Monday,
December 3, 2012. Chaos and violence continue, Nouri uncorks the crazy
and threatens his political rivals, tensions between Erbil and Baghdad
increase, the Peshmerga (and their tanks) station themselves around
Kirkuk, violence increased in November, the Democratic Party needs to
address the issue of Ranking Member on the House Veterans Affairs
Committee because Corrine Brown and her non-stop defense of and excuses
for the VA isn't going to cut it with veterans, and more.
This evening Hurriyet news reported
that Kurdistan Regional Government Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani is
"accusing Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of continually suspecting
conspiracies against him" and quotes Barzani stating, "We want to solve
issues through dialogue, not through tanks or F-16s. The problems with
al-Maliki are not personal. Most Iraqi factions support us." What is
Barzani talking about? Nouri has created so many crises in Iraq that it
can get confusing. This one stems from Iraq's law of the land.
Iraq's
Constitution was written in 2005. At the time of the writing -- and
still today -- there were areas in dispute. Three provinces are part of
the semi-autonomous Kurdish region. In addition, Kurds feel they have a
right to other areas including oil-rich Kirkuk. The central government
out of Baghdad also feels it has a claim to Kirkuk. What you have is
two sides attempting to make historical claims to one piece of land.
That will never resolve the issue, as the writers of the Constitution
knew. So they created Article 140. It calls for a census and a
referdum to resolve disputed areas. Nouri al-Maliki is installed by the
US government as prime minister of Iraq in the spring of 2006. Article
140 is supposed to be implemented no later than the end of 2007.
Despite
having had six years to implement Article 140 (and despite forever
promising he was just about to), Nouri has refused to implement it.
The climate was not just one of mistrust on this issue, it was one of
Nouri refusing to follow the law. And he made it worse a few months ago
by sending Iraqi forces (Tigris Operation Command) into these disputed
areas. The Kurds fear that he is doing that to 'resolve' the dispute by
force.
The dispute could have ended last week and it stood a serious chance. Dropping back to Thursday's snapshot:
Tensions
continue between the KRG and the Baghdad-based central government over
Nouri sending in the Tigris Operation Command forces into disputed
regions, as Martin Kobler noted today when addressing the UN Security
Council. In an interesting development, Mohammad Sabah (Al Mada) reports
Nouri is said to be angry because his generals are not providing him
with details and summeries of the ongoing negotiations with the Kurdish
Peshmerga officials. If Nouri is really being kept out of the loop,
that says a great deal about how much his power has faded in the last
weeks. Even more surprising since the Peshmerga has published the main points the two sides agreed upon:
1.
Forming an operational mechanism, principles of cooperation and joint
committees in the disputed regions. The joint operations in the disputed
regions of Kurdistan will remain unchanged but the mechanism of
operation will be revitalized between the federal forces and the forces
of the Kurdistan Region.
2.
The meetings of all the joint operations committees will be rescheduled
to once a month. This will be increased if deemed necessary, especially
for meetings of the SAC.
3.
The location of the meetings and coordination for the meetings will be
organized by the command of the Iraqi Armed Forces who will work as a
coordinator for the work of the committees, especially the SAC.
4.
A follow-up procedure will be conducted for the work and the decisions
of the joint committees and punitive measures will be taken against any
defaulting party or individual.
5.
Any party or individual will be punished in case of reporting
misleading information to their superiors in order to create problems
and crisis at any level.
6.
The SAC must be immediately informed about any problems that arise in
the disputed areas in order to immediately work on solving them.
7.
The agreements must be honored and the commanders, officials and
individuals who violate the terms of the agreements will be punished.
8.
Forming a quick mechanism to pull out all the forces of both sides that
were mobilized to the region after Nov. 16, 2012. Pulling out these
forces must be transparent, truthful and supervised by the supreme
committee members after the consent of the SMC.
9.
Reconsidering the decision of forming operations command in the region,
especially the Tigris Operations Command, and giving back the authority
of security in Kirkuk to the police, Asayish and internal forces.
This
could have been the first step in resolving that crisis. Instead,
Nouri nixed the deal and uncorked the crazy. And he was spewing it on
Saturday. Al Mada reported
the prime minister made a public statement in which he attacked
Shi'ites, Sunnis and Kurds, stated that those attempting to withdraw
confidence for him should be warned and floated "arrests" as part of his
threats. It was a very disturbing speech. In the speech he made a
demand that everyone attend a meet-up. All Iraq News notes
that the Kurdistan Alliance has already: They won't be attending. They
issued a statement explaining Nouri has refused to be practical and
resolve the crisis (he created). While the Kurds willingly met with
Speaker of Parliament Osama al-Nujaifi in good faith, Nouri blew off the
exchange. When the Iraqi military and the Peshmerga came up with a
14-point plan to resolve the latest crisis (created by Nouri), Nouri
said it would not be allowed.
Dar Addustour added
that Nouri declared in his speech that the Kurds don't believe in the
Constitution and that efforts at a no-confidence vote in him will be
met by actions that have never been taken before. In addition, he
announced he wants to arrest members of Parliament who raised the
torture of Iraqi women in prisons. He also made a number of statements
involving President Jalal Talabani which appear to be that the same
people who put him (Nouri) in power put Jalal in power and if Nouri goes
down so does Jalal. Al Rafidayn emphasized the attacks on Jalal Talabani in Nouri's remarks. Today the Iraq Times reports MP
Amir al-Kanani, with Moqtada al-Sadr's political bloc, states that
Nouri's speech was in response to the loss of popularity for his
political party Dawa as a result of his attempts to end the food ration
card system and as a result of the Russian arms deal that fell apart.
Dawa is Nouri's political party. His political slate that he ran with
in 2010 is State of Law. Provincial elections are supposed to take
place in April which could be behind any concern about the popularity of
Dawa. All Iraq News notes that State of Law was supposed to meet this evening in Nouri's offices to prepare their strategies for the upcoming elections.
Al Mada notes
that the religious authorities in Najaf are said to be troubled by the
escalation of the conflict. They're not the only ones troubled. Wael Grace (Al Mada) notes
that the actions are troublinging investors and would-be investors
dismaying the business community in Iraq. Also watching the situation
closely is the government of Turkey. Rudaw reports,
"Turkish officials say they are following recent tensions between the
Kurdistan Region and the Iraqi government with concern." Alsumaria reports
Iraqiya head Ayad Allawi declared today that Nouri al-Maliki's actions
have been an assault on the Kurdish region. It's noted that Allawi
has spoken via telephone with both Barzani and Talabani about the issue
already today. The Iraq Times notes
that Allawi is scheduled to visit Erbil on Wednesday. Iraqiya is the
political slate that came in first in the 2010 parliamentary elections.
How
serious is the above? Not at all serious to the reporters covering the
US State Dept. Despite the fact that a press conference was held
today, no one asked spokesperson Mark Toner one question about Iraq.
In violence, Alsumaria reports a Kirkuk mortar attack injured a police officer. Also in Kirkuk, Alsumaria reports
a 20-year-old man shot dead his 2 brothers and 1 sister behind the Dawa
Party's offices and he shot his parents as well but they were left
injured, not dead. All Iraq News notes 1 person was shot dead in Mousl. Friday ended the month of November. Iraq Body Count counted 244 deaths from violence in the month. AFP reports
the government ministries (under)count 166 deaths. The outlets notes
this is an increase from the government's claims of only 144 deaths in
October.
As noted above, Nouri's threatening
to arrest members of Parliament who spoke publicly about the abuse Iraqi
women are suffering in prisons. The BRussels Tribunal has a very important article on this torture.
We're going to highlight a little from their report each snapshot this
week and hopefully include the entire thing that way. Here they are on
the starting point:
The
torture journey starts when security forces raid and search the houses,
through random raids or ordered raids. The Fourth Commander of the
Second Brigade – Team 6, Major Jumaa Al-Musawi, has confirmed this
information. This man has a criminal record, and he was assigned to this
position by the American Forces during their first training courses in
intelligence gathering. He used to live in Al-Thawra (now called Sadr
City) / Sector 87. In his own words:
"When
we receive the raid and search orders from the Brigade Intelligence, we
usually start with a little party and drink alcohol, or take some
drugs. We choose the most cruel soldiers to carry out such operations.
The first thing we do is to lock the men and youngsters in a room, and
the women and children in another room. We start to steal what can be
taken fast, like jewelry, and we mess up the house, like throwing the
women's underwear here and there; some soldiers even steal some of this
underwear. After that, we start to do a body search on the women, and
having fun touching their private parts or breasts. We threaten them to
arrest the men in the house when they refuse to be touched. If those
women are pretty, we usually rape them immediately, and leave the house
when we find no weapons or incriminating material. In case we find some
weapons, every man and youngster in the house will be arrested, and if
there are no men at home, we arrest all the women instead. This is
totally according to the orders we receive."
What
follows is one of many stories about the crimes committed by these
corrupt creatures, who shamelessly brag about their misdeeds to each
other. Al-Musawi and his assistant Lt. Rafid Al-Darraji (another
criminal who was imprisoned in Abu-Ghraib and sentenced to death, but
was released by the Americans, using him as a guardian, along with their
own guard dogs, giving him the Lt. rank. He used to live in Al-Nuariyah
District. Here is what they state:
"In
July 2006, we received an order to raid and search the house of one of
the fabric merchants in Karradah (his name is not mentioned). When we
reached his house at 1:00 a.m., we didn't find the man, we only found
his wife and his 17 year old son. During the search we found a rifle,
which – according to our law – is permitted for the personal protection
of civilians. But we threatened the woman that we would arrest her son
if she didn't let us rape her. So, we handcuffed the son and locked him
in a room, and one soldier after the other raped the lady in the other
room. The other soldiers stole what they could find, then we headed to a
well-known brothel in Al-Doura District in Um Alaa's house to enjoy the
rest of the night there."
They
continue: "The first thing we do when an arrested woman is being
transported to the detention location, is that every part of her body is
touched by all the soldiers in the vehicle, while using dirty language.
When we reach the detention facility, we leave her in the investigation
room, supervised by the intelligence officer and his assistants. They
directly take all her clothes off, blindfold her, handcuff her, then the
intelligence officer starts to rape her with his assistant. And later
they ask her some questions: if she's guilty or innocent and so on. Then
they blackmail her, saying that she should be cooperative and give
important information about the District where she lives, otherwise they
would distribute photos of her while she was naked and being raped.
They would accuse her of false charges if she would file a complaint
about harrassment and torture. If she receives a "guilty" verdict, she
usually stays in the same location for a period of one to three months,
in order to finish the procedures of her "case", to be sent to the
headquarters. During these months, every single intelligence officer and
soldier in the Brigade will rape her. After that, she will be sent to
Al Tasfeerat Prison in Shaab Stadium, or to Al-Muthanna Airport Prison.
Sometimes the prisoner is transferred to the facility of the Chief
Commander's Office in the Green Zone, which is a cellar under the
building of the Baghdad Operations Headquarter, supervised by Major
General Adnan Al-Musawi. This place is one of the most dangerous,
dirtiest prisons of Al-Maliki.
More
than the Russian weapons deal, more than the escalation, this is the
most dangerous story for Nouri al-Maliki. That's why he's threatening
people who are talking about it. Why is it so dangerous?
Because
it could be your mother, your sister, your daughter. This goes to the
core of abuse in Iraq. And this story harms Nouri because he's over the
prisons. So he wants it to go away and various of his flunkies have
stepped forward in the last days to dismiss it. Yesterday, Aswat al-Iraq ran
a story about how the judges are insisting that "only" 46 Iraqi women
are being held right now for questioning. 46 women who are not charged
with one damn thing shouldn't be held to begin with. But they want to happy talk it and tell you that it's "only" 46.
The
Crazy has been let out and it is running free and, if you doubt that,
note that the story continues that, oops, one of the women was
pregnant. And she went into labor during questioning. Don't worry
though. They're going to let her go just as they're done questioning
her. They have held a pregnant woman without charge, they have upset
her and she went into labor. She is still not released from custody.
In what world is that acceptable? It's not, especially not in Iraq.
And this news emerges just as the Iraqi people are again saying "enough." Kitabat puts the announcement on their front page:
Friday,
January 25th, Iraqis are preparing to return to Baghdad's Tahrir Square
and protest. It's another call for change and it will come ahead of
the scheduled provincial elections. The announcement notes that Nouri
al-Maliki has become more tyrannical, that the Parliament is more
corrupt, that two years ago, Iraqis took to the streets calling for
change and were promised change but there was none.
Nouri's
abusive to Iraqi women and like most men who beat up on women, what
really scares him is that people are going to learn what a petty, little
coward he is that he has to beat up on women.
The Christian Community in Iraq
is a lot smaller than it was in 2003 when the Coalition invaded. During
the occupation, radical Muslims claimed the Christians were helping the
invaders and used this as an excuse to attack them. Churches and shops
were bombed and individual Christians were murdered or told to leave on
pain of death.
In an interview with the BBC, the priest at St Joseph's Chaldean Church in Baghdad said that in the past nine years his parish has shrunk from 1,200 families to 300. The New York Times
reports that before the war the Christian population was estimated to
be as high as 1.4 million, and has now dropped to less than 500,000.
I met few Christians in my 17 days in Iraq other than some shopkeepers and the owners of a liquor store when I went on a beer run in Basra.
I was anxious to see some of the early medieval centers of Christianity
that make the country so important to Church history. The Christian
community in Iraq is splintered into more than a dozen different
churches, including the Assyrian Church of the East, the Syrian Orthodox
Church, the Syrian Catholic Church, the Armenian Apostolic Church, and
many more. Many of their rites and beliefs are from a markedly
different religious tradition than what we are familiar with in the
West.
There are a
series of photo that go with the essay. I would argue that Chrisians --
and all minorities groups -- immediately became at risk in Iraq
following the US invasion as a result of the US government's desire to
put thugs in charge to shock the Iraqi people into submission. Thugs in
charge guaranteed that the murders of Iraq's various minorities never
resulted in any real punishments.
One of the worst attacks on Iraqi Christians is back in the news so let's drop back to the November 1, 2010 snapshot for details:
Yesterday in Baghdad, Iraqi forces swarmed Our Lady of Salvation Church where people were being held hostage by assailants. Ernesto Londono and Aziz Alwan (Washington Post) report,
"The bulk of the bloodletting happened shortly after 9 p.m. when Iraqi
Special Operations troops stormed Our Lady of Salvation church in the
upscale Karradah neighborhood to try and free worshipers who had been
taken hostage. Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy's Miami Herald) reports,
"Insurgents seized control of a church in central Baghdad on Sunday,
taking hostages during evening mass after attacking a checkpoint at the
Baghdad Stock Exchange." Graham Fitzgerald (Sky News) observes, "Apparently no attempt was made to negotiate with them and bring the siege to a peaceful conclusion." John Leland (New York Times) quotes
police officer Hussain Nahidh stating, "It's a horrible scene. More
than 50 people were killed. The suicide vests were filled with ball
bearings to kill as many people as possible. You can see human flesh
everywhere. Flesh was stuck to the top roof of the hall. Many people
went to hospitals without legs and hands." Lara Jakes (AP) reports there were 120 hostages in the church. Ned Parker and Jaber Zeki (Los Angeles Times via Sacremento Bee) add,
"The Iraqi police immediately sealed off the surrounding area in the
busy Karada commercial district. The American military was called in to
help. As U.S. Army helicopters buzzed overheads, American officers
accompanied Iraqi commanders and shared satellite imagery, according to
Iraqi police and the U.S. military. A caller to the Baghdad satellite
channel Baghdadiya, who insisted he was one of the attackers, said the
group was demanding the release of al-Qaida prisoners in Egypt and
threatened to execute the hostages if the authorities failed to meet
their demands."
Anne Barker (Australia's ABC) reports,
"The siege began when militants wearing suicide vests and armed with
grenades took an entire congregation hostage. Some 120 people were held
in the church for at least four hours." Today the Telegraph of London explains (link has text and video) the death toll has risen to 52. BBC News offers a photo essay of the siege. Lewis Smith (Independent of London) quotes
hostage Marzina Matti Yalda, "As we went outside the hall to see what
was happening, gunmen stormed the main gates and they started to shoot
at us. Many people fell down, including a priest, while some of us ran
inside and took shelter in a locked room as we waited for the security
forces to arrive." The Telegraph of London quotes
a young male hostage (unnamed) stating of the hostage takers, "They
entered the church with their weapons, wearing military uniforms. They
came into the prayer hall, and immediately killed the priest." Martin Chulov (Guardian) adds,
"The priest they call Father Rafael is believed to have survived, but
his colleague, Father Wissam, is believed to have been killed." Jim Muir (BBC News) offers
a video report and an Iraqi female hostage states, "Gunmen entered the
church and started to beat people. Some of the people were released but
others were wounded and some died and one of the priests was killed."
Muir points out that churches in Iraq have been attacked before "but
there's never been anything like this."
Today All Iraq News reports
the Ministry of Housing and Construction has announced that the
reconstruction of the Chuch has been completed. They state
reconstruction was done at a cost of 2.3 billion dinars. Last week in
Australia, the Assyrian Times notes,
Senator Concetta Fierravanit-Wells discussed the plight of Iraqi
Christians before the Australian Senate and she made a number of motions
including one which "calls upon the Government to raise the signficant
human rights concerns of Christian Assyrians with the Iraqi Government."
Ray McGovern has a piece at OpEd News on Susan Rice
that we will try to highlight a section of tomorrow. We are short on
time and space today so I'm pulling the last part of Martin
Kobler's briefing to the UN Security Council and we'll include it
tomorrow. Right now we have to go over a House Veterans Affairs
Committee hearing.
US House Rep Bob Filner
served in Congress for many years. He chose not to seek re-election
last November and instead ran for, and won, Mayor of San Diego. He was
sworn in today and hopefully will be as strong a voice for the San Diego
community as he was for veterans in the last year as he served as Chair
of the House Veterans Committee or Ranking Member (depending on whether
or not Democrats controlled the House) on the Committee. His departure
leaves a huge hole on the Democratic side of the Committee. Bob Filner
didn't play games. He didn't care who was in the White House and who
appointed the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. If it was a Democrat, his
questions were just as tough in hearings as they were when it was a
Republican. He put the veterans first and he brought common sense into
every hearing to cut through all the double talk various officials
wanted to try to hide behind.
US House Rep
Linda Sanchez has that same focus and intensity and she would make a
great Ranking Member. US House Rep Michael Michaud is a bit lower key
but he has a methodical approach that could be a real plus for the
Committee. US House Rep Silvestre Reyes also has a lower key approach
but echoes Filner's common sense approach that cuts through the double
talk. Those are the three strongest Democrats on the Committee
currently and any of the three would make a great Ranking Member.
A veteran
of the Iraq War stopped me last Wednesday after a House Veterans
Affairs Committee and said, "Please tell me they're not making her
Committee Chair. I can't understand her and she looks like she's ready
to go on the road with Bootsy [Collins] and George [Clinton]." He was
referring to Corrine Brown. [And her bad wig -- her bad wigs are
infamous.] Veterans do not feel she is on their side because all she
does is make excuses.
That's all she did at
last week's hearing. It's all she ever does. US House Rep Al Green sat
in on the hearing and I believe he's just been assigned to this
Committee. The former judge was first elected to Congress in November
2004 and has been re-elected every two years since. He made a point to
state Wednesday that on the Veterans Affairs Committee, he doesn't come
in saying he's a Democrat, "I'm a person who respects people who are
willing to risk their lives for us. They go to distance places and they
don't always return the way they left. And I just believe that we have
to do as much as we can to assist them. And I'm a believer that when it
comes to these issues, we can transcend party lines and work hard for
them." It's a shame he doesn't have more seniority because he'd be a
wonderful Ranking Member or (when the House goes back to the Democrats)
Chair.
The topic of the hearing was the money
that VA has wasted on trips. And US House Rep Corrine Brown wanted to
offer excuses and whined about how the VA having to go through their
records to provide answers to Congress was an imposition on VA. Is the
woman crazy? If it takes too many hours for the VA to gather the
information, that goes to their not doing an adequate job with their
record retention which does include storage.
While
Brown made one excuse after another, US House Rep Al Green stated,
"The optics of this are quite disturbing. I sense that you are contrite.
I sense that you want to attone. But I have to let you know the optics
are quite disturbing." He is correct. Appearing before the Committee?
VA's Deputy Secretary W. Scott Gould and he was accompanied by the VA's
Phillipa Anderson and W. Todd Grams. US House Rep Jeff Miller is the
Chair and he outlined the issues right at the start.
Chair
Jeff Miller: We are here to examine, in detail, VA's conference
spdning, particularly following the VA Inspector General's report
highlighting the wasteful spending that occurred at HR conferences in
Orlando, Florida in 2011. We will also examine VA's response to
Congress regarding its conference spending. Fundamentally, this hearing
is about accountability -- accountability to veterans, to taxpayers and
to this oversight Committee. I am concerned on all fronts. Let me
briefly share the reason why. On August 16, 2012, the Ranking Member
and I sent a letter to the Secretary asking a series of questions
related to VA's conference spending. In that letter we referenced the
conflicting testimony we received over the course of the 112th Congress
regarding VA's total expenditures. First we were told $20 million was
spent in FY 2011 on conferences. Then we were told it was a little over
$100 million. Finally, we were told that no accurate, reliable
figure on conference expenditures exists. Because of these
discrepancies, we asked for clarification of VA's total conference
spending for that year and prior years, as well as a breakdown of all
individual conferences. Rather than receiving a coherent response
clearly explaining these discrepancies and answering all of the
questions we posed, VA produced a data dump of information to the
Committee under the cover of a letter by Assistant Secretary for
Congressional and Legislative Affairs, Joan Mooney, on August 24, 2012.
Even though I discussed what I believed was the lack of a response to
our letter at the Committee's September 25, 2012 hearing, we were not
informed by Ms. Mooney until a week later that her latter, and the
information provided along with it, served as the Secretary's official
response. But even assuming what was provided in August was the
Secretary's official response, our questions still weren't answered.
And those questions that were answered conflicted with prior VA
testimony. For example, when we tallied up the total VA conference
expenditures for FY2011 based on the information VA provided, it came to
$86.5 million. This represents the fourth answer provided it came to
$86.5 million. This represents the fourth answer provided to the
Committee this Congress on VA conference spending in FY2011: First $20
million, then over $100 million, then no reliable number and, now, $86.5
million.
That's not
minor. And although Corrine Brown may feel that it 'imposes' on VA to
make them accountable, that is -- someone get her a copy of the
Constitution -- Congress' job. As always, US House Rep Phil Roe -- a
medical doctor -- could be counted on to provide wisdom in these areas.
He noted that, at his practice, they figure out the next year's
continued education needs and then they figure out a budget and then
they start booking. He also addressed what he'd learned in the
continued education classes he'd taught. And he noted that it's
nonsense to claim that it takes months to find out these costs. He said
he could make one phone call and find out the costs of continued
education for the 450 employees and have the answer in five minutes.
Gould wanted to argue that with 320,000 employees -- they took months to
reply. And as Roe pointed out, these are written checks. It shouldn't
be difficult to calculate.
US
House Rep Bill Flores objected to sending VA staff to Italy -- on the
taxpayer's dime -- and wondered why, when additional training is needed,
it can't be done online? US House Rep Tim Walz made several good
points. We'll note this comment by Walz, "The thing that's always
concerned me about professional development is: Why aren't we
backplanning it from the results that Dr. Roe talked about, what we're
going to get out of this? I've got to be honest with you, if you're
doing professional development and the wait time on claims increases,
your professional development stinks. And that's the way it is."
That's
an overview. We're not done. We have to go back to Brown. In the
hearing, she noted she was made fun of about her comments at a previous
hearing. Unless someone else wrote about the hearing the way we covered
it in the snapshot, she was referring to my comments.
To
which I say, when she was demanding accountability from the VA (when
Bully Boy Bush occupied the White House), I looked the other way on her
speaking. We never could quote her in full because she's so bad about
not finishing sentences. But we would selectively quote her. Now? I'm
going to try and transcribe her bad speech as she makes idiotic
statements using lousy grammer? Forget that. I don't want to pick up
her bad habits.
Reality, she's a member of
Congress and has been for nearly 30 years. She should have worked to
improve herself. She didn't. She didn't even try. She sounds like an
idiot.
No sympathy? I arrived in college
with a huge knowledge gap because I arrived with a huge memory gap of
whole years wiped away.
In college, this
huge knowledge gap of things I learned but couldn't recall was
embarrassing. I was an idiot throughout freshman year. The most basic
things my peers knew, I had no idea about. (World War II to give but
one example.) I was funny and could make the entire room erupt in
laughter but, honestly, a lot of those 'jokes' that people thought were
so funny? No joke. I was being serious. I was that ignorant. And it
was a very steep climb but I worked very hard and made up for as much as
I could as quickly as I could.
So I don't
really have a lot of sympathy for a Congress member who, year after
year, opens their mouth and sounds like an idiot because they don't know
proper English, because they can't finish their sentences and because
they're reading level is so low that it's embarrassing when they try to
read from their opening statements. I'm sorry, Corrine, I have no
sympathy for you. Life has obstacles. Anyone who works to overcome
their own, I don't mock them. There's a Democrat in the House who has a
condition that makes his speaking a struggle. I have never and would
never mock him and I congratulate him on the long road back that he's
made and is making. But a woman who sits in Congress for 29 years and
can't learn to speak? Who is never tempted to better herself and thinks
sounding like a buffoon is acceptable? Get used to the mocking because
if you're going to be Ranking Member, your poor speech is about to
get a lot more attention. And not just from me. You're a member of the
US Congress. That should force you to strive for something better, not
beg you to be a public embarrassment. If no one's ever before made it
clear to you how embarrassing you are, hate me but use that hate to
improve yourself because your current speaking abilities are
unacceptable.
| 