I noticed a trio of articles about congress today, and they all really had the same theme:  Our leaders are in trouble in the court of opinion and they are frantically spinning damage control

 Voters unhappy with Bush and Congress

The Reuters/Zogby Index, which measures the mood of the country, also fell from 98.8 to 96 — the second consecutive month it has dropped. The number of Americans who believe the country is on the wrong track jumped four points to 66 percent.

Bush’s job approval rating fell to 24 percent from last month’s record low for a Zogby poll of 29 percent. A paltry 11 percent gave Congress a positive grade, tying last month’s record low.

“There is a real question among Americans now about how relevant this government is to them,” pollster John Zogby said. “They tell us they want action on health care, education, the war and immigration, but they don’t believe they are going to get it.”

The dismal assessment of the Republican president and the Democratic-controlled Congress follows another month of inconclusive political battles over a future path in Iraq and the recent Bush veto of an expansion of the program providing insurance for poor children.

More info about this at: MoJoBlog, Washington Wire, The Swamp, Simply Left Behind, Roger L. Simon, Conservative Belle, First Draft, The Strata-Sphere and Pensito Review

While the left may chortle at Bush’s depressing numbers, they should be more concerned about the mood swing in the country over their performance in Congress.  When the  Democrats engineered their Washington DC regime change in 2006 they promised a new era.  And not only has that new era not come to pass, they have fallen squarely back into the self serving gridlock that they claimed they wanted to cut through.  Earmarks, corruption, back room deals and a complete lack of promise fulfillment has made the New Direction Congress a farce.

Bush himself was on the defensive in a press conference today, and leveled direct accusations at congress for playing games and not doing their jobs.  This editorial however gives that speech a failing grade and accuses Bush of being a Bully:  

Bush: ‘I Am Relevant’

A defensive President Bush insisted that he was still relevant this morning in a news conference dominated by his bitter complaints about the Democratic Congress.

Asked how he found himself vetoing a children’s health insurance bill that had passed Congress with bipartisan support, Bush insisted that using a veto is “one way to ensure I am relevant.”

…

Bush said that “now it’s time to put politics aside and seek common ground.” But New York Times reporter Sheryl Gay Stolberg asked: “This morning, you gave us a pretty scathing report card on Democrats. . . . I’m wondering, how would you assess yourself in dealing with Democrats this past year? How effective have you been in dealing with them on various issues? And do you think you’ve done a good job in finding common ground?”

In his response, Bush demonstrated that his idea of common ground involves Democrats caving in and giving him whatever he asks for.

I thought in his speech he was at his best and worst.  Where he was expecting the questions he was spot on with his answers.  Where he was taken aback or unprepared he was halting and slow, but still eventually gave decent answers.

The press was gunning for him, but he refused to play the game:

“QUESTION: Thank you, sir. A simple question.

“BUSH: Yes?

“QUESTION: What’s your definition of —

“BUSH: It may require a simple answer.

“(LAUGHTER)

“QUESTION: What’s your definition of the word torture?

“BUSH: Of what?

“QUESTION: The word torture, what’s your definition?

“BUSH: That’s defined in U.S. law, and we don’t torture

Did he evade the question?  Sure he did, because he knew it was a loaded one.  Had he answered with anything he would have been chewed apart on the interpretations and definitions.  He answered it the only way he could.

The point is that if you want to look at one reason his number suck, it is because the press is solidly against him.

He could have come out, announced the troops were coming home tomorrow, that social security was now fixed and that OJ had confessed and they would have continued to hammer him, and then wrote articles about his smug gloating and how he was a racist for accusing OJ.

No, I do not contend that the media is so opposed to Bush that he can safely blame them for his numbers.

But if all you hear are the bad things, it does have an impact.

So what about congress?  How about those Earmarks:

 Timing of gifts stirs ‘earmark’ debate

Days after a Senate committee approved $1 million for a Woodstock concert museum, the project’s Republican billionaire backer and his family contributed $29,200 to help the Democrats who requested the money, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Charles Schumer.

It’s neither illegal nor unusual for contributors to benefit from congressionally directed spending known as earmarks. But the timing of the June donations is grist for critics who see a link between legislative pet projects and campaign money.

“If you don’t help their campaign, they’re not going to be as friendly with the earmarks next time,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who will seek to amend a spending bill this week to redirect the Woodstock money to educate homeless children.

The man behind the project is Alan Gerry, a former cable television mogul and registered Republican. State government pitched in $15 million for the $100 million project, most of which was funded by Gerry himself through a foundation.

Making political contributions is “something we think a good citizen should do,” Gerry said, adding that he believes the earmark is unrelated to the donations.

On the federal level, Gerry, his wife and three children have given $507,800 since 1998, including $272,050 to Democrats and $212,750 to Republicans, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Gerry’s wife, Sandra, is a registered Democrat.

Most of the Democratic recipients helped the Woodstock venture. Since 2005, the Gerrys have donated $150,000 to the Schumer-led Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and $18,600 to Clinton

More at:  Captain’s Quarters, Heading Right, Washington Times, Los Angeles Times, Don Surber, The Van Der Galiën Gazette, Debbie Schlussel and pw pub

So how does Speaker Pelosi see it? Besides blaming Bush, obviously. Blame the Senate of course.

Pelosi sours on Senate

Frustrated by lack of legislative progress in the Senate, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is increasingly touting Democratic achievements in the House.

Her statements represent a significant shift from the stance she took six months ago. In March, the Speaker celebrated the first 100 days of the congressional majority by stating, “Democrats have brought the winds of change to the Capitol.”

These days, she’s confined to claiming those winds are blowing on her side of the building. In the minds of her caucus members, the Senate is in the doldrums and House members are paying the price for Senate inaction on Democratic priorities.

When pressed on the slow progress of spending bills during ABC’s Sunday morning talk show “This Week,” Pelosi passed the buck to the Senate, saying, “In the House we’ve passed every one of our bills.”

The change in talking points at the top reflects a deepening frustration among House Democrats, who are irritated with lack of progress in the Senate and are starting to publicly press their Senate counterparts to stop letting Republicans use procedural tactics and instead force Republicans to carry out a filibuster, if that’s what it takes.

The comments also signal a growing unease within the House Democratic Caucus about the difficulty Senate Democrats are having in attracting sufficient GOP support for controversial bills. The Senate gridlock is undermining Democrats’ ability to tout the first Democratic-controlled Congress since 1994 and is playing a role in the public’s disapproval of the legislative branch. 

And again more at:  The Carpetbagger Report, WorkingForChange, Wake up America, Conservative Belle, Redstate and Brian Beutler

They can act shocked and but when the Republicans ran congress there was no lack of obstructionist tactics on the Democrats side of the aisle.

As I said, in the end, Congress is business as usual.

Trackposted to Nuke’s, Perri Nelson’s Website, The Virtuous Republic, Right Celebrity, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The Populist, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Stuck On Stupid, Cao’s Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Big Dog’s Weblog, The Pet Haven, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS