Pelosi, as Speaker of the House, had no business representing America in Syria. It is obvious that her intentions were to show a divided government and undermine the position of the United States in the middle east. Pelosi is really full of herself. My only question is why wasn’t Jack Murtha with her.
Oh, and leave it to Jimmy Carter to endorse the trip. He knows a lot about dealing with Iran and others in the middle east, doesn’t he?
Update: Pelosi is blasted by the liberal Washington Post: Ouch!
Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) offered an excellent demonstration yesterday of why members of Congress should not attempt to supplant the secretary of state when traveling abroad. After a meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in Damascus, Ms. Pelosi announced that she had delivered a message from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that “Israel was ready to engage in peace talks” with Syria. What’s more, she added, Mr. Assad was ready to “resume the peace process” as well. Having announced this seeming diplomatic breakthrough, Ms. Pelosi suggested that her Kissingerian shuttle diplomacy was just getting started. “We expressed our interest in using our good offices in promoting peace between Israel and Syria,” she said.Only one problem: The Israeli prime minister entrusted Ms. Pelosi with no such message. “What was communicated to the U.S. House Speaker does not contain any change in the policies of Israel,” said a statement quickly issued by the prime minister’s office. In fact, Mr. Olmert told Ms. Pelosi that “a number of Senate and House members who recently visited Damascus received the impression that despite the declarations of Bashar Assad, there is no change in the position of his country regarding a possible peace process with Israel.” In other words, Ms. Pelosi not only misrepresented Israel’s position but was virtually alone in failing to discern that Mr. Assad’s words were mere propaganda.
Two weeks ago Ms. Pelosi rammed legislation through the House of Representatives that would strip Mr. Bush of his authority as commander in chief to manage troop movements in Iraq. Now she is attempting to introduce a new Middle East policy that directly conflicts with that of the president. We have found much to criticize in Mr. Bush’s military strategy and regional diplomacy. But Ms. Pelosi’s attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it is foolish.
WASHINGTON (CNN) — Former President Jimmy Carter expressed his support for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Syria, rejecting White House criticism of the visit.
“I was glad that she went,” Carter said Wednesday. “When there is a crisis, the best way to help resolve the crisis is to deal with the people who are instrumental in the problem.”
Pelosi arrived in Syria on Tuesday, in an attempt to open direct dialogue with Syria’s leader, something President Bush opposes. Pelosi also discussed with President Bashar Al-Assad concerns about Syria’s support for militant groups. (Full story)
Bush on Tuesday called the trip “counterproductive” and said it would send mixed signals.
“Photo opportunities and/or meetings with President Assad lead the Assad government to believe they’re part of the mainstream of the international community, when, in fact, they’re a state sponsor of terror,” he said at a news conference in the White House’s Rose Garden.
Carter, however, said there was “no threat” that the Democratic speaker’s visit would dilute the United States’ ability to speak to Syria with one voice.
Pelosi defended her visit, saying her talks with Al-Assad focused only on topics on which she and Bush agree.
“On the issues that we set before the president (of Syria),” she said, “there is no division among us or between our congressional delegation in Congress and the president of the United States.” (Full story)
Check out Hot Air