushes and be in the forefront of doing what they’re SUPPOSED to do. Why does the press continue to protect this administration from answering the hard questions?

    Now, there are some out there asking – beginning to ask, anyway, the tough questions, but they’re still totally overwhelmed by the ones willing to sit back and take what the Administration hands out.

  • very timely comment phoebes. one of these days, one of those so-called journalists from the mainstream media is going to suddenly remember how he is supposed to do his job, and start doing it the way he learned in journalism school. and the american public, long ago despairing of any real reporting from the msm, will rise up and celebrate this newly reborn journalist. and the rest of the media will be forced to follow.

    at least a guy can dream……….

  • While I think that it is cool and hopefully constructive that she is having one on one discussions with the President of Syria, this event is far more significant than any similar discussion that some minority party member of Congress might have. — dd@15

    It depends. If there’s any truth to the rumour that the Repub delegation went out with the WH support, then their standing — as representatives of the WH — would have been at least equal to that of Pelosi, from the Syrian POV.

  • The statements being made here are such a wonderful example of the lengths to which liberals are willing to go to maintain the delusion that they have a monopoly on all that is right and that Bush is somehow responsible for all that is wrong in the world. It is almost impossible to read such nonsense without suspecting that the people know full well how extremely ludicrous their statements are even as they are making them. Yet, they continue to make them!!!
    Pelosi going to Syria is in the very least a declaration of contempt for every American that has lost his or her life defending the United States and indeed the entire world from the growing terrorist threat that has received so much support from countries like Syria and Iran.
    This whole discussion is part and parcel to the liberal desire to see Bush fail in his attempts to make a lasting difference in the world, even if such a failure irreparably damages the United States of America!!!

  • Pelosi was carrying a message from Israel. Although that part will never get play because it doesn’t contribute to the right wing screed that only loyal Bushies are legitimate. Most Americans don’t know about the message, so it makes her fair game. They count on the public being ignorant and as Martin shows, we don’t disappoint.

    For the record, we don’t want America to fail. Bush isn’t America.

  • “It is almost impossible to read such nonsense without suspecting that the people know full well how extremely ludicrous their statements are even as they are making them. Yet, they continue to make them!!!” – martin sims @#20.

    referring to your own comments again martin?

  • Ever notice how single-celled trogladytes demonstrate the classic tendency to exchange words like “Poles, Jews, French, English,” etc. with contemporary terms such as “Liberals, Democrats, and Un-American?”

    And a great big Ziggy-Heil-Bile to you too, Martin. By the way—isn’t it hilarious the way that no one ever seems to comment on your trog-blog?

  • “Pelosi going to Syria is in the very least a declaration of contempt for every American that has lost his or her life defending the United States and indeed the entire world from the growing terrorist threat that has received so much support from countries like Syria and Iran.”

    But Republican lawmakers going to Syria, hey, that’s fine.

    “This whole discussion is part and parcel to the liberal desire to see Bush fail in his attempts to make a lasting difference in the world, even if such a failure irreparably damages the United States of America!!! ”

    Um, no, I think Bush is doing a heck of a job at that without those pesky liberals.

    • Comments are closed.