Dem controlled house is at it's all time low ( yes Bush is low as well) what dahell do we do to bring our powers that be back to center?

The libs here pushed hard for their regime change and to be honest it was as out of control as many of us predicted.

You can't rule by polls, to do so leads to as fucked up choices as Bush following Rove blindly.

As I said from the begining, don't just bitch and follow the crazy left...give reasons for it and possible choices....

To just vote by "it's not Bush" was a fucking blind mistake has proven how short sighted this option can become.

Polls are crazy, ya'll are now reaping it....enjoy

/disclaimer , give me a candidate that really means what he/she says...$$

Fandros Finglaflin

I'm having a real tough time understanding you ...
The latest Harris Poll put Dems in Congress at 31% and Reps in Congress at 21%. Pelosi at 34% and Bush at 26%.

Generally the entire government is in need of a new leader and until that happens I don't see any changes for the better. A lot of good (at least in my eyes) legislation was vetoed in the past year and the most disappointing thing is that congress hasn't been able to figure out a way to get us out of the mess our President got us into. The election is too far away :(

We are basically living in a dictatorship, for all intents and purposes.

Bush vetoes anything he does not like, and says straight out what it will take to get him to approve something; without sufficient control to override a veto, it does not matter who has the most members in Congress.

I think what we honestly need in the next round is a strong president and speaker who can set aside party nonsense and work to get the nation back on track. The partisan squabbling has become one of the biggest flaws in our government, and unfortunately I think the average voter doesn't understand that - they're just still voting party lines. Heck, I'll be half of Bush's fall in the polls is from people who just heard on the news that he's doing bad, and probably haven't thought it out much beyond that anyway.

Ronald Reagan

>>I think what we honestly need in the next round is a strong president and speaker who can set aside party nonsense and work to get the nation back on track.<<


We say this every time there is a presidential election.

I, personally, think we need a business man that is mega rich to run it (kind of like Ross Perot but better).

To an extent, yes. And I realize I'm speaking largely within only my own lifespan, but much of the current political bog seems to have started, or at least heated quickly, with the Republican witchhunt after Clinton, followed by the lunacy of both major parties during the Bush era.

This thread sparked a thought. I consider myself patriotic, I love my country, I get angry when my students won't respect the national anthem, but I've been struggling with my view of our country lately. I'm suddenly catching on that I still love my country, I'm just sick to death of my leaders and government in general - probably because of their own lack of patriotism.

>>I think what we honestly need in the next round is a strong president and speaker who can set aside party nonsense and work to get the nation back on track.<<


We say this every time there is a presidential election.

I, personally, think we need a business man that is mega rich to run it (kind of like Ross Perot but better).We do, but it's especially true this time. I wouldn't be opposed to a business man (or woman!), or at least someone outside the parties.

Dem controlled house is at it's all time low ( yes Bush is low as well) what dahell do we do to bring our powers that be back to center?I'm not sure what you mean by "center." People do disagree about stuff, and politicians and people regularly base their political decisions and approaches on which position they take over issues that matter to them.
The libs here pushed hard for their regime change and to be honest it was as out of control as many of us predicted. What is out of control and who predicted it? Maybe you're referring to the repeated GOP filibusters (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/18218.html) of House passed legislation? Over the past few years you complained often about "obstructionist Democrats," so I'm supposing "out of control GOP obstruction of legislation" is what you mean.
You can't rule by polls, to do so leads to as fucked up choices as Bush following Rove blindly.Polls indicate that the country wants us out of Iraq. We're still in Iraq, with quite a few Dems allowing that state to continue. I'm really not sure what fucked up choices you're talking about (this whole screed is pretty vague), so here's a cartoon (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/215/gallery/18867-a18932-t3.html) relevent to the quote.
As I said from the begining, don't just bitch and follow the crazy left...give reasons for it and possible choices....I have no idea what you're talking about, but you've defended the previous state of rule at every stage, no matter how "crazy right" it was. Reasons and choices have been offered here regularly for years, and in return we've gotten spittle flecked diatribes and "But Clinton!" I'm also not sure you'd recognize the "crazy left" at an ANSWER rally. Plank firmly in eye.
To just vote by "it's not Bush" was a fucking blind mistake has proven how short sighted this option can become.Whaaa? Did we just time warp back to 2004? The Republican party steered this country and themselves in a direction the nation largely doesn't like, but they're not supposed to vote for other options? They should just reward the GOP with continued power? These are utterly bizarre thought processes. Too much Whiskey & Savage again?
/disclaimer , give me a candidate that really means what he/she says...$$

Fandros FinglaflinI'll settle for a candidate that isn't a testosterone-fueled crazy person wanting to repeat or out-do the last two terms.

Dem controlled house is at it's all time low

This is actually quite a humorous statement Fanny, since it really makes no specific point.

Do you mean something with regard to the Democrat controlled House now has the agenda and legislative priorities determined by the Democrats rather than the Republicans?

Are you referring to the Democrat controlled House that does not have sufficient Democrats to stop Republican tactics blocking legislative votes?

Are you sure the all time low is due to the Democrats that now outnumber the Republicans, or can it also be an indicator of the public's disgust with the Republican disruptive maneuvers keeping legislation from being voted on and sent to the President, where he will have to take final responsibility for passage or veto?

Can you clarify what exactly you are trying to say? Maybe with some examples that will illustrate your position?

And btw, with the Ohio Republican Rep. now saying she is not going to run for another term, folks in that state should be in for another nasty, brutal election year.

Thanks. :)

"A lot of good (at least in my eyes) legislation was vetoed in the past year..."

???

Two vetoes in the past year (one of which was the same bill he vetoed in July 06 and you call that "a lot"?

Well he vetoed the Stem Cell and the Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, but he's also promised to veto a number of bills that just never got off the ground because of it including any bills that increase funding for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and the House Clean Energy Bills. And of course we all sat by and witnessed as the Defense Spending Bills kept getting thrown out because they had a timetable for removal from Iraq.

We have to hope that as all of our congressional representatives are on vacation in their home districts they attend a few public picnics and bbqs and gatherings and hear what is really on the minds of their constituents and are willing to actually represent their people in overriding a veto in some of that previously dead legislation. I believe the next big update with regards to Iraq happens in September.

An interesting, if slightly biased, article on Bush and spending. More of the damage done by our current administration: http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

The article and chart show what many of us have been saying for some time; the Republicans, who are supposed to be about lower taxes and less government, are no better than the Democrats when it comes to wasting monies. At least, the Democrats use a tax and spend method; the new Republicans cuts taxes/income but still raise spending, thereby increasing debt.

Bush campaigned on a platform that he basically threw out once elected; he has shown no reluctance to waste monies, provided that the monies were being wasted in a manner his cronies approved, and not on some silly Labor, Education or Welfare programs.

Bush is in office because he had a better sales and advertising team, with lots of big business folks willing to write checks to fund him, in return for the favors Bush could give once elected.

The Republican Party has been destroyed by the likes of Lott, Gingrich, Delay, Hyde, Rove, etc; men who put personal ambitions ahead of the party's guiding principles, and who will stoop to whatever depths need be to achieve their ends. It will take several generations before their taint can be fully removed from the party, and we can maybe get a candidate who conducts him or herself as a principled statesman who puts the country first.

To paraprhase a line from the movie "Dave", which I may have before, ...."we hired this person, and it was for a temp job at that." Someday maybe we will get someone who realizes that, and responds accordingly.