Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 01/05/07 11:56 am:
As an addition to my response ,I noticed that Cindy Sheehad was on Capitol Hill disrupting a speech by Rahm Emanuel .This was a stark reminder by the moonbats to the Dem. leadership that it was Kossaks that paid for the microphone. I don't think they will let them forget it .

Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 01/05/07 2:08 pm:

Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 01/05/07 2:12 pm:
They had waited a long time for this night to party, nibble on goat cheese ravioli with pumpkin and truffle, wipe their lips with paper napkins embossed in gold with "Speaker Pelosi January 4, 2007," listen to former members of the Grateful Dead sing "Truckin' " and Tony Bennett sing "I Left My Heart in San Francisco."(Washington Compost)

Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 01/05/07 2:23 pm:
Pelosi ascent in Congress a breakthrough
By Associated Press
Wednesday, January 3, 2007 - Updated: 01:35 PM EST

WASHINGTON - It shouldn’t be surprising that it took more than 200 years for Congress to select a female speaker of the House. The United States isn’t exactly at the forefront when it comes to women in politics.

Women make up a larger share of the national legislature in 79 other countries, including China, Cuba, North Korea and Vietnam, according to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, an association of national legislatures. The U.S. even trails a couple of fledgling democracies: Afghanistan and Iraq. Boston Globe

See ????? the ascension of Speaker Pelosi is an important milestone in the US obtaining the same democratic institutions and representation as North Korea, Cuba, Afghanistan and Iraq

Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 01/05/07 2:24 pm:
According to the Kossaks ,the media is not reporting this historic event . lol

Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 01/05/07 2:37 pm:
I always love it when the MSM can't figure out what they're talking about. In the Globe article they quoted Pelosi, "In more than 200 years of history, there was an established pecking order - and I cut in line." Then they quote Ellen R. Malcolm as saying "The biggest obstacle women candidates face is not about gender, it’s about the lack of opportunity."

Huh? Well at least the Globe explains it...

"Ninety-eight percent of incumbents who run for re-election are re-elected in most years. ... The bottom line is there are very few opportunities."

Once women decide to run for office, they are just as successful as men, according to experts who study the issue. However, women are much less likely to run.

Let me see if I have this right. It's not about gender. There are fewer opportunities for women, even though just about anyone can run for office, yet when they do run they're just as successful as men. So what's the fuss about Pelosi then?

I don't quite understand mcjoan's beef about Pelosi not being trumpeted all over 'opinion' pages. I'm sure she's been front and center many times over the past weeks. And if most papers are like ours most of our editorials are given after the event. She should be quite pleased with news coverage though, every news break on the radio yesterday was about Pelosi and she's splashed across front pages all over the country today (btw I loved your pic of her tootin' her own horn). This was on our front page:


They said she was waving to the gallery, I think it looks more ilke she's inviting the peasants to bow at her royal feet.

Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 01/05/07 3:26 pm:
I haven't found any significant women's rights feasts for the new speaker, but I did come across this interesting 'accomplishment' of the new speaker.

It's been just over 10 years since Congress passed Rep. Nancy Pelosi's Presidio Trust legislation, effectively creating the first privatized national park in the United States (see "Stolen Base," 5/8/96). The results are pretty clear: Just cruise through the Presidio and check out the gigantic new office complex George Lucas has built. In fact, the private business interests that were given control of the park in 1995 now oversee more than 80 percent of the 1,408-acre parcel. The goal of the privatizers: raise enough money from development, leases, and other real estate deals to pay the entire cost of running the park by 2013. That's what Pelosi's legislation requires.

It's a terrible disaster for San Francisco. And at the time we warned it would set a terrible precedent for the nation: Once you turn the national parks over to private interests and require the parks to pay for themselves, you'll get the equivalent of Nike Corp. putting logos on the Grand Canyon and casinos demanding concessions at Yosemite.

Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 01/05/07 4:29 pm:
yes and a shame. I always thought the Presidio looked more like this













GOOD JOB NANCY!!

Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 01/05/07 4:43 pm:
Absolutely Nancy, good job. I can say with relief however that the first pic still does look that way. I recognized it immediately as Presidio Park in San Diego. At least it was still standing guard over Old Town and Mission Valley last time we were there :)