2007-04-04 14:57:42 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
and he didnt get mad at the republicans
2007-04-04 14:58:15 · update #1
nancy pelosi is awesome
2007-04-04 15:01:34 · update #2
he never told the republicans not to go but he told pelosi to not go
2007-04-04 15:03:22 · update #3
Because most republicans are hypocrites, including Bush.
2007-04-04 15:07:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
She had no business going, and that goes for her pet rinos as well. The State Dept, which is under the executive branch, is supposed to handle diplomacy, Not the congress. They should be back in washington working on a bill that will give the troops the money they need, not over in Syria making nice with an evil tyrant that cuts the toungues out of his subjects, and is sending his people over the Iraqi border to kill our troops.
Peace talks with Israel? This man is not interested in peace, talk is useless and unproductive, which is why the state department is trying to isolate them. These congress people are underminding US foriegn policy. It's not their job. They don't have the White House yet. They need to stop acting like they do.
2007-04-04 22:11:47 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
GREAT QUESTION.
THE answer is that THE GOP SHAMELESSLY COMMITS HYPOCRITICAL ATTACKS FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES AND THE MEDIA LETS THEM GET AWAY WITH IT.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200704020007
http://mediamatters.org/items/200704040010
http://mediamatters.org/items/200704030014
Media reported White House criticism of Pelosi Syria trip, but not its silence on GOP-led trip
In reporting that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is planning a visit to Syria accompanied by a bipartisan congressional delegation this week, several media outlets highlighted White House criticism of Pelosi's trip but did not note that a Republican-led delegation met with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus on April 1 -- nor did they note the White House's inconsistency in criticizing Pelosi for her trip but remaining silent on the GOP-led visit.
2007-04-04 22:05:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
It's not that he's not mad at the Republicans.
He's just going to keep his mouth shut.
He can't afford to alienate the party ant more than he already has.
But criticizing Pelosi is a way to score points with his base.
2007-04-04 22:03:13 · answer #4 · answered by Zapatta McFrench 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Bush said at a White House news conference yesterday that the administration has ``made it clear to high-ranking officials, whether they be Republicans or Democrats, that going to Syria sends mixed signals.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20070404/pl_bloomberg/a4r6kszkdec0_1
2007-04-04 22:01:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
It shows that he is a lame duck President. He is mad that he is losing "control." She accomplished what Condi has not been able to accomplish. Syria has agreed to peace talks with Israel.
It sucks to be Bush!
2007-04-04 22:01:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Because shes not a mouthpiece for the president and may actually trying to open up dialog that may lead to peace and if she succeeds he'll look like the idiot caveman he is. and being told no pisses him off but oh well!!!
2007-04-04 22:05:06 · answer #7 · answered by pamela d 1 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Could be she can't be trusted. Or is counteracting his efforts in the war on terror. Maybe she took money to fund terrorist organizations.
We don't know.
What we do know is we want to keep Pelosi far, far away from international policy decisions.
2007-04-04 22:05:36 · answer #8 · answered by WJ 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Because she's self promoting & will do exactly what's opposite to the White House.
2007-04-04 22:07:51 · answer #9 · answered by Vino33 1 · 3⤊ 1⤋
And how do we know he didn't get mad at the Republicans?
2007-04-04 22:02:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋