BarbaraS: if the Dems lose ground they will not have a veto proof congress. They need 66 in the senate for that.

I agree with term limits. We should have 3 maybe 4 terms for congress. Then you are done.

On second thought…what am I saying? The states should get to determine term limits!

The dems are awful, but the Repubs need a reformation.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I really with we cold throw them all out and start all over with people that actually work for regular people, not the special interests on both sides.

But if we have anything, it would be better to have the Republicans in power, at least they try and do the best with the children on the Left side of the aisle. If we learned anything in the past 2 years, it is the Dems are just a bunch of whiney children that can not stick to promises they put forth in the campaign and will do anything to go after Republicans, facts or no facts. Integrity be damned.

Even weak Republicans will be better than the children that are runnning CONgress right now.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

A McCain/Palin landslide where the Dems lose ground (esp any of the far left Dems) might be a best outcome

I don’t know how you can say that when the dems threaten impeachment all the time. If they have a veto proof congress then they will impeach McCain and Palin and put Nancy in as president. They have shown their childishness for the last two years with their endless investigations trying to find something anything to hang on the Bush administrations. What makes you think they will change?

And I’ll tell you this when the republicans took all those earmarks they were still not as corrupt as the dems. Facts have proven otherwise even with the MSN covering for them it has come out.
And the republicans did not spend all their time trying to investigate the dems. We need to put the adults back in Washington and tell the children (dems) to go home. I wish we could get term limits for all of them. No one needs to be in Washington for more than 8 or 12 years.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

The Webb Amendment failed because it eventually became clear that the Democrats were still playing politics with the war and the lives of our troops and the Iraqis. They wanted to throw a monkey wrench into troop deployment to guarantee failure of the surge.

_________________________________________________________________________
Secretary Robert Gates
Secretary of Defense
September 14, 2007

The complexity of managing the flow of units, individuals and capabilities to two active combat theaters is enormous and does not lend itself to simplistic, or to simple, legislative prescriptions…The cumulative effect of these kinds of things, we think, would, frankly, increase the risk to our men and women in uniform over there.

*

Fred Kagan
The American Enterprise Institute
September 14, 2007

The amendment as offered earlier this summer (when it garnered 56 votes in the Senate) would present a nightmare in execution…This amendment would insert a rigid inflexibility into the military planning process…If the commander of American forces in Iraq or Afghanistan concluded that some event were likely to require the deployment of additional forces to his theater, even for a brief time, this amendment would severely constrain the pool of units and personnel that could be sent…If American commanders are constrained to have only those “units and members” of the services in theater who have spent the requisite time at home, then a time will almost certainly come when they do not have the forces they need to accomplish their missions…

*

General Peter Pace
Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
September 14, 2007

[I]t’s just not simple math. So when people start picking at pieces of the process, it impacts parts of the process that you really don’t even see until you try to react to that and make it work.

*

Senator John McCain
Republican Senator from Arizona
September 15, 2007

Where in the Constitution of the United States does it say that the Congress decides how long people will spend on tours of duty and how long they will spend back in the United States? It’s blatantly unconstitutional…Is this all about helping the men and women in the military having a lighter burden, or is this another way of achieving a goal that they can’t get, a straight up or down vote on withdrawal?

*

James Carafano
The Heritage Foundation
September 16, 2007

The goal of this legislation is to limit the options available to (Secretary Gates), thereby tying Pentagon planners’ hands and forcing a de facto drawdown of U.S. force levels in Iraq. This legislation would undermine how America fights wars…Congress’s mandating deployment schedules would put U.S. forces and Americans at risk unnecessarily. Mandating deployment schedules would limit the Commander in Chief’s flexibility during war and would be the first step toward cutting and running in Iraq.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

RAP – The truth hurts, don’t it. Democrats don’t do anything besides complain and point the finger. They have no leadership skills whatsoever. Example: Obama (no experience).

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Sky,

Have you read the US Constitution lately?

Have you ever?

Can you show me in there who has the authority and responsibility for the military?

Can you show me in there who the responsibilities of Commander In Chief of the military falls to?

Hint….it’s not Congress.

Any bill that Congress tries to create which would hamstring the CIC is a bad bill and should rightly be considered unconstitutional, regardless of the political parties involved.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Bill C…

apparently you righties think allowing our soldiers more rest between Iraq deployments a batshit crazy bill…. are renewable resources.. a batshit crazy bill?? its seems your new hero McCain wants renewable resource bills.. or at least now he says so… although he has never voted for them..

yep Republicans.. they are simply astounding. Full of batshit is what they are..

Like or Dislike: 0  0

- OMG, seriously? That’s your defense of congress? They offer batshit crazy bills that would never have seen the light of day at any other time and the Republicans shoot them down,,, why?,,, because they are so batshit crazy that the Dems can’t get even one Republican *NOR* every democrat to support them,,, and you blame the Republicans??

Astounding, simply astounding.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Scott, you made this statement.
“The Democrats’ Congress is a failure-pure and simple. They are unable to compromise and have failed on almost every campaign promise from 2006. I voted Democrats into Congress in 2006, I will not make that mistake again.”

Are you aware the Republicans stopped most major bills in the senate with their BS Filibuster mentality this session. it was a do nothing Senate why??? the republicans stopped anything of value. Total obstructionism. The Republicans have become the filibuster everything Minority.
134 more than double the number of any other.

from the Atlantic.com:
A roll call of the bills subject to conservative filibuster shows a vision for a different America. Conservatives filibustered bills to end the occupation of Iraq, reduce subsidies for oil companies, and allow residents of the District of Columbia to vote. Conservatives used the filibuster to kill legislation that would increase renewable sources for electricity and that would allow soldiers in Iraq rest time equal to their deployments.

Will the republicans retake congress?? NOT a chance

Like or Dislike: 0  0

my husband and i had this conversation lastnight actually. it was interesting, he didn’t realize that congress has such a low approval rating. he is very nervous about obama being elected, his job is a union job, other than our benefits they do nothing for us. his union keeps sending literature about obama nad other democrats, we will be using it as fire starter. but we talked about a repub controlled congress and he was excited and i told him that it wasn’t a for sure good thing. we are waiting with bated breath, we are getting campaign signs for the first time ever. my husband actually is voting, he either forgets or chooses not to, but he is voting because he is afraid of the corruption in washington d.c.

Like or Dislike: 0  0