Why is Congress approval rating so low?

Question

Could it be because they were brought into office to end the war and the war is still going on?

Answer 1

Exactly.
And when they want to do anything constructive, idiot Bush vetoes or threatens to.

Answer 2

If you look at the after voting exit polls it is because Republicans, quit acting like republicans. America did not just grow a bunch of new democrats, these were fence riding conservatives that said enough to corruption and runaway spending.

Now today, we have a new majority who has done NOTHING meaningful, NOTHING, they have not completed a single promise made in their campaigns, NOT A SINGLE ONE. They lied to AMericans and it will come back to bite them.

An interesting point on this change. The incumbents who lost their seats, about 23 I believe, only two had more than 12 years in congress, the rest were newbies. Of the remaining seats taken they were absent an incumbent. Now what does that tell you?

Pelosi and Reid, everytime they open their mouths are almost certainly guaranteeing a shift again in 2008..

AMericans are sick of lifetime congressmen, sick of corruption and runaway spending, and now that they see the new group, AMericans will reject the socialist agenda and the pendulum will again swing the other way.

Answer 3

That is one of the biggest reasons. Many people are starting to think like I do, that the party doesn't matter it is just more of the same.

The Democrats voted to go in just the same as the Republicans. Then they wanted to blame it on Bush for lying. I think informed people know that the Congress gets all the same briefings that Bush does. The congress has a house intelligence comittee and an armed services comittee. This is why their approval is a bad as the president.

I think both parties suck! Vote them all out, we dont need career politicians.

Answer 4

Because the leader of congress neither has a real or a proverbial pair. She has played the role of career politician. She knows that if she were to use the power to de-fund this war she would not get re-elected. They will not stop the funding of this war even though they have come out and said it is lost. However, most opinion polls show that Americans do not think that this war is lost.

Answer 5

Because they (democrats) have proven what those of us in the military have been saying for years -- THEY (dems) hate this country and hate the military. Their so-called funding bill was nothing but prok for their own soical programs. They do not care about our troops, they want to bow down and face East with Barrak HUSSIEN Obama Bin Ladden.

I am sicken by them. This bra-burning, tree hugging, peace at any cost additude would sicken our founding fathers as well.

10 years USMC Recon
I have shed blood for my freedom
I have fought to protect the freedom that the democrats want to give away

what have you done for your freedom, and your country?

Answer 6

For the same reason George W. Bush enjoys such low approval ratings: incompetency; arrogance; greed; evil; cowardice and corruption. -RKO- 05/23/07

Answer 7

Most Americans know something is wrong, but they have been mis-educated by government schools for so long that they can't quit get to the root cause.

If one can ignore the incessant propaganda that bombards us from what passes as "news" on TV, movies, and even music, one might ponder why Americans no longer have Rights over themselves, their children, and their property.

In the pre-socialist days prior to 1935, the Common Law based upon justice, reason, and common sense was the Law of the land. Since the Common Law is a prerogative of sovereigns, the servant government had no lawful authority to enact nor prosecute Common Law offenses. Many judges agreed that the Common Law was too harsh for a democracy. And they were right because Americans were promised a Republic form of government wherein the People (not citizens) were the sovereigns. Since property and sovereignty are inseparable, only those who absolutely owned property could rely upon the promises in the organic documents that instituted America's governments at the Federal, State, and Local levels. In the original instrument, the Declaration of Independence, it was clearly stated that governments were instituted among men to do two things: help secure property rights, and govern by consent.

What are property rights? The absolute right to own ourselves, our labor, the fruits of our labor, and that for which we choose to trade our labor. Private property is defined as land, houses, and chattels (property other than real estate). Real estate is not private property. If two or more persons have a claim it ceases to be private property and devolves to estate. Estate is held with qualified ownership. It's no surprise to me that State constitutions only list "real and personal property" as subject to taxation and regulation. Private property is sacred, and exempt.

Before the politicians (poly from the Greek, meaning many; and tic, an ugly bloodsucking parasite) sold out America, a sovereign who owned private property was the supreme authority and absolute monarch over his domain. An example of the absolute power to decide and act (sovereignty) was the landlord's right to defend his property from trespass with deadly force. If capital punishment without benefit of trial isn't evidence of individual sovereignty, I don't know what else will suffice.

To retain the status of private property, only ONE individual can own said property, therefore, coverture was essential. Coverture was the transfer of the wife's property to her husband for the duration of the marriage. This made the man the sole authority over the property insuring that servant government had to respect the family's property rights in all things. There were very few problems as long as men loved their wives and treated them as equal partners.

Historical revisionists would lead one to believe that men "owned" their wives and children, not unlike slaves, and that it was a bad thing (as if collective ownership by "Big Brother" is superior). If one will recall, though men had the rights of ownership, they also had the sole duty of support and defense of their family. As the saying goes, "women and children first" into the lifeboat. Men were obligated to lay down their lives, if necessary, in defense of their family. Was it a burden that women and children had to obey the man of the family in exchange for his lifelong obligation to them? I don't think so. Even the Law recognized that only the man could be held legally liable for failure to support his family. A wife who was forced by circumstances to "work outside the home" was tantamount to giving notice that the man was either unable, or worse, in violation of the Law, unwilling to support his family. At the very least, it was an insult to the manhood of the husband.

All this changed with the institution of national socialism in 1935. Known as the Social Security Act, or Federal Insurance Contribution Act (F.I.C.A.), this treacherous enactment was the final nail in the Grand Old Republic's coffin. The ground work had been laid in 1913, giving control of America's money to a privately held loan shark operation known as the Federal Reserve; and in 1916, the creation of the Fed's collection agency, the Internal Revenue Service. It took the Fed less than 25 years to totally bankrupt America. The wealthiest nation in the history of the world was brought to her knees by the "Great Depression", and had desperate Americans demanding that the government "do something", which lead to the destruction of individual property rights. For the truth about the Federal Reserve (which is no more "Federal" than Federal Express), read FOURTH REICH OF THE RICH by Des Griffin and SECRETS OF THE TEMPLE: HOW THE FEDERAL RESERVE RUNS THE COUNTRY by William Greider.

Unknown to the gullible participants, enrollment into "Social Security" (I call it socialist insecurity), had dire effects. First, it changed their status as Free men to paupers eligible for charity from the public treasury. Second, it eliminated their private property Rights to own, and thus have a domicile, in exchange for a residence. Third, it obligated them to pay the claims made upon the bankrupted United States of America (upper and lower case spelling), replaced by a bankruptcy trustee, the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (all capital letters, a legal deception), and made the federal debt into their "national debt". Fourth, it made it legally impossible to object to the worthless federal reserve notes. Fifth, it was prima facie evidence that a national socialist security number made them wards of the government and status criminals without the former protections accorded Free Inhabitants. Sixth, it made men (and women) subject to, and object of, administrative bureaucracy without constitutional restrictions. Seventh, it made them co-signers on all the loans the politicians borrow (present tense) from the Federal Reserve.

When Americans were reduced to bleating paupers, hands out for a share of their "entitlements", the government could rightly ignore the centuries of Law based upon securing private property rights, and shift to policy based on voluntary consent. Without Common Law rights, the Common Law evaporated from public awareness (with a little help from public schools). In its place the strict rules and regulations of "civil law" have become the standard, Instead of natural and personal liberty, those birthrights of free Americans, we now have civil and political liberty as permitted by our master government. Contrary to popular belief, "Civil Liberty" is not freedom, but license (permission). Who needs permission (license) to own a dog, marry, build a house, travel public roads, carry a gun, and so on? Not a Free Man. Who needs to pay a tax for the privilege to live, work, or hold property? Not a Free Man!

Since 1935, Americans have surrendered their Republic form of government, guaranteed by Article 4, Section 4 of the constitution for the united States of America, and the promise to the Free Inhabitants of the Land from Article IV of the Articles of Confederation, in exchange for the mob rule of democracy. If you think democracy is something fine and good, you have been brainwashed, programmed, and indoctrinated with ANTI-AMERICAN propaganda. If you think it's good that American lives and property are being used to make the world safe for democracy, your ancestors are spinning in their graves in outrage. Patrick Henry would spit on you. George Washington would turn his head from you. Ben Franklin would kick you in the ****.

All Law is for the protection of life and property. All else is mere policy, and policy requires fully informed consent. And though involuntary servitude was outlawed, there is no restriction on voluntary servitude, howbeit by fraud and deceit. Why do Americans keep re-electing the same politicians year after year? None of them ever honor their oath of office to defend and protect the constitution, and restore the Republic.

In answer to the question why Americans have no rights, national socialism is to blame. However, our continued consent to national socialism is the mechanism that has locked the chains of tyranny upon us. He who consents can't complain... can't bite the hand that feeds you... beggars can't be choosers... you get the idea.

Never re-elect anybody. Public service is a brief civic duty, not a career.