Nancy Pelosi: Hey, what say we spread the wealth around a bit – Video

In the interest of fairness of course. From last night’s O’Reilly Factor. Ya know, I’m just about at the point where not only does this not shock me, it’s kinda loosing its punch, even for a small “l” libertarian (H/T Larry Elder) like myself.

Speaking Monday to the United Steelworkers Union Pelosi showed her true colors, not that it offended anyone in the Steelworkers Union.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9nTmUzGAgo

I could go for the cheap shot here and play this:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRPbCSSXyp0&feature=fvst

Or this:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-aMZGg4Ol4

But I wouldn’t do that. It wouldn’t be fair.

UPDATE: From Gateway, here’s the transcript.

“We’re talking about addressing the disparity of income where the wealthy people continue to get wealthier and some other people are falling out of the middle class when we want to bring many more people into the middle class. But that disparity is not just about wages alone, that disparity is about ownership and equity. It’s all about fairness in our country,”

Posted in

Jim Vicevich

Jim is a veteran broadcaster and conservative/libertarian blogger with more than 25 years experience in TV and radio. Jim's was the long-term host of The Jim Vicevich Show on WTIC 1080 in Hartford from 2004 through 2019. Prior to radio, Jim worked as a business and financial reporter for NBC30 - the NBC owned TV station in Hartford - and as business editor at WFSB-TV in Hartford for 14 years while earning six Emmy nominations and three Telly Awards.

13 Comments

  1. winnie888 on October 20, 2010 at 2:52 am

    Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the fairest of them all?  (Obama on your shoulder, Pelosi on the other)

     



  2. Dimsdale on October 20, 2010 at 5:17 am

    Can you have two devils on your shoulders, winnie?  I thought one was supposed to be an angel?  😉



  3. Odonna on October 20, 2010 at 5:28 am

    I will believe she is committed to "fairness" and wealth disparity when she gives the majority of her wealth away to other people.



  4. Dimsdale on October 20, 2010 at 5:39 am

    No way!  She can spend your money with ease, but her own?  She throws nickels around like they are manhole covers!



  5. rjan on October 20, 2010 at 6:10 am

    I wonder how the workers of Pratt& Whitney and UTC that are about to lose their jobs feel today about the profits that the corporation is making. The socialism sounds pretty good.



  6. Dimsdale on October 20, 2010 at 6:15 am

    Is it P&W and UTC, or the economy and policies by the Øbama administration and the controlling Democrat Party that are truly responsible?  No profits, no corporation.  More taxes, less jobs.  I am sure it is not a pure either/or problem, but the failed policies of this administration have much to do with the malaise that P&W and the rest of the country is feeling.



  7. rjan on October 20, 2010 at 6:31 am

    The economy must not be that bad if they can still post a pretty good profit.



  8. Dimsdale on October 20, 2010 at 8:27 am

    You could be right.  Do you  have the details?



  9. porschepete on October 20, 2010 at 12:50 pm

    Someone should tell "Miss Nancy" that life is not fair. If they pass Cap and Trade these steel workers will not have jobs.Takes a lot of carbon to make steel.  



  10. NH-Jim on October 20, 2010 at 1:33 pm

    Rjan says: The socialism sounds pretty good.

    Aah, yes, you mean crony capitalism the likes of Burundi, Venezuela, Eritrea, Nicaragua, Cuba, North Korea, Zimbabwe………the list goes on.



  11. DuffTerrall on October 20, 2010 at 3:43 pm

    Why is it that I have yet to see anyone who is such a fan of "fairness" an "helping the little guy" and all that jazz go out and start a company where they ensure that all their employees are paid more than they are, any profits made over a certain level are immediately given back to the employees, people are hired based on the amount of money the company is making instead of on how large a labor force they need to continue to be profitable and the like? Why is it always the Fed that needs to do these things and not something that they leverage their frankly enormous resources to do regardless of the "system"? Seems to me that would be a much more direct and less divisive way to deal with the problem.



  12. Dimsdale on October 20, 2010 at 7:15 pm

    Socialism always looks good to those thinking they are going to grab a piece of someone else’s pie (da rich).



  13. Dimsdale on October 21, 2010 at 4:06 am

    Because people that believe that this could be done know nothing about how to create and maintain a business (particularly in a climate of taxes being raised at a political whim), or the first thing about creating a job (see Rambo).  Pols like to do the easy work of parasitizing the job creator and hold power over him/her in the process.



Pelosi steelworkers

The website's content and articles were migrated to a new framework in October 2023. You may see [shortcodes in brackets] that do not make any sense. Please ignore that stuff. We may fix it at some point, but we do not have the time now.

You'll also note comments migrated over may have misplaced question marks and missing spaces. All comments were migrated, but trackbacks may not show.

The site is not broken.