Unethical Quote Of The Year: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi

“People will do what they do.”

—-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi  yesterday, following being  asked at a press conference about her reaction to the statue of Christopher Columbus being torn down and dumped in the Bay by the usual gang of vandals and anarchists who are symbolically tearing down the United States and Western civilization, as well as its values.

I am serious about this being the Unethical Quote of the Year. I can’t imagine a worse one, once Pelosi’s status as the third ranking official in the United States Government and the leader of the Democratic Party is taken into consideration. This would be a morally, legally and ethically bankrupt statement if it came from a sociopathic teenager. Coming from a leader who people follow and trust, it is infinitely worse. Such an attitude strikes at the soul of civilized society. “They just do what they do” is a line from  “Jurassic Park,” as the paleontologist, Dr. Grant (Sam Neill) explains to the children that dinosaurs aren’t good or bad, they are just animals that “do what they do.”

But they were animals.

I’m going to restrain myself here, because I could literally write volumes about how odious Pelosi is. But this is just another smoking gun in that  diagnosis; there have been many others. The fact that a major political party could permit itself to be led and corrupted by someone with her ethics vacuum is one of the major reasons Democrats cannot be trusted with power. I could go through the Rationalizations List and rattle off the entries that “People will do what they do” echoes in one way or another, but it’s too easy. My guess is about 30.

Maryland Governor Larry Hogan criticized Pelosi in the lamest and most trivial manner possible, saying that Pelosi had “lost touch” with the Baltimore community. Yeah, that’s the ticket, Governor: shrugging off property destruction and lawlessness as if human beings are velociraptors indicates that Nancy needs to get to Little Italy and  have a canoli more often.  That’s more sensitivity than the rest of their party, apparently. I’m on the lookout for a prominent Democrat with the decency and guts to call Pelosi’s words what they are. I suspect I’ll be waiting a long time.

It helps, of course, that the mainstream news media is ignoring Pelosi’s disgusting remark. I just checked: Fox, the New York Post,  The Hill, RealClearPolitics, CNS, The Federalist—no New York Times (The Epoch Times, though!), no Washington Post, no CNN, ABC, CBS or NBC. Well, to be fair, the fact that Nancy Pelosi is despicable isn’t news, or shouldn’t be.

Jonathan Turley’s blog was on the list. He wrote in part, “Her comment explains why a recently arrested supporter of Antifa declared that they are winning in the campaign to destroy statues and memorials….It is disgraceful that a Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the third in line for the presidency of the United States, should have to be prodded to condemn such unlawful action and even then will not do so….”

She’s a terrible human being, one who corrupts and weakens the nation she vowed to protect and serve every nanosecond she remains in a position of power. That also makes her a dangerous one.

As for the Democratic Party, the fish rots from the head down.

27 thoughts on “Unethical Quote Of The Year: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi

  1. Her immediate family has been on the public payroll continuously since 1926. While her father and then brother served as Mayor of Baltimore, at least three of her brothers accepted the call to service by clerking in the city courthouse.

  2. But wait! There’s more (from the Daily Mail) from Crazy Aunt Nan! Take it away, Sweetie:

    “If the community doesn’t want the statue there, the statue shouldn’t be there,’ Pelosi, who is from Baltimore, told reporters.

    ‘It’s up to the communities to decide what statues they want to see,’ Pelosi said, adding that the toppling of the Columbus statue ‘doesn’t diminish my pride in my Italian American heritage’. (DID ANYONE ASK YOU ABOUT YOUR ITALIAN HERITAGE?)

    ‘I think that it’s very important that we take down any of the statues of people who committed treason against the United States of America,’ Pelosi said. (WHAT? TREASON? BY CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS?)

    When asked whether a commission should decide what statues go rather than protesters, Pelosi responded: ‘People will do what they do.’

    ‘I do think that from a safety standpoint, it would be a good idea to have it taken down if the community doesn’t want it. I don’t know that it has to be a commission,’ she added. (SAFETY? YOU’RE WORRIED ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY?)

    So, Nancy, just to be clear about this, there’s no need for any sort of public order or democratic process. Mob rule is the just fine with you. And with the Democratic Party. One of the two parties that govern the country. And the House of Representatives. You know, Half of the law making body of the United States.


    • I think this should be immortalized on the rationalization list.

      Maybe 41B: Pelosi’s Posse “People will do what they do”

      It is what it is, and I am what I am. But Pelosi represents the people, and the people want change. So who are we to stop them.

      On a positive note, when fireworks were banned, even California looked like this: https://youtu.be/tIvdcdogC6k

      There is hope.

      • Yeah, I think I agree. This remark is so ethically bankrupt, yet linguistically simple, that it deserves a permanent place in the ethics hall of shame. I can think of no useful place for it other than its own enumerated rationalization attributed directly to its author.

  3. But Man is just an animal. No special creation he. Just an upright naked ape. He is born that way and it is the greatest of moral outrages to even suggest he can change from the low beast he was born as. He must remain true to himself. That’s why we can’t arrest people for shitting in the street. Or is that White Supremacy? It’s hard to keep these straight.

  4. The mob that Speaker Pelosi brushes off with a wave of her liver-spotted hand and a botox-induced smile will someday do what it always does – eat its own. I try not to be overly harsh, but Speaker Pelosi is a despicable human being. She’s also an anachronism, and the mob knows it. She lacks the purity of ideology they crave, waffling between their insanity and her desire to still be relevant and maintain appeal. They hate luke-warm believers as much as they hate their enemies.

    So eventually, she will tossed aside, or tossed into the harbor with Christopher Columbus, or beheaded, or burned at the stake, or any number of less dramatic, but equally permanent, endings that have been handed out to far better people than her.

  5. The sad fact, Jack, is that the anarcho-left IS winning at this point. It’s also a fact that Nancy is a hero to the left. She isn’t quite Michelle Obama, but she’s stylish, adjusts her sunglasses just so, and has only slightly more patience with questions she views as stupid than Hillary did.

    As an Italian-American, I am disgusted with this organized attack on my heritage. I have marginal respect for public officials who remove Columbus statues out of concern for public safety (mmhmm) , since it at least leaves the possibility open that they’ll quietly be put back in place when this fever passes (maybe). I consider it insulting when officials say they are part of a dark or ugly past or evidence of white supremacy, since that’s not why any of them were put there. I consider it a betrayal and a dereliction of duty when mayors and governors just look the other way, or tell those charged with upholding the law to stand down and allow the destruction to take place. I don’t know what’s worse, the destruction of the statue in St. Paul (together with a few others that had not a thing to do with slavery),the destruction of the statue in Richmond, or this recent event. All of those statues were gifts to the municipalities from the Italian communities. They deserved better than to be destroyed and not have the local authorities lift a finger to prevent it, then shrug at it. Nancy’s was just the most dismissive shrug of them.

    The fact is that the Democratic Party is all-in with BLM and hopes to ride this wave to the White House. I think they’re going to do it, too. So what if it involves stomping on one group’s heritage because another one is angry. Get in line, Italian-Americans, you passed for white, now you need to step aside for the Indians.

    • I know you think that, and I believe you are being fooled by multiple factors. I believe the Left is similarly fooled. There’s a reason why so many models contradict the polls, which are, again meaningless at this point anyway. A lot can and will still happen, and unpredictable stuff. But you underestimate the number of pro- Americans, because the anti-Americans are louder. I could list 10 factors that point to a Trump victory in both the popular and the electoral vote…actually, there’s more like 20. The biggest one, perhaps, is that its really, really hard to defeat an incumbent, even lame ones. The two of recent vintage who lost were weak and had no real “base” at all. One had a third party challenge; other were challenged within their own parties. To say Reagan and Clinton were more formidable opponents than Biden will be is depressingly obvious, and the Crazies will keep pushing until they scare everyone to death—as the Democrats continue to give lip-service to the indefensible.

      I would not be surprised if Trump wins in a landslide.

      • From your keyboard to God’s ears…

        I know the deranged will go absolutely stark-raving mad if the President is re-elected, but they will riot if he loses as well, using his defeat as an excuse to “celebrate” and “vent their pent-up anger”, which means more burning, looting, and pillaging.

        If I’m going to have that, I guess I’d prefer it with a POTUS that is regularly forced to sleep in the bed he makes rather than the guy who is more likely to wet the bed.

        • Great OpEd by Barton Swaim in the WSJ:

          Will Democrats Accept Another Trump Victory?
          Every time they’ve lost since 1968, they’ve called it illegitimate—except for the 49-state landslides.

          I mean no disrespect to my liberal friends when I say, to borrow Mr. Biden’s phrase, that I am absolutely convinced that Democrats won’t accept the result if the Republican wins. I say this because, with only two exceptions, liberals have considered every GOP presidential victory in the last half-century more or less illegitimate. The two exceptions were Richard Nixon’s defeat of George McGovern in 1972 and Ronald Reagan’s defeat of Walter Mondale in 1984. Both were so lopsided as to make allegations of dirty-trickery a waste of effort. (Nixon’s re-election was tainted by crimes, but they didn’t contribute to his victory in any meaningful way.)

          After every other Republican presidential victory from 1968 forward, however, Democrats invented cockamamie theories that the GOP had won by illegitimate means…

          Swaim then proceeds to document every single Republican presidential victory since 1968 and explain how the Democrats cast them as illegitimate. Truly an OpEd for the ages.

        • I know the deranged will go absolutely stark-raving mad if the President is re-elected, but they will riot if he loses as well, using his defeat as an excuse to “celebrate” and “vent their pent-up anger”, which means more burning, looting, and pillaging.

          It is very hard to predict what will happen in November. Although my clairvoyance is notably accurate I find there is a wall of fog I can’t see through.

          But a reelaction of Trump will definitely drive the country and the opposition-movement into extreme reaction.

          If Biden should win there will defintely be celebration, and then the *Systems* them self will release narcotics (so to speak) to calm down the riled up masses. What the System wants (the collusion between government corporations academia media) is stability. They want their various systems to be restored. In a sense you could say that they desire people to *go back to sleep* and to carry on in their dream-life.

          In the event that the faction within America that stands with the Democrat Party now and whatever this *movement* is that we see operating should gain power I think that people will wonder What Next? They will ask OK, we have won back *our country* (as they say) and how what is going to happen?

          But will they riot in celebration? I don’t think that stands to reason. But what will happen then — this does stand to reason — is that *they* will feel it ncessary to completely destroy, deplatform and disempower the right-leaning opposition movement(s) that you here refer to as extremists (and as Valky says as ‘Nazis’). It will be imperative to try to destroy these people and groups and to drive them underground.

          In the Sixties, you will remember, America’s political police went after and decimated the so-called Black Liberation Movement when it became militant. I have asked Jack if he supports that. If he supports the use of National police to defeat perceived internal enemies. Steve of NY has indicated — no mincing words with him! — that he supports and believes in the use of international para-military forces to assassinate foreign leaders, and my question is “Fine, and will you also support para-military domenstic operations to defeat ‘internal enemies’?” Because one follows from the other it seems to me.

          It is a very good question — a necessary question. I am trying to alert you to the fact that the System itself cannot do other than to recognize the Crisis and to plan, from its perspective and according to its needs, how the fringes here will be defeated. Do you think that planning is not going on today?

          It is necessary (it seems to me) to defeat populism in a general sense. On one hand the Democrat expression of populism but on the other the nativistic, nationalist and ‘white supremacist’ (as it is called) manifestation of populism.

          That is the struggle, isn’t it? Could the object be anything different than an attempt to restore, to the degree possible, the status quo ante?

      • I could list 10 factors that point to a Trump victory in both the popular and the electoral vote…actually, there’s more like 20. The biggest one, perhaps, is that its really, really hard to defeat an incumbent, even lame ones. The two of recent vintage who lost were weak and had no real “base” at all. One had a third party challenge; other were challenged within their own parties. To say Reagan and Clinton were more formidable opponents than Biden will be is depressingly obvious, and the Crazies will keep pushing until they scare everyone to death—as the Democrats continue to give lip-service to the indefensible.

        I am wondering where people get the idea that you can win here with a “We Hate America” campaign.

      • I would not be surprised if Trump wins in a landslide.

        He may indeed win the next election. But he will not, and the *structure* he represents (if I can put it in this way) will not win what I think must be seen as ‘the demographic war’. Unless you imagine that the *colored masses* (I do not know how else, fairly, to describe those that are part of the demographic shift which is remaking and restructurring America except to use that term) will suddenly ‘turn Republican’ or become conservative. It does not seem likely.

        Therefore, and this is something that the Dissident Right speaks often about, in the course of time, despite Trump or any other figure, battles might be won by Republican-Conservative factions, but the larger war will be won by *them*.

        It is just an Opinion Piece but still there is an item in today’s Times which seems to state the intentions of the wider movement.

        The Left Is Remaking the World: “Defund the police” and “cancel rent” aren’t reforms, but paths to revolution.

        The uprisings in response to the killing of George Floyd are far different from anything that has come before. Not just because they may be the largest in our history, or that seven weeks in, people are still in the streets (even if the news media has largely moved on). But also because, for the last few years, organizers have been thinking boldly.

        They have been pushing demands — from “defund the police” to “cancel rent” to “pass the Green New Deal” — that would upend the status quo and redistribute power from elites to the working class. And now ordinary people are, too; social movements have helped spread these demands to a public mobilized by the pandemic and the protests.

        These movements are in conversation with one another, cross-endorsing demands as they expand their grass-roots bases. Cancel the rent campaigns have joined the call to defund the police. This month, racial, climate and economic justice organizations are hosting a four-day crash course on defunding the police.

        Each demand demonstrates a new attitude among leftist social movements. They don’t want to reduce police violence, or sidestep our environmentally unsustainable global supply chain, or create grace periods for late rent. These are the responses of reformers and policy elites.

        Instead, the people making these demands want a new society. They want a break from prisons and the police, from carbon and rent. They want counselors in place of cops, housing for all and a jobs guarantee. While many may find this naïve, polls, participation in protests and growing membership in social movement organizations show these demands are drawing larger and larger parts of the public toward a fundamental critique of the status quo and a radical vision for the future.

        Consider the appeal to defund and dismantle the police, championed by almost every major social movement organization on the left, from the Black Visions Collective to Mijente to the Sunrise Movement, and echoed on the streets.

        Defunding, part of a strategy to eventually abolish the police, challenges the prevailing logic of police reform: the idea that police brutality is caused by individual bad apples acting without sufficient oversight and training. This idea undergirds the familiar panoply of reforms: body cameras, community policing, implicit bias workshops. If officers are properly equipped and controlled, there will be less violence, its proponents argue — despite no significant evidence to back that up.

        Defunding suggests the problem is not isolated, nor is it a result of a few officers’ attitudes. It challenges the power, the resources and the enormous scope of the police. Whether they are responding to a mental health emergency or deployed to a protest, their training and tools are geared toward violence.

        The demand for defunding suggests, as the police and prison abolitionist Rachel Herzing often says, that the only way to reduce police violence is to reduce police officers’ opportunities for contact with the public. The protests have forced us to rethink state-sanctioned violence as our default response to social problems, to reconsider the hundreds of billions of dollars we have spent on prisons and the salaries of more than 800,000 sworn law enforcement officers.

        The uprisings have also expanded the space for a reckoning with the failures of liberal reforms and with the possibility of doing things in radically different ways. Tinkering and training cannot fix our reliance on police officers to deal with routine social problems through violence and the threat of it.

        The demand for defunding calls into question the fundamental premise of policing: that it produces safety. It urges us to take collective responsibility for collective care, repair and redress. It shifts our vantage point on persistent problems: for example, to guarantee housing for all rather than to continue to arrest and cage this country’s more than 567,000 homeless people.

        The call to defund the police is often accompanied by a call to shift resources elsewhere, to education, housing and health care. The pandemic has put on display the spectacular contradiction such appeals reveal. We have no guaranteed health care, wages, housing or food; we can’t even provide personal protective equipment. These failures have devastated Black communities in particular.

        But then, in response to Black Lives Matter protests, the police show up in high-tech gear and military-style vehicles to arrest, gas and bludgeon protesters, demonstrating where our tax dollars have gone instead. The demand for defunding shifts power and our imaginations away from the police and toward a society rooted in collective care for ordinary people. It brings into sharp relief who we have allowed ourselves to become and offers a vision for who we could be.

        Taking money away from the police is not the sole demand. Consider the push to cancel rent. It asks the state to abolish tenants’ obligations to pay their landlords each month. But rent is the product of a private contract about private property: the foundation of our social, economic and political order.

        So when organizers make the demand to cancel rent, they are conjuring up a state whose primary allegiance is to people’s needs instead of profit. The demand raises the possibility of a world where housing is an entitlement rather than a commodity. It aims to shift power from landlords to tenants, in the service of visions of housing for all.

        Or consider the environment. The Green New Deal does not merely call for less pollution. It requires that we restructure our economy so we can move to clean, renewable energy sources and net-zero greenhouse gas emissions.

        To get there, the Green New Deal calls for enormous investments in public transit, universal health care, free public college tuition and millions of high-wage green jobs. It emphasizes that everyone ought to carry out its projects, with a central role for working-class people of color. The bill’s vision is so counter to the actual practices of the state, and to the talking points of the Democratic and Republican Parties, you have to stretch your imagination to understand it. And that is the point.

        Organizers often call these demands “non-reformist reforms,” a term coined in the 1960s by the French socialist André Gorz. Reform on its own is a tired continuation of liberal politics and legalism, expert-driven and elite-centered. Even now, policing experts are grasping to turn the energy around ‘defund’ toward the same old reforms, and mayors are endorsing superficial budget cuts, diluting the bold demands.

        The way to respond is to stay focused on building mass movements of ordinary people who are serious about restoring and redistributing social wealth, as the Red Nation’s Red Deal puts it, to those who created it: “workers, the poor, Indigenous peoples, the global South, women, migrants, caretakers of the land, and the land itself.” Here, too, you see the connections — among Indigenous resistance, environmental justice and more.

        Leftist movements today see our crises as intersectional. Police violence, global warming and unaffordable housing are not disconnected, discrete problems; instead, they emerge from colonialism and capitalism. Organizers recall these histories, and tell stories of freedom struggles.

        And whatever you think of their demands, you have to be in awe of how they inaugurate a new political moment, as the left offers not just a searing critique, but practical ladders to radical visions. These capacious demands create the grounds for multiracial mass movements, our only hope for a more just future.

        The author, Amna Akbar, presents her radical vision in a talk called: Prison and Police Abolition. I think she demonstrates how far and how deeply Radical Left thinking has penetrated.

  6. If someone got their head blown off trying to topple such a statue would she shrug that off with a simple ” people do what people do”. I bet not and the amplitude of her complaint would increase as the number of demographic check boxes of the victim are assessed.

    First she would rail against gun violence to stifle “peaceful protests”. Then if the victim was black it would be white supremacists attack innocent blacks with evil guns. If the victim was a black woman or trans or queer that would really raise her ire.

  7. SanFranNan and statues and Baltimore…? Hmmmm.

    There happen to be some real REAL “reprehensible” statues she wants removed from the halls of Congress in our Nation’s Capital, statues she’s passed every work day (a reference I use advisedly) for the last 30 plus years.

    It Gets Worse

    05/02/1948, former Baltimore Mayor, the late Thomas D’Alesandro Jr.:
    Today, with our nation beset by subversive groups and propaganda which seeks to DESTROY OUR NATIONAL UNITY, we can look for inspiration to the lives of (Robert E.) Lee and (Thomas “Stonewall”) Jackson to REMIND US TO BE RESOLUTE AND DETERMINED IN PRESERVING OUR SACRED INSTITUTIONS” (bolds/caps/italics mine)

    Funniest thing: Not only is SanFranNan from Baltimore but, and this is where it gets GOOD, her maiden name is D’Alesandro.

    Hey; you don’t think…nah…couldn’t be…could it?

    • Paulie. Surely you know Nan’s a second (or third?) generation Dem machine pol from Baltimore, right? She’s pure “to the manor born” stuff. A political dowager princess. American Democrat royalty. And her kids all have government jobs.

        • Have you seen Nan’s gazillionaire developer husband has received Covid money from the Feds? (What a stupid thing for him to do.) These “loans” evidently don’t have to be repaid or spent on anything in particular. Our neighbors’ daughter received such a loan for her business. They didn’t need the “loan,” the company is doing just fine. They simply took the proceeds and put them in the bank, all hundred plus thousand of them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.