"This Week" with Christiane Amanpour

So, in an extreme rarity, due to some issues my wife was having, I was not able to attend worship this morning. So I did some reading, and kinda halfway listened to a show that was being advertised as what you could call actual journalism on ABC. That would be "This Week" with Christiane Amanpour. Curious as to whether it would be as advertised, I especially paid attention when her first guest was Nancy Pelosi. Of course you can find videos for it on the ABC website, but I'll just link to the transcript here. Now, as far as Amanpour goes, she did seem to be about as neutral as they come. Perhaps, I just didn't have time to catch bias, but she asked fair questions. On the other hand, I'd like to point out a few things Pelosi said in the interview. Perhaps I'll interjects some comments.

We are there, we've taken an oath to defend the constitution and therefore the American people.

Nothing like lip-service . . .

In my visits to afghanistan, the last time i was there was over mother's day weekend to visit the troops///and the four metrics that we have always used year in and year out on these visits have been about security. And the military tells us this cannot be won militarily solely.

Secondly, governance and ending corruption.....

So what we would like to see is for President Karzai be a more reliable, a stronger partner, ending the corruption, increasing -- improving the governance.

Yes, because it's so easy for corrupt leaders to teach others how to stop being corrupt!

Now to one that really requires seeing the conversation. Here goes:

AMANPOUR: Let's go to something much closer to home right now at the moment and that is the ethics conundrum with Representative Rangel.

How does your affection and your respect for him as a colleague square with what's going on right now and what you said and declared, that this is going to be the -- the -- the most ethical Congress ---- that you're going to drain the swamp of any kind of wrongdoing and corruption, etc.?

PELOSI: When I came in, I said we're draining the swamp. And we did. We have passed the most sweeping ethics reform in the history of the Congress. Any personal respect and affection we may have for people makes us sad about the course of events, but we have to pull the high ethical standard and none of our personalities is more important than that.

AMANPOUR: Can you see Congressman Rangel ever returning as chairman of the Ways and Means or in any position of leadership in -- in the House?

PELOSI: Well, the -- the Ethics Committee is working its will and

AMANPOUR: No matter what happens?

PELOSI: it's an elementary discussion, because what we have done is to wait and see what the Committee decides. I respect what they do. I'm totally out of the loop. It is independent. It is confidential, classified, secret, whatever. We don't know what it is. But we do respect the work that the members of the Committee do.

Draining the swamp? Somehow I haven't seen that in the last 18 months. More like filling it up. And what's all this about the Ethics Committee working its will. How about the will of the people, who are the only ones who really care about draining the swamp that is DC. Independent? Confidential, Classified? Excuse me, but it seems like something should be a little more public about this, especially considering that this Congress hasn't exactly been honorable.

Then in later discussion about the Bush tax cuts expiring, Pelosi doesn't seem to know what she's talking about:

Well, the -- the tax cuts for the wealthiest -- of the $250,000 and above -- were the -- the Bush initiative. I dont see any reason why we should renew a tax cut that only gives a tax cut to the wealthiest people in America, increases the deficit and doesn't create jobs.

That doesn't make any sense.

No, the only thing that doesn't make any sense is your ignorance, Madame Speaker. However, it does appear that she has one thing figured out:

This isn't about inter-party bickering. This is about a major philosophical difference as to whose side you're on.

She's right there, it is a major philosophical difference. On the side of the people (and Constitution) or one the side of government and totalitarian rule. Too bad what she says a few sentences before shows that she is still delusional (or just lying) about where she and her party stands, especially given the outright contempt they've shown for the people.

The Republicans are here for the special interests, we're here for the people's interests.

I don't know about you, but I vote for not just draining the swamp, but for removing the figurative corpses of those who were elected to be representatives of the people, but apparently died and became self-centered government zombies. Remember in November, this one and all that follow.