Thursday, August 09, 2012 ... Français/Deutsch/Español/Česky/Japanese/Related posts from blogosphere

Nancy Pelosi spoke to ghosts of Susan B. Anthony et al.

NASA may have been communicating with a vehicle on Mars but NASA is an apolitical organization so its science and its communication technologies can't possibly be as advanced as those of the self-described owners of science, the leftwingers.

In the video above, former spokeswoman of the House of Representatives "swears" that during her visit to the White House, she was sitting on the same chair as the ghost of Susan B. Anthony, a 19th century activist struggling for women's voting rights in the U.S., and they were chatting with each other.

We learn that that a very gracious man, George W. Bush, was surprised whom she was talking to but she didn't care. "At last we have a seat at the table," the dead women (including Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Sojourner Truth) said.

The experience had to be rather terrifying. For the ghosts.

Just to be sure that you don't miss some points or you don't think that her sentences were a sequence of verbal typos or jokes, she repeated the stories about her state-of-the-art WiFi intertemporal intercosmic interactions at several places. Well, after you watch this video, you must admit that conservatives simply can't compare with the scientific sophistication that is so common among the leftwingers, especially the most powerful ones in the wealthiest country of the world. They're just so much ahead of us!

Too bad that she apparently hasn't measured the pressure, density, and other parameters so that the Democratic Party could determine the equation of state for the ghosts of Susan B. Anthony. No, seriously, I agree with the first commenter under the YouTube video above: she is as nutty as a fruitcake.

Add to Digg this Add to reddit

snail feedback (28) :

reader Gene said...

Pelosi was simply trying, rather clumsily, to employ allegory in order to make her point. She is not very good at this sort of thing but you should not take her literally.

reader Gene said...

Nancy Pelosi is not a former spokeswoman for the US House of representatives. She is a former "Speaker of the House", a title reserved for the majority leader. The House is a bit more powerful than the Senate because all spending measures have to originate there; the Senate cannot initiate appropriations. The House Speaker chairs the House sessions and largely controls House procedures. It is a position of great power.

Georg Bush was, indeed, gracious when, at the start of his 2006 State of the Union speech he said he had the great honor of being the first President in the 230-year history of the United States to welcome "Madame Speaker". Previously, the term "Mr. Speaker" was always employed.

Pelosi is also one of very few House Speakers without a hint of scandal. She is quite a lady (yes, she is a lady) regardless of her left-wing politics. Perhaps, as the second most powerful person in the U.S., she was deserving of a modicum of respect.

reader Gene said...

Whoops! The Democrats gained control of the House in the November, 2006, election so Bush's State of the Union speech was in January, 2007, not 2006.

reader chris y said...

Dear democrat Nancy is a great believer in natural gas as a cheap, clean alternative to fossil fuels.

I am still not sure if she is the stupidest person currently in Congress. Her main competition is democrat congressman Hank Johnson, who is concerned about Guam tipping over and capsizing because too many people occupy the island.

It really says a lot about a country that can survive such imbeciles in power.

reader Luboš Motl said...

Dear Gene, I know she was the boss of the House, it's just that the words Speaker and Spokeswoman sound almost identical to me.

I don't believe she wasn't serious.

reader Smoking Frog said...

Lubos, you're probably not aware of the word spokeshole, which, I believe, was coined many years after you departed from the U.S. Some talk show hosts use it. You can guess the etymology. :-)

reader Luboš Motl said...

LOL, I guessed correctly it was a portmonteau of aš$hole and speaker/spokesman but I had to look it up to understand the exact meaning.

reader Smoking Frog said...

Well, not exactly. A portmonteau is a "large trunk or suitcase opening into two equal parts." The word you want is portmanteau. :-) (Not that I'd have known the difference, except by chance.)

reader Smoking Frog said...

I want to get rid of the italics in that last sentence, but I can't figure out how to edit.

reader Luboš Motl said...

Thanks, it may be a good idea for me to leave all the attempts to look elegant by using silly French words to those who are good at it, pretentious and smug pseudointellectuals. ;-)

If you care, I spelled it with an "o" because a portmonka is a "Czech" word for a wallet

and I assumed that it had the same vowel. That was of course a wrong assumption as "o", while probably pronounced, is surely not being spelled in this way in French, a language in which one deliberately spells almost everything totally incorrectly just to look cool. ;-)

reader Shannon said...

A "porte-manteau" is a coat rack in French. :-D

reader Smoking Frog said...

Lubos - According to John Derbyshire, formerly of National Review: In the English-speaking world of the 19th century, it was considered poor form to give the foreign pronunciation to foreign place names, book titles, etc., unless you actually knew the language in question (know, not know which language it is), since by using the foreign pronunciation without knowing the language, you were pretending to know it. Dictionaries gave the pronunciation of Don Quixote as DON KWIX-OTT. (I don't know if Derbyshire knows what he's talking about.)

I can't say I've ever thought of the French as spelling everything wrong just to look cool, but I have always wondered how on earth they understand each other. :-)

BTW, my wife, who is from Mexico, many years ago "discovered" that we English speakers pronounce the silent 'e' at the ends of words; we only think we don't pronounce it. By listening very carefully, she said, she could hear it. :-)

reader Smoking Frog said...

I can't see it that way, Gene. I could believe she was lying, though.

reader Gene said...

Sorry, Lubos, I certainly did not mean any offense but I have, for at almost 70 years, associated "Speaker of the House" with Sam Rayburn, a remarkable man who, beginning in 1940, brought real integrity to that office. Rayburn's high ethical standards have been pretty well maintained over the decades. John Boehner (R) and Nancy Pelosi (D) both have impeccable personal credentials, nicely carrying on that precious tradition. The few that have faltered a bit (think Newt Gingrich) have been ejected from the job. Some things actually work well, my friend.

Pelosi is generally re-elected with over 80% of the vote so she will be around until she decides to retire. Her personal wealth has nothing to do with her political success. There is merit in electing rich folks; they are often (usually?) less corruptible.

Of course, as a Republican, I disagree with her views but I strongly agree with her that we badly need less rancor and a lot more personal respect for our elected representatives. They are, almost always, good people whom you would love and value as personal friends.

Of course, in her 8th Congressional District, Pelosi is not left-wing. Her only significant challengers have been far to her left.

reader Luboš Motl said...

Dear Gene, it sounds very nice and many principles are agreeable here. But would you dare to revisit your thoughts if someone has e.g. proved that Nancy Pelosi got her $50+ million by insider trading with Visa, like some people say? What exactly leads you to believe that the right explanation of her wealth is much cleaner for her?

reader Bob In Texas said...

For a slightly different take on Nancy's paranormal political experience, see this:

reader Gene said...

The estimated $58 million is the joint property of Nancy and her husband, Paul Frank Pelosi. In California, all property of any type that is acquired by either party during a marriage automatically becomes jointly owned. You cannot have legally separate property except for property that was separately owned prior to the marriage. Even this needs to be protected by a prenuptial agreement to avoid co-mingling of funds, which would automatically lose the "separate" protection.

Paul Frank Pelosi is a well-known and very successful businessman and venture capitalist in San Francisco, who has managed to accumulate the fortune. By law, Nancy has equal title to the money that her husband has made.

It is just bullshit to assume impropriety on her part. She has no need to engage in illegal schemes which, in all probability, would send her to prison. Remember, Nancy has tons of political enemies who would just love to expose her and it is virtually impossible to hide such activities. Remember, Martha Stewart went to prison over a just such a $50,000 misstep. There is an abundance of prosecutors and investigators who would jump at the opportunity to make their careers by nailing Nancy Pelosi.

Like it or not, Nancy Pelosi is a person of honor who has earned the respect of her colleagues. It is ridiculous to impugn her honor without a shred of evidence.

reader Gene said...

I should add that an inheritance by either party remains separate property but care must still be taken not to co-mingle the funds.

reader Gene said...

How can natural gas be an alternative to fossil fuels when it is one?

reader Gene said...

The position "Speaker of the House of Representatives" was established in 1789 by the Constitution without actually defining the duties involved or even requiring that the Speaker be a member of the body. It is reasonable to assume that the Founders actually intended something close to a spokesman, i.e. a messenger, but I'm not sure how the term "Speaker" was used in those days. It was before my time.

Tradition and precedent has made the job more important but as the current Speaker, John Boehner, has pointed out, getting his party in the House aligned is a bit like herding cats.

reader Gene said...

Not to beat a dead horse but either party can sign a "Quitclaim Deed", which renders the property at issue separate and belonging to the other party.

OK, I'm beating a dead horse.

reader Luboš Motl said...

Dear Gene, thanks, sorry for thinking and writing things that you don't find respectful enough. You're clearly a fan of hers and your argumentation looks irrational to me.

I am aware of the joint ownership by spouses, of course, but I don't know of any particular successes of her husband that could be publicly explained as more than mysterious trades so chances are at least 50% that the true source of the wealth was her. If those folks are right and it was due to insider trading, her husband could directly participate in that scheme, too. Spouses often do.

Just like spouses share wealth, they share responsibility, so all the accusations against her are automatically accusations against her husband, too.

The comment that she has lots of enemies and *therefore* she must be clean is silly, isn't it? David Rath has had and still has lots of enemies, he's arguably the most hated Czech politician. They could have go after his neck and they did. Still, almost all his wealth came from corruption and despite all the immunity protection, he could have been arrested when he was caught red-handed. He's our template for very rich politicians of this sort and I don't think that you have presented rational evidence that Nancy Pelosi isn't an element of the same category. Yes, be sure that his wife as well as his mistress got rich at the same moment.

There's a lot of implicit assertions about causal relationships in your comment that could be upside down. The fact that she is hated may be something else than a proof of her innocence; it may be a consequence of people's knowing that something isn't clean about her. The same thing with the rich husband which doesn't have to be a cause but consequence of her wealth.

At any rate, I only wrote about those impressions of mine because you were celebrating her as a Mother Teresa, a point that looks strange to me. That wasn't the original point of this light blog entry which was more modest, namely that Nancy Pelosi swears that she talked to ghosts once in her life. You said it was an allegory but she still swore so if she isn't nutty, she is a liar.

reader Luboš Motl said...

Tx for the history, there had to be a relationship to a spokesman, otherwise it wouldn't be called this way. She may be a great spokeswoman but I am just scared by so many things in the beef of what she's saying. A random video:

She is talking about making radio hosts "advertiseless" and to prove that it's not vacuous, at the end, she talks about making guarantees that no one will have to fight again for the right to abortion. WTF? It's the very point of democracy that if the people and their elected lawmakers decide that it's unacceptable to abort an embryo - which isn't just a "female reproductive health" issue: 50% of the genes in the embryo belong to someone else and the whole embryo is an emerging independent human being - then it is banned and those who things that abortions shouldn't be restricted have to fight again.

The only way how I can understand her words is that she wants to financially destroy and perhaps outlaw all the people who disagree with her. Rush Limbaugh may be rough and there are all kinds of complaints one may raise but if this were the genuine conflict, I would treat Rush Limbaugh as the equivalent of Jesus Christ.

reader Eugene S said...

Mrs. Gene
"Are you reading that crazy right-wing website again?!"

"Oh no, love, I -- uhmm -- I'm, I'm civilizing them. Look, I even put in a good word for Nancy Pelosi!"


reader Gordon Wilson said...

Lewis Carrol in "Through the Looking Glass" was the originator of using portmanteau word combining two two or more words or meanings (Humpty-Dumpty to Alice)
Smoking: re Darbyshire's comments on pronouncing foreign words and names---I find it is generally only the Americans who insist on mispronouncing foreign words and peoples' names, which they do proudly and repeatedly, even, it seems from TV sports and other events, when they hear the correct pronunciation. I like Derbyshire's writing, and his firing from the National Review for violating the holy US political correctness laws was absolutely shameful. Editors have to stop caving to PC loonies who should be charged with harassment or slander.
Gene: WRT Nancy Pelosi, I must admit that the bias I had against her was triggered by her passive-aggressive rictus-like smile. My similar dislike of John Boehner was triggered by his perpetual "faux" tan making it look like he had carotenemia and had eaten bushels of carrots :)
I googled both of them and was quite impressed with their accomplishments.

reader papertiger0 said...

If Nancy Pelosi told me the sun was shining, I'd be obliged to check the window.

She is the latest in a line of East Coast imports cosseted and coddled by the Democrat Machine that runs San Francisco.
Just like both of our Senators she has no connection to California, the daughter of a Maryland (read Washington) insider who was so crooked he got primaried out of office by democrats (you have any idea how hard that is? Practically impossible). She has never held a job in her life.
She got a BS degree in political science, went right to work as a money launderer for the Democratic party, and from there was bequeathed her district in SF from a terminally ill wife of another life long Democrat, who in turn had inherited the seat from her dead husband.
How cosseted is she? In her 25 years in the House she has never debated an opponent in an election. She is reelected every two year with an average 80% of the vote in elections more akin to Saddam's Iraq than what you would expect in an American election.
The strongest challenge Pelosi has faced was in 2008 when anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan polled 17% and Pelosi won with 72%.

No scandal? She is the richest bitch in Congress. She got that way without working a day in her life, while "serving" the people of California.

reader papertiger0 said...

From the Devil's perspective, it wouldn't surprise me at all if she were telling the literal truth about being haunted by the ghosts of Susan Anthony, Cady Stanton and Sojourner Truth.
She is evil enough to disturb those good women's spirits into coming back to set things right.

reader chris y said...

I am simply quoting what she said on NBC's Meet The Press on August 24, 2008- “I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil
fuels", and natural gas “is cheap, abundant and clean
compared to fossil fuels."

This was during her reign as Speaker Of The House.