Loading Profile...
Pelosi/Gore Bait and Switch Perfomance
I am really upset that Gore was used and a bait and switch when Pelosi need to be answering questions. Who allowed this to happen? Why was Gore not given his own "surprise" slot? I am extremely disappointed that this dog and pony show took place. Shame on who organized this stunt. I love Al but this was supposed to be about asking Nancy the hard questions.
What the hell happened?
What the hell happened?
Follow this discussion to get notifications on your dashboard.
Create a customer community for your own organization
Plans starting at $19/month
-
Inappropriate?Maddie, Pelosi's schedule was not cut short, she was always scheduled for an hour and that's how long she spoke. We were able to get additional time to squeeze in Gore by taking it from other parts of the schedule.
It wasn't a stunt or a deliberate bait and switch, we were thrilled Gore could attend and we chose to accommodate his schedule.1 Comment
Add a comment
-
It seem rather short to me, but then I was watching live stream. -
Inappropriate?Additionally, this was the only time that Gore could make it (he had a high profile speech on Thursday in DC, more events in DC on Friday and he is returning there to do Meet the Press Sunday). It came up within the last week and this was the only way to work in the widely popular Al Gore.
And Speaker Pelosi's first question was about impeachment and the second question was about FISA. It is unlikely that a more lengthy session would have resulted in a different answer to those questions.1 Comment Add a comment
-
we will never know, will we?
-
-
Inappropriate?what was sadder is that NN didn't even try to make Nancy accountable. No follow up to get her back on track to answer the questions and the #1 question that was requested to be asked - was some how missing.1 Comment Add a comment
-
Some of you folks need to get the big picture. The question and answer "show" was not about the Q & A, it was about expanding the audience, pushing the progressive agenda and showing the "mainstream" media as well as the bloggies that Netroots is and will continue to be a power player in the game of politics. Many of you out there are so puffed up with self importance that you lose sight of the fact that you were able to get 2 of the heaviest hitters in American politics together with Gina on one stage to talk about substantive issues.
On another topic: The mariachi band, follow the leader to the party on Friday night was hilarious. Everyone followed like sheep. The mariachi band could have been going to a McCain rally at another bar and most of you wouldn't know the difference....baaaaaaaah ...... -
Inappropriate?Adam Bonin asked for feedback on the Speaker Pelosi/Al Gore event today. It was great! I would not change a thing! I know that some have found fault with the Speaker's responses. Remember, the Speaker is not only a politician, but also the leader of a diverse majority in a contentious body. Therefore, I doubt that her answers would have gotten more in depth with added persistence of questioning. Witness my follow-up question on FISA that I based on her initial response, asking for elaboration on how the new FISA would hold Bush accountable. I received a reply about holding future administrations accountable. That was not satisfying to me, but not surprising.1 Comment Add a comment
-
Let me clarify that I am not giving the speaker a pass. I agree with Nolan when he says, "It is unlikely that a more lengthy session would have resulted in a different answer to those questions." The one thing that I would actually change would be to allow for more follow-up questions TO BE ASKED. I got to ask mine more or less by luck.
-
Inappropriate?There is a larger issue that Netroots Nation needs to deal with - are we willing to hold elected Democrats accountable when they defy core Democratic Party principles - not to mention the Constitution?
And if so, how exactly do we do it?
Obviously Pelosi dodged and filibustered our questions, as will any Democrat who doesn't want to be held accountable.
What do we do then? Do we stop contributing to them? Do we recruit and support primary challengers?
This is a serious question we need to resolve - otherwise we're just going to keep getting screwed by our "leaders." -
Inappropriate?Accountability for dissatisfaction with an elected official's answers or views comes primarily in the form of elections. I don't think it would have served us to yell at Pelosi more, and asking more followup questions on topics she was clearly giving answers we didn't like probably wouldn't have gotten her to give better answers. To the extent that we remain dissatisfied with her, we should find, recruit, or support someone we like better to challenge her in an election.
I do *not* share the questioner's view about the forum with Pelosi. There are a few questions I think could've been better asked, but I don't think hammering her more or asking more followups would "hold her accountable".1 Comment Add a comment
-
I think one of the points made at the NN conference was that elections are NOT the sole way to express dissatsifaction or call for accountability from an elected official; that we should not just applaud her but confront her, otherwise you are treating elected officials like royalty, and they will act like royalty that don't have to answer to anyone. It can be a long time between elections.
-
Inappropriate?I didn't advocate "hammering her more" - I questioned whether we should use our donations as leverage for more responsiveness, or whether we should recruit primary challengers.
Currently BlueAmerica is most active in recruiting primary challengers, but they mainly jump into races late after challengers prove themselves according to traditional criteria through fundraising and campaign staffing. Unfortunately there are only a couple of races this cycle that meet their tough criteria - Edwards v. Wynn, Fallon v. Boswell, Thomas v. Barrow.
Is it time for the Netroots to pro-actively recruit primary challengers for 2010 against non-responsive incumbents - including Pelosi?2 Comments Add a comment
-
Bob - you didn't. The question we're all commenting on here, did.
-
I agree with you that we should find ways to keep them responsive. Money is a good way (for example, see the escrow fund established at Democrats.com).
However, in the absence of other concrete strategies, a real forum at the NN conference would have been one way to go for now.
Rawstory tried few months ago a similar strategy as askthespeaker.com, except it was live. It did not work (Pelosi showed up online a day later, the questions were carefully selected, etc.- in other words, this was not just one incident, but a pattern for Pelosi). -
Inappropriate?I am surprised that the organizers STILL defend the way Pelosi show was organized.
While we did not get any clear answer from her, she did achieve her goal. Look at how the mainstream media portrayed her appearance - a courageous politician coming at NN08... Ironically, it was only the conservative Washington Times that gave a correct picture of what happened Saturday morning.
The askthespeaker.com did nothing except giving us a false impression of a democratic debate.
I know it is hard to accept you've been used.
This was pathetic guys. -
Inappropriate?I agree. Pelosi got off way to easily. One thing I did learn is that she never answers a direct question directly. Damn she is good at putting lipstick on a pig. I guess in her position, in this do nothing congress, that is a survival skill. It still irritates the hell out of me. The Gore/Pelosi love fest thing was like a used car salesman's' meeting replete with back slapping congratulations and insincere smiles. Those who said Code Pink "disrupted" the talk must have been on mescaline because I thought the CP troop was incredibly mild mannered. Come to think of it, the whole experience might have been better ON mescaline instead of the BudLight one group handed out. Too bad Hunter Thompson is gone he could have called it "Fear and Loathing in Austin". -
Inappropriate?I already made my views known on this at Kos but I will say Pelosi is no "heavy hitter" based on her performance and if we need "stars" for the NN community to feel like we are taken seriously by the "MSM" we make fun of, something is wrong with this picture. Maybe it is because I am older, met a lot of "stars" in politics and entertainment over the years and am just not impressed as some of the younger organizers may be. If you are looking for the very people you don't respect to accept you, then you really haven't learned anything about being change agents.
I have been to conferences that get a lot more media attention than NN and they have a real progressive line up even including celebrity activists. If NN feels they need to get the corporate media attention to get sponsorship, then my suggestion would be do it, but with a better line up of speakers that matches the progressive agenda. You can find them in journalism, entertainment (actors, writers, directors), politics (Feingold, Sanders), the labor movement, the civil rights movement, the women's movement (what is Steinham up to?) etc. Think outside the box on this because as I expressed before, this was a big win for Pelosi and Bush enabling Democrats but not a win for the progressive movement imho.
I had no issue with Gore being there as he isn't currently in office. Pelosi should have only been there in the context of how Harold Ford was there...being grilled and smacked down by Kos or the community.
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE
