View Single Post
Old 04-06-2007, 04:39 PM   #11 (permalink)
StupidScript
Inactive
 
StupidScript's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-22-06
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 678
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Latest Blog:
None

StupidScript is just really niceStupidScript is just really niceStupidScript is just really niceStupidScript is just really niceStupidScript is just really niceStupidScript is just really niceStupidScript is just really niceStupidScript is just really niceStupidScript is just really niceStupidScript is just really niceStupidScript is just really nice
Quote:
As I've said before, she, or any memeber of congress was not elected by a majority of Americans and entrusted to represent the country.
So ... only George or Dick should be the ones to go ... also without any training? (Condi's only foreign relations training was on-the-job ... and what a whiz-bang job she's been doing!) And what about our diplomats who are trained in foreign relations ... since they weren't elected to represent the country, but are appointed by the Administration ... they shouldn't go, either?

So who should go? Or maybe you're thinking that any type of diplomacy is a bad idea?

I'm thinking that every type of diplomacy should be given a chance. It's way better than no attempt to build bridges. And if Pelosi was swindled by Olmert (and who hasn't been, in those circles) it's more of a sign of immaturity than stupidity. In her case, unlike in GWB's case, at least she can become more mature through experiences like this.

Besides, all of this Pelosi-bashing is just a piling on by an Administration that has been neutered. Several delegations of Republicans have engaged in similar junkets without comment by the Administration, but when the first female Speaker of the House (and coincidentally, a Democratic Party member) does the same, all of a sudden it's a "bad idea"? Sounds like silly whining, to me.
StupidScript is offline   Reply With Quote