Nancy Pelosi’s Unethical Quote Of Her Career Proves What An Ethics Villain She Is…But We Knew That Already

“Who would ever [have] suspected that a creature like Donald Trump would become president of the United States, waving a list of judges that he would appoint, therefore getting the support of the far right and appointing those anti-freedom justices to the court?”

—Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi on CNN yesterday

Almost exactly four years ago, progressives, Democrats and the news media accused Donald Trump, then President, of racism because he referred to border-jumping MS-13 gang members as “animals.” At that time, Pelosi delivered this pious rebuke:

We believe some of us who are attracted to the political arena and to government and public service that we’re all God’s children. There’s a spark of divinity in every person on Earth and that we all have to recognize that as we respect the dignity and worth of every person. … And so when the president of the United States says about undocumented immigrants, ‘these aren’t people, these are animals,’ you have to wonder, does he not believe in the spark of divinity? The dignity and worth of every person? ‘These are not people, these are animals,’ the president of the United States. … Calling people ‘animals’ is not a good thing.

Of course it was a cheap shot by Pelosi, but she specialized in cheap shots during the Trump years. If one is going to call anyone an animal, the brutal, lawless MS-13 gang members are a good choice. Now, however, Pelosi calls a President of the United States a “creature,” which is even lower than “animal,” evoking slimy insects, reptiles, and this guy…

I can find no evidence of any Speaker ever using such an extreme and disrespectful term to describe a former President or, for that matter, any opposing party leader. It makes a mockery of calls for civility. It puts a target on Trump’s back: killing a creature isn’t murder, after all. The statement also is in direct contradiction of what Pelosi said she believed in 2018, and she was literally talking then about murderers, kidnappers and rapists.

This is so predictable I probably don’t need to write it: the mainstream media that freaked out over Trump calling gang members “animals” doesn’t think that the Speaker of the House referring to the previous President as a “creature” is newsworthy. Dana Bash (above) didn’t even blink when Pelosi charged across all previously honored lines of political rhetoric about a President. The only major news outlet that covered Pelosi’s statement was…well, guess.

Imagine if a GOP Speaker, or any Republican leader, called Barack Obama a “creature.” The news media would make sure he or she had to go into Federal protection.

But Pelosi’s astonishing attack—yes, I didn’t think even she could stoop this low—is worse than just a slur on a former POTUS. It’s an insult to anyone who voted for him or who supports him: they all supported or support a “creature.” Hitler could be fairly called a creature. Pol Pot. Stalin. Jeffrey Dahmer. Ted Bundy. Supporting any of these makes an individual a candidate for societal shunning, or worse.

That rhetoric is a deliberate attempt to bring political and social disagreements into the realm of fury, fear and violence. Nothing Donald Trump said about the 2020 election was as direct an endorsement of violence as Pelosi’s comments yesterday. If someone tries to shoot up the next Trump rally, it will be just moral luck—but it will also be moral luck if no one does. Pelosi’s rhetoric was irresponsible, reckless and dangerous.

Calling Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court “anti-freedom” is similarly unconscionable, as well as dishonest. Ruling, if it does, that abortion is an issue that needs to be settled by the democratic process is not, by any standards, “anti-freedom.” Nor has the freedom to kill an innocent ever been recognized as a constitutional right; when Roe was (wrongly) decided, the issue of a fetus’s humanity was barely considered.

Later in the same interview, Pelosi says, “Let’s not take our eye off the ball. The ball is this court, which is dangerous to the freedoms of our country.” So she also placed a target on the Court. What do good Americans do to those who are dangerous to their freedom?

Pelosi was not finished setting records for mendacity and irresponsible political discourse. She also said,

And I say this as a practicing, devout Catholic, five children in six years and one week, I don’t disrespect people’s views and how they want to live their lives. But I don’t think that it’s up to the Donald Trump appointees on the court or any politicians to make that decision for women.

Devout Catholic! You know, like Joe Biden. Here is what the Catholic Church says about abortion: “Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law.”

How can Pelosi claim to be a devout Catholic and yet advocate the pro-abortion deception that the only rights and lives involved are those of the women wanting to end their pregnancy?

She can because she is, herself, an ethics monster, a villain in a high place of power where she can do maximum damage to civility, politics, society and our democratic institutions.

 

24 thoughts on “Nancy Pelosi’s Unethical Quote Of Her Career Proves What An Ethics Villain She Is…But We Knew That Already

  1. I have thought for years that Pelosi was evil and unhinged. But it does not matter. The people of S.F. keep re-electing her, so obviously there are vast numbers of people that think highly of her. I don’t blame politicians, I blame the voters.

    • Agreed. I’m sure she set of a sea of bobbing heads among the media and the general population with those comments.

  2. Irish and Italian Catholics have historically been almost monolithically Democrats. I suspect the vast majority of today’s Catholics are Joe Biden and Nan Pelosi “devout” Catholics and still lean heavily Democrat. Steve-O can give us a better report from the field.

    • Irish and Italian Catholics were strongly Democratic for a very long time. They tended to live, initially, in the cities, which have always been heavily Democratic. They tended to be blue-collar, and the unions leaned and still lean heavily Democratic. When their own started to get into politics, they almost came exclusively from the Democratic Party: LaGuardia, DeSapio et al., from the Italians and Hugh Grant and the Kennedys, etc., on the Irish side. They used to say that the Catholic Church was simply the Democratic Party at prayer. This held true until approximately the early 1970s, when the Democratic Party embraced feminism and abortion, thinking that was the way to more votes. After all, each of those two ethnicities only accounts for about 7% of the population, and Catholics for only about 1/3 of Christian Americans. Women are half. In the decades leading up to this you also saw the Irish and Italians start to benefit from the rising standards of living throughout America. The days of Irish-populated tenements and brick=wall-and-iron-fire-escape Italian neighborhoods started to come to an end as they started to buy houses and move their families out to the suburbs. Some also started to become VERY successful, like the founder of Bank of Italy, which is now Bank of America. The liberal policies of the Democratic Party don’t look as good when you own your own house and you have a business going, which you know the Democrats want to tax and tax and tax to buy the votes of others. Many’s the Catholic who finally broke with the Democratic Party over their embrace of abortion. Now, the Catholic Left kept going, by all means, typified by the Berrigan brothers, etc., but most Catholics don’t lean that far left. The Boston Irish will always vote for Kennedy, but JFK would look at today’s Democratic Party and by like “WTF?”

      Oh, there are plenty of “cafeteria Catholics” who tailor their faith and pick and choose what they observe and look the other way on other things: “I think I’ll have some communion and forgiveness, but hold the pro-life stance and the Golden Rule,” as well as those who are super-strict about certain things, like those who preach the “seamless garment” doctrine that holds no abortion, no war, no death penalty, no anything that takes life. However, American Catholics are a pretty diverse bunch these days. There are plenty who think those two politicians are just swell, but just as many who think they are hypocrites.

      This Catholic has no use for either of them. I think Biden sees his faith the same way he sees all of his principles, to be used when it benefits t
      him, to be worked around or looked the other way on when it does not. Nancy Pelosi is a CINO – a Catholic In Name Only. She is about as pro-abortion as any politician in this country except maybe Andrew Cuomo, and is not living anything even close to a Catholic lifestyle. Between her lying, her bullying, her political manipulation, and her complete disregard for the truth on top of all this, she is a disgrace to the title Catholic. In fact, I’d call her possibly one of the greatest villains ever to bear that title. Godfrey de Bouillon sacked Jerusalem and massacred thousands of non-Christians in the name of Pope Urban II. Tomas de Torquemada burned and tortured thousands in the name of purifying Spain. The conquistadores, especially Pizarro, destroyed pre-Columbian America and robbed it of its treasures. None of them, however, bore the blood of 62 million unborn children on their hands proudly.

  3. I shall, however, continue to refer to members of the House of Representatives (of either party) as Congresscritters, and you can’t stop me.

  4. I honestly don’t know what she believes. I think her goal is to maintain herself in power, so she’s willing to ride the crazy train if it takes her to the emerald city.

    • I think her goal is to finish out this year – she knows she is going to be done as Speaker soon, and probably done altogether soon after that. She’s 82 and no one can live forever. She’s also slipping mentally and probably knows it. It’s not going to be too long before she joins Harry Reid and Ted Kennedy frying extra crispy in Hell.

        • There are a lot of moving parts, and many unthinkable things have been down already.

          My best guesses, in no particular order:
          -Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (net worse)
          -Kamala Harris (“forgoes” presidential ticket to run for Pelosi’s seat upon retirement; net improvement)
          -Adam Schiff (white guy, nomination doa)
          -First [Insert Here] – neutral

        • As bad, but worse would be impossible.

          Her calling Trump a creature is very telling. It summarizes the professional political class’s contempt for a rank amateur stealing the biggest prize right from beneath their noses. That’s the primary thing that drove them over the edge about Trump. That’s not supposed to happen. Not everyone can grow up to be president. You have to spend your life grubbing for money and sucking up to all sorts of people and following the advice of political consultants and doing absolutely nothing productive. You have to be approved of and endorsed by your peers who despise you for coming out on top. It’s a very diabolical profession. Outsiders need not apply. Trump’s treatment is meant as an object lesson to anyone who dares to mess with the levers of power without having had the starch (and any sense of self-respect) beat out of you beginning when you were running for class president in kindergarten.

  5. Regarding the complete lack of civility and encouragement of violence, there’s been much more direct statements and actions from prominent Democrats than this. A few of many examples:

    Former Attorney General Eric Holder:

    “Michelle [Obama] always says ‘When they go low, we go high.’ No. No. When they go low, we kick them”

    Sen. Jon Tester:

    “[the best way to beat Trump in 2020 is to] punch him in the face”

    And then the encouragement from Congresswoman Maxine Waters to harass members of Trump’s administration:

    “If you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”

    This is one behaviour that I’m happy to see the Republicans are not reciprocating.

    • Give it time. I would have no problem confronting any of these slugs and telling them EXACTLY what I thought of them. Bullies hate it when others do them by as they do.

  6. As a pretty devout Catholic myself, I am always torn when Biden and Pelosi (among other politicians) call themselves that. My first reaction is to laugh, and keep on laughing until someone throws me into the loony bin. The other is to throw up. They take not one single action that the Catholic faith says they are to do, politically. That is not to say that a Catholic cannot be a cafeteria Democrat. We are also called to be cafeteria Republicans.

    I’ll take a heaping helping of pro-life, hold the death penalty (except in extreme cases), the immigration issue needs to be a half helping, with the other half from the opposite side of the cafeteria, etc.

    The idea that a major force in a party, like a Speaker or President, is a devout and faithful Catholic is laughable…or otherwise.

  7. As a Catholic cleric I cringe every time Pelosi, Biden and their ilk describe themselves as Devout. Devotion and outward piety is not the definitive characteristic of the Catholic faithful. What defines us is our adherence to our baptismal identity as a disciple of Christ living out or mission to be a holy people, a people set apart, a prophetic people.

  8. When someone goes through RCIA (the Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults) and joins the Catholic Church, one thing he is asked is whether he gives full faith and assent to the teachings of the Catholic Church. If he cannot give assent to certain Church teachings, he should not enter the Church, pure and simple. On the flip side, what do we make of someone who has been part of the Church, say from Baptism, and does not assent to certain teachings of the Church? As long as they do not formally renounce being Catholic, they are still Catholic. But they are certainly risking the danger of schism or heresy. And it is a danger, both because it places one’s own soul at risk, and also because it is a scandal that can lead others astray.

    In my opinion, it one cannot give full assent to the teaching of the Catholic Church (and that does not mean having questions or reservations on some topics), one should formally leave the Catholic Church. It would be actively professing a lie, otherwise, and breaking the commandment against bearing false witness.

    That Pelosi does not renounce being Catholic has only two feasible explanations that I can think of. One, she actually is ignorant of what the Catholic Church teaches on abortion, and has made an adamant refusal to find out. Two, she feels there is some status she gains by being Catholic, and so wants to hold onto that association. The first I find implausible, because surely — surely! — she can’t be that blind. Thus we have the second explanation, but then I wonder what status she feels she gains by professing to be Catholic. Are there enough people who would refuse to vote for her because she declared herself Protestant or Hindu or a none?

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.