Author Topic: A New Pelosi Pigout?  (Read 3511 times)

Mr. Intenseone

  • Guest
A New Pelosi Pigout?
« on: May 09, 2007, 08:56:42 AM »
A New Pelosi Pigout?
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, May 08, 2007 4:20 PM PT

Media: When Dennis Hastert was accused of profiting from congressional earmarks last year, media went into a front-page frenzy over "corruption." With Nancy Pelosi now in the same spot, it's a back-page story.

In case you haven't heard, and maybe you haven't, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi slipped in a $25 million provision for San Francisco's waterfront on a $15 billion federal water bill at the last minute. It's pork barrel spending, yes, but more than that.

Republicans are crying foul because the federal cash for port improvements and the bill's provision for Pier 35 cruise ship dockage all benefit a toney area of San Francisco — one where Pelosi's husband just happens to own real estate about a mile away.

His properties are close enough to benefit from the inflow of federal cash to the area — and from the added business the new development will bring. At the very least, the question should be raised because he definitely has friends in high places.

To be fair, Pelosi's earmark is going to a touristy area near Coit Tower, where plenty of San Francisco's movers and shakers could potentially benefit from the trough's offerings, too. Given the small size of San Francisco, maybe it's impossible to avoid conflicts.

But that's just it. When the last House Speaker, Dennis Hastert, made a $2 million profit from selling land almost six miles from a highway project he secured a $200 million earmark for in 2005, the outcry was loud about how he might have served himself.

The media ran front-page stories on it for days and television commentators harrumphed about public corruption — the GOP kind.

Now that Democrat Pelosi has secured an earmark for some land a mere 5,400 feet from her husband's property, there are no front-page stories. But there should be, because this isn't the first time she's been noticeably helpful to her own interests.

A few months ago, Pelosi wrote a provision into a minimum wage law that exempted American Samoa from its costs to businesses. The exemption benefited Starkist, whose Del Monte headquarters is in Pelosi's district. Like this pork issue, that story dropped from the news like a dead fish.

As far as we can tell, only the Associated Press and New York Post have reported the story, and local papers are asleep. Much of the media has tucked the lonely AP story onto their back pages for appearances' sake. But in practical terms, this story will drop from the pier fast and sink without notice.

Maybe Pelosi did something wrong and maybe she didn't. Were phone calls made from Union Street lobbyists, or were deals cut at The Palm? Is there something about the law that makes it impossible to follow? We don't know because the media aren't on it.

The one thing we do know is that the media shows one standard of coverage for charges made against Republicans and another standard for Democrats.

With Pelosi on the hot seat this time, this news probably will get deep-sixed. It shouldn't.

 



 

Tre

  • Expert
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16548
  • "What you don't have is a career."
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #1 on: May 09, 2007, 09:02:20 AM »
We expect politicians to be self-serving, but at the same time, they have to be called on it. 


headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #2 on: May 09, 2007, 09:03:40 AM »
U would think they would avoid this at all costs. If i was a dem i would stay as squeeky clean just so i could attack Bush.
L

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #3 on: May 09, 2007, 09:05:28 AM »
If she broke laws, charge and remove her.

However, the articles's use of:

"Media: When Dennis Hastert was accused of profiting from congressional earmarks last year, media went into a front-page frenzy over "corruption." With Nancy Pelosi now in the same spot, it's a back-page story. "

shows it to be not an event reporting news outlet, but an agenda-driven company try to sway the unbiased reader.  This casts a shadow on the credibility of every word they say.

Why not just report the news?  Why "one-up" and insult when you do it?

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #4 on: May 09, 2007, 09:06:58 AM »
This story has already been debunked.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200705080014?f=h_latest

Port of SF authorities asked for the earmark.  Pelosi is not its originator.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #5 on: May 09, 2007, 09:07:18 AM »
240..u have used some pretty bizarre sources to make points as well..but i agree with what u said.
L

Mr. Intenseone

  • Guest
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #6 on: May 09, 2007, 09:07:57 AM »
shows it to be not an event reporting news outlet, but an agenda-driven company try to sway the unbiased reader.  This casts a shadow on the credibility of every word they say.

Why not just report the news?  Why "one-up" and insult when you do it?

lol.........you're shitting us......right? LOL!

Mr. Intenseone

  • Guest
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #7 on: May 09, 2007, 09:10:12 AM »
This story has already been debunked.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200705080014?f=h_latest

Port of SF authorities asked for the earmark.  Pelosi is not its originator.

It was debunked by a extreme left-wing propaganda site!

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #8 on: May 09, 2007, 09:17:23 AM »
WASHINGTON - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi used her clout to get lawmakers to back a San Francisco redevelopment project near her multimillion-dollar rental properties, disclosure documents reveal.

Pelosi got House members to authorize $25 million to improve the Embarcadero port area, clearing the way for cruise-ship-dock development and other improvements to aid the neighborhood's comeback.

There is nothing to debunk..she did it and her office admitted it. It remains to be seen if it was a conflict of interest.
L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #9 on: May 09, 2007, 09:18:42 AM »
It was debunked by a extreme left-wing propaganda site!
Thank you for pointing that out.

The rightwing fabrication was pointed out as nonsense by a media watch dog group.  An extremely left wing propaganda site no less.

However, as Barney Fife says, "Facts is facts..." and the facts are on my side and not yours.

Mr. Intenseone

  • Guest
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #10 on: May 09, 2007, 09:21:39 AM »
WASHINGTON - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi used her clout to get lawmakers to back a San Francisco redevelopment project near her multimillion-dollar rental properties, disclosure documents reveal.

Pelosi got House members to authorize $25 million to improve the Embarcadero port area, clearing the way for cruise-ship-dock development and other improvements to aid the neighborhood's comeback.

There is nothing to debunk..she did it and her office admitted it. It remains to be seen if it was a conflict of interest.


bump!

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #11 on: May 09, 2007, 09:23:23 AM »
WASHINGTON - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi used her clout to get lawmakers to back a San Francisco redevelopment project near her multimillion-dollar rental properties, disclosure documents reveal.

Pelosi got House members to authorize $25 million to improve the Embarcadero port area, clearing the way for cruise-ship-dock development and other improvements to aid the neighborhood's comeback.

There is nothing to debunk..she did it and her office admitted it. It remains to be seen if it was a conflict of interest.

No.

The rightwing smear machine is claiming that "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi slipped in a $25 million provision..." as if to increase the value of property she owns OVER 1 MILE FROM THE SPOT!

Oh the corruption.

But if it were proven that the improvements were in fact requested by the Port of San Francisco, and not Pelosi herself, of course, it would render the story thoroughly bogus -- unfit for publication, really.

"The port initiated these requests. They came entirely from the city and county of San Francisco. [The requests] were generated at the staff level. The port initiated our request through the city and county of San Francisco. Our requests were funneled through the mayor's office on up to Speaker Pelosi's office...If anyone is claiming that Pelosi initiated these requests in some way, that's completely false."

As I said, this is a bogus story with no factual underpinning.

headhuntersix

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17271
  • Our forefathers would be shooting by now
L

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #13 on: May 09, 2007, 09:28:06 AM »
http://www.nypost.com/seven/05082007/news/nationalnews/her_an_fran_treat_nationalnews_geoff_earle.htm

She did it....
Of course she included the earmark.  The Port Authority asked her to do it.  There's a trail a mile long.  Nothing she did can be construed, except through vile innuendo, as wrongdoing.

Otherwise, I await her censure.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #14 on: May 09, 2007, 09:45:51 AM »
lol.........you're shitting us......right? LOL!

Let's compare two media sources.

1) give us the facts of the case.

2) STARTS the article by pointing out the hypocracy of what they view is a left-wing media blackout of news coverage, THEN gives us the facts of the case.


It is designed to SWAY, not INFORM.  The fact you cannot see this, makes me worry... It means that you don't have the ability separate news from opinion when you read sources.  When Rush posts a story, it is the facts, plus his interpretation of them.  You have shown us here that you possess no ability to seaparate the two, nor EVEN RECOGNIZE when an article is trying to sway your opinion.

Mr. Intenseone

  • Guest
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #15 on: May 09, 2007, 09:51:06 AM »
Let's compare two media sources.

1) give us the facts of the case.

2) STARTS the article by pointing out the hypocracy of what they view is a left-wing media blackout of news coverage, THEN gives us the facts of the case.


It is designed to SWAY, not INFORM.  The fact you cannot see this, makes me worry... It means that you don't have the ability separate news from opinion when you read sources.  When Rush posts a story, it is the facts, plus his interpretation of them.  You have shown us here that you possess no ability to seaparate the two, nor EVEN RECOGNIZE when an article is trying to sway your opinion.

 ::)

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #16 on: May 09, 2007, 09:54:18 AM »
::)

nooooooo, please don't go there.  Beach Bum became a joke around here by rolling his eyes, and it became the universal symbol of "I can't argue that, so I"m just gonna do a middle school eye rolly".

I believe this news article is designed to sway opinion, not just inform
Do you agree or disagree?

Mr. Intenseone

  • Guest
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #17 on: May 09, 2007, 10:10:28 AM »
nooooooo, please don't go there.  Beach Bum became a joke around here by rolling his eyes, and it became the universal symbol of "I can't argue that, so I"m just gonna do a middle school eye rolly".

I believe this news article is designed to sway opinion, not just inform
Do you agree or disagree?

I totally disagree since it already CONFIRMED by her own office!

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #18 on: May 09, 2007, 10:13:54 AM »
I totally disagree since it already CONFIRMED by her own office!

we're not discussing the facts of the case and of this article - i completely give you those.

I am asking you:
I believe this news article is designed to sway opinion, not just inform
Do you agree or disagree?

egj13

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 554
  • Got life by the balls
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #19 on: May 09, 2007, 10:25:39 AM »
Thank you for pointing that out.

The rightwing fabrication was pointed out as nonsense by a media watch dog group.  An extremely left wing propaganda site no less.

However, as Barney Fife says, "Facts is facts..." and the facts are on my side and not yours.

I wouldn't say the facts are on your side. She might not have asked for it, but I didn't see her trying to remove it before presenting it to the president. I also didn't see the republicans who allowed their votes to be bought by getting pork included asking for it to be removed here either. The part about this story we have to remember is that if it wasn't for the republicans there wouldn't have been all that pork in the first place. It was used as bribes.

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #20 on: May 09, 2007, 10:29:10 AM »
we're not discussing the facts of the case and of this article ...
You should be talking about the facts.

An omission of a fact is important.

"The port initiated these requests. They came entirely from the city and county of San Francisco. [The requests] were generated at the staff level. The port initiated our request through the city and county of San Francisco. Our requests were funneled through the mayor's office on up to Speaker Pelosi's office...If anyone is claiming that Pelosi initiated these requests in some way, that's completely false."

This deflates any innuendo of Pelosi where she introduced the earmark just to inflate her property values...which exist over a mile from the spot of renovation.

The article Mr. Intenseone posted is a propagandistic hit-job and nothing less.

He should follow up with an apology or a retraction now that the innuendo has been debunked.

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #21 on: May 09, 2007, 10:31:43 AM »
I wouldn't say the facts are on your side. She might not have asked for it, but I didn't see her trying to remove it before presenting it to the president. I also didn't see the republicans who allowed their votes to be bought by getting pork included asking for it to be removed here either. The part about this story we have to remember is that if it wasn't for the republicans there wouldn't have been all that pork in the first place. It was used as bribes.
Why would she remove an earmark requested by her constituency?  She's not sworn to refuse all earmarks.  It's how the government does business.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66424
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)

Laughing Sam's Dice

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3119
  • $12.95 per monthman
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #23 on: May 09, 2007, 11:16:44 AM »
The New York Post isn't a conservative paper is it? 

Of course not, any news outlet owned by Rupert Murdoch must be fair and balanced.  Ask Joe!
Stick out your tongue.

egj13

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 554
  • Got life by the balls
Re: A New Pelosi Pigout?
« Reply #24 on: May 09, 2007, 11:30:15 AM »
Why would she remove an earmark requested by her constituency?  She's not sworn to refuse all earmarks.  It's how the government does business.

why would you attach an earmark for the port to an emergency war funding bill?