We hear that the US Congress has a 7 % approval rating (meaning that only 7 out of every 100 US adults views Congress’ performance favorably). If this be true, then how can we explain the expected outcome of the elections coming this November? The expected outcome is that the vast majority (80 – 90%) of incumbents (current elected office holders) will be re-elected and returned to office for another term.
Perhaps the sample size of this survey (or public opinion poll) was not large enough and/or not random enough to accurately gauge the views of American adults.
We saw this same type of voter behavior in the late 1990s with the call for term limits for those in Congress (both in the Senate and the House of Representatives). Opinion polls at the time showed fairly widespread support for such term limits, yet most incumbents were returned to office in the late 1990s. This means that many people who claimed they wanted term limits went out and voted for the current (often long-standing) incumbents. I guess we like our own incumbent office holders, but despise the incumbents in other neighboring congressional districts and in other states of the country.
Here is how this behavior is nonsensical. Often when you re-elect a current federal office holder in your state, he or she is going to vote the same way on proposed legislation as many of the incumbents that you want ousted would vote. For example, if I do not like Senator Barbara Boxer (from California) and desire term limits so that she will be retired, yet I then vote to re-elect Senator Harry Reid (in my current home state of Nevada), I have voted for an incumbent that has rarely ever voted differently from Senator Boxer. Thus, it is hard to fathom the voting behavior of many Americans given the opinion polls that tell us these Americans are disillusioned, disenchanted and disgusted with the current members of Congress in Washington.
I wonder what Jonathan Swift, or Voltaire, or Mark Twain would think of this behavior.
other related thoughts
The Tea Party movement has failed primarily because it had hoped to be able to gain significant influence within the Republican party. Neither of the 2 major (corrupt) political parties can be reformed. That is the reality. When the piece of fruit you hold in your hand is rotten to the core, one must throw it out and seek a fresher piece of fruit. We need new parties, if it is not already too late to save this sinking ship of state. (Some people are calling for a convention of the states. This is allowed for by the US Constitution, but is there the will to pull it off?)
The US mainstream media, which runs interference for Obama and his political allies, would have us believe that conservatism was tried and failed under former President George W. Bush. No, this is not true. What was tried under the Republicans was, for lack of a more suitable term, “republicanism” – not true conservatism. True conservatism, as in smaller government and more respect for the Constitution (and its principles) by those in government, has not been seriously tried since prior to the time of Franklin Roosevelt, if not Woodrow Wilson. (Ronald Reagan expanded the size of the federal government in his 8 years as president.)
Given the sins of commission of the Democrats, and the sins of omission of the Republicans, who can true independents (that want a return to our Constitution’s principles) vote for?
Just what is the deal with the tens of thousands of young males flooding across our southern border right now? Most of these “children” are teenage males older than 14. Are these the recruits for a possible Obama Jugend (or Obama Youth)? (In fairness to the Hitler Jugend, those young men rebuilt West Germany after 1945. Originally, the Hitler Youth was aimed at building character among young people in the 1930s after the terribly demoralizing years of the Weimar Republic of the 1920s.)
My 3 part essay on the enormity of Obama’s crimes posted late last year is seriously out of date and needs revision as Obama adds to his growing list of crimes weekly, if not daily.
The US Supreme Court routinely legislates from the bench and ignores the US Constitution (the de jure governing document of the nation). The justices look more to prior judicial “precedents” than at the Constitution in coming to their legal opinions. The effect is that the Court’s previous decisions (even its bad decisions) become the benchmark to adjudicate future cases that come before the Court. (Thus, previous bad decisions and their effects – that are not in accord with the Constitution – are perpetuated.) What we have seen for the past several years is the high court often rubber stamping its approval of the expansion of federal government power at the expense of our constitutional rights and liberties (recall the Obama Care decision of June, 2012).
3 very corrupt and out of control branches of government.
“3 strikes and you are out” comes from the game of baseball. America: you have 3 strikes against you, and you are out! Game over. Sadly, the attempts at real reform have come much too late. You cannot realistically expect to come back and win the game in the bottom of the ninth inning when there are already 2 outs.
You millenials, young people: Obama (and his cabinet and administration), Congress and the Supreme Court (brigands all) are robbing you of your future. Their “progressive” agenda is narrowing the possibilities for your lives. You cannot possibly wish to continue living with mommy and daddy when your are 35 or 40 or even older. (Be sure now to queue up in November and re-elect these miscreants, but please do not expect things to improve to any substantive degree.)
The pic for this essay is the face of the Supreme Court – or at least of the liberal/radical wing of the court – Ruth Bader Ginsburg (formerly of the ACLU), an embittered revolutionary.
Here is a much earlier essay that is relevant.
copyright 2014 – larrysmusings.com