Pelosi: Obama Blessed by God

God may be technically an independent, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi has stated that he is the power behind the selection of Barack Obama as our leader. It was God who “blessed us” with the elevation of Obama — a remark that seems designed to justify a controversial video below on Obama being divinely chosen for good or evil.

At a California fundraiser, Pelosi called Obama “a leader that God has blessed us with at this time.” For the full story, click here.

This comes after Obama was criticized for statements that were portrayed (unfairly in my view) as claiming virtual divine status. These statements led to this controversial spoof video.

Given the fact that we just finished eight years with a president who believes that God speaks to him on such questions as invading Iraq, many voters are actually not looking for more divinely inspired leadership.

65 thoughts on “Pelosi: Obama Blessed by God”

  1. Gyges, I notice your article’s author uses my use of health and science applied toward government, particularlymy recent cancer (metastatic growth) analogy when speaking of ‘presidentialism’… 🙂

    He’s from ‘Copley News Service’ in Boston where Harvard Medical School and my training hospital is located, so I will take it either as a compliment or simply a result of being exposed to some of the the best Health-Care in the world.

    Harvard #1 – yes!

  2. “Thanks Gyges,

    I have been trying to post the following info under Pelosi sees no crimes, but it won’t go through. Perhaps it will go through here:

    The U.S. intelligence community buckled sooner in 2002 than previously reported to Bush administration pressure for data justifying an invasion of Iraq, according to a documents posting on the Web today by National Security Archive senior fellow John Prados.”

    This is not ‘news’…

    The same obvious facts in evidence have been the basis for several best-selling books – including the late one by George Tenet, himself.
    I remember watching horrifying sworn testimony from people who were still in a position to know, televised on CSPAN, during a quietly held, retired CIA anlayst hearing in response to obert Novak’s Valerie Plame (Mrs./Ambassador Joe) Wilson leak very early on.

  3. Gyges,

    I read your link (thanks for it) and I think you’ve made specific suggestions that would really help out. Obama and other Democrats could help restore some faith in their intentions about the Constitution by speaking out about Denver. I think it will be another significant blow if they do not.

  4. Cro,

    I don’t disagree with you, but I’ll make a point (that Jill’s been making as well). I don’t like everything Obama says and has done, and like Jill, I’m not convinced that he’ll just hit the “restore default settings” button on the Constitution. So what do we do to make sure he at least starts to?

    Well, we can stop fixating on the Presidency. It’s important, but so is Congress, and so are all the local elections. The President might nominate people for SCOTUS and Attorney General, but Congress has to confirm them. State Legislators are necessary for the Constitution to be amended. The Denver City Council is the body limiting protesters free speech. The School Board is generally in charge of which Principals get picked, and can be pressured removing one who tramples on students rights.

    So how can we get the right people in these positions? We can start demanding that our news stations do more coverage of other elections. We can start researching our candidates and vote based on actual positions and action not party affiliation. We can start donating to and working for individual campaigns rather the political parties. We should learn from the Prohibition Movement, effective social changes grow from the local to the national.

  5. Well it comes down to this I think.

    If we don’t vote Obama, we get McCain.

    And while Obama has made some really questionable votes recently, he at least is not CRAZY.

    John McCain is showing ALL the signs of “age onset DEMENTIA”. He is clearly slipping away.

    His mind is “shutting down”. He gets confused now on simple questions, like how many houses he owns, or who he spoke to last, or what he said to them.

    He’s a nice old guy that belongs with grandkids on his knees.

    He belongs NO WHERE near the White House, unless its on a tour.

  6. Thanks Gyges,

    I have been trying to post the following info under Pelosi sees no crimes, but it won’t go through. Perhaps it will go through here:

    The U.S. intelligence community buckled sooner in 2002 than previously reported to Bush administration pressure for data justifying an invasion of Iraq, according to a documents posting on the Web today by National Security Archive senior fellow John Prados.

    The documents suggest that the public relations push for war came before the intelligence analysis, which then conformed to public positions taken by Pentagon and White House officials. For example, a July 2002 draft of the “White Paper” ultimately issued by the CIA in October 2002 actually pre-dated the National Intelligence Estimate that the paper purportedly summarized, but which Congress did not insist on until September 2002.

    A similar comparison between a declassified draft and the final version of the British government’s “White Paper” on Iraq weapons of mass destruction adds to evidence that the two nations colluded in the effort to build public support for the invasion of Iraq. Dr. Prados concludes that the new evidence tends to support charges raised by former White House press secretary Scott McClellan and by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in its long-delayed June 2008 “Phase II” report on politicization of intelligence.

  7. “The Democrats and Republicans are one political party with two faces.
    Either we save ourselves or we are not going to be saved.”

    There is much in what you say that has the ring of truth. The country is currently a Corporatocracy and our individual rights are being eroded with rapidity. My question is though just what is meant by “save ourselves.” How do you propose we do that? What means of change do you foresee?

    I hope you understand that I am not naive. I know that our political system is rigged in favor of the Corporatists and those of totalitarian belief. However, my experience has taught me that positive gains can be achieved through our political and legal systems, as flawed as they may be.

    Racism in the US is still palpable, yet the lives of people of color have improved greatly. A woman’s right of choice still stands as the law of the land. There have been many more victories that have been achieved and also many sad defeats. The battle continues, however, at the polls and in the Courts. Am I satisfied with the progress that humanistically inclined people have made? I’m quite dissatisfied.

    So my questions to you above were not rhetorical. If you can suggest other viable means I’m interested, as would be many on this site.
    However, if you’re talking revolution, count me out (paraphrasing the Beatles). I lived through the 60’s and I still stand in the same political place, though I’ve learned some things through the years.
    One was that the Left, of which I’m proudly a member, can produce just as many egocentric leaders who are totalitarian in their hearts, as the Right. Obama, may not be politically all that I’d want, but my sense of him is that he truly believes in positive change and has the capacity to produce it.

  8. Obama was bought and paid for long ago by the same people who bought and paid for McCain long ago. He is a know nothing puppet, and all it take to figure that out is to listen to him speak: mindless drivel, stands for nothing, says whatever he thinks it will take to win. If you think Obama is going to save you, you are in for an unpleasant surprise. He will do as good of a job as his fellow Democrats like Nancy Pelosi are doing now.
    The Democrats and Republicans are one political party with two faces.
    Either we save ourselves or we are not going to be saved.

  9. Jill,
    I totally agree with you. I think that his not adopting a stronger position on FISA, Surveillance, etc. is actually hurting him. Attacking an opponents positions is not going negative although the MSM, which prefers horse race to discourse, feels differently. He needs to clearly differentiate his positions from McCain’s positions and explain why McCain’s positions are bad for the country. In the parlance of the politico, that would indicate strength.

  10. That’s why I say we have to deal with the primary ‘cancer’ now.

    It’s useless to entertain reinstating the Independent Counsel Rule, now, if we don’t first set that stage by impeaching those responsible for our current debacle at the hands of the Bush Administration,
    thereby limiting their continued influences, twofold – near term electin processes, and over our ultimate desire for recovery, Constitutionally, over the longterm.

    This is a potentially grave issue.

    We HAVE to ‘slice them out’, surgically, with a blade or by laser, and we have to do it now!

    AND in more ways than just this, we do have to take back our power!

    This is serious – no messin’ around, here.

  11. Mike,

    I think Obama should follow the Constitution now and we should put pressure on him to do it. We have a right to expect this from him as a candidate and as a president. Again, I am not saying not to vote for him. He needs to hold faith with the rule of law, right now. Putting pressure on him will not keep him from being elected. I believe it would actually help as so many people are disillusioned with politics as usual, and don’t want that from him.


  12. At the risk of sounding hysterical, I believe that this election is the most important one in my six decade lifetime. If McCain wins the US will become a fascist police state. I don’t use fascist as an epithet for Nazism. I use it as the blending of oligarchic corporate power with the aims of the state. Such as China is today and where Russia is probably heading. McCain’s victory will solidify the concept of the Imperial, All-Powerful Presidency. Those supporting him represent the worst instincts of Corporate America and in fact are lobbyists for it.

    The scariest part is that at least Bush’s excuse for his attack on Iraq represents his need to prove himself a better man than his father. A horrid excuse to be sure, that has led to much unnecessary death and destruction. McCain, however, is a man locked into the Cold War mindset of his pre-captivity days. This is exacerbated by his years in captivity and the psychological need to redeem himself from breaking under torture.

    McCain also no doubt bears imperfectly repressed anger at the fact that the US never rescued him from captivity. Since after all his father, The Admiral, had rescued him constantly from the screw ups brought on by McCain’s partying sensibility and lack of intellectual depth. The man is seriously damaged enough that he could start a nuclear war. This makes him more dangerous as a leader than Bush, since Bush became bored by the whole President’s job, once he had Saddam hung, thereby proving he was a better man than his father. McCain, however, will revel in the power of being Commander-In-Chief.

    Making this further problematic, is that like Bush, McCain is surrounded by Corporate lobbyists, whose main interests are motivated by greed and whose world views solidified back in the 60’s. They are incapable of recognizing the nuances of international diplomacy. i.e.
    Talking tough on Georgia, when the US is powerless, save for nuclear weaponry, to “punish” Russia for its’ behavior. Under a McCain Administration we will see a continued degradation of the US economy and standing in the world. At the same time our barely recognizable social safety net will deteriorate and the inequality of the distribution of wealth will get worse. The continuance of the US’s slide into becoming a “banana republic.”

    I believe that Obama is smart enough not to travel these roads as shown by a flawless campaign and overcoming the great handicap of his skin color. Forget the MSM propaganda regarding polling. It is in their financial interests to keep this race close and in the end to have a Republican prevail. Most pollsters doctor their polls for their own gain and to reflect their own viewpoint. Zogby/Reuters for instance has always been pro-Republican.

    How does all this relate to the topic of Nancy Pelosi? Easily, since she was among the Democratic Leadership who signed off on Bush’s surveillance violations, stupidly believing in bi-partisanship and made up facts. She couldn’t impeach Bush, since she and other Democratic leaders were complicit. Let’s get the Republican’s out and then immediately begin the pressure on Obama to follow the constitution. We still may be able to save our country with our vote.

  13. Mojo,

    Sometimes I think we liberals are the “scared populace”, the press is the “spineless legislature” and Obama is the “I’ll take that power” executive. All three groups must be complicit (unless military force is at play–something I’d never put past cheney) in order for the executive grab to work. So we are terrified that McCain will get in. No one does their best thinking when they’re scared shitless, but we just can’t abdicate on sorting things out. Obama depends on left wing volunteers. If he wants to court the religious right, perhaps it is time to tell his website, not one more voluteer hour from the left until he stands up for the Constitution, national healthcare, etc. He needs people on the ground and if he finds he can’t count on them to be there for him unless he’s there for us, then this could make an impression.

    The left wing press could be a lot better at truly analyzing Obama’s positions on things, instead of going along with what he says, excusing one thing after another after another. If he isn’t called out to explain what the hell he’s doing, he won’t.

  14. Did anyone see Bill Maher on Larry king last night?

    He speaks for me – in so many levels.

    I regret that Hillary is not the Democratic nominee.

    And I know Obama must use her AND he needs Bill Clinton ‘On Board’.

    Between all the rest of them, with the exceptions of Joe Biden and possibly Chris Dodd (and MOSTLY because I think his voice really IS heard loudest in the Senate) – she was the genuine article for THIS election.

    I look at McCain from 2000 to now and I don’t get it, either. I keep thinking – ‘what the Hell happened to him’?

    He scares the b’jesus outta me now and I can’t tolerate another four years of buffoonery.

    I honestly don’t think I can do it…!

    A warmer, cheaper climate is looking pretty good right now!

  15. Jill –

    Everything you said is right on, I just don’t type as much as I’d like to say because I could fill pages with anger at the spinelessness on both sides of the aisle. Obama has been right on a number of issues, and he’s gotten it wrong on some big ones, too. As I said, I’m hopeful even if it’s being naive. What else have we got?

    And besides, so long as nobody is paying attention to the myriad problems with the paperless e-voting machines and the uselessness of the electoral college, do our votes really “elect” anyone? I think all we’re really doing is giving our opinion.

    mnoble –

    When she announced impeachment is off the table my blood boiled. She is quite a worthless and pathetic figure and history will remember her as such.

  16. Nancy Pelosi does seem somewhat (at times greatly) unstable. Perhaps she was installed as Speaker of the House because she would offer no material resistance to the existing agenda. The empirical evidence is that nothing has changed in any material way since the People voted for change.

    “Impeachment is off the table”

  17. Mojo,

    I’m not saying people should not vote for Obama. What worries me is the belief of many people of good will, such as you seen from your postings, that “they will have a plan once in office to restore… the Constitution…”

    I feel this is not a supportable conclusion concerning Obama’s actions. If the voters are lulled into a false sense of security, and believe Obama will “restore” our rights I believe we’re in for a rude awakening. Power is rarely given back. Our rights have been taken by cheney/bush with the help of a spineless legislature (including Obama) and a frightened populace. To take back our rights we cannot afford to believe someone will “restore” them. Our rights cannot depend on the munificence of the president. They are in our Constitution and when a candidate sells out those rights they don’t deserve being given the benefit of our doubt. Obama doesn’t just need his feet held to the fire if he becomes president. He needs clear eyed citizens challenging him every time he breaks faith with our Constitution as a candidate. If we keep making excuses as to why he has broken faith on this important issue or that, then he will take that as our assent to let him do as he pleases. That is a dangerous message to convey.

  18. rafflaw –

    I think Obama and Co. are playing it very safe right now. They intend to win and given the other choice I hope they do. They’ve been pretty coy, and I’m hopeful (perhaps naively) that they will have a plan once in office to restore not only the Constitution, but much of the lost faith many of us are feeling in our political and justice system. This is supposed to be a government for the people, by the people, and not against the people.

    When the government is afraid of it’s citizens that is a democracy. When the citizens are afraid of their government, that is something else …

Comments are closed.