Pelosi – Policy Decisions Based on Faith - Analysis

House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, has apparently been making policy decisions based upon her Catholic faith according to a CNS news article and video (below). Pelosi made this statement while attending a May 6, Catholic Community Conference in D.C. Pelosi, a Roman Catholic, has been on the opposing side of Catholic (Christian) teaching as regards the abortion issue. She has consistently voted for legalized abortion, including voting against a ban on partial-birth abortion. In February of 2009 Pelosi met with Pope Benedict, who read her the riot act as regards her stance on abortion. The Pope lectured Pelosi on Church doctrine and allowed no cameras into the meeting.
CNS News: In quoting Pelosi,

They ask me all the time, ‘What is your favorite this? What is your favorite that? What is your favorite that?’ And one time, ‘What is your favorite word?’ And I said, ‘My favorite word? That is really easy. My favorite word is the Word, is the Word. And that is everything. It says it all for us. And you know the biblical reference, you know the Gospel reference of the Word.”



“And that Word," Pelosi said, "is, we have to give voice to what that means in terms of public policy that would be in keeping with the values of the Word. The Word. Isn’t it a beautiful word when you think of it? It just covers everything. The Word.

“Fill it in with anything you want. But, of course, we know it means: ‘The Word was made flesh and dwelt amongst us.’ And that’s the great mystery of our faith. He will come again. He will come again. So, we have to make sure we’re prepared to answer in this life, or otherwise, as to how we have measured up.”

Pelosi’s has always identified herself as Catholic, however, in recent years high profile politicians’ who have voted consistently against Church doctrine on the abortion issues, have faced criticism from the Church. This normally takes place during an election cycle, when the same head into Churches across the country, with the media in tow, vying for the Catholic vote (which is one of the largest voting blocs in the nation). Several of these politicians, including John Kerry (D-MA), have been denied the Catholic sacraments pending a change of heart on the abortion issue.

It is quite possible that Nancy Pelosi, as is the case with all humanity, may have gravitated towards a more religious stance as she ages, that said, it is difficult to ignore the role of the church or religion (or lack thereof) in the lives of those who govern and how that might affect policy. Religion has been used as a tool against politician’s, depending upon political party – George Bush was consistently criticized in the media for his faith, and 2008 presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee was castigated by the media for having been, of all things, a minister at one time. Concerns over politicians whose decisions are based on faith, by those who concerned about the separation of church and state have yet to mention Pelosi’s statements. Go figure. In direct interpretation of the Constitution, the separation of church and state, only refers to the establishment of a particular state religion, and does not extend to the individual practices of politicians and their ability to govern if one is Christian, Jew or, for the matter Atheist.

As Pelosi faces opposition for her seat from several contenders, including businesswomen and Republican, Dana Walsh, it may well be that Nancy Pelosi has grown closer to her faith as she has recently considered
retirement.

No Surprises and Fannie Mae now Seeks Bailout of 8.4 Billion – Barney Frank – Retirement Options are on the Table

Fannie Maeis seeking an additional 8.4 billion in funding from the federal government on top of the 13 plus billion loss in the first quarter. Fannie Mae, sister to Freddie Mac, are examples of government run and funded programs that have spiraled out of control over the decades. The mortgage giants can be directly linked to the start of the financial crisis that began the spiral of recession in the last year of the Bush Presidency. The chief architect and cheerleader for the institutions is the Congressman from Massachusetts 4th district, Barney Frank (D-Ma), who has repeated gone to the defense for Mae and Mac.

As recently as the 5th of May, Frank had asked the White House to protect his favorite lenders from “Republican attacks”. The trail of corruption and Frank’s insistence that the two lenders are on solid ground can be traced back to 2003, when frank told a Frank insisted before Congress that the two entities were “sound” quote from NYTimes Article:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Perhaps it is time to take government control away from certain types of institutions (namely anything relative to the financial strength of our nation). Just how many government run programs are not rife with corruptions, bankrupt and supported endlessly by politician’s who receive large donations from whichever industry happens to be at the public trough? The Federal Government should be divested from corporations it currently “oversees” (sic. “Owns outright”) and allow those to either fail or succeed based on their merits. One has to question how much debt can the United State continue to amass?

As to Barney Frank, his sister-in-arms, Nancy Pelosi, and the ringleader of the Senate Clowns, Harry Reid; it may not be long before they are replaced by conservatives (see November 2011). In Frank’s district, two republicans are running against Barney Frank: Earl Sholley, a stalwart fiscal conservative, www.sholleyforcongresss.us and a new face to Massachusetts Politics, Sean Bielat www.seanbielat.org will face off in a September primary. Whichever one of these men, who make it through the primary, should be a force in the 4th district, and deserving of support on a national basis in order to rid our nation of that imbecile, Frank. That is, of course, if Frank does not pull a Gordon Brown and simply bows out of the race at the last minute, by announcing his retirement (and those rumors have been rampant.)

Over in California, Dana Walsh is giving Pelosi a run for her money, literally. Walsh,a conservative who will not support taxing your great-grandchildren to pay for Nancy's earmarks, can be found at www.danawalshforcongress.com

In Nevada, there are so many running against Harry Reid and besting him by double digits, the conclusion is somewhat foregone. One of three or four Republicans are leading Reid according to polls at Real Clear Politics.

Nancy Pelosi Not Sure How Long She’ll Remain Speaker of the House – Is the Speaker Considering Retirement Options? Analysis

Pelosi unsure of her role as Speaker - Image: Time

A rather glowing article on House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, from the WashingtonPost yesterday included a somewhat unusual statement from the Speaker at the end of the article:

"If you're asking me how long I intend to stay here, I don't know. I don't know. I just don't know. I have certain issues that I want to accomplish, but what's more important to me is that we have a strong Democratic majority," she said. "That's more important than who is speaker."

Some may argue that her national favorability rating standing at 11% would give her reason to muse over losing the speakership, however, it is the approval rating in her own back yard that would give Pelosi pause. A Field Poll conducted last October 2009, shows Pelosi with an overall approval 34% in California, with Democrats, at that time, giving the Speaker a 51% rating, with 21% of the Party Faithful having no option, and 23% disapproving of the Speakers performance. In the same poll, Senator Boxer, who is now in a battle for her Senate Seat, has a higher rating, 66% in this particular poll. According to Real Clear Politics Polls Boxer is now within the margin of error in most California polls, giving her Senate Seat the websites “Toss up” status.

The 8th district may not be representative of the balance of California, however, if one looks at the California Secretary of State’s registration statistics, in 2008, 56.49% or 269,664 registered voters identified themselves as “Democrats” , the latest figures show a slight decline in registered Democrats – dropping to 251,516, with the overall percentage remaining basically the same.

Interesting, however, is that 17% of those Democrats voted for Cindy Sheehan, of Code Pink fame, in 2008. What would an approval poll in Nancy Pelosi’s district look like now? See Barbara Boxer.
Nancy also faces opposition from Dana Walsh, the Republican candidate who ran against Nancy in 2008, in a year where the Republican Brand was as bad as the Democrat Brand is today. At that time, Walsh received only 8% of the vote.

However, fundraising in 2010 is telling. Both Walsh and Pelosi have filed approximately the same amount in dollars: Pelosi: 1.7 million to Walsh: 1.4 million. Cash on hand: Pelosi: 172,000, Walsh: 123,000. Both women are not being funded by their political parties. Walsh, however has a primary fight with John Dennis, while Pelosi has recorded a total of $2500 from her Party. That fact, in and of itself, maybe due to the fact that the Speaker’s district seat is considered a “lock” for the Party, but then again, so was the Senate Seat referred to by Democrats as the Kennedy Seat.

One also understands that Dana Walsh is no Scott Brown, nor does she have to be, (or any other challenger with fiscally conservative credentials in 2010), and one would hazard to guess that Pelosi, is watching this more closely than any other race she has faced in the district. Given her popularity nationwide, as well as the statistics favoring a change in majorities – thereby ousting Pelosi as Speaker, the real possibility exists today, that she may also be looking at forced retirement in her own district. Nancy Pelosi's Statement, in the post article, directly stating that it is not important who the speaker is, as long as the Democrats maintain a majority, appears to be forced bravado on her part. Perhaps like Dodd, and others who have “fallen on the sword” so to speak, for the sake of the Party and outright retired, Pelosi maybe thinking along the same lines. It would prevent her from losing face: first by losing the majority, and secondly by losing in her own backyard.