Do any liberals feel Pelosi should step down as speaker?

Question

Example: She's clueless.

Answer 1

Absolutely not. If you want to talk about clueless, look no further than the President. Speaker Pelosi is doing a first rate job.

Answer 2

Maxine Waters may well be hillarious, she is batcrap loopy, ought to besides elect Michelle Bachman (R) MN, I guess those too circulate to the bars in DC jointly. yet heavily, i do no longer think of Pelosi might step down, even nevertheless as a democrat, i want her too and it has no longer something to do with any CIA briefing. i be attentive to Murtha exchange right into a favored posibility whilst she exchange into elected, yet he's been quiet considering the fact that. i might desire to be certain somebody like Ron type of Wisconsin get it. he's youthful, yet exceedingly intelligent and pushed. or maybe Pomeroy of North Dakota I additionally like Adam Smith, WA and Robert Wexler FL. long photos, yet my 2 cents. See the challenge is that the republicans have pent up rage, yet lack the numbers, they're combating to maintain Franken out in MN, yet which will subside quickly in the event that they want a great gamble to win the different fights, so as that they actually could elect their battles or unfastened all of them. Do they desire to maintain Franken out, and enable Pelosi stay? Do they desire to combat wellbeing care reform or do they desire to deliver the religious good lower back into the blend and combat whoever Obama nominates to the excellent courtroom? they are in a position to't win all of them, they only don't have the numbers. My money is on the excellent courtroom combat. They make a great number of noise and Obama looks to offer in an appoints a average, republicans declare victory then years later call the nominee a liberal besides because of the fact she does not factor with the properly suited wing nutjobs.

Answer 3

Yes, Ms. Pelosi is clueless....you are right.

She will not step down voluntarily. I think Ms. Pelosi envisions herself as a great diplomat.

Perhaps Ms. Pelosi just does not have a good understanding of the Muslim world and the quest for power and world domination. I am especially convinced of that because she favors establishment of the "nuclear fuel bank" although a country like Iran has the capability of further enriching "nuclear fuel" to be pure enough (U235) to provide fissile material for a nuclear bomb.

On April 10, 2997, an article written by Carla Mariunucci appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle, indicating that Ms. Pelosi and Rep. Lantos are interested in making a "diplomatic trip" to Iran.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/10/BAGV9P6C0S6.DTL
Pelosi, Lantos may be interested in diplomatic trip to Iran
Furthermore, the article quoted Rep Lantos as saying that he co-sponsored legislation with Ms. Pelosi which could pass as early as May that calls for making available to all countries --including Iran -- nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes under international oversight by establishing a "nuclear fuel bank".

I believe that the legislation is:
HR 6 Clean Energy Act of 2007
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h6ih.txt.pdf

Those who advocate the "nuclear fuel bank" consider that clean nuclear technology would be available to all countries. However, those who argue against the "nuclear fuel bank" point out that the uranium enrichment process (using centrifuges to separate isotopes as in the FEP at Natanz, Iran) can also be used to produce a more pure grade of uranium 235 which may be used in a nuclear bomb.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4416482.stm
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/09/28/opinion/edbuffett.php
http://www.goodharborreport.com/node/295

The head of the Iranian Nuclear Energy Organization, Gholam-Reza Aghazadeh, explains it thus:
The simple way is to inject 0.7% (uranium) and obtain 3.5%, right? Now, if you take this 3.5% and inject it again into the chain (of centrifuges), the result will be 20%. If you inject the 20% back into the chain, the result will be 60%. If you inject this 60%, the result will be 90%.
http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=1120
http://www.memritv.org/Search.asp?ACT=S6&P1=2,148&P3=4

Since Iran has uranium enrichment capabilities at its FEP (fuel enrichment plant) at Natanz, giving Iran nuclear "fuel" enriched to 3.5% might not be a good idea if Iran does have the agenda to develop a nuclear bomb.

The BBC article (listed below) describes the nuclear fuel process.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/sci_nat/05/nuclear_fuel/html/mining.stm

Answer 4

Like Stony the toothless stuffed lion the answers you get from the left have no substance. Pelosi has much in her closet and should be kicked out of Washington.

Answer 5

No they don't want her to step down, and no she's not clueless. She knows exactly what she is doing. She is taking advantage of clueless Americans, by violating the Constitutional separation of powers.

And they are applauding her for it.

Answer 6

If cluelessness is reason to leave office, then Bush should left 6 years ago.

Answer 7

If Pelosi is clueless, then the English language is not extensive enough to provide an adjective for Bush. Buffoon comes to mind, but it's just too complimentary.

Answer 8

HA!
Ever notice how limp little cowards tend to spew crap about strong women while defending themselves or other impotent morons?
Perfect example here.
Pelosi is speaker. Get used to it. And Bush is now utterly irrelevant.
Get used to that too.

Answer 9

Your just saying that because she is an Italian Grandmother.

She caught you __________ (fib) behind the barn and smacked you with a Polenta spoon didn't she.

Answer 10

Right. She's clueless and GWB isn't.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

Nice try sweetie, now be a good girl and go get Daddy his paper and slippers.