Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Foreign Policy & News Petraeus Assessment

How many? What do you mean, how many? Your statement was 100%, not 99% or 90% or 83.75%. You said every last one, without exception. You said they worship the Chief Executive. That's what sent my bull%hit meter off the scale, Philly. I'll grant you there is a lot of party loyalty among Repub's. But one day, one day I'm going to start a "party loyalty" thread, and we'll make a comparison, and I wouldn't be at all surprised, not at all surprised, if we discover that Democrats break ranks with their leadership no more frequently than do Republicans.

I think that 'bullshit' may be understating the case. The inference, of course, is the the Democrats are completely hamstrung and cannot do anything. The simple fact is that without Democratic collusion nothing could have been passed in the last year! Funding for the war - not possible without the Democrats, renewing the patriot act - not possible without the Democrats, its just goes on and on. Blaming one segment of fools is, purely and simply, WRONG!

What we have here is a complete failure of OUR political system. We have voted in a bunch of true believers and/or politicians (in the very worst sense of the word). They could have shut down Bush anytime in the last 8 months but choose to play their political games instead. What we really need is to replace the whole damned bunch of them with folks who have a brain in the head, enough strengh of purpose to do what they are elected to do, have some personal integrity and actually have the best interests of nation at the core of their belief (I know, wishful thinking). Right now the entire congress seems to have 'Gone to Abeline' (deny everything individually and then, acting as a group, simply lose their collective minds). In other words our 'leaders' have sold us out to the highest bidder and we, as the electorate, voted for these clowns! Hell, we will probably do it again!

How does it go? "We have met the enemy and the enemy is us"? We are, obviously, a nation of sheep eagerly waiting for the next political 'entertainment'. My only real problem with all of this is just how long the system can take this abuse before it starts to collapse. I, personally, for instance, have yet to find a single individual who will even admit to trusting their own government! Congressional numbers are the lowest ever recorded. Its easy to blame Bush but he could have done nothing without the complete collusion of congress and he is STILL getting it!

So what are you going to DO about it? Vote for that perfect third-party candidate, knowing that 100% Republican loyalty, coupled with splitting the Independent vote will guarantee President Guiliani has a loyal Republican Congress?

Unfortunately, the facts do not back up your assertion.

But then, as we see on a daily basis From Republican though leaders Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, facts are not necessary in determining what the Republican Party Faithful think.


http://www.votetracker.com/new/Press_0806.html

VoteTracker has released its mid-year report on party loyalty in Congress. Last week, VoteTracker released its presidential support scores. That release is available at www.votetracker.com (click on What's New).

Through July 31, with both houses having begun their summer recess, 30 Senators voted with the majority of Republicans on at least 95% of the votes, while 22 had voted with the majority of Democrats at least 95% of the time.

In the House, 28 Members voted with the majority of Republicans on at least 98% of the votes, while just one Democrat showed 98% loyalty to the Democratic majority.

That's a great resource, Philly Steve. I wonder what it costs to subscribe? I'd like to see more data that would directly address my conjecture, rather than looking only at the converse. I'd also like to see some data that isn't four years old.

According to the figures you posted, which again are from 2003 when the Administration was much more popular, and influential, 25 of the Senators serving at that time voted with the Republican majority less than 95% of the time, while only 23 of the Senators serving at that time voted with the Democratic majority less than 95% of the time. So it looks like, at least in the Senate in 2003, my conjecture is supported by the limited data available.

How different would the data be in 2007, with a highly unpopular Executive? I don't know the answer, but again I have my suspicions.

I just checked on the cost. It's $1500 a year. DOH!

jgw wrote:

I cannot agree more. The great hope that I and many Americans felt when we voted in a Democratic majority to Congress to lead us out of the darkness is long gone.

In our present system, I don't HAVE to work for and financially support the Democrats. I am and have been very much on their donor lists and have volunteered for candidates. Frankly, if we still have Iraq, and still have the Patriot Act, etc., etc., then what is the difference? Do I hate George Bush? No, actually. He's an idiot, but I hate his policies and what he does much more than himself, personally. But, if the Democrats do the same and support the Administration programs, why put myself to any pain to end up in the same place? Wow, I can finally become a Republican.

Right now I don't even believe that the Democrats can actually win next year. They are completely disorganized. They have failed to keep their promises. They are returning to a strict policy of constituency pandering (it just goes on and on). I have no solution and, quite possibly, nobody that I can support!

I think the worst thing about the past Republican rule is their complete incompetence in virtually everything BUT politics! You name it, they screwed it up. Even Republicans have got to be seriously concerned about this. Its just not the war (which is generally considered to be a world class mess), its the spending, the inability of FEMA to function, the destruction of the military, the continuous stories of greed and corruption, collapse of infrastructure, our decline in the eyes of the rest of the world - I'm sure everybody gets the idea.

We have SERIOUS problems! Perhaps even worse there is a SERIOUS lack of leadership and that kind of hole can get filled with something we neither need nor want. I do, however, wish us all luck. We have survived worse and I believe that we can rise above this crap (I just don't have a solution!)

im wondering when people are goign to start blaming the american people, if they wanted such huge changes surely they should have voted a bigger Dem majority.

oh no im channelling senator hatrack!!

seriously though, the dems could have shut down govt, but they appear to have wanted to have a more pro-active appearance. i dont think a re-run of the conservative tictacs of the 90s would would have served them well (at least in their own planning). They took the message that people wanted change, tried a changed approach, ie not shutting down the govt but attempting investigations which were predictably stonewalled. The bush admin are far too skilled in political tactics, manouevering and agenda setting for the dems.

they dont have the numbers to do much else, especially if they dont want to appear obstructionist. aint it grand when your opponents smears change your behaviour.

Now when winning elections is your purpose in life, in and of itself. And actually serving your country is a (distant) third (after cashing in on the elections wins, of course).

Pentagon: Please rewrite Iraq report by John Byrne

Interesting spin from the administration


Now the administration did not complain when the initial report claimed 8 of 18 showed progress. But what was really interesting was Perino's statement.

So compare wth William Kristol statement in A Pathetic Preemptive Strike where he says "The turn of the Sunnis against the insurgency?"

I suspect she read Kristol's editorial early to gets some talking points. Now Kristol didn't complain either when the initial report came out but the GAO report he says does not take into account ...

What he doesn't take into account is the substance of the report

Initial Benchmark Assessment Report

which states


O did the miss the fact it only pertains to the Iraqi government. How embarrassing for these clowns that they can not get the facts right.