I don't have a dog in this fight, but...

[Undertoad]

After this weekend's 60 Minutes, hating Pelosi should be some sort of bipartisan thing.

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

After this weekend's 60 Minutes, hating Pelosi should be some sort of bipartisan thing.

While I still really admire Pelosi, she was a deer in the headlights in that show.

[Griff]

I'm shocked just shocked... that 60 Minutes is still on television.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

While I still really admire Pelosi, she was a deer in the headlights in that show.

I can has explanation plz?

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

I can has explanation plz?

60 Minutes TV show had a segment on how members of congress are exempt from "insider information trading laws" because they are privy to information about upcoming Bills in committees, etc.

The reporter started with Pelosi in what looked like a large press conference, asking if she thought it was ethical for the Speaker to invest in stocks based on such insider information.

Pelosi looked (to me) as though she was caught completely unawares, and tried a couple of times to divert the question.
Finally, she denied she or her husband made such investments.
This was my "deer in the headlights"

Next, the reporter confronted Boehner with the same question, and Boehner gave a similar denial.

Then the reporter talked about several other Congressmen (heads of committees, etc) doing the same thing.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

After this weekend's 60 Minutes, hating Pelosi should be some sort of bipartisan thing.

Oh I wasn't objecting to him hating Pelosi. But referring to her as 'Princess' in that context was dodgy as fuck. particularly coming from a man who is desparately trying to make people think he has respect for women.

The equivalent, in my view would be if one of the Democrats referred to Cain as Uncle Tom.



@ Clod: thanks for the explanation. When you spell it out like that it makes more sense.

[Happy Monkey]

It looks to me like Pelosi and Boehner were added to pad the guy's book with big names, when he really only found a smoking gun with the unknown guy from Alaska.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Why? How? WTf is this man doing at the forefront of politics? I mean....I am assuming he isn't as thick as he appears to be (roughly the thickness of two short planks) ... because that really would be scary.

Well I'll say it, since I find it unlikely anyone else will: Cain is in the forefront at this exact moment in time because he is black. It's the same reason John McCain chose a female running mate back in 2008. Because you have to have something to counter the people who vote purely on idealism--both the racists who would vote against him no matter what, as well as the symbolists who would vote for him no matter what in order to ensure we finally got our first African-American president.

If the Republicans run a black guy, maybe they can head off at the pass all the people who would vote for the black guy over the white guy no matter what. If the Republicans run a black guy, then the marginally racist members of the base can make the effort to vote for him to prove that 'some of their best friends (candidates) are black.' The best way for everyone to show that race has nothing to do with anything, is to run a candidate of a matching race. If Hilary Clinton had won the democratic primary and then the presidency, then Bachmann or Palin or someone else with a uterus would be polling with undeservedly high numbers right now instead.

[classicman]

Never admired her, this just gave me more reason to dislike her ... and the rest of them all the more.

[ZenGum]

Thanks LL.

So, she poorly handled a loaded question, but there's no evidence (yet) that she was doing insider trading, is that it?

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

Thanks LL.

So, she poorly handled a loaded question, but there's no evidence (yet) that she was doing insider trading, is that it?

Well, you know how accurately you can read someone's facial expressions ?
She looked guilty as all h;;;.
Boehner had one of Sandy's painted stone faces.

I would say the reporter was on to something that probably involves all of Congress.
But then, sometimes I'm just can't help being cynical.

[Lamplighter]

Classic posted a video that is "classic" for what is happening to Herman Cain today.

Here is the interview video only

Here is the original article:
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Don Walker and Craig Gilbert
Nov 14, 2011

Cain stumbles on Libya question

Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain,
in the midst of a Midwestern campaign swing,
stumbled badly Monday when attempting to answer a question
about whether he agreed or disagreed with President Barack Obama's
approach to handling the Libyan crisis.
<snip>

Over the weekend, I started to comment on this interview,
because of the headline, I almost followed the media sheep by ridiculing Cain for his gaff.
But I did not.

Cain's campaign has later reported he was just tired from the campaign...
I believe that may well have been the case.

I watched the video and came to the conclusion that Cain actually gave a good,
reasoned answer to the question, and was been exceedingly cautious
about getting trapped by the reporters.

But I urge people to actually watch the entire interview,
and then decide if the media today is treating this story fairly.
.

[Undertoad]

Yeah, I'm sure it's a problem for all of Congress. Fuckers are getting rich playing games. Pelosi is one of the worst examples, to sum up:

Through her husband, in 2008, Pelosi bought at least $1.3M, maybe a much greater amount, of Visa stock.

Some of it was bought during Visa's IPO, and it's not clear whether this was an invite-only party, or an excellent investment decision on behalf of Mr. Pelosi.

Shortly thereafter, the legislation that led to the BoA $5 surcharge was debated and passed through committee. (Here's our thread discussing it.) We found that it had a $19B impact on banks in 2009 (a much greater amount in 2008) but apparently it would have a similar impact on Visa.

It failed to come up for a vote in the House. Pelosi is roughly the person who decides which bills will go to a vote.

A year later in 2009, similar legislation was introduced, passed committee again, gained additional support, and again failed to come up for a vote.

Finally in 2010 it gained more support and was passed.

In her defense, Pelosi offers that a Cardholders Bill of Rights passed in 2009 and the card companies didn't like it. But that didn't hurt Visa as much as the interchange fees matter, and in the meantime, the IPO shares doubled in price.

Hastert's example is also particularly obvious. He bought a bunch of worthless land. Then he got earmarked money to build a highway next to it. Then he sold the land for $2M.

Can it be proven that they intended to make money from these deals, probably not. They merely did. But since we are stuck in the false dichotomy of left-right politics, it can all be written off as partisan attack, and there will always be people to defend them.

[infinite monkey]

And here I thought all these guys hated her because she wasn't attractive.

At least that's the sense I got.

[TheMercenary]

Pelosi should be in jail. The same cell as Boehner.

The 60 Minutes interview was fantastic.

Proof they are criminals. And Pelosi was caught unawares. It was so obvious in her face. She was caught with her hand in her cookie jar and her chopping motion and facial expressions were so telling. I hope they bring her down. But alas nothing will happen until the laws are changed by those who are currently making the most off of inaction. The Republickins are no better. But props must be given to those interviewed and who were honest enough to tell the story.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?...;storyMediaBox