Nancy And Harry, Public Enemy #1
June 27th, 2008 by jacob
This is truly a first. Our congress is less popular than used car salesmen, dog catchers and arch villains that tie beautiful damsels to the train tracks. People prefer bad breath to congress. OK, maybe not bad breath, but the following does tell an incredible story …
HMO’s are more popular than congress. You know those guys who in the movies leave grandma on a gurney outside the hospital to die? Yeah, those guys are more popular than our elected officials. According to Henniger at the Wall Street Journal
At the bottom of the heap, displacing HMOs as our worst institution, one finds the second branch of government, our Congress, at 12%. The Gallup folks noted it is “the worst rating Gallup has measured for any institution in the 35-year history of this question.” Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, come on down! You’ve made history.
Congress has become a bad joke. With 74% of the American people wanting us to drill for oil domestically, what does Nancy Pelosi say in response to $4 a gallon gas?
It’s an energy policy “literally written by the oil industry - give away more public resources,” declared House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California.
OK Nancy darling, who is going to drill for the stuff OTHER than oil companies? Do you want to start a government program to do this, nationalizing the oil industry perhaps? Some Democrats have called for this from the floor of the house. Is that where you are going?
There is nothing a Democrat hates worse than an American company being able to make money while helping the American public with a crisis. When there is a crisis, money must be lost and the government has to do the helping, unless it is a Republican president in office, then of course nothing can go right. Speaking of presidents, Bush, our buffoon in chief, is more than TWICE as popular than congress. This is remarkable as the president has managed to alienate just about everyone in the country except … well … hmmm. It is remarkable! At 12% the odds are that many of the mothers of those in congress think they are doing a lousy job.
Some of the other groups that score worse than the president are Unions and the Mainstream Media. Considering that congress, Unions, and MSM are the big three of the modern left, is it possible that mood of the country reflects a desire for a truly conservative alternative? I wonder how well the likes of MoveOn.org would score?
The people at the top of the heap are the military, despite it’s involvement in Iraq and the MSM policy of only bad news from Iraq is fit to print, or, report. Then comes small business, the police and organized religion. All the above are conservative entities. Considering the publics current distaste for Republicans it is becoming clear that the party is no longer associated by the public at large with conservative principles. It appears that the country is seeking a conservative response to the socialistic instincts of the modern Democrat party.
It is obvious they are not seeing this response in the modern Republican party.
This entry was posted on Friday, June 27th, 2008 at 7:22 am and is filed under Culture, Den of Thieves, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
June 27th, 2008 at 8:46 am
FYI - Congress does not consist of only Nancy and Harry as your headline implies!
June 27th, 2008 at 9:03 am
No, but they do run the asylum and Nancy has set the rules up in the house so that the buck and everything else stops with her. She is one autocratic little queen bee.
June 27th, 2008 at 9:05 am
I believe that people prefer bad breath over congress - but you will never hear that in the media!
June 27th, 2008 at 9:17 am
I suppose you’d rather do WITHOUT a congress.
Or you GOOD people could stand for election, i.e. if you can take all the criticism and digging into private affairs and stupid things you did in kindergarten and before and have the millions of dollars it takes to run for office and don’t mind being deep in debt, should you lose.
Just a thought. Criticizing is soooo easy! There’s a difference between bitching and positive criticism, IMO.
June 27th, 2008 at 9:21 am
“here’s a difference between bitching and positive criticism, IMO.”
Heal thyself!!! The left suffers from BDS to the n-th degree, and no move made by either Bush or any other republican for that matter warrants anything other than criticism.
Waaaaggh! your picking on Democrats, waaagh! What a total load of crap.
June 27th, 2008 at 9:27 am
Lovisa,
Speaker of the House Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid set the tone and direction of their individual chambers. As predicted they are doing a piss poor job of managing and the job approval rating of the entire Congress is lower than the IRS. Unfortunately they are not being held accountable for their actions and inactions, and it is people like you that give them a pass. you should know better.
I won’t leave the ineffectiveness and blatant hypocrisy of an overhwelming majority of Congress go unmentioned, but the leaders of each chamber must take the lion’s share of the blame. I can only predict the business of the people of this country will go undone until these 2 are removed from their posts, and hopefully their seats.
June 27th, 2008 at 9:31 am
“BDS” ??????
June 27th, 2008 at 10:24 am
I was in bar recently, and a guy stood and screamed “All Congressman are assholes!”.
A moment later, a rather inebriated patron also arose shouting “I resent that!”
“What, are you a Congressman ?” asked the first.
“No, I’m an asshole” replied the second.
TGIF.
June 27th, 2008 at 10:25 am
lovisa,
BDS: Bush Derangement Syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Derangement_Syndrome
coined in 2003, considering it is a term 5 years old, I almost wonder if you ain’t pulling my leg. Get out sometime, read something.
June 27th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Ignorance, ignorance on my part, jacob. Be patient with me. I’m learning. -
I DO get out, but somehow BDS has never come up in any conversation I’ve had, and I talk to a lot of people. I mean, I always talk to the checkout people in the market and say Hola to the Mac-makers with a “?como Usted?”
June 27th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Guess that should be : “como ESTA Usted”
June 27th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
NoVisa,
I also didn’t know what BDS was but I have no patience with you if you are going around talking spanish while liven in the USA. Like Cathymac said, people like you that give them a pass. What disaster or mishap do you need to endure before you “see the light”?
June 27th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
I did run for office, and one of the things I said is that because I’ve run, I have the right to complain. So now you get to listen.
Congress in general is made up of persons that have no inclination to serve the people; they serve only themselves. Elected officials are chosen for electability, not because they are better at doing the job than someone else. Electability — not capability — is what people vote for in primaries and, truth be told, in general elections. When you get material about a candidate running for office, does it state how they will vote on major issues, or does it give you fuzzy words about issues without any controversy and background about how wonderful a person they are?
In a very real sense, we have a system that majors on these minors all the time. After all, we elect people for 4, 6 or even 8 years at a time. Someone can do a horrid job for all but the last 18 months and come out smelling like a rose. There is no “fire the bum” after 90 days, or 6 months, or even telling a representative that they have done a poor job and they need to clean up their act as they are being placed on probation.
The only time a politician has to worry is when they are getting close to election time. Why do you suppose that unpopular laws are passed right after elections, and not right before?
Bush stinks; congress stinks; 4/9ths of the SCOTUS stinks; local politicians tend to stink (I’ll give some credit, but not many — and that is mostly a bow to my mother-in-law who I find intelligent, honest, and totally wrong politically). The only difference between the heavy duty politicians in this country and the old soviet union is that the ones in this country are limited by a constitution that is hard to overturn.
June 28th, 2008 at 12:12 am
Brian,
Tell us how you REALLY feel-after you have a Tums!
“The only difference between the heavy duty politicians in this country and the old soviet union is that the ones in this country are limited by a constitution that is hard to overturn.”
The Soviet Union has nothing on this bunch. And when you say a constitution that is hard to overturn; since when did the congress ever let the constitution stand in their way?
June 28th, 2008 at 12:12 am
That’s a pretty good overview of things, Professor Withnell, and succinctly stated. Thank you. We need to get some more mileage out of that little lecture.
June 28th, 2008 at 5:19 am
Well, dear ACTivist, so sorry to strain you patience.
You mean that I am causing disaster by saying “como esta” rather than “hi”? Could I be punished?
The manager of my neighborhood Mac is from Syria and I would greet her in Syrian or Arabic, if I knew how. I’ll ask her next time I’m in. Friendliness is next to godliness.
Arrivederci, ACTivist! Hasta la vista, even!
June 29th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Jacob et all,
Just tell me a few things. If drilling is allowed in the U.S., exactly where is it going to be processed? Where is the infrastructure to support this? What type of drilling will be done? Is it a form that does not cause environmental damage? What about the state rights? What if they don’t want drilling in their state? Does the Federal government have the right to override? What about when oil runs out?
Please enlighten us.
June 29th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Sorry about the lecture Joe. Sometimes things just hit me wrong. The idea that there can be positive criticism for those in congress you have to first think they would listen and that they care. I’m not sure many of them do. I know a guy who is a lobbyist in DC, and when I’ve said things like my post he doesn’t say much. When I asked him why (I respect him greatly) he essentially said that what I was saying is true for at least 90% of the people on the hill. He didn’t have anything to add, and so just remained silent. Some of what I see is from afar. I know people that work with heavy-weight politicians (or very closely around them) and I know what they are like from reading what they have said, and looking at how they vote. Having what I think confirmed by people that deal with these guys every day makes it difficult for me to think politicians should be given the benefit of the doubt. I can understand the poll because it reflects what we see in these people. I wish it weren’t so.
Elective office should be onerous, low paying (no more than the average wage of the people represented) and without huge long terms. If it were, people would not enter elective office as a career. That would be a good thing. They would enter elective office as a service, and they would have to get out soon thereafter. More people would be directly involved, and we might actually see the country straighten out.
June 29th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
Robin,
Most of our refineries are at full capacity right now. But there is more to it than that …
1. there is a new refinery being built in the Dakotas, it will take a few years to come on line, but so will the new drilling.
2. too much of our oil comes from people who hate us, increasing the domestic supply while waiting for new technologies to develop is prudent
3. any increase in the world wide supply will help with the current market rate of oil, the Chinese and Indian demand is what is driving the speculative end of the market
fair enough?
July 1st, 2008 at 7:22 pm
Jacob,
A fair response and I thank you for it but…
If they are at full capacity and the one in the Dakotas will take a few years, and the drilling will take a few years then wouldn’t it be appropriate to invest some money in some renewable resources that are already available?
I certainly agree that too much of our oil comes from people who hate us and increasing the domestic supply while waiting for new technologies to develop is prudent (off topic but did you ever read “Princess”? Very scary) I would like to see those technologies developed here thus providing new jobs.
I do however believe that the increase in the world wide supply will be to small to help the market rate to any discernible degree.
I’m just wondering if we could develop some green tech that would provide jobs,ease our energy pain (Lord knows I wince every time I fill the old jalopy) and avoid harm to the earth. Maybe I’m dreaming but I’d love to see some good studies on it. I must say I have seen some good community efforts to ease the gas crunch.
China and India would benefit from going back to bicycles in their inner-cities(too many gas guzzling cars). They also need to stop the controls and allow the market to set the prices. We also need to stop pegging to the dollar IMHO.
