Maybe she lied about the torture thing. Maybe she didn’t.

But what possible motivation would neo-conservatives have to blast Nancy Pelosi for knowing about it, and lying (or not doing anything as a minority member of Congress in 2003) while not being angered that Bush/Cheney approved the whole thing to begin with?

In the GOP World, lying is worse than advocating torture? Or, more accurately- the possibility of lying is worse than advocating torture?

Here’s a novel idea for all you dimwits who are too dense/partisan/stupid to know that Pelosi was tangential and irrelevant during the period we are discussing, try reading a freaking book.

Bush & Cheney approved the torture AND lied about it, committing a double whammy.

Geez, people are so stupid sometimes.

PROTIP: Investigate the whole affair. Throw Bush & Cheney under the wheels of the historical bus, and yeah, we can open up a can of whoop-ass on Pelosi as well if she lied about it. But directing hatred at Nancy Pelosi, a minor figure in the 2003 Congress and a powerless pawn in the whole Republican led cabal, makes as much sense as blaming¬†the baby when Daddy doesn’t pay the light bill.

Advertisements