Polls show that investigations are popular and that the drop in Congressional approval is due to Democrats upset that Congress hasn’t stood up more strongly to Bush, particularly on Iraq. That’s why Congress has such low approvals and yet Democrats are widely preferred in the generic Congressional polls. There are large numbers of voters who dislike what Congress is doing (or not doing in this case) but who will vote for the Democrat candidate come November 2008.

Greenwald did not claim that Congress was unpopular because of too few investigations. Why not quote what he wrote?

Thus, the only rational conclusion is that Congress is so unpopular, particularly among Democrats, because of their ongoing capitulations to the Bush administration, their failure to place any limits on his Iraq policy, and their general inability/refusal to serve as a meaningful check on the administration. Democrats and independents overwhelmingly dislike the President. Thus, the weaker Congress is in defying the President, the more unpopular Congress becomes.

That’s different than what you implied. The point isn’t the number of investigations but the results. That’s what’s bothering the Democrats who are angry at Congress. They want to see Bush stopped and us leaving Iraq and Congress is not delivering.

Kudos to you Rob, it takes real courage to link to an article that thoroughly refutes one’s own reasoning.

He pulls this kind of obviously dishonest garbage all the time (remeber the clear cases sock-puppetry he denied & got a pass on from the left)

and

12 out of 10 sock puppets who live at Glenn Greenwald’s house?

qualify.

And “given how overwhelmingly Americans want Congressional investigations of the administration” comes from poll numbers in Greenwald’s post.

From Rasmussen Reports, July 12, 2007:

Have there been too many investigations of the White House, not enough investigations, or about the right amount of investigations?

Too many – 32%

Not enough – 39%

About right – 19%

So, again, anything substantive to say?

So the 58% you have so adroitly summed for us believe that 300 investigations is either about right or want more!

And 51% think that it’s either just right or too many! Your bogus argument cuts both ways! Minus, of course, the margin or error (which you did not cite)

Clearly it’s easy to get you all worked up in a lather over all this,

Some sock puppet wanders by with a poll and WE’RE all lathered up? Overwhelmingly is the word used by those lathered. Common sense and reality are what we’re trying to use to hose you down!

attacking Greenwald in order to discredit his argument

Sorry! Greenwald discredited himself with his shameless sock puppetry. At what point would I ever take him seriously again?

Greenwald could be the biggest idiot on the planet

We’ll conclude with your argument! (Unless you’re vying for the position yourself?)

Yesterday Glenn Greenwald wrote a column at Salon claiming that the Democrats’ low approval numbers can be explained by too few investigations of the Bush administration.

Greenwald, in his column from Aug 21, wrote:

Since Democrats took over Congress in January, there have been three major attributes characterizing their conduct: (1) a failure to stop or restrict the war in Iraq; (2) a general failure/unwillingness to stop Bush on much of anything else of significance (FISA, a failure to reverse any of the excesses of the GOP Congress, such as the Military Commissions Act, lack of limits on his ability to attack Iran, etc.); and (3) numerous investigations, sometimes flashly but thus far inconsequential. There is no rational way to argue that the numerous investigations (item (3)) are responsible for Congressional unpopularity given how overwhelmingly Americans want Congressional investigations of the administration.

How did you read that to mean that he thinks Congress’ low approval numbers are because of too few investigations??? Feel free to retract and/or apologize, though I would not ask anybody to hold their breath, unless it Bill O’Reilly or Rush Limbaugh…

That’s OK, in less than 2 years we will have a Dem WH and Congress and we will begin the process of cleaning up the mess Bush and his supporters created.

How heartwarming /sarc. And what is their plan to do that? They don’t have one yet?? Why does that not surprise me.

Either God is able to say exactly what He
means or we can never trust Him to ever mean exactly what He says about
anything, including salvation.

The problem with your logic is that, even if divinely inspired, God didn’t transcribe the words onto paper, a man did.

When that man wrote what he wrote onto paper, it could have had an exact meaning to him (“four corners of the earth”=”entire earth”), even though he phrased it in terms of the cosmology of his time (where the writer really believed the Earth to be flat and to have four corners). The problem retrospectively is to divide out the scriptural message from the cultural context in which the words are framed.

This is easy enough to do if you are willing to use your eyes and your brain in assisting your interpretation of scripture, much harder if you are dogmatic about those words meaning today exactly what they meant then.

Where’s the “honest debate?”

You want honest debate with laugh lines like:

given how overwhelmingly Americans want Congressional investigations of the administration.

Please! Take your own arguments seriously if you want us to as well!

This guy never goes away. I suspect it may have something to do with his undeath – see photographic proof below:

http://catcubed.com/images/zombie_puppetmaster_lrg.jpg

That’s “Ellison” about midway down in the picture on the right side.