Columnist | John Brummett

What’s Pelosi’s wrong, exactly?

By John Brummett

Let’s see if we can get to the crux of what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stands accused of.

Right-wing radio blowhard Rush Limbaugh, widely considered woefully unattractive himself, accuses Pelosi of being sexually unarousing. He said in a broadcast that one way to lower the birth rate would be to put pictures of Pelosi on the walls of cheap motels.

While typically classless and wholly inappropriate, his assertion is not actually an accusation. Being unsexy, even if Pelosi is that, and I’m not saying either way, is not a matter of character or worth. It’s a matter of how one is beheld physically by others, and one often can’t help how one is beheld physically by others.

Other right-wing commentators in the cable all-talk wasteland accuse Pelosi of Botox injections, a face-lift and neck work.

Again, I can’t say and wouldn’t. And, anyway, that’s also not so much an accusation as a kind of judgmental criticism of the supposed sort of person who would get herself tidied up cosmetically.

So now let’s move from the wholly offensive and nonsensical to the mostly so.

Here is the most terse compilation of Pelosi’s supposed misdoing that I can fashion: She declares herself now to be shocked and outraged to learn that we waterboarded terrorist suspects. But, in 2002, she was among selected persons briefed by the CIA on the point.

Now she accuses the CIA of telling her nothing about waterboarding although it had occurred, thus of lying to Congress. This, in turn, causes disgraced former Republican Speaker Newt Gingrich and others of the GOP to say that she is unworthy of remaining speaker, which is third in line to the presidency, because there can be no trust on account of her having said such a thing about our brave and vital intelligence gatherers.

Pelosi responds, and I paraphrase: They told us in 2002 only that certain enhanced interrogation techniques had been approved as legal. They didn’t say we were actually doing them. The next year, one of my staff members attended a briefing that I didn’t attend at which, apparently, the CIA owned up to engaging in some of these techniques.

Since I was not personally at that meeting and by then no longer the ranking member of House Intelligence, I did nothing while the ranking Democrat, Rep. Jane Harman, who was the appropriate party, sent a letter to the CIA’s general counsel raising objections.

So they didn’t tell me the truth in 2002, which we can now understand was hardly out of character considering that, at the same time, the Bush administration was lying about evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and the CIA was not publicly challenging or correcting that lie.

Meantime, Pelosi wishes to remind us that it was the Bush administration that tortured. It was the Bush administration that took us to war on false information that this supposed unassailable CIA did not publicly contest. It was the House under her leadership that voted a ban on torture, vetoed by Bush. And she is the veteran member of Congress who has championed human rights, specifically in China, for decades.

Republicans accuse her of hypocrisy in not raising objections in 2002 or 2003, then of crying out only now. But she can easily say that any criticisms in 2002 of a mere abstraction would have been futile and that, in 2003, her appropriate colleague indeed made formal objections.

Pelosi is clearly guilty of this: political expediency.

She did not risk a brave public position in 2002, then dived head-first into a popular one in 2009.

A politician engaging in expedient pronouncements owing to changing times and circumstances? Please.

Republicans are just trying to weaken her so that she might not so easily ramrod health reform and carbon taxes through this summer.

——-
John Brummett is an award-winning columnist for the Arkansas News Bureau in Little Rock and author of “High Wire,” a book about Bill Clinton’s first year as president. His e-mail address is jbrummett@arkansasnews.com.

2 Comments For This Post

  1. sailhardy Says:

    Questions which might be asked of Speaker Nancy Pelosi could include, “how exactly does her questioning of the CIA’s integrity affect America at home and abroad?” Additionally, one might ask Speaker Pelosi, President Obama and other worthies what is their authoritative source for the assertion that American interrogation techniques aid the recruitment efforts of al Qaeda or other Islamic groups arrayed against American forces? I have read and heard that assertion, but the only non-American sources for those comments come from those who might well have to face American interrogators at some point in the future.

    No one on the issue seems to have much interest in torture or treatment of prisoners by our enemies. As far as I know, they don’t take prisoners, or when they do, they often behead them, even if they are civilians like the reporter they beheaded and produced the tape of that happy event. That tape probably was used as a recruiting tool. It was a twofer: An American and a Jew

    Secondly, yes comments about Speaker Pelosi’s person, clothing and grooming are out of bounds, but Democrats are not the ones to complain, particularly after the excoriation of Katharine Harris, the former Florida secretary of state. And certainly not after the trashing of Sarah Palin and her family.

    As for Pelosi’s standing in Congress: Probably a good deal higher than it is in the country at large, and likely to remain high in Congress as long as she permits earmarks to feed (but certainly not satisfy Congress’ appetites for pork in the form of billions and billions of American taxpayers’ required tribute to a totally corrupt Congress. Yes, I mean both parties.

  2. OklahomaProf1940 Says:

    I read your column published in my local newspaper (Bartlesville, Oklahoma Examiner Enterprise) on Monday. After the typical lead-in about finding a way to blame Bush I got to the crux of your argument. If we define waterboarding as brutal torture as many have, where does that put battery cables applied to nipples or testicles or amputation of fingers, beatings, cigarett burnings, etc.? Or breaking of limbs, starvation, sealing up in sunbaked cages?

    But lets get past all of that. I have two problems with Pelosi that you really didn’t mention. If she is not to have her veracity questioned on the topic of CIA briefings, then why isn’t she pushing to have the relevant portions of the minutes of those briefings published? This would quickly put to rest any discussion of her position if indeed she was not told exactly what HAD been done and was going to be done.

    My second complaint about Pelosi: as a representative from a very liberal district from San Francisco, I had no fault with her representing her constituents. But the moment she aspired to the house speakership and campaigned for it, she elevated herself from a regional official to one of national scope, third in line to the presidency, and should therefore make some effort to represent the rest of the country. Indeed, I think any representative or senator serving as chairperson of a standing committee in congress has an obligation to put his narrow constituency interests somewhat aside and take a more national viewpoint. Unfortunately she is not the only one at fault in this, but she certainly has made herself very visible this way.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Live Coverage of the Cotton Bowl

Advertise Here
  • Latest Stories
  • Comments
  • Tags
  • Subscribe
Advertise Here