Good work on freeing the hostages, Nancy!
Hahaha! .. only kidding .. just thought it made a lovely header.
What is the big deal here -- that Pelosi spoke with Assad or that the Bush Administration won't?
The White House's hissy fit about Nancy Pelosi's visit to Syria is just a bunch of hooey. Congress is an independent and coequal branch of our government. Its members can go anywhere they dang well please.
While Bush plays politics Pelosi is out there doing all the hard work .. and if she continues to take steps like this, as we get closer to '08 elections, the loyal Bushies are going to look so isolated and out of touch.
If Bush hasn't stepped up to start a dialogue to ease tensions between the US and Syria .. well, thank goodness she did not go to the Bush School of Diplomacy. She is only doing what was recommended in the bipartisan Iraq Study Group.
Time is running out .. even the Syrians recognize a lame duck when they see one.
It tickles me how frothed up the Righties get about Speaker Pelosi's trip .. running around ranting and accusing her of acting like the Secretary of State.
Many people -- on both sides of the aisle -- think it should be Condi doing this.
And get the media! They've reported on Pelosi's trip -- and White House criticism of it -- without mentioning that a congressional Republican accompanied Pelosi to Syria as part of her Mideast trip delegation.
There's Dick "last throes" Cheney and the Preznit .. all over the air waves with their pathetic whining .. criticizing Pelosi, claiming that her trip was rewarding "bad behavior" ...
Never mind that a Republican-led delegation met with the Syrian President Bashar on April 1 .. or that after returning from the trip, Rep. Robert B. Aderholt (R-AL) was quoted in the following April 4 article disagreeing with White House objections to Pelosi's trip.
From the AP:
"Three Republican congressmen who parted with President Bush by meeting with Syrian leaders said Wednesday it is important to maintain a dialogue with a country the White House says sponsors terrorism.
"Three Republican congressmen who parted with President Bush by meeting with Syrian leaders said Wednesday it is important to maintain a dialogue with a country the White House says sponsors terrorism.
"This is an area where we would disagree with the administration," said Rep. Robert Aderholt of Haleyville. "It doesn't mean you're weak in your policy or that there's no problems ... We just wanted to let them know that the lines of communication are open and if we can find some common ground on some issues we need to go forward on that."
Thank goodness that not all Republicans are Bush-bootlicking dupes who only parrot neo-con talking points.
“President Bush, is the head of state, but he hasn’t encouraged dialogue. That’s an important message to realize: we have tensions, but we have two functioning embassies.” - Rep. Darryl Issa (R - CA)
But this is the comment that gets to the nut of it:
"Dialogue is not a sign of weakness," Pitts said after returning home Wednesday. "It's a sign of strength." - Rep. Joe Pitts (R - PA)
"Dialogue is not a sign of weakness," Pitts said after returning home Wednesday. "It's a sign of strength." - Rep. Joe Pitts (R - PA)
Yep, funny how the White House criticized Speaker Pelosi for taking this trip .. but stayed relatively quiet about a similar trip taken just a few days earlier by those GOP Reps.
Everyone should just relax .. it's probably a good thing that Syria thinks Pelosi's visit is a signal that their current isolation may be melting .. evil devils they may be, but we might need them in this very troubled and complicated world.
Paraphrasing LBJ -- It's better to have them inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in.
I don't like that all this is probably more about politics than policy -- that it's more about the elections in 2008 than the problems we're facing today in 2007.
And talk about "rewarding bad behavior" -- which is what a hostage swap would certainly be -- looky here...
Even Righties are wondering if there was some kind of background deal linking the release of the 15 British sailors captured by Iran to the release of an Iranian diplomat by US forces in Iraq.
Like this editorial from the very pro-Cheney New York Sun:
Quid Pro Quo...New York Sun Editorial...April 5, 2007
"It's hard to believe it was strictly a coincidence: On Tuesday Iraq and America freed an Iranian "diplomat" they had been holding, and the next day Iran turned around and announced it would release the 15 royal marines it had been holding hostage. Whether there was a connection was the question on everyone's mind yesterday."
"It's hard to believe it was strictly a coincidence: On Tuesday Iraq and America freed an Iranian "diplomat" they had been holding, and the next day Iran turned around and announced it would release the 15 royal marines it had been holding hostage. Whether there was a connection was the question on everyone's mind yesterday."
Stay tuned.
