Why would Pelosi want Hillary Clinton out of this race? What might this have to do with ethics and the FEC?

Considering the fact that Clinton WON here in California, it seems a little odd, in fact, even a bit desperate on Pelosi’s part. I read this last night over at Political Intelligence out of Boston.

Pelosi: Nomination fight won’t go to convention

“….Pelosi, the California congresswoman who is chairwoman of the Democratic National Convention in late August, said if necessary, she will “step in” to resolve the nomination fight by late June.

“Because we cannot take this fight to the convention,” she said in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle’s editorial board published today. “It must be over before then…”

Well, this just makes a fellow Californian wonder why she would be in such a big fat hurry. I wondered if maybe she had something to hide? Beyond such a flagrant dislike for Hillary Clinton. It’s been difficult to watch women from California not act out of FEMINIST causes in this election process. In fact, I consider their actions to be quite treasonous to FEMINIST ideology, in general. But that is beside the point. I have deep concerns about how Hillary Clinton has been treated by Democrats across the board in what is perhaps the most important election of our lifetimes. Here is the wikipedia on Nancy Pelosi.

Hmmmm. She’s an Italian-American. What irony. I wonder if she took offense at Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s comment about “Garlic Noses.” Perhaps she should, no? All Americans found that offensive. Given this article on contemporary Afrocentrism, there might be a thing or two that Pelosi should inform herself about. It’s reposted at a very informative site in the web, but originally was an op-ed from the New York Times dating from 1992. This site on Race and History, and the fabulous journalists over at Black Agenda Report will open her eyes, I think. To some very important facts about multiculturalism post Martin Luther King. I particularly enjoy the editorials by Glen Ford.

In the meantime, I’m curious about a couple of things about Ms. Pelosi and that “haste” of hers. She is a public servant after all. And a member of the Democratic Party, no? This article off of SFgate seems a little skewed to me. I wonder what Poll they are referencing?

Clinton falls behind Obama in state, poll says

“…Women have pretty much come ’round to accepting Obama,” said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll. He said the erosion of ground under Clinton in California is the result of Democrats’ growing acceptance of the outcome of the primaries and the fact that Obama could have the required number of delegates for the party nomination by as early as next week…“

I don’t think so. Many, many women support Hillary Clinton. If you read this article from the Politico, you’ll see why.

White women cold toward Obama

There is NO EROSION of support for the candidate California voted for in the primary. My sense is that Politico is right on the money. Perhaps, Ms. Pelosi intended all along to see the Feminist vote go Pro-McCain. Because, that is what will happen come Fall. The ideologies and associations of an unvetted, opportunistic, target-marketed, Janus faced candidate have not gone unnoticed by Democratic women, Ms. Pelosi. I shall refer you to Rezko, et al. But back to you, for a moment.

It has been a tremendous concern that the FEC is “closed” right now. Because, without the FEC monitoring things in Washington, questionable events regarding fundraising undertaken during this primary need exploration, don’t they?

For instance, what about this?

Judicial Watch Asks FEC to Investigate House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Al Gore Group for Violating Campaign Finance Laws

You see, the FEC takes care of these sorts of things doesn’t it? I’ve been following a place called Democracy21 in the web. They are such ethical people aren’t they? Democrats are really looking to have our next President be ethical, and so you see, anything resembling unethical behavior is entirely suspect to the American electorate. It seems you have an interest in ethics yourself. According to the wikipedia you introduced something called the “Honest Leadership and Open Government Act” to Congress, didn’t you?

But? It’s looks as if the FEC has had dealings with you in the past, doesn’t it? This is from the archives at NewsMax.com:

Saturday, Oct. 1, 2005 10:35 a.m. EDT

FEC: Nancy Pelosi’s PACs Broke the Law

“…Two political action committees linked to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi have been charged with attempting to circumvent to legal limits on campaign giving, the Federal Election Commission has ruled…”

It’s those PACS and 501’s and 527’s that are concerning many Democratic Women at present. Perhaps you would like to have Hillary Clinton exit because many of us feel she has high ethical standards, Ms. Pelosi? Perhaps she can have some role in reinstating a broken FEC?

Don’t you feel that the FEC is going to take a seminal role in politics in the future because of the ability to do fund raising on the internet in such unprecedented ways? We do.

(to be continued…)

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Pelosi Prepares to Stop the Race Before Convention
• Democratic Women at Work
• Stalwarts for Clinton, in Search of Catharsis - NYTimes.com
• Clinton Backers to Make Noise at Dem Convention