Nancy Pelosi supports the Tibetan Buddhists

March 21, 2008 Category: Global

Tags: , ,

By: johnnyb

Great quote from Nancy Pelosi:

“If freedom loving people throughout the world do not speak out against China’s oppression and China and Tibet, we have lost all moral authority to speak on behalf of human rights anywhere in the world,” said Mrs. Pelosi, a Democrat.

I must give the good speaker credit when due.  I wouldn’t expect Denny Hastert to be visiting the Dalai Lama.  George W Bush, who has talked a good game about spreading democracy, has been much more ambivalent on his approach to China, and the upcoming olympic games.  For shame, Mr. President.  It is sad to see that on an issue of such importance he is outflanked on the right by Nancy Pelosi, of all people.

House Republican wants to restrict Pelosi’s travel

June 22, 2007 Category: Uncategorized

Tags: ,

By: rgahagan

This is an interesting way to try to prevent Pelosi from continuing to travel to Iran, Syria, etc. pretending that she is the foreign policy Queen of the United States.

House Republican wants to restrict Pelosi’s travel
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will not be permitted to use State Department funds to travel to nations that are known to have sponsored terrorism if a Republican amendment to appropriations legislation passes the House on Thursday.
The amendment to the $34 billion State and Foreign Operations bill, offered by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), prohibits funds to be used to travel to Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan or Syria.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-republican-wants-to-restrict-pelosis-travel-2007-06-21.html

Princess Nancy in Damascus

April 06, 2007 Category: Uncategorized

Tags: , , ,

By: wdporter

Yeah, can’t say I expected anything miraculous from HRH in the Middle East, but I must say I expected a little more professionalism and tact than this.

This whole fiasco comes on the heels of Nancy’s instructions to President Bush to “take a deep breath” and to respect Congress’ constitutional role, which apparently now includes establishing dipolomatic foreign policy.

washingtonpost.com