Leonard Pitts: Pelosi's call for truth commission rings of hypocrisy

A truth commission to ponder the obvious. More government, more wasteful spending. When you have to drag a patriot into the narrative to make a point about a crazed leader then the rest of the article is not worth a complete read.

The townfolk chased chased a thief. As they caught up with him; he pointed his finger at a man down the raod and cried thievio! thievio! And the townfolk took off after that innocent man.

Let Nancy have her tuth commission.

Then try to find someone, who would know the truth if they saw it to head the panel.

Hmmm. She is a nut job just like almost all the politicos we elect. Her only mistake? Just as in the downfall of others, arogance replaced reason and logic. And she only now realizes it, maybe. You'll be able to tell by her forthcoming comments, if she dares make any.

Pitts repeats the Republican talking point that Pelosi has been silent on torture for seven years. That's inaccurate. She issued a press release on the issue in December of 2007 in response to a Washington Post article on the subject.

Hill Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002, December 9, 2007
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/08/AR2007120801664.html

Pelosi declined to comment directly on her reaction to the classified briefings. But a congressional source familiar with Pelosi's position on the matter said the California lawmaker did recall discussions about enhanced interrogation. The source said Pelosi recalls that techniques described by the CIA were still in the planning stage -- they had been designed and cleared with agency lawyers but not yet put in practice -- and acknowledged that Pelosi did not raise objections at the time.

Pelosi Statement on Washington Post Report on Congressional Briefing of Administration Interrogation Techniques, 12/09/2007
http://speaker.house.gov/newsroom/pressreleases?id=0439

"On one occasion, in the fall of 2002, I was briefed on interrogation techniques the Administration was considering using in the future. The Administration advised that legal counsel for the both the CIA and the Department of Justice had concluded that the techniques were legal."

Well, at least Pitts has a moral leg to stand on to question Pelosi. I don't get the Republican attacks. In essence they seem to be saying "we did nothing wrong when we tortured detainees - but impeach Pelosi for condoning it!"

More of Mike's incredible quotations attached to both ends of fabricated nonsense.

Mike is unconvinced that Americans falling from the sky was an event worthy of a perpetual place on the scale. I could not disagree in stronger terms.

By the way, you are being played by your man Obama big time. Hope your satisfied.

I've often thought that Pelosi didn't understand what the CIA was talking about when they discussed advanced interrogations. I'm sure they also told her waterboarding is no big deal and is legal. She's not terribly bright and they knew she'd buy it. And she doesn't like to look ignorant, then, or now so she's trying to cover it up. I'm not a fan of hers and I think she's more of a detriment than a positive.

That said, Bart, think of this line when you mention your "patriots."

We are a nation of laws, not men, we are better than those who attacked us, we are America and that has to mean something, even -- "especially" -- in days of heat, panic and fear. When we compromise that, we compromise what cannot be replaced.

When an administration compromises the nation's integrity, and then lies to the public, patriot isn't the first word I would use. It's sad though because I'm sure Bush and Cheney honestly love this country.

Bart, "incredible fabrications" is a good description of your post, as it has nothing to do with the point I made. Do you just have a stash of insults that you bring up and post, whether or not they have any relation to what the other person said?

Honestly, sometimes I wonder why I bother reading your posts.

Scot
Your last paragraph reminds me of complaints lodged at the Musharraf regime in Pakistan. He was forced out of office under threat of impeachment. That country elected Zardari, a weak replacement (second to the assassinated first choice, Bhutto.) They campaigned with slogans promising greater democracy and return to the rule of law also. Pakistan is now in an existential crisis with an enemy army inside its own borders, due partly because of a very expensive security digression during protests supporting the reinstatement of a supreme court judge. Well, the lawyers have their favorite judge now, but according to Hillary, Pakistani forces are behind schedule fighting invaders. Taliban courts convene in the street just long enough for the defendants to be rounded up.

Leaders who are responsible for your security are not negotiating with an enemy which pays much attention to the double fine along construction zones, except to comply as a means of deception. The sooner democrats figure this out, the safer we all will be.