Worst congress ever??

Add to this the fact that the two parties have a virtual duopoly on writing the rules to get on state ballots. The system is rigged to favor political parties with large grassroots organizations and access to large quantities of cash, which - the last time I checked - is limited to the Democrats and Republicans.

Even if we wanted to push for a third (or fourth, or fifth) political party, the finanical and staffing needs of mounting a 50-state campaign are mind boggling. Even H. Ross Perot with his impressive hoard of cash could not effectively overcome both of these barriers in 1992.

the real answer is this: the supreme court has to stand up against gerrymandering and safe districts created by state legislators - return to natural compact boundries. - So I guess you don't believe in separation of powers? The Supreme Court should hold over The Legislative branch? Why don't we just let the Pres fill the Supreme Robes and tell Congress to go home, from what I'm reading you don't like the Congressional Leadership and wish someone else to lead? I'm gonna make a wild assumption if if was Dem's controlling the process you wouldn't be complaining about "gerrymandering". To the victor of the spoils or so I'm told.

I don't know about "worst congress ever" since the last one we had used kickbacks, parlor room games, and out right lies to pass the biggest budget busting measure known to this country in Barry-Care, oh yeah don't forget about TARP money pissed away (or we are not even told whats left), bailouts, and Nancy Pelosi never "drained the swamp" as she promised. Oh and they jacked spending 20%!!!!!

Umm Umm love that spending

separation of powers? it is telling the states what to do, not congress.

any suggestions for improvements or do you wish to just pretend the dems are the only problem?

any suggestions for improvements or do you wish to just pretend the dems are the only problem?

I think the answer to that is pretty obvious, fred and dbw will pretend that Dems are the only problem. No Rs (save Ron Paul) were out there beating the drum of fiscal responsibility from 2000-2008 while Bush and the Republican congress passed huge tax cuts and then entered two foreign wars, enacted a massive prescription drug giveaway and bailed out banks to the tune of $700B (everyone seems to forget that happened under Bush's watch). But Obama gets into office, tries to give the uninsured some health care coverage and all of the sudden Republicans are screaming that Obama and the Democrats are mortgaging our childrens futures with all their reckless spending. It's like they think no one can remember anything that happened more than a year ago. But I can't blame them, most of the uninformed electorate doesn't.

And yet Obama outspent him easily.

And yet Obama outspent him easily.

So what? Bush outspent himself every year he was president:

Fiscal Years 2000 to 2008
Year GDP-US$ billion Total Spending-fed$ billion Federal Deficit-total$ billion
2000 9951.5 1789.22 a -236.24 a
2001 10286.2 1863.19 a -128.24 a
2002 10642.3 2011.15 a 157.75 a
2003 11142.1 2160.12 a 377.59 a
2004 11867.8 2293.01 a 412.73 a
2005 12638.4 2472.20 a 318.34 a
2006 13398.9 2655.44 a 248.19 a
2007 14077.6 2728.94 a 160.94 a
2008 14441.4 2982.55 a 458.55 a

And yet Obama outspent him easily.

So what? Bush outspent himself every year he was president and turned a $236B surplus into a $450B deficit.

My point is that no Rs seemed to give a shit back then. All of the sudden, Obama is in office and the Rs are fiscal conservatives. Let's face it: Republicans are as profligate spenders as Democrats. It's the Republican hypocrisy of talking like a fiscal conservative while spending like a drunken sailor that annoys me.

First of all I didn't vote for Barry or McCain, second of all us Libertarians were out there beating the drum of fiscal responsibility from 2000-2008. But I guess fiscal hawks like Obama and Pelosi, who where both for war spending before they where against it, where not for the "surge" before they where for it, and did not support raising the debt limit before they where before it. BOTH PARTIES ARE FUCKING US!

And my point being the 6 years while Dems controlled Congress spending went up 20%! Complain bout GWB all you want, Dems had control of the purse strings and did NOTHING to stop him.

Turn off the daily show for 5 mins and stop getting your news from an entertainment channel that specializes in South Park and fart jokes.

Complain bout GWB all you want, Dems had control of the purse strings and did NOTHING to stop him.

Thats not strictly true in that Republicans controlled the House for 6 of Bush's eight years and the Senate for 4 of the eight.

There's plenty of blame to go around on this one. Both Moonbats and Wingnuts have been spending like there's no tomorrow, and not just in a war we neither needed nor wanted. The only meaningful difference between the two parties is... I can't think of one. Both parties should be eliminated from the beltway.

K Street should not be the most powerful address in America. Ace & ESandwich I agree with you more on social and economic issues more than you probley think, but to just scream about "Chimpy McFlight Suit" cause it's cool or funny and ignore the 6 years of Dem control of congress loses any debate you start. They had to hand the mental midget the keys to the Kingdom in the first place. The Patroit Act was passed in the House by 357 to 66 and in the Senate by 98 to 1 and was supported by members of both the Republican and Democratic parties. Lots of Dems voted for (and still do) the War Machine.

Bush fucked up, I'm sorry I voted for him the second time, John Kerry was not fit to lead. It was he last time I ever closed my eyes and pulled the "R" lever. I admit I learned my lesson. But to blame the worlds problems on The Teabaggers who have not been in office for a full 2 years is just as bad as blaming Obama for where we are now. I don't agree with his leadership and I think he has drove us further into the ditch but it's not all his fault.

(Apologies for the length, but this story pissed me off this morning)

Here...add this bullshit to your spending debate (along with the Tarta solar panels):

U.S. Funds to Supply Backpacks For Lucas County Children

Lucas County Job and Family Services will spend as much as $230,000 in federal funds in the coming weeks to outfit schoolchildren with more than 5,000 supply-filled backpacks.

But with charities, churches, and businesses conducting similar school-supply drives at no cost to taxpayers -- and the Federal Government's $14 trillion debt the focus of Congressional debate -- the purchase raises questions of whether federal money should be spent on programs when there's already a robust private sector alternative.

------

No fucking shit "raises questions"! Does any parent anywhere in this city have a responsibility to take care of their child and buy a few school supplies once a year??? ANYONE? I'm not trying to be hard hearted, but school supplies do NOT break anyone's bank account except in the most dire of circumstances. You're telling me that nearly 5,300 students/parent(s) in this district are in the most dire of circumstances, unable to afford the most basic supplies of their children's education? After rent assistance, food stamps, Medicaid, hot breakfast and lunch, other family assistance, churches, etc.? Come on....

Or do the parents just not give a shit about their kids, their education, or anything else? It's just about getting a freebie? In that case, the kids don't need just a backpack...they need a jetpack to blast out of there...

Here comes the math. Remember they are going to spend up to $230,000:

------

The program, which was given the go-ahead by Lucas County Board of Commissioners, will allow Job and Family Services to buy 5,282 backpacks, fill them with school supplies, and distribute them to all county children who qualify under the cash assistance program.

Supplies will be targeted by grade level. For example, pupils in kindergarten to second grade will get a box of 24 crayons, glue, markers, scissors, tissues, and notebooks. The other grade splits are third to fifth and sixth to 12th. Commissioners approved a contract not to exceed $250,000, though Job and Family Services expects to spend no more than $230,000.

------

$230,000/5,282 = $43.54 average cost. Not that bad you say??? For 24 crayons (A bigger box-- 64 count --is $3 at WalMart), glue (4 pack at Walmart is $5.44 -- let's call it $2 for one bottle), scissors ($2), markers (2 pack of 8 at Walmart for $5.80 -- let's call it $4 for individual 8 pack), tissues (3 pack for $4.50 -- let's call it $2 for one box), and notebooks (0.10-0.25 cents right now at any big box retailer) with a backpack ($8-$10)??? Even me completely overestimating costs by paying a retail price doesn't bring me anywhere close to what these fucking morons are paying. Older kids backpacks will not be over $43 so that argument on the cost is out. Not to mention that WalMart is retailing the same damn thing for $20 + shipping! Not $43.50--$20. Someone is making at least double profit on money meant for your children.

But do you want to see the political logic that makes people throw up in their mouths??? When we are supposedly debating "cancelling grandmas social security and medicare because of the debt" (what bullshit, but I digress)? What animates those evil "cut spending" tea partiers??? It's in the next two paragraphs:

-------

The funding comes through Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, a federal block grant program that is sent to the states and then divided among the individual counties. Lucas County expects to receive about $12.7 million over the July, 2011, to June, 2012, state fiscal year. The county must return unspent temporary assistance money, and it is the intent of Job and Family Services to return none, officials said.

----------

That's right. Never return ANY money. Spend it all! Spend it all and never look back!!! Don't be an example of fiscal responsibility. Don't show you are good financial stewards of the people's money! SPEND SPEND SPEND!!! Santa Claus is coming to town...every single July!!! But mention cutting this small, duplicative-of-the-private-charity-sector program??? OH HELL NO...you just want "the children" to starve, you teabagging bastard!

----------

"As soon as there's no need in our community, we will be the first to send it back," said county Administrator Peter Ujvagi, a former Democratic city councilman and state representative.

---------

Right, Peter...right. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Fat douchebag has been a drain on this town for 30 years and continues his mission to buy votes whatever way he can...

"hot breakfast and lunch" don't forget dinner too!

Come on you know those "evil rich people" got the money to take care of us all from cradle to grave, lets storm the castles! And you wonder why we have had 2 or 3 generations of Americans who believe EVERYTHING should be paid for by the Evil Rich. Viva La Redistribution!

OK this annoyed me also (and I'm somewhat liberal.) So first, can we please NOT blame the unions for this one? OK that said, when i was in grade school, we didn't even NEED a backpack, our supplies were carried in a bag left over from the grocery store and stored in our DESK'S. There is simply no need for a backpack in grade school. Second, in Junior high and high school, again supplies were stored in LOCKERS. I supposed some kids may have had to have a book bag if they were too lazy to do work in class and had to carry a ton of books home every day, but at least for myself, i don't remember even needing one, because i could CARRY the books home that i needed.

And OK fine, if churches and private entities want to do this, fine, more power to you, but in no way, shape or form should the government be wasting our money on something like this!