I previously criticized Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi for suggesting that she has dirt on Newt Gingrich but would disclose it later. She has returned to that ignoble theme in an interview with CNN, saying that Gingrich will not be elected because “There is something I know.” I have been a vocal critic of Gingrich on this blog, but once again I view this low-grade form of politicking to be grossly unfair to Gingrich and a further degrading of our political system. If you want to attack Gingrich, then do it. Do not constantly suggest that you have severed heads in a duffel bag or some other evidence against the man.
Here is the exchange:
John King, CNN: “You make your case there passionately for President Obama. But also understand that this is a tough reelection climate for any president, Democrat or Republican in this economy. Because of your history with Speaker Gingrich, what goes through your mind when you think of the possibility, which is more real today than it was a week or a month ago, that he would be the Republican nominee and that you could come back here next January or next February with a President Gingrich?”
Rep. Nancy Pelosi: “Let me just say this. That will never happen.”
Pelosi: “He’s not going to be President of the United States. That’s not going to happen. Let me just make my prediction and stand by it, it isn’t going to happen.”
King: “Why are you so sure?”
Pelosi: “There is something I know. The Republicans, if they choose to nominate him that’s their prerogative. I don’t even think that’s going to happen.”
Once again, it should be Democrats who denounce this type of politics. It should not fall to either Gingrich or Republicans. What is really astonishing is that I would think that the Democrats would be dying to have Gingrich nominated and offering Obama a target-rich environment. Regardless of the political wisdom, it is wrong to constantly claim to have dirt on a politician . . . while promising to reveal it later.
Update: As on the earlier occasion, Pelosi has sent out aides to say that she was merely referring to things in the public record. After the prior incident, I was contacted by Pelosi aides who wanted to make the same point. Yet, here again, Pelosi comes forth and makes the same type sinister suggestion. She is not a stupid person and she knows how such comments will be interpreted — particularly after being criticized on the earlier occasion. This is precisely why Congress is now as unpopular as ebola.
66 thoughts on “Pelosi: Gingrich Unelectable Because “There Is Something I Know.””
Thank you, anon nurse. I am afraid the Republican zeal to defund everything will hurt my cousin (and his 4 siblings with the disease). Yet all but one will vote for a Republican simply because they claim to be prolife.
>If Pelosi has something, she should either 1) use it or 2) have kept her trap shut until she uses..
Not to pick on you, but to use the concept as an example..
Pelosi _is_ using it.. in her own way.
Just as law is only incidentally about the truth (a slippery concept, there), and more-so about proper preparation by lawyers, so is politics only incidentally about truth.. and more-so about proper preparation by politicians. As another (others?) has/have noted, Pelosi is stealing attention from Barack.. teamwork in action. Also, timing is everything – given long enough, any dirt can disappear in the distance. A ‘splat’ in the face, directly before an election, can be disastrous.
For the record, I am most definitely _not_ a fan of Pelosi.
“Make that mice with computer chips running the space station.” -Karen Weber
lol, KW. And I hope that your cousin finds relief… Many of us take our health for granted…
Make that mice with computer chips running the space station. Thanks for that article anon nurse–got a cousin with severe neuro disorder who might benefit.
“Mice with computer chips tomorrow….”
Wireless mice (of the living, breathing kind) yesterday…
Brain Cells Of Mice Controlled With Wireless Router In New Research
Published: 01/24/2012 02:54 PM EST on InnovationNewsDaily
“A startup has created “a wireless router for the brain” that allows researchers to control brain cells in mice and other small lab animals. The device lets scientists easily turn brain cells on and off in living mice that are wearing the router. Researchers watch how the mice respond to find which brain cells are connected with different behaviors.
The basic technique that the router uses is actually several years old. In 2005, researchers at Stanford University created a technique to examine brain cells by controlling them using flashes of light. Studies that use this light control help scientists understand what the brain’s complex networks are doing when they’re acting normally and when they’re diseased, like with Parkinson’s disease, Karl Deisseroth, the technique’s creator, wrote in Scientific American. The technique is “God’s gift to neurophysiologists,” Robert Desimone, director of the brain research institute at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told Nature News in 2010. (MIT’s Technology Review reported the news of the brain’s “wireless router.”)”
Comments are closed.