You also left out the trips of a number of Republican Congressmen.

I believe that the current trips are being done to start deplomacy that doesn’t involve a gun in the face – the only type Bush knows, and a style that has become increasingly dangerous to our nation and the world.

To top it off he labels her a “novice” in foreign affairs. As compared to who, I wonder? A former governor of Texas? Pelosi may not be the best choice but she has many years involvement in national and international affairs through her service in congress if we are comparing her to Bush or Rice (wherever she is).

Also, as Mark pointed out, he failed to note the lack of objections when Republicans visited the Middle East and many other things that would have been “fair” to an objective commentary. The intent of his article is obvious.

I have no doubt that Pelosi made the point to the Syrians that there was to be a new attitude forthcoming in our relationships with their’s and many other countries. But I would not publicly declare that to be fact because, like Thomasson, I wasn’t there. For all we know she told the man he had bad breath.

I am sick and tired of all these people who have the privilidge of communicating to millions of people using it to lie to them. We need to establish some sort of punishment for these people. Any government employee or other person that has been granted the right of national communication should be guilty of a crime when they lie to the public or offer statements that cannot be verified by fact. Imagine what a difference honesty would make.

Yes, there are important domestic issues, but the chaos in the Mid East is of top priority. Thomasson sounds like he thinks the little woman, Pelosi, should just stay home and take care of the house. Saying she has no diplomatic experience disregards her congressional experience and her 10 years on the Senate Select Intelligence Committee. She has forgotten more than Bush will ever know about foreing policy.

If it weren’t political, the republicans would have been sure to work with Pelosi instead of against her!

I agree with Mark’s statement:
“I believe that the current trips are being done to start deplomacy that doesn’t involve a gun in the face – the only type Bush knows, and a style that has become increasingly dangerous to our nation and the world.”

This is the same person who said “impeachment if off the table”…huh?! This is the subject she should be engaging in the House right now, doing her Constitutional duty to see that Bush and Cheney are removed from office, not running to Syria and other Middle-Eastern enclaves running her duplicit, mealy, mouth!

I do know this, she’s the wrong person to be Speaker of the House at this grave time in U.S. history. She wasn’t very well respected prior to her ascendency to SOH, but now she’s showing her true flim-flam self to the world. And no Virginia, her trip will not open doors for diplomacy with these cunning, evil, machissmo, raghead leaders. In fact, within, they feel it an insult that they even have to deal with a lowly woman. They feel the same way about Condi too. Madeline Albright was another example under Clinton. This is not a sexist remark, but a fact. Most of the trouble spots in the third world are run by Islamic, Hispanic, and Oriental machissmo, chauvinist pigs! If you have to deal with these monsters then you need to send a male diplomat that has a set of titanium nitride balls along with serious gray matter between his ears! Sorry gals, but that’s the way the ‘worm turns’…

However, the political reality is the country is in a difficult war. To put congress and the country through an impeahment that can’t go anywhere would be irresponsible. Republicans can be counted on to defend their president and it takes 2/3 of the Senate to vote for removal.

Finally, the male chauvinistic traditions can’t be broken by caving into them. Look at the recent accomplishments of those societies that have repressed women. Their greatest contribution to the world has been the suicide bomber.