Why aren't you complaining about Rice's talks with Syria? Shouldn't she receive the same wrath Nancy did for talking with terrorists? Oh, and by the way, there has been a noted decrease in Syrian intervention in Iraq since Nancy's visit. See BBC online edition - today.
2007-05-03 04:09:03 · 17 answers · asked by CHARITY G 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
They'll just say that Condi's allowed to set foreign policy, even though their argument about Pelosi was that ONLY BUSH is allowed to set foreign policy.
2007-05-03 04:12:25 · answer #1 · answered by Bush Invented the Google 6 · 6⤊ 5⤋
The reductions in Syrian intervention might also be due to increased manpower (the surge) and increased scrutiny at the Syrian border by its neighboring countries in cooperation with coalition forces. Its probably based more on the fact that more people are watching Syria, than anything Nancy could have said or done in a non-official capacity. The fact that there appears to be a split forming among the various insurgent groups might also have played a role in Syria "cooling it".
2007-05-03 11:22:44 · answer #2 · answered by ludwig1027 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.
2007-05-03 11:24:28 · answer #3 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Condi isn't going to go over the presidents head and do whatever she feels like including telling lies. That was the big thing she told an outright lie!!! And then you say Bush makes the country look stupid. She also won't set the women in the country back by years trying to make a feminist statement with the hat. As for Syria and Iraq, you really need to study up on that one!!
2007-05-03 11:16:35 · answer #4 · answered by Brianne 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.
ITS HER JOB !!!
2007-05-03 11:19:50 · answer #5 · answered by Antiliber 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because THAT IS HER JOB. Nancy Pelosi is the speaker of the house, not the speaker for Bush. Pelosi isn't supposed to be an ambassador. Read up on their jobs.
2007-05-03 11:25:32 · answer #6 · answered by The Angry Elephant 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The difference is, Condi will deliver the message that this administration wants her to give them.
She is a sycophantic crony - and is personally responsible for her tireless efforts to promote the agenda of this administration.
She will not get off easy.
2007-05-03 11:18:47 · answer #7 · answered by Joe M 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's called integrity. Something that Peloser lacks and Rice is filled with.
Why would we complain?
2007-05-03 11:22:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Rice is the Secretary of State. Her job includes relationships with other countries. Pelosi is Speaker of the House. Her job does not encompass relationships with other countries. She is functus officio in that role.
2007-05-03 11:16:09 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Who's job is it to establish foreign policy???
Check your constitution out and see if it says, "Speaker of the House"....
2007-05-03 11:55:21 · answer #10 · answered by Dr. D 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Is Piglosi Secretary of State? Nope. Ok, move along.
2007-05-03 11:17:01 · answer #11 · answered by Wendy 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋