The Unbelievable Hypocrisy Of Nancy Pelosi

[JenyEliza]

Nancy Pelosi has proved often that she's not the brightest tool in the shed...but this latest statement shows once again that the rules she and other Democrats in Washington push down our throats only apply to targeted groups.....not to them.

This is a video of her instructing Catholic priests to teach about amnesty from the pulpit.

Excuse me???

What happened to the Liberal mantra of "Separation of Church and State"?? Doesn't she know what she's saying?

Does this imaginary separation only apply to Christians?

Yeah, she's a sickening hypocrite, a grotesque caricature of Christian decency. Catholics in good standing aren't supposed to stand in support of destroying human life.

Here's the ugly truth though... the Roman Catholic Church is big with hispanics, and just like Nancy, they are going to pander to them for support. It will not be until our own American citizens of hispanic decent DEMAND that our immigration laws be enforced, that Democrats and the Church's hierarchy back down.

Personally, I've stopped giving them money. While I understand that the Church has no borders... it needs to stay out of our internal politics.

I am a Catholic (cradle) in good standing. I stopped giving the Church my money several years ago when the Priest molestation scandal first came to light. Instead I donate my time and talents to the Church, but NO money.

I am protesting on two counts...on behalf of the children that were molested (I was not one of them, though there are several who claim they were molested at my Catholic school), and also because of the Church's position on ILLEGAL immigration.

This is what the Church understands best...when the Faithful vote with their checkbook. I always put a note in my offering envelope explaining WHY there is no money in there, and WHY there will be NO MORE MONEY until the Church gets its act together.

For now, they'll have to settle for my time and talents....they are undeserving of my treasure.

Jeny

 

[Liability]

Does anyone really grasp what would happen if we DID lock up or send home every illegal immigrant?

Maybe. Maybe not. And that includes you and your fevered imagination.

But even if there were some adverse impacts, is it your argument that they would somehow justify tolerating such massive evasions of our immigrations laws?

 

[Samson]

Does anyone really grasp what would happen if we DID lock up or send home every illegal immigrant?

There was a movie about it: "World Without Mexicans?"

A lot of people in the public services sector would lose their jobs? Fewer Emergency room admissions, prisoners, teachers, social workers?

 

[California Girl]

Pelosi has simply lost her mind. The botox has infiltrated, or it's drug-induced dementia.

Is there any hard evidence that Pelosi ever had a mind to lose? Far as I can tell, that woman was born stupid and has made it her life's mission to remain so.

 

[Samson]

Pelosi has simply lost her mind. The botox has infiltrated, or it's drug-induced dementia.

Is there any hard evidence that Pelosi ever had a mind to lose? Far as I can tell, that woman was born stupid and has made it her life's mission to remain so.

Her state doesn't have much to choose from as far as representation is concerned......all the actors that have performed with apes are dead, or dieing, or born in Austria.

 

[California Girl]

Pelosi has simply lost her mind. The botox has infiltrated, or it's drug-induced dementia.

Is there any hard evidence that Pelosi ever had a mind to lose? Far as I can tell, that woman was born stupid and has made it her life's mission to remain so.

Her state doesn't have much to choose from as far as representation is concerned......all the actors that have performed with apes are dead, or dieing, or born in Austria.

I'm ashamed of the 'representatives' for my state. It used to be such a cool place.... now, it's a dump - filled with drooling idiots who struggle to spell California. They've made stupidity into an artform.

 

[Samson]

Is there any hard evidence that Pelosi ever had a mind to lose? Far as I can tell, that woman was born stupid and has made it her life's mission to remain so.

Her state doesn't have much to choose from as far as representation is concerned......all the actors that have performed with apes are dead, or dieing, or born in Austria.

I'm ashamed of the 'representatives' for my state. It used to be such a cool place.... now, it's a dump - filled with drooling idiots who struggle to spell California. They've made stupidity into an artform.

All the cool people moved to Idaho, Montanna, and Colorado.

 

[The T]

Does anyone really grasp what would happen if we DID lock up or send home every illegal immigrant?

Maybe. Maybe not. And that includes you and your fevered imagination.

But even if there were some adverse impacts, is it your argument that they would somehow justify tolerating such massive evasions of our immigrations laws?

True. And why are some tolerating this invasion by these people?

 

[Samson]

Does anyone really grasp what would happen if we DID lock up or send home every illegal immigrant?

Maybe. Maybe not. And that includes you and your fevered imagination.

But even if there were some adverse impacts, is it your argument that they would somehow justify tolerating such massive evasions of our immigrations laws?

True. And why are some tolerating this invasion by these people?

Because they are poor......

they need more government services......

The Feds will give more money to places that have more poor people......

Which justifies larger budgets for government services.

Keeping Bureaucracy Growing is the Mission of all Bureaucrats (it doesn't matter which party is in power).

 

[George Costanza]

I am strongly opposed to the expression of political viewpoints from the pulpit. It has less to do with separation of church and state and more to do with the fact that I just find it offensive when a cleric, who is supposed to be a "father to all" in his parish, seeks to impose a certain political view on the people who attend his church. What if you don't agree with the view being expressed? How do you then feel about that particular church?

Having said that - I am wondering if the "view" here involved is a truly political one. The kind of political opinions which I object to from the pulpit are those about who or what to vote for in an upcoming election. Taking a stand on an important, public issue - I'm not so sure that qualifies as a "political" viewpoint.

 

[California Girl]

Maybe. Maybe not. And that includes you and your fevered imagination.

But even if there were some adverse impacts, is it your argument that they would somehow justify tolerating such massive evasions of our immigrations laws?

True. And why are some tolerating this invasion by these people?

Because they are poor......

they need more government services......

The Feds will give more money to places that have more poor people......

Which justifies larger budgets for government services.

Keeping Bureaucracy Growing is the Mission of all Bureaucrats (it doesn't matter which party is in power).

 

[Samson]

I am strongly opposed to the expression of political viewpoints from the pulpit. It has less to do with separation of church and state and more to do with the fact that I just find it offensive when a cleric, who is supposed to be a "father to all" in his parish, seeks to impose a certain political view on the people who attend his church. What if you don't agree with the view being expressed? How do you then feel about that particular church?.

Um, change churches?

My guess is that the Grand Inquisitor would understand.

Having said that - I am wondering if the "view" here involved is a truly political one. The kind of political opinions which I object to from the pulpit are those about who or what to vote for in an upcoming election. Taking a stand on an important, public issue - I'm not so sure that qualifies as a "political" viewpoint.

As much as we Americans hope to separate Church and State, the reality is, particularly for the Catholic Church, which actually governed Europe for over a thousand years, and even has its own country (Vatican City), there is no separation.

 

[California Girl]

I am strongly opposed to the expression of political viewpoints from the pulpit. It has less to do with separation of church and state and more to do with the fact that I just find it offensive when a cleric, who is supposed to be a "father to all" in his parish, seeks to impose a certain political view on the people who attend his church. What if you don't agree with the view being expressed? How do you then feel about that particular church?

Having said that - I am wondering if the "view" here involved is a truly political one. The kind of political opinions which I object to from the pulpit are those about who or what to vote for in an upcoming election. Taking a stand on an important, public issue - I'm not so sure that qualifies as a "political" viewpoint.

And yet, when the Church took a stand on the public funding of abortion (ie in the healthcare bill), Pelosi et al screamed at them about separation of Church and State. You cannot have it both ways.... that bitch is just unbelievably hypocritical. When it suits her agenda, it's fine, when it does not, it's an outrage. It's laughable.

 

[JenyEliza]

Does anyone really grasp what would happen if we DID lock up or send home every illegal immigrant?

There was a movie about it: "World Without Mexicans?"

A lot of people in the public services sector would lose their jobs? Fewer Emergency room admissions, prisoners, teachers, social workers?

Hardly likely with more than 10% of the US population out of work.

 

[mudwhistle]

Maybe. Maybe not. And that includes you and your fevered imagination.

But even if there were some adverse impacts, is it your argument that they would somehow justify tolerating such massive evasions of our immigrations laws?

True. And why are some tolerating this invasion by these people?

Because they are poor......

they need more government services......

The Feds will give more money to places that have more poor people......

Which justifies larger budgets for government services.

Keeping Bureaucracy Growing is the Mission of all Bureaucrats (it doesn't matter which party is in power).

That single-minded approach is what worked to get Dems in the majority.

The two parties couldn't be much more different but because the GOP had to rebuild a decimated military, fight two wars, repair and refurbish hundreds of military installations that were left to crumble, spend billions on cleanup after natural disasters...the GOP is accused of being big spenders.

And then the Dems come in and out spend the GOP 3 to 1 and get a pass.

Makes sense.

And once the Dems lose the majority after all of this wasteful spending on entitlements and bailouts for Greece and other countries....the cycle will repeat itself.

 

[The T]

Maybe. Maybe not. And that includes you and your fevered imagination.

But even if there were some adverse impacts, is it your argument that they would somehow justify tolerating such massive evasions of our immigrations laws?

True. And why are some tolerating this invasion by these people?

Because they are poor......

they need more government services......

The Feds will give more money to places that have more poor people......

Which justifies larger budgets for government services.

Keeping Bureaucracy Growing is the Mission of all Bureaucrats (it doesn't matter which party is in power).

Yep. But it's rather obvious to most of us. (Thus my comment regarding invasion. That's what this is and has been).

 

[The T]

I am strongly opposed to the expression of political viewpoints from the pulpit. It has less to do with separation of church and state and more to do with the fact that I just find it offensive when a cleric, who is supposed to be a "father to all" in his parish, seeks to impose a certain political view on the people who attend his church. What if you don't agree with the view being expressed? How do you then feel about that particular church?

Having said that - I am wondering if the "view" here involved is a truly political one. The kind of political opinions which I object to from the pulpit are those about who or what to vote for in an upcoming election. Taking a stand on an important, public issue - I'm not so sure that qualifies as a "political" viewpoint.

And yet, when the Church took a stand on the public funding of abortion (ie in the healthcare bill), Pelosi et al screamed at them about separation of Church and State. You cannot have it both ways.... that bitch is just unbelievably hypocritical. When it suits her agenda, it's fine, when it does not, it's an outrage. It's laughable.

They use religion/religious entities only when it suits their goal(s). Ever been chastised by a LIB whom cites Jesus Christ (WWJD) when you know damned well they could give a rat's ass about Jesus?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Does anyone really grasp what would happen if we DID lock up or send home every illegal immigrant?

Maybe. Maybe not. And that includes you and your fevered imagination.

But even if there were some adverse impacts, is it your argument that they would somehow justify tolerating such massive evasions of our immigrations laws?

No, that's not my argument at all.

Which, by the way, I stated pretty clearly in the same post you quoted.

I just think both sides should be examined.

 

[Liability]

Does anyone really grasp what would happen if we DID lock up or send home every illegal immigrant?

Maybe. Maybe not. And that includes you and your fevered imagination.

But even if there were some adverse impacts, is it your argument that they would somehow justify tolerating such massive evasions of our immigrations laws?

No, that's not my argument at all.

Which, by the way, I stated pretty clearly in the same post you quoted.

I just think both sides should be examined.

You probably don't even realize that you are babbling.

Both sides of WHAT should be "examined?"

What "side" is there other than that any sovereign has the absolute right to protect its own borders and limit access of others into it upon such terms and conditions as to the sovereign shall seem most prudent?

If I want to wander across some other nation's fucking border without their ok, do you imagine I won't get my ass arrested?

"Oh gee. Come right on in. Ignore our laws. Just feel right at home."

Yeah.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Maybe. Maybe not. And that includes you and your fevered imagination.

But even if there were some adverse impacts, is it your argument that they would somehow justify tolerating such massive evasions of our immigrations laws?

No, that's not my argument at all.

Which, by the way, I stated pretty clearly in the same post you quoted.

I just think both sides should be examined.

You probably don't even realize that you are babbling.

Both sides of WHAT should be "examined?"

What "side" is there other than that any sovereign has the absolute right to protect its own borders and limit access of others into it upon such terms and conditions as to the sovereign shall seem most prudent?

If I want to wander across some other nation's fucking border without their ok, do you imagine I won't get my ass arrested?

"Oh gee. Come right on in. Ignore our laws. Just feel right at home."

Yeah.

Jesus fucking Christ, can you read?

I'm NOT arguing for amnesty. I'm NOT supporting illegal immigration.

Actions have consequences, that's all I was trying to explore. Not every post on this board is a statement - I'm asking a question.

You zealots are some damn insecure.