A Short Lesson On Congress, Or Why The Senate Is So Screwed Up

Everyone knows what the House of Representatives is supposed to be - the voice of We the People. We select, through direct election, those people we think will most closely represent our social-economic-political beliefs to speak for us in our form of government. Hence the reason they've always been elected through direct election. The House was the only body in our federal government to have such elections, and here's the most important part - the only one MEANT to be directly elected.

The Senate, on the other hand, was meant to be the voice of their individual states, and only indirectly be a voice for the people.

The Founders, given their natural (and completely understandable) fear of a strong central government, wanted senators chosen by the state legislatures of the individual states. Their intent was to ensure that the federal government's power resided in the states. Hence the reason every state - from smallest to largest, least populated to most populated - have just two senators.

Until Woodrow Wilson, that is. That brilliant progressive, in his infinite wisdom, decided we'd be better served with directly electing our senators. Why? It's simple really - progressives, above all things, crave power. Not necessarily for themselves, but for the strong, overbearing, and centralized federal government that couldn't be had with senators that are beholden only to the states they represent. Progressives, liberals - call them what you will - all leftists believe that they know better what's best for you than you do - and what better way to enforce their vision of "best" than a government capable of intruding into every aspect of your life.

We are now forced to endure the likes of Harry Reid-iculous, John McCan't, Lindsey Graham, et al, because becoming a senator is more of a popularity contest than doing what's right for the state you serve.

Had the brilliance of the Founders been left as they intended, those senators (and many others throughout the years) wouldn't have lasted as long as they have, because the ones they damaged most - their state - would have removed them from office, and the rest of us wouldn't have gotten stuck with them. ~ Hunter

Congressional Obstructionism: It's Not Who The Main Stream Media Says It Is

While listening to the morning show on my local talk radio station (thank God for Chris Stigall), I heard a caller state that if King DingleBarry is going to be called an "obstructionist" for vetoing bills coming out of the next Congress it's a tacit admission of the obstructionist nature of the present Congress. Seriously, someone actually said that...

Let's review, shall we?

At last count, there are presently somewhere in the neighborhood of 270-plus bills, the overwhelming majority of which have bipartisan support (that means members of both parties support them, libbies) languishing in the black hole known as the desk of Harry Reid-diculous. That's in a Senate controlled by the democrats - which means, libbies, that the Republicans can do.........wait for it.........absolutely nothing to stop their passage and then hitting the Petulant Pretender's desk for his signature into law.

For the first two years of what will forever be known as "The Dark Times" (King DingleBarry's reign), the demoKKKrats controlled the whole of Congress, and the only major piece of legislation they could get thru was a law nobody wanted (that would be 0bamadontcare - follow along, libbies).

Sounds to me like he's been obstructed by his own party throughout his reign. Huh - Whoulda thunk?

The caller also went on to say that he's interested to see what the Republicans are going to do to help all Americans, not just the "top 2%."

Here's a hint - Republican policies, on the whole, help all Americans, with an eye towards helping all of us become the "top 2%."

I loathe liberals, everything they do, and all they represent (Just to clarify for the Lurking LiberTrolls, who I know will deliberately take that statement out of context - I loathe their big government approach to each and every problem). ~ Hunter