The Presidential election is now history.

The system shows it still works. A new administration will now take charge of the Executive Branch. The transition will be accomplished peacefully and is already underway. Come Inauguration Day new bodies will be occupying key seats within our government, without rioting or civil disorder. The system shows it still works.

Yet, in many ways there has been no change, nor will there be.

Within the Congress – the most important branch of the three – there has been little change at all. Most of the incumbents were re-elected, to include almost all of those with over 20 years already in office. These are the same folk whose job is to provide key oversight over the Executive Branch, as well as approve tax rates, budgets and expenditures. They as a group have done a lousy job so far (approx. 10% approval rating) or we wouldn't be in the mess everyone says exists, yet there was a 90% re-election rate for Congressional incumbents.

Our prayers are that the President-Elect and his appointees perform their jobs with logic, common sense, concern for the populace and humility. If that happens, the nation will continue in this “noble experiment” that the rest of the world watches with awe.

I wish the President-Elect well in his mission of “change.” I hope all Americans give this administration the opportunity to succeed, as it deserves that chance. It is important to remember the President is not a 4-year king, and should not be held to that standard or expectation. The Executive Branch is only as good as the sitting Congress which controls the purse-strings and provides oversight for the electorate.

However, we still need to be vigilant, especially when it comes to Congress. In two short years, all those 435 within the House and 33 (of the 100) within the Senate are on the ballot again. Let’s hope that these 468 elected officials don’t get another free pass for crummy work.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

The Presidential election is now history.

The system shows it still works. A new administration will now take charge of the Executive Branch. The transition will be accomplished peacefully and is already underway. Come Inauguration Day new bodies will be occupying key seats within our government, without rioting or civil disorder. The system shows it still works.

Yet, in many ways there has been no change, nor will there be.

Within the Congress – the most important branch of the three – there has been little change at all. Most of the incumbents were re-elected, to include almost all of those with over 20 years already in office. These are the same folk whose job is to provide key oversight over the Executive Branch, as well as approve tax rates, budgets and expenditures. They as a group have done a lousy job so far (approx. 10% approval rating) or we wouldn't be in the mess everyone says exists, yet there was a 90% re-election rate for Congressional incumbents.

Our prayers are that the President-Elect and his appointees perform their jobs with logic, common sense, concern for the populace and humility. If that happens, the nation will continue in this “noble experiment” that the rest of the world watches with awe.

I wish the President-Elect well in his mission of “change.” I hope all Americans give this administration the opportunity to succeed, as it deserves that chance. It is important to remember the President is not a 4-year king, and should not be held to that standard or expectation. The Executive Branch is only as good as the sitting Congress which controls the purse-strings and provides oversight for the electorate.

However, we still need to be vigilant, especially when it comes to Congress. In two short years, all those 435 within the House and 33 (of the 100) within the Senate are on the ballot again. Let’s hope that these 468 elected officials don’t get another free pass for crummy work.

Unless I have another John McCain in mind he has been in the Senate since 1987 and before that was a Congressman. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain I could not see much change though coming from someone who has been a politician in DC for so long.

On the other hand, it seems like Barack Obama has spent most of his time in the US Senate preparing for his run at the Oval Office.

Both McCain AND Obama though seemed to have very keen eyes on the prize of the Oval Office for quite some time.

In my mind, Barack Obama is still a real untested politician. I did vote for Barack Obama on November 4, 2008 though. We will just have to wait and see what kind of solutions he comes up with the Senate and House for the many problems facing the United States.

The big hurdle with some of the legislation passed by this "new" Congress and supported by the new President Barack Obama will be the US Supreme Court which President George W. Bush has 8 years to put his nominees on.

Originally Posted by Taltarzac

Unless I have another John McCain in mind he has been in the Senate since 1987 and before that was a Congressman. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain I could not see much change though coming from someone who has been a politician in DC for so long.

On the other hand, it seems like Barack Obama has spent most of his time in the US Senate preparing for his run at the Oval Office.

Both McCain AND Obama though seemed to have very keen eyes on the prize of the Oval Office for quite some time.

In my mind, Barack Obama is still a real untested politician. I did vote for Barack Obama on November 4, 2008 though. We will just have to wait and see what kind of solutions he comes up with the Senate and House for the many problems facing the United States.

The big hurdle with some of the legislation passed by this "new" Congress and supported by the new President Barack Obama will be the US Supreme Court which President George W. Bush has 8 years to put his nominees on.

The Supreme Court is not as fluid an operation as many would be led to believe. It really deals in only one subject - Constitutional Law. Everything else just flows as subsets of it. While the jurists who staff it may have personal leanings, they have demonstrated a propensity to view the law independent of their personalities. That's what makes them good jurists and why no matter who replaces whom, SCOTUS will still be SCOTUS.

Laws passed are meaningless unless four things happen: 1) Congress gives the Executive Branch the funding to enforce them; 2) the Executive Branch actually enforces them; 3) If Constitutionality is challenged, the Supreme Court rules for-or-against; and 4) Congress fulfills is oversight responsibilities with vigor.

Congress - at least the greatest majority of seat-holders - have proven themselves to be lumps of inorganic material when it comes to accomplishing anything. A 10% approval rate for a group of people with an average incumbency of over 16 years! With records like that, the lot of them would have been fired from any business a long time before accruing that sort of longevity. Yet, they keep on a'chugging along....

A new President is not going to make the next Congress "better perform" than its current dismal rating. The Congress[wo]men are still basically the same human beings who flunked out this past term. If after 10-20-30 years they can't work together any better, having a new guy in the "other branch" of government won't affect Congress. It is still its own animal, and diseased with too-long-a-tenure.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

The Supreme Court is not as fluid an operation as many would be led to believe. It really deals in only one subject - Constitutional Law. Everything else just flows as subsets of it. While the jurists who staff it may have personal leanings, they have demonstrated a propensity to view the law independent of their personalities. That's what makes them good jurists and why no matter who replaces whom, SCOTUS will still be SCOTUS.

Laws passed are meaningless unless four things happen: 1) Congress gives the Executive Branch the funding to enforce them; 2) the Executive Branch actually enforces them; 3) If Constitutionality is challenged, the Supreme Court rules for-or-against; and 4) Congress fulfills is oversight responsibilities with vigor.

Congress - at least the greatest majority of seat-holders - have proven themselves to be lumps of inorganic material when it comes to accomplishing anything. A 10% approval rate for a group of people with an average incumbency of over 16 years! With records like that, the lot of them would have been fired from any business a long time before accruing that sort of longevity. Yet, they keep on a'chugging along....

A new President is not going to make the next Congress "better perform" than its current dismal rating. The Congress[wo]men are still basically the same human beings who flunked out this past term. If after 10-20-30 years they can't work together any better, having a new guy in the "other branch" of government won't affect Congress. It is still its own animal, and diseased with too-long-a-tenure.

I doubt if the Republican loaded US Supreme Court with Barack Obama as President and a Democrat majority in the House and Senate will on one hand push forth any kind of anti-abortion agenda which could have been a different story with McCain/Palin in the White House. On the other hand, doubt if this Supreme Court will even touch on the matter of the the right of gays and lesbians to marry under State and US Constitutions. It would seem that the US Constitution and how SCOTUS justices interpret it would be the final arbiter on whether or not gays and lesbians can marry in states like FL, CA and MA.

"Seven of the current justices of the court were appointed by Republican presidents, while two were appointed by a Democratic president. It is popularly accepted that Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito compose the Court's conservative wing. Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer are generally thought of as the Court's liberal wing.[13] Justice Kennedy, generally[citation needed] thought of as a conservative who "occasionally vote[s] with the liberals", is considered most likely to be the swing vote that determines the outcome of certain close cases.[14]"

From Wikipedia article on the United States Supreme Court. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme..._United_States

Only time will tell..

“The time to take counsel of your fears is before you make an important battle decision. That’s the time to listen to every fear you can imagine! When you have collected all the facts and fears and made your decision, turn off all your fears and go ahead!”
General George S. Patton

Originally Posted by Taltarzac

I doubt if the Republican loaded US Supreme Court with Barack Obama as President and a Democrat majority in the House and Senate will on one hand push forth any kind of anti-abortion agenda which could have been a different story with McCain/Palin in the White House. On the other hand, doubt if this Supreme Court will even touch on the matter of the the right of gays and lesbians to marry under State and US Constitutions. It would seem that the US Constitution and how SCOTUS justices interpret it would be the final arbiter on whether or not gays and lesbians can marry in states like FL, CA and MA.

"Seven of the current justices of the court were appointed by Republican presidents, while two were appointed by a Democratic president. It is popularly accepted that Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito compose the Court's conservative wing. Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer are generally thought of as the Court's liberal wing.[13] Justice Kennedy, generally[citation needed] thought of as a conservative who "occasionally vote[s] with the liberals", is considered most likely to be the swing vote that determines the outcome of certain close cases.[14]"

From Wikipedia article on the United States Supreme Court. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme..._United_States

Again, who appointed the justices seems to matter very little in the long run. SCOTUS is currently handling over 10,000 cases per term, and the breadth and scope of these cases covers quite a legal spectrum.

People tend to forget that SCOTUS is actually a court of appeals (except if the dispute is between states or the US versus a state). Unless the case has been decided by a US Circuit Court of Appeals already; or has US Constitutional considerations and has been decided by the highest court of the state, SCOTUS is out of bounds. SCOTUS can't jump into the middle of a legal fray which is winding its way through the existing appellate system.

For those who have never been involved with SCOTUS, a visit to its website (www.supremecourtus.gov) can make for an interesting time. For a real legal kick, visit the website with the transcripts of the oral arguments presented before the Court (http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_a...anscripts.html). These can be quite entertaining.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

The Supreme Court is not as fluid an operation as many would be led to believe. It really deals in only one subject - Constitutional Law. Everything else just flows as subsets of it. While the jurists who staff it may have personal leanings, they have demonstrated a propensity to view the law independent of their personalities. That's what makes them good jurists and why no matter who replaces whom, SCOTUS will still be SCOTUS.

Laws passed are meaningless unless four things happen: 1) Congress gives the Executive Branch the funding to enforce them; 2) the Executive Branch actually enforces them; 3) If Constitutionality is challenged, the Supreme Court rules for-or-against; and 4) Congress fulfills is oversight responsibilities with vigor.

Congress - at least the greatest majority of seat-holders - have proven themselves to be lumps of inorganic material when it comes to accomplishing anything. A 10% approval rate for a group of people with an average incumbency of over 16 years! With records like that, the lot of them would have been fired from any business a long time before accruing that sort of longevity. Yet, they keep on a'chugging along....

A new President is not going to make the next Congress "better perform" than its current dismal rating. The Congress[wo]men are still basically the same human beings who flunked out this past term. If after 10-20-30 years they can't work together any better, having a new guy in the "other branch" of government won't affect Congress. It is still its own animal, and diseased with too-long-a-tenure.

I guess that's where I differ from some folks. I don't wish Obama well with his changes. I think his changes are extremely bad for America. For one I hope his tax policy fails to be enacted.

People seemed to have voted for change but I talk to very few who can actually tell me what the change is. That's troubling to me.

Originally Posted by dklassen

I guess that's where I differ from some folks. I don't wish Obama well with his changes. I think his changes are extremely bad for America. For one I hope his tax policy fails to be enacted.

People seemed to have voted for change but I talk to very few who can actually tell me what the change is. That's troubling to me.

Quite often, when people get a new job, how they think they will perform once in the job, and what they will do while in the job are two wildly different things. In short, the job usually makes the person, not the other way around!

Pres-elect Obama got his first on-the-job lesson today with his first REAL intelligence briefing. That's usually enough to make a person seek a double Scotch or two when they find the real world makes the TV show "24" look like Romper Room in comparison. There will be many more such lessons in the next few weeks, and then he gets the keys to the car. He will then learn like every President before him that the car drives the driver more than the other way around.

So, if he doesn't get too arrogant, or try to pay off his close supporters with more than Plum Book patronage, all is well. However, if he starts believing his own press clippings and thinks of himself as a monarch rather than a public servant, it's going to be an "interesting" time....

I see where DC voted 93% for Obama!


.

Originally Posted by chuckinca

I see where DC voted 93% for Obama!


.

That's not a surprise, and obvious!