« UK: MI5 Warns Of A "Generation" Of Muslim Terror |
| UK: BNP Victory Could Lead To Islam Protection Bill »
November 10, 2006
Commentary: The Stunning Admission of the Next Speaker of the House
In a recent interview with Fox News Channel's Brit Hume, the next speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Nanci Pelosi, said the following in response to a question about whether she wanted to win the Iraq war, or just end it (emphasis mine):
"This isn't a war to win, its a situation to be solved, and you define winning any way you want, but you must solve the problem."
She has been criticized for those remarks, but, mostly, I think the criticism misses the mark. Critics have pounded on the first part of her sentence "This isn't a war to win, its a situation to be solved", and expose her ridiculous thinking. But that's just an instance of the kind of thinking the woman routinely employs. The more serious problem is evident in the bold phrase above "you defined winning any way you want." The woman believes that; she believes that if we define winning any way we want, we would have "won." It seems that after we "won" the Vietnam war and "redeployed" the forces, absolutely no negative consequences followed, because, we "defined victory any way we wanted." What are a couple of million of dead Cambodians and a renewed advanced of Communism, when you have defined victory to your heart's content.
There is a more general problem with Ms. Pelosi's views; they make it impossible to conduct a rational discourse. She has, for example, promised to "work in a bipartanship manner", but then, what happens if she decides to define bipartanship any way she wants? She has promised to "make the rich pay their fair share" (soak the high-wage earners); what happens if she decides to define "rich" any way she wants? (Never mind; this happens already.)
Ms. Pelosi has accepted dishonesty on principle. She can never be taken at her word.
Posted by Ruy Diaz at November 10, 2006 2:43 PM
Comments
I don't know much about this Pelosi but the little bit I'm hearing about, I don't like. I wish Dhimmirats would stop with the Vietnam analogy already. They forget it was their party who got us into that one and that it was them again who cut off funding while Nixon was in charge. With all of his flaws, he did end the war. Different time, different era, though. She calls the war in Iraq: "a situation" Hmm. To quote Michelle Malkin: "It's the jihad stupid."!!!
How many years of this now with the likes of Pelosi and her ilk, good grief.
Posted by: pigtails not veils ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.westernresistance.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 11, 2006 12:33 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)