NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, Gallup two months ago had Congress at 24%. Now it's lower.

According to Zogby Polls.

The first job approval numbers for July are in and the Reuters/Zogby Poll shows Bush at 34 percent, Congress at 14 percent.

"The Democratic Congress gets poor marks across the ideological spectrum -- just 21 percent of liberals and 10 percent of the very liberal give it positive marks, while 14 percent of conservatives and 14 percent of the very conservative give it positive ratings," Zogby wrote.

"Among Democrats, just 19 percent give Congress positive marks, compared to 13 percent of Republicans and 8 percent of political independents.

"By way of comparison, the Republican Congress had a 23 percent positive job approval rating last October, just a week before voters tossed the GOP out of their leadership posts in both houses."

Apparently, 63 percent of Republicans still approve of how Bush is doing.

So even among Democrats, they think the Democratic Congress stinks on ice.

America appears to like its government less and less every day.

See, you would expect that. People often approve of their own congressional reps, but disapprove of everyone else's. An equivalent poll to compare to Bush's approval ratings therefore wouldn't be, "How do you feel about the job Congress is doing?" It would be, "How do you feel about the job Senator Shmoo is doing?" and would have to be asked in Senator Shmoo's state. I dare say you would not find a single score anywhere near as low as our lovably retarded president. :)

The question is why? I'm willing to bet that many of those conservatives are unhappy with Congress for attempting to leave Iraq, and many of the liberals are unhappy with it for failing to do so.

Of course, a significant percentage on both sides is due to the uselessness of Congress in general.

The question is why? I'm willing to bet that many of those conservatives are unhappy with Congress for attempting to leave Iraq, and many of the liberals are unhappy with it for failing to do so.

Of course, a significant percentage on both sides is due to the uselessness of Congress in general.

Bingo. Funny how, no matter how many times we post this sort of explanation, RO never seems to get it.

America appears to like its government less and less every day.

Probably not so much the government itself so much as the people in it. though I can't speak for the rest of us. Such is the tricky part of a two party system. Sometimes it comes down to "which one do you dislike the least"

Bingo. Funny how, no matter how many times we post this sort of explanation, RO never seems to get it.

I was just about to say something like that.

I was just about to say something like that.

What's the old saying--it's hard to convince a person of something when his livelihood is dependent on his believing the exact opposite.

See, you would expect that. People often approve of their own congressional reps, but disapprove of everyone else's. An equivalent poll to compare to Bush's approval ratings therefore wouldn't be, "How do you feel about the job Congress is doing?" It would be, "How do you feel about the job Senator Shmoo is doing?" and would have to be asked in Senator Shmoo's state. I dare say you would not find a single score anywhere near as low as our lovably retarded president. :)

Also a good point. I don't know who the hell your senators and representatives are, because I can't vote for them. Governors are a little easier to spot. Especially yours

It's interesting that even though 251 of 535 congressmen are still republican, that congress has suddenly become the Forces of Evil.

I wonder what's gonna happen in 2008 when the senate shifts even more democratic. :)

The question is why? I'm willing to bet that many of those conservatives are unhappy with Congress for attempting to leave Iraq, and many of the liberals are unhappy with it for failing to do so.

Of course, a significant percentage on both sides is due to the uselessness of Congress in general.


Correct. The dishonest RO knows this, but presumably just likes the attention.

It's interesting that even though 251 of 535 congressmen are still republican, that congress has suddenly become the Forces of Evil.

I wonder what's gonna happen in 2008 when the senate shifts even more democratic. :)

I reckon that the Dems will open up the gates to the abyss, and creatures will pour forth. At least, that's what Fox News would have us believe.

See, you would expect that. People often approve of their own congressional reps, but disapprove of everyone else's. An equivalent poll to compare to Bush's approval ratings therefore wouldn't be, "How do you feel about the job Congress is doing?" It would be, "How do you feel about the job Senator Shmoo is doing?" and would have to be asked in Senator Shmoo's state. I dare say you would not find a single score anywhere near as low as our lovably retarded president. :)

Zogby says that Democrats think less of their Congress than Republicans think of Bush.

Far, far, far lower. :eek::eek::eek:

Zogby says that Democrats think less of their Congress than Republicans think of Bush.

Far, far, far lower. :eek::eek::eek:

The point being made I think is that Dems disapprove of Congress as a whole, which includes Repulicans and hasn't resolved anything involving Iraq

Zogby says that Democrats think less of their Congress than Republicans think of Bush.

Far, far, far lower. :eek::eek::eek:

That's not the point. The point is how do people feel about the representatives from their own districts and states, not how do they feel about Congress as a whole. An equivalent question for me would ask, for example, how I feel about the job Senator Fienstein is doing, not how Congress as a whole is doing and not how the Democrats in Congress are doing. I've a felling you knew that that wasn't the point, however.

The point being made I think is that Dems disapprove of Congress as a whole, which includes Repulicans and hasn't resolved anything involving Iraq

Seems like the Democrats made a lot of promises about ending the war that they knew were unfeasible.

Seems like the Democrats made a lot of promises about ending the war that they knew were unfeasible.

Yeah, because they're politicians. Republicans do the same thing.

Seems like the Democrats made a lot of promises about ending the war that they knew were unfeasible.

Didn't Bush make a promise about ending the war? I mean it was different. It was supposed to be ending in a swift victory where we would be "greated as liberators," but it was a promise none the less.

Seems like the Democrats made a lot of promises about ending the war that they knew were unfeasible.
Ah, so the presidential veto is Congress's fault.

Zogby says that Democrats think less of their Congress than Republicans think of Bush.

Far, far, far lower. :eek::eek::eek:

I'd point out five or six different arguments that you missed completely, but you'd ignore them and merely post ignorant tripe like this is resposnse. Does ignorance feel good?

Sagging Ratings May Not Hurt Democrats

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS
The Associated Press
Friday, July 20, 2007; 1:59 PM

WASHINGTON -- Dismal approval ratings for the Democratic-led Congress _ even worse than President Bush's _ don't seem to be a threat to the party in next year's elections.

Congress' reputation is hurt by widespread anger over the war in Iraq, and lawmakers' inability to change the war's course. On that point, Republicans are still far more vulnerable than Democrats, say strategists in both parties.

That's why Democrats are doing all they can to stoke dissatisfaction with the war through repeated votes and attention-grabbing scenes like the Senate's all-night debate this week. For now, they're not worrying that voters will punish them for failing to achieve their agenda.

"The Democrats now own a share of discontent with national conditions, but it's a minority share. People still look to the White House and Republicans" as the people responsible for most of the discontent, said Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.

Just 24 percent approved of Congress' job performance in the latest Associated Press-Ipsos poll this month, down 11 percent from only two months ago. That included a sizable drop _ nearly in half _ among Democrats, just 27 percent of whom approved. The rating among independents also fell by 10 percent, to 23 percent. Meanwhile, Bush's overall approval rating remained unchanged at 33 percent this moth.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/20/AR2007072001241.html

Ah, so the presidential veto is Congress's fault.

Another point that shouldn't be overlooked. Just because the Dems are in the majority doesn't mean that they have enough numbers to overturn a veto.

Didn't Bush make a promise about ending the war? I mean it was different. It was supposed to be ending in a swift victory where we would be "greated as liberators," but it was a promise none the less.

Yes, and people were upset at him.

SO they elected a lot of Democrats.

Looks like the polls say Americans think Congress sucks more than Bush.

Can't argue the numbers.

Yes, and people were upset at him.

SO they elected a lot of Democrats.

Looks like the polls say Americans think Congress sucks more than Bush.

Can't argue the numbers.

Thinking that congress sucks more than the current president... That's NEVER happened before :eek:

Another point that shouldn't be overlooked. Just because the Dems are in the majority doesn't mean that they have enough numbers to overturn a veto.

Or the 60 votes needed in the Senate to get anything done. If you really want to talk about wh's being obstructionist, it's the 10-17 Republican Senators who continue to put party before country and refuse to do the will of the American people.

Yes, and people were upset at him.

SO they elected a lot of Democrats.

Looks like the polls say Americans think Congress sucks more than Bush.

Can't argue the numbers.

No, you can't argue numbers, but you can ignore the reasons for those numbers. Again, the Dems may have majority, but they don't have enough seats to have the total control you seem to think they have. slightly over 50% is not the same as 2/3rds

Seems like the Democrats made a lot of promises about ending the war that they knew were unfeasible.

If the same thing had been happening involving Republicans and not Democrats, would you report it the way you're reporting this?

Yes, and people were upset at him.

SO they elected a lot of Democrats.

Looks like the polls say Americans think Congress sucks more than Bush.

Can't argue the numbers.

No, but you can argue their relevence and what they mean. You can't argue the relevence and what the numbers mean with a rigid ideologue who ignores points he can't contend with, however.

See, you don't like to debate with people. You like to debate with yourself. You have this method of ignoring points you can't defeat or intentionally distorting points to make them seem like they are something else, attacking the pseudo-point and then acting as though you won the debate. This is a painfully transparent argumentative strategy for everyone including yourself, but that doesn't matter. You know you've ignored the central issue of whatever point of contention was brought up and everyone else knows it as well, but in your head you still feel like you "won" something even if it wasn't the debate. At the very least you avoided having to concede a point by ignoring them.

If the same thing had been happening involving Republicans and not Democrats, would you report it the way you're reporting this?

Did you see him do it last year, when the republican-controlled congress slipped low?

No, but you can argue their relevence and what they mean. You can't argue the relevence and what the numbers mean with a rigid ideologue who ignores points he can't contend with, however.

See, you don't like to debate with people. You like to debate with yourself. You have this method of ignoring points you can't defeat or intentionally distorting points to make them seem like they are something else, attacking the pseudo-point and then acting as though you won the debate. This is a painfully transparent argumentative strategy for everyone including yourself, but that doesn't matter. You know you've ignored the central issue of whatever point of contention was brought up and everyone else knows it as well, but in your head you still feel like you "won" something even if it wasn't the debate. At the very least you avoided having to concede a point by ignoring them.

You know, I don't think he debates at all... There's not enough napalm in the world to burn his strawmen army..

Did you see him do it last year, when the republican-controlled congress slipped low?

He seems to have joined after the Democrats gained majority, though, I haven't been here long, and wouldn't know if he's been under different names.

It's interesting that even though 251 of 535 congressmen are still republican, that congress has suddenly become the Forces of Evil.

I wonder what's gonna happen in 2008 when the senate shifts even more democratic. :)
as long as they're politicians...

SOS... Same Old S#*t.

Trilby63;12895964']You know, I don't think he debates at all... There's not enough napalm in the world to burn his strawmen army..

That's what it's called. Been a while since I took logic.

That's what it's called. Been a while since I took logic.

Perhaps in the strictest dictionary sence of the word it can be called "debate" but I maintain that his quality disqualifies him somehow..

Trilby63;12896001']Perhaps in the strictest dictionary sence of the word it can be called "debate" but I maintain that his quality disqualifies him somehow..

Taking numbers out of context will do that. He seems to conveniently disregard other factors for those numbers.

Trilby63;12896001']Perhaps in the strictest dictionary sence of the word it can be called "debate" but I maintain that his quality disqualifies him somehow..

As evidenced by the fact that he seems to be gone now. He'll wait until the points he wishes to ignore get buried under a few pages and then he'll come back.

He seems to have joined after the Democrats gained majority, though, I haven't been here long, and wouldn't know if he's been under different names.

Eh, he's Deep Kimchi. He's been around for a VERY long time.

Of course, I do remember RO claiming that he wasn't DK, but he seems to have stopped doing that now.

He is well known for claiming to have any profession that seems fit for a given topic.

So, basically, he's old. Old old old. And still up to his same old antics.

He seems to have joined after the Democrats gained majority, though, I haven't been here long, and wouldn't know if he's been under different names.

Join dates don't tell the whole story.

Eh, he's Deep Kimchi. He's been around for a VERY long time.

Of course, I do remember RO claiming that he wasn't DK, but he seems to have stopped doing that now.

He is well known for claiming to have any profession that seems fit for a given topic.

So, basically, he's old. Old old old. And still up to his same old antics.

Ah, thanks. I don't come here often enough to pick up on these things, though I've come to remember the more frequent posters by this point, and some of the characteristics of their posts.

Eh, he's Deep Kimchi. He's been around for a VERY long time.

Of course, I do remember RO claiming that he wasn't DK, but he seems to have stopped doing that now.

He is well known for claiming to have any profession that seems fit for a given topic.

So, basically, he's old. Old old old. And still up to his same old antics.

The earliest alleged incarnation was Whispering Legs, I believe.

And yes, he has been employed EVERYWHERE.

As evidenced by the fact that he seems to be gone now. He'll wait until the points he wishes to ignore get buried under a few pages and then he'll come back.

Do you think he intentionally tries to embarrass and alienate the rest of the right-leaning inhabitants of this board?

Trilby63;12896031']Do you think he intentionally tries to embarrass and alienate the rest of the right-leaning inhabitants of this board?

I've often wondered that about Fred Phelps. Or at least maybe hoped that was the case. Certainly he makes us liberal types look good.

Trilby63;12896031']Do you think he intentionally tries to embarrass and alienate the rest of the right-leaning inhabitants of this board?

No, I think he's just representative of anyone who still supports this president. Even clear-headed, thoughtful conservatives have abandoned Bush now. There is no logical argument to be made that states that this president has been in any way good for our country or the rest of the world so the only supporters he has left are people who put ideology ahead of practicality and stuborn adherence to faith above accepting reality and changing course. There are conservatives who will tell you that Bush is the worst president in history. The people who won't accept that aren't conservatives, their rigid ideolologues.

No, I think he's just representative of anyone who still supports this president. Even clear-headed, thoughtful conservatives have abandoned Bush now. There is no logical argument to be made that states that this president has been in any way good for our country or the rest of the world so the only supporters he has left are people who put ideology ahead of practicality and stuborn adherence to faith above accepting reality and changing course. There are conservatives who will tell you that Bush is the worst president in history. The people who won't accept that aren't conservatives, their rigid ideolologues.

I imagine that the Republicans may use Bush's failures in next year's election. Interesting though that a president can go from such peaks to such depths

Yes, and people were upset at him.

SO they elected a lot of Democrats.

Looks like the polls say Americans think Congress sucks more than Bush.

Can't argue the numbers.
so sayeth the man who steadfastly refused to accept the lousy poll results for GOP coming out before the last elections.

No, I think he's just representative of anyone who still supports this president. Even clear-headed, thoughtful conservatives have abandoned Bush now. There is no logical argument to be made that states that this president has been in any way good for our country or the rest of the world so the only supporters he has left are people who put ideology ahead of practicality and stuborn adherence to faith above accepting reality and changing course. There are conservatives who will tell you that Bush is the worst president in history. The people who won't accept that aren't conservatives, their rigid ideolologues.
Basically he suffers from this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

Having had trumpeted for years about how great a GOP-dominant govt would be, he's seen it fall into total chaos and totally fuck everything up.
Now instead of admitting he was wrong to follow those idiots that made the mess, he instead acts like a cornered rat and looks to attack anything and everything (no matter how tenuous) that is not within his small sphere of political thought.
In this way, he seeks to find solace to his troubled soul and not need to re-evaluate his own political beliefs.



Indeed, one could almost say he has regressed to a child's logic of 'they did something bad, which means whatever I did doesn't count'.
as way of example, my g/f's 6 year-old daughter has a pet rabbit she's supposed to take care of. Being a child she often forgets. The poor thing (the rabbit, not the kid) sometimes goes for a day or more without food or water. We're not going to immediately do her chores as it's her responsibility (though obviously we wouldn't let the rabbit die).
When confronted one time with her slackness in caring for her pet, instead of accepting she was wrong, she turned around and attacked me for one day having not fed my cat. Ignoring the evolutionary and biological reasons why cats can easily go without food and water for a day while rabbits can't, we're still left with the fact that whatever I did or did not do in no ways absolves, excuses or explains her not doing her task.
In her child's way of looking at things, however, it does.

Much the same that RO is doing here. People not approving of Congress now, in his mind, absolves and excuses all the excesses and mistakes that Bush & co have done over the past 6 years. In addition, he can now justify to himself that his continued support for their failed policies is a good thing, because everyone else is 'just as bad'.

So remember the hungry rabbit next time you open a RO created thread.

Maybe they should consider impeachment...that might bring them up a bit.

Maybe they should consider impeachment...that might bring them up a bit.

It would give Bush a nice boost...

Eh, he's Deep Kimchi. He's been around for a VERY long time.

Of course, I do remember RO claiming that he wasn't DK, but he seems to have stopped doing that now.

He is well known for claiming to have any profession that seems fit for a given topic.

So, basically, he's old. Old old old. And still up to his same old antics.
Remote Observer

Join Date: April 9, 2007
Last Post: currently posting and is AKA

Eve Online?

Join Date: Nov. 28, 2006
Last Post: April 5, 2007, 2:58 PM
Last Activity: April 10, 2007 6:59 AM and is AKA

Deep Kimchi

Join Date: Oct. 20, 2005
Last Post Oct. 25, 2006, 6:02 AM
Last Activity: April 6, 2007 10:48 AM and is AKA

Sierra BHTP

Join Date: Sept. 2, 2005
Last Post: Nov 6, 2005, 3:58 PM
Last Activity: Nov. 6, 2005 4:33 PM and is AKA

Whispering Legs

Join Date: Jan. 26, 2005
Last Post: July 29, 2005, 3:04 PM
Last Activity: August 05, 2005 9:09 AM is

He has been here quite a long time and recently admitted to having over 20 aliases. It would appear when he has used up a nick he just transfers to a new nick. He generally starts controversial threads supporting the Bush agenda and has openly suggested the sterilization/genocide of Muslims and wiping Afghanistan and North Korea out with nukes, among other niceties.

RO denies the Eve Online puppet but sooo many called him on it. :p

What's the old saying--it's hard to convince a person of something when his livelihood is dependent on his believing the exact opposite.

True.

It would give Bush a nice boost...

That's what they all say.

Remote Observer

RO denies the Eve Online puppet but sooo many called him on it. :p

The odd thing is, I actually supported the denial for a very long time. He had me convinced he wasn't Deep Kimchi because he wasn't acting as ridiculous as Kimchi was.

Remote Observer

Join Date: April 9, 2007
Last Post: currently posting and is AKA

Eve Online?

Join Date: Nov. 28, 2006
Last Post: April 5, 2007, 2:58 PM
Last Activity: April 10, 2007 6:59 AM and is AKA

Deep Kimchi

Join Date: Oct. 20, 2005
Last Post Oct. 25, 2006, 6:02 AM
Last Activity: April 6, 2007 10:48 AM and is AKA

Sierra BHTP

Join Date: Sept. 2, 2005
Last Post: Nov 6, 2005, 3:58 PM
Last Activity: Nov. 6, 2005 4:33 PM and is AKA

Whispering Legs

Join Date: Jan. 26, 2005
Last Post: July 29, 2005, 3:04 PM
Last Activity: August 05, 2005 9:09 AM is

He has been here quite a long time and recently admitted to having over 20 aliases. It would appear when he has used up a nick he just transfers to a new nick. He generally starts controversial threads supporting the Bush agenda and has openly suggested the sterilization/genocide of Muslims and wiping Afghanistan and North Korea out with nukes, among other niceties.

RO denies the Eve Online puppet but sooo many called him on it. :p

Wait... he's Whispering Legs? Jesus, I didn't know that. I actually remember that from back when. Just as nuts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/20/AR2007072001241.html

You'd think this would be /thread.

Wait... he's Whispering Legs? Jesus, I didn't know that. I actually remember that from back when. Just as nuts.
When he was Whispering Legs, he and I had a lot of back and forth dialogue regarding gun control and the Iraq War.

The question is why? I'm willing to bet that many of those conservatives are unhappy with Congress for attempting to leave Iraq, and many of the liberals are unhappy with it for failing to do so.

Of course, a significant percentage on both sides is due to the uselessness of Congress in general.

Also the fact that they have failed to properly rein in Bush and Cheney.

I will not let anarchy take over America! Quick! Somebody else do it!

Speaking of anarchy..

Harold Crick: Miss Pascal, what you're describing is anarchy. Are you an anarchist?
Ana Pascal: You mean, am I a member of...
Harold Crick: An anarchist group, yes.
Ana Pascal: Anarchists have a group?
Harold Crick: I believe so, sure.
Ana Pascal: They assemble?
Harold Crick: I don't know.
Ana Pascal: Wouldn't that completely defeat the purpose?

RO appears to have everyone in an uproar.


I'm fairly new, so I haven't been around long enough to know much about anyone, but what did this guy do, kill someone's puppy or something?

lol

you guys really seem to have it in for him

or her, i guess


and for the topic of this thread goes, the poll inadequately explains the numbers that it gives out. For example, yes a majority of people could say that they do not approve of the job congress is doing, but WHO are they thinking of when they say congress?

for a majority of people, including myself, when I say I'm not satisfied with this congress, I'm talking about the republicans who stand only along party lines and lobbyist interests, instead of the will of the people and the sake of the nation.

I honestly think that Americans have lost faith in their government because everyone knows that all that matters to these congressmen is money.


BIG GREEN DOLLAR BILLS!!!!!!!


so, if I, just an average citizen, threaten my congressman/congresswoman that I'll pull my vote from them and vote for someone else, do you think it will impact them the same way than if a large lobbying corporation threatens to pull their multi-million dollar funding?


exactly


it's all about the money, and we've become like this because this is what society is like. Our capitalistic society has now made its way into our congressional halls.


should we not stop the corruption at the core?


The politicians who accept these lobbyist funding are not the core of the problem, they're the result.

The core would be the fact that large corporations are allowed to donate large sums of cold hard cash to politicians.

pretty much like how michael moore put it, if I don't donate to my congressman, but I am actively involved in politics and i do vote

but a large corporation DOES donate LOTS of money to my congressman

who is my congressman gonna listen to? Who's his daddy?

exactly

See, you would expect that. People often approve of their own congressional reps, but disapprove of everyone else's. An equivalent poll to compare to Bush's approval ratings therefore wouldn't be, "How do you feel about the job Congress is doing?" It would be, "How do you feel about the job Senator Shmoo is doing?" and would have to be asked in Senator Shmoo's state. I dare say you would not find a single score anywhere near as low as our lovably retarded president. :)

"Lovably" deserves a poll.

I should point out though that Shmoo was quite lovable most of the time, when not scary. Probably the opposite and with less of the "lovable" part in Shrubya's case.

I wonder if RO wants to bring up poll arguments he made with The Nazz back when the repubs were in control of congress, just for posterity's sake.
Probably not.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12895960&postcount=29

RO appears to have everyone in an uproar.


I'm fairly new, so I haven't been around long enough to know much about anyone, but what did this guy do, kill someone's puppy or something?

He's the latest screen name out of a bunch of Busheviks that includes Deep Kimchi, famous on NSG for proposing the creation of a virus that would somehow magically determine a human being's religious orientation, and if that person turned out to be a Muslim, sterilize him or her. As well as display a general attitude of "Kill 73h /\/\00h@/\/\/\/\3dd1nz" attitude towards Muslims as a whole.

All of the screen names will also go out of their way to post threads that either try to imply Muslims as a whole are savage, barbaric terrorist hiveminds that all have Bin Ladin on speed dial and that systematically preparing them for a Final Solution is a good thing, or threads that always defend Beloved Dear Leader George Dubya Bush as the greatest leader of the United States since Washington and the Roosevelts and make excuses or try to shift blame on for one of the Bush administration's many fuckups.

so by chance did these sad statistics come up because they locked 5 people in a room, each one a different view, and asked them their opinions or did they get valid opinions from numbers in the THOUSANDS..

Statistics cannot be trusted, especially polls, and even moreso, polls that provide no valid "how many we asked".

This isn't America thinks, its 500 random New Yorkers think..

He's the latest screen name out of a bunch of Busheviks that includes Deep Kimchi, famous on NSG for proposing the creation of a virus that would somehow magically determine a human being's religious orientation, and if that person turned out to be a Muslim, sterilize him or her. As well as display a general attitude of "Kill 73h /\/\00h@/\/\/\/\3dd1nz" attitude towards Muslims as a whole.


You forgot one of DK's most (in)famous quotes "Killing Muslims is better than sex".

He's the latest screen name out of a bunch of Busheviks that includes Deep Kimchi, famous on NSG for proposing the creation of a virus that would somehow magically determine a human being's religious orientation, and if that person turned out to be a Muslim, sterilize him or her. As well as display a general attitude of "Kill 73h /\/\00h@/\/\/\/\3dd1nz" attitude towards Muslims as a whole.

All of the screen names will also go out of their way to post threads that either try to imply Muslims as a whole are savage, barbaric terrorist hiveminds that all have Bin Ladin on speed dial and that systematically preparing them for a Final Solution is a good thing, or threads that always defend Beloved Dear Leader George Dubya Bush as the greatest leader of the United States since Washington and the Roosevelts and make excuses or try to shift blame on for one of the Bush administration's manymanymanymanymanymanymanymanymanymanymanymanymanymanymanymanyMANYMANYMANYMANY fuckups.

Fixed.

You forgot one of DK's most (in)famous quotes "Killing Muslims is better than sex".

Nothing is better than sex *nods*

How many people in that poll even know what would constitute their job let alone if it were good or bad?

Nothing is better than sex *nods*

What about the obvious .... sex WITH DK?

Approval ratings for congress are almost always low. Everybody hates congress but loves their congressman. It's essentially a meaningless statistic. What would be remarkable is if congress as a whole had an over 50% approval rating. That would be newsworthy. Having a low approval rating isn't really.

Approval ratings for congress are almost always low. Everybody hates congress but loves their congressman. It's essentially a meaningless statistic. What would be remarkable is if congress as a whole had an over 50% approval rating. That would be newsworthy. Having a low approval rating isn't really.

Not everybody. I hate my Congressman, Don Young. He's a pathetic piece of shit, a vestigal caricature that belongs in black and white Keystone Kops reruns.
Our senator blows mule too - Mr. Ted "Tubes"/"The Hulk" Stevens.

Seems like the Democrats made a lot of promises about ending the war that they knew were unfeasible.

ZOMG! Politicians made promises they couldn't deliver? Stop the presses! :rolleyes:

How many people in that poll even know what would constitute their job let alone if it were good or bad?

Few, if any.

What about the obvious .... sex WITH DK?

Thanks a lot. I just threw up a little.

Not everybody. I hate my Congressman, Don Young. He's a pathetic piece of shit, a vestigal caricature that belongs in black and white Keystone Kops reruns.
Our senator blows mule too - Mr. Ted "Tubes"/"The Hulk" Stevens.

It's a saying, actually. And of course it's not universally true, no general statement is, even if generally true.

What about the obvious .... sex WITH DK?

Why? Have you had some kind of orgy with the Dead Kennedys? :confused:

Bingo. Funny how, no matter how many times we post this sort of explanation, RO never seems to get it.

RO needs a Poli sci class.

Nothing is better than sex *nods*

So very true.

NationStates General?

NationStates General?

Nah, that's not as good as sex.

Well. What a wonderful topic I think I'll add my two cents. For starters as my name suggests I absolutely "HATE" the Senate. I personally believe everyone one of those 100 corrupt bastards should be hung...after being tarred and feathered. Now that, that cheery picture is out of the way:

The House of Representatives should be given all congressional power. I may not personally like my own rep but the fact is its easier to vote out a corrupt representative than a corrupt senator. The latter is nigh impossible. YOU try to convince a whole state their senator is corrupt...I live in California both my senators and my congresswoman are corrupt....i live in a really bad area no? I really couldn't care less as far as bush is concerned. he doesn't have much time left anyway and our current congress isn't going to pass any bills for him to sign anyway. Oh and the impeachment idea won't work..its been passed around for a long time and it hasn't really been considered by congress yet. (It never will be)

Now for the more serious stuff. I remember reading someone said that the Republicans in particular are bought by lobbyists...that statement makes me laugh....THEY ARE ALL BOUGHT BY LOBBYISTS. I don't care which party your from if you accept donations from a lobbyist group...THEY OWN YOU! And I believe Michael Moore was mentioned somewhere...don't get me started on him...less then half the crap he spews is truth and its all biased....its because of his Fahrenheit movie i remained IGNORANT to the truth of the whole thing for years. Never trust someone who gets paid a lot of money to make a documentary based on their own warped political beliefs. Now if he made his movies through a non-profit organization i MIGHT listen to what he has to say. It wasn't until I saw Loose Change years later that my eyes were opened. Good movie I recommend it.

As I republican I can honestly say that both parties have gotten on my nerves in recent times. The Democrats are just causing problems for political gain and the republicans aren't doing ANYTHING right...both parties suck. The only good thing they've done recently was keep that amnesty bill from going forward...and thats already old news. Ironically this whole idea was promoted by a republican which shows just how far the party has fallen. I hope McCain is seriously humiliated in the up coming election.

Am i surprised that congress has lower appeal than Bush? Not really. They cause just as much problems as he does...actually more. In fact I'll leave you with a fun fact: If Pro is the opposite of Con. What is the opposite of Progress?

RO needs a Poli sci class.
Please. No one needs a political science class. It would be far more useful to take some economics and some statistics classes, read a lot of history, and then go out on your own. Work for a few campaigns, volunteer for a couple politicians...

So? Americans always think less of Congress than they do of the President. Always. It's virtually meaningless to bother making comparisons between a specific Congress and a specific President.

It would be significant if the President were doing particularly WELL while Congress is doing particularly poorly, but when they are both doing poorly and Congress happens to be worse... well, it's just meaningless.

See, you would expect that. People often approve of their own congressional reps, but disapprove of everyone else's. An equivalent poll to compare to Bush's approval ratings therefore wouldn't be, "How do you feel about the job Congress is doing?" It would be, "How do you feel about the job Senator Shmoo is doing?" and would have to be asked in Senator Shmoo's state. I dare say you would not find a single score anywhere near as low as our lovably retarded president. :)That's exactly right.

So? Americans always think less of Congress than they do of the President. Always. It's virtually meaningless to bother making comparisons between a specific Congress and a specific President.

It would be significant if the President were doing particularly WELL while Congress is doing particularly poorly, but when they are both doing poorly and Congress happens to be worse... well, it's just meaningless.
I think the trends are more interesting. The current Congress is at a 12 year low. The last time it was this low was 1994. Guess which party held the majority during that year?

I see a trend. Abysmal ratings when a Democratic Congress is in session and slightly improved ratings when they're booted out. I figure most voters want some sort of action from their Congress.

To be fair, the only time Congressional ratings were worse was after the House impeached Clinton.

So you see what kind of company this Congress is keeping.

This probably won't make much difference this year, but if it continues through 2008, Bush's unfavorables might not be enough for the Democrats to post any more gains.

As I republican I can honestly say that both parties have gotten on my nerves in recent times. both parties suck.

AMEN:headbang:

What we need to remember is the word Politician. I don't trust anyone who has enough power to vote their own self a raise. Should the PEOPLE not be in charge of the raise part?

What I don't understand is why Clinton was impeached when he had an affair with that secretary, but when Bush started a war and killed over 3,000 people, over 3,000 American people, he didn't get impeached. At least Clinton brought us out of debt, and even got us a surplus. Bush used all the surplus -and- brought the country into debt. And a lot of it. And why are we even in Iraq? We'ren't we supposed to be in Afganistan?:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:

What I don't understand is why Clinton was impeached when he had an affair with that secretary, but when Bush started a war and killed over 3,000 people, over 3,000 American people, he didn't get impeached. At least Clinton brought us out of debt, and even got us a surplus. Bush used all the surplus -and- brought the country into debt. And a lot of it. And why are we even in Iraq? We'ren't we supposed to be in Afganistan?:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:

To be clear, and I'll probably fuck some little part of this up and someone else will correct me, but he didn't bring us out of debt, we were still in a heap load of debt, what he did do was bring spending in line with income, so to speak. The surplus was money the government generated (through taxes) in excess of what it needed.

Instead of using that surplus to pay down the debt or put it aside for up coming crisis (the unfortunately named 'lock box' that would have suddenly come in handy when some dickwads slammed jets into buildings...), he gave us all $300 to vote for him.

Did you enjoy your $300?

To be clear, and I'll probably fuck some little part of this up and someone else will correct me, but he didn't bring us out of debt, we were still in a heap load of debt, what he did do was bring spending in line with income, so to speak. The surplus was money the government generated (through taxes) in excess of what it needed.
His fiscal policies reduced the amount of debt burden as a % of GDP.
http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP.gif

Why? Have you had some kind of orgy with the Dead Kennedys? :confused:

Am i surrounded by whelps?
Who HASN'T?
:rolleyes:
;)
Well, dead *something*. It didn't seem to matter what i named them, they didn't seem to mind much.

Nah, that's not as good as sex.

What if Nationstates General had group sex with you?
*DK's night in the barrel, WooT!*

I'm claiming sloppy 19ths.

And I believe Michael Moore was mentioned somewhere...don't get me started on him...less then half the crap he spews is truth and its all biased....its because of his Fahrenheit movie i remained IGNORANT to the truth of the whole thing for years.

Wow, you took someone else's representation of personality as an excuse for your own ignorance?
Sounds republican to me. Very Bush-loving.
Hopefully you've grown out of it.

Never trust someone who gets paid a lot of money to make a documentary based on their own warped political beliefs. Now if he made his movies through a non-profit organization i MIGHT listen to what he has to say. It wasn't until I saw Loose Change years later that my eyes were opened. Good movie I recommend it.
right. So if someone makes money from their movie, we shouldn't listen to them. But if they don't then their opinions are somehow much more valid and correct.
oh yeah, that's really works. That's real logical.
To call Loose Change's work a documentary is an afront to the word 'documentary'. To call it a biased, convoluted, selective fact-use, ignorant (and arrogant) bag of crap is more apt.
Do yourself a favour and check out the all the critical reviews of Loose Change's work of fiction and see for yourself just how 'unbiased' and 'truthful' it really is.

In fact I'll leave you with a fun fact: If Pro is the opposite of Con. What is the opposite of Progress?
gosh, I've never heard that witticism before. How delightful. Next you'll be telling us to google 'French Military victories'.