The 2005 video of Nancy Pelosi defending the 3-day rule in order to combat lengthy legislation has been watched by many.

Recently she passed a 1,990 paged health care reform bill that had been amended and changed frequently, then passed without sufficient time for review.  The hypocrisy is too blatant to ignore.

The Washington Examiner sums up the following in their “opinion” section:

The most obvious and immediate take on the video is disgust with the unsurpassed hypocriscy of Pelosi in forcing the Obamacare bill through to passage despite its massive size, its gigantic implications for changing the daily lives of every American, and its enormous impact on the financial integrity of the government.

But let’s not forget the context in which Pelosi’s 2005 speech was delivered. House Speaker Dennis Hastert and other leaders of the Republican majority that held power prior to 2006 were routinely doing exactly what Pelosi just did wth Obamacare – jamming continuing resolutions consisting of thousands of pages and costing trillions of dollars through Congress with barely enough time to read the titles, much less the entire text.

Bottomline: A binding, 72-hour public posting of all legislation should be an inviolate rule no matter which party is in power in either chamber of Congress. And it cannot happen too soon. The people at Readthebill.org need your help.

Recently, however, she has proven to be the one practicing the methods she was warning Congress about nearly five years ago.  House Speaker Pelosi has successfully campaigned for and passed a nearly 2,000 page healthcare reform bill with all kinds of sneaky legislation written in; the exact practice she condemned years ago before her fellow members.  She also failed to post her healthcare reform bill online 72-hours before the vote.

In December 2003 she said (reiterating another House Member’s comment in agreement): “if you have to twist people’s arms over and over to vote for you on issue after issue, then you would be wise to reevaluate your positions.” Interesting, considering (6 years later) that she’s the first one to come to mind regarding congress members persuading and lobbying one another.  A practice some regard as modern horse-trading.