When opining about an election, it would be best to avoid obvious faux pas'. First, no one won a convincing majority in the House.  Second, least of all the republicans.

I understand your embellishment on the first error, and one can be forgiven for being gleeful that their philosophy won.  However, when writing about politics, to mis-name the party is tantamount to yelling "Hey!  I dont know what the hell I am talking about.".

However the Rpublicans have won a convincing majority in the House of Representatives.

I meant the Democrats. Thank you for pointing out the error.

The exit of Donald Rumsleldt has shown that the Democrats have tasted blood, and will not hesitate to extract their concessions for compromising with Bush for his legislative agenda. A weakened Bush with 2 more years left to go bodes ill for the war in Iraq and other problems facing the country.

Isn't it interesting how the election lines changed comparing to, say 1860?
It is almost the opposite of what it used to be in the past. Back then progression rose from the now Blue States; now progression comes from the Red States which used to be the blue ones. A complete reshift. One thing remained unchanged: the Republicans were and are the carriers of progression.

The Democrats? Look at their voter demography. The majority of actives vote Republican, and passives vote overwhelmingly Democratic. Really, they are kind of a parasite, they pose as socially sensitive, while they abuse the poor and ignorant masses. That is the Democratic Party is about. Parasitism.

Look at their voter demography. The majority of actives vote Republican, and passives vote overwhelmingly Democratic. Really, they are kind of a parasite, they pose as socially sensitive, while they abuse the poor and ignorant masses. That is the Democratic Party is about. Parasitism

What you say was true until the period of FDR when the rural votes in the south and south west shifted to the Democrats. But now the issue is the Iraq war and hopefu;;y the Dems have aan exit strategy in mind.

The exit of Donald Rumsleldt has shown that the Democrats have tasted blood, and will not hesitate to extract their concessions for compromising with Bush for his legislative agenda. A weakened Bush with 2 more years left to go bodes ill for the war in Iraq and other problems facing the country.

And it boded well before Democract victory?

Let's face it, the whole Iraqi War have been a huge mess runned by politicans.

From:
- The reasons to invade Iraq (WMD, Ties to Al-Qaeda, Biochemicals, restoring democracy (the last excuse standing at the end))

To:
- The results (sectarial wars, terrorism-crops, 6-digits death toll)
- The consequences (huge, HUGE loss of America's influence and respect worldwide)

Going trough:

- Abu Graibh (wrong spelling, I know)
- The 5-6-7 (or is it more?) "mistakes" commited by cohalition troops


I can't see exactly how the past Congress + Senate has done a good job to prevent this whole mess. Maybe now that the administration will be under the looking glass, it will begin something efficient.

I can't see exactly how the past Congress + Senate has done a good job to prevent this whole mess. Maybe now that the administration will be under the looking glass, it will begin something efficient.

Please do not lump the congressional slop with the current administration. They are not one in the same. For you to lump them together they would have to been put in/ appointed to their office by Bush. But they weren't.

Please do not lump the congressional slop with the current administration. They are not one in the same. For you to lump them together they would have to been put in/ appointed to their office by Bush. But they weren't.

they haven't done their jobs into protecting american citizen's interests, and USA's financial integrity.

I do not lump them with Bush. I accuse them of giving Bush almost a free pass.

The fact that the Republicans controlled both Houses and had a Republican in the White House meant that George Bush could do anything without serious discussion and dissent. Now it will be difficult for him to get away with the sort of scandals that plagued the Bush regime.

The idea of a regional conference of Iran, Iraq, USA that we mentioned has now become the policy of the post election Bush regime.

The fact that the Republicans controlled both Houses and had a Republican in the White House meant that George Bush could do anything without serious discussion and dissent.

This shows how delusional you are, Bahu. If you think there hasn't been "serious discussion and dissent" for the past 6 years you're living on a planet without oxygen somewhere.