DCPolitics

America Is Also “Ripe For Regime Change”

U.S. CITIZENS HAVE NO FAITH IN THEIR LEADERS … AND RIGHTFULLY SO There’s been a lot of talk coming out of Washington, D.C. lately about the need for “regime change” in Iraq – which is particularly ironic when you consider the current regime was hand-picked by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)…

U.S. CITIZENS HAVE NO FAITH IN THEIR LEADERS … AND RIGHTFULLY SO

There’s been a lot of talk coming out of Washington, D.C. lately about the need for “regime change” in Iraq – which is particularly ironic when you consider the current regime was hand-picked by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) during an American military invasion that cost trillions of dollars and thousands of lives.

What have been the fruits of that invasion?

Don’t ask … or if you do ask, be prepared for a depressing (but predictable) answer.

But hey … this is the U.S. government, which is following its time-honored playbook of chasing good money after bad by ramping up its engagement in Iraq.

The administration of Barack Obama has the support of “Republicans” and Democrats in Congress in its efforts to provoke a confrontation in Iraq, although neither Obama nor Congress appears to have much in the way of support from the American people.

We wrote earlier this week about Obama’s abysmal poll numbers (especially when it comes to foreign policy), but new data from Gallup released this week shows things are even worse for members of the U.S. House and Senate.

According to Gallup, only seven percent of American adults have “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of faith in the U.S. Congress.

That’s down from a record low of 10 percent in 2013 and 42 percent in 1973, when the company first began asking the question on a regular basis.

“Americans’ current confidence in Congress is not only the lowest on record, but also the lowest Gallup has recorded for any institution in the 41-year trend,” the pollsters note. “This is also the first time Gallup has ever measured confidence in a major U.S. institution in the single digits.”

Here’s what that trend line looks like …

confidence congress

Gallup surveyed 1,027 adults nationwide from June 6-8, 2014.  The margin of error of its survey is plus or minus four percentage points.

“The dearth of public confidence in their elected leaders on Capitol Hill is yet another sign of the challenges that could face incumbents in 2014’s midterm elections — as well as more broadly a challenge to the broad underpinnings of the nation’s representative democratic system,” the pollsters added.

Indeed … which is another way of saying America is every bit as “ripe for regime change” as Iraq.

Related posts

Politics

Prioleau Alexander: Don’t Forget About Texas

E Prioleau Alexander
Politics

Embattled South Carolina Sheriff Faces Primary Opposition

Andrew Fancher
Politics

Guest Column: South Carolina School Choice Law Benefits The Public

FITSForum

43 comments

G.O.B. June 20, 2014 at 9:30 am

Dive bombs during Carter admin, spikes for Reagan, falls again under Bush Sr., creeps back under Dubya and bottoms out with Obama.

Reply
tomstickler June 20, 2014 at 9:38 am

Creeps back up under Clinton, plateaus, then dives under Dubya.

Fixed it for you.

Reply
Truth June 20, 2014 at 10:52 am

let’s be honest…Clinton is why the economy is in the tank right now. The housing bubble and ensuing collapse is a direct result of his policies. Dubya was okay in the first term, but did us NO favors the second half of his presidency, and Obama has continued (with full steam) don’t that same path.

Reply
No Pravda please June 20, 2014 at 11:24 am

Reagan added a huge percentage of debt compared to the GDP at the time….

Look, these policies have been going on since Nixon disconnected from gold in 71′ because the nation couldn’t make its bill then…the closest anyone truly got to reversing course was Carter, who almost didn’t have a deficit for a bit. SO IT’S NOT A PARTISAN ISSUE.

When you factor in SS, Clinton wasn’t close either.

Our gov’t loves the power of creating currency, it’s the way they can pay for everything without directly taxing us(which would cause revolt), instead by simply stealing it via money creation. No vote necessary and no immediate effects felt(just like term economic misery).

But, like much of what the gov’t engages in, it’s incompetence will eventually overtake even their ability to create currency.

Reply
Smirks June 20, 2014 at 12:45 pm

Dubya was okay in the first term

Except for that time they decreased revenues while increasing government spending for his entire first term.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200

Oh, and the two wars (which as we see today totally fixed Iraq), the Patriot Act, etc.

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein June 20, 2014 at 3:22 pm

…let’s be honest…Clinton is why the economy is in the tank right now.

*sprays beer on monitor*

Try FDR, LBJ and every President that succeeded them that was unwilling or unable to undo their damage.

Blaming Clinton for our current economy is like blaming Konstantin Chernenko for the fall of the Soviet Union.

Reply
Inveterate or Pathological June 21, 2014 at 4:50 pm

“let’s be honest”
LOL. A GOPer couldn’t even at gunpoint.

Reply
Tomocchio June 20, 2014 at 9:35 am

They all suck.

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein June 20, 2014 at 9:44 am

“Regime Change begins at Home.”

Reply
The Colonel June 20, 2014 at 10:21 am

“…A fiery horse with the speed of light, a cloud of dust and a hearty “Hi Yo Silver!” The Lone Ranger. “Hi Yo Silver, away!” With his faithful Indian companion Tonto, the daring and resourceful masked rider of the plains, led the fight for law and order in the early two thousands. Come with us now to those thrilling days of this year…
This is an honest question – where will the leaders come from to move us back from the precipice?

Reply
euwe max June 20, 2014 at 10:28 am

This is an honest question – where will the leaders come from to move us back from the precipice?

——
from the liberals.

Reply
The Colonel June 20, 2014 at 10:35 am

Pray tell, who are these liberal leaders who will actually cut the federal budget?

Reply
euwe max June 20, 2014 at 10:57 am

Let’s start with no more wars.

He does that alot... June 20, 2014 at 11:18 am

Notice he didn’t answer the question…

He just talks around the tough questions in weird red herrings.

The Colonel June 20, 2014 at 11:34 am

That’s Euwe’s function here, to further the dialogue with “unusually insightful perspective”

Smirks June 20, 2014 at 11:21 am

Bet you’ll find a liberal that will cut the budget a helluva lot faster than you’ll find a conservative that will concede to raising tax revenues.

I don’t think liberals hold all the answers to fixing the mess here, nor do I think that of conservatives.

The Colonel June 20, 2014 at 11:37 am

Why haven’t we seen that liberal then? I’m studiously avoiding the D and R monikers here in preference for ideology. John Spratt, early on, was a conservative Democrat (fiscally conservative) GHW Bush was a relatively liberal Republican.

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 20, 2014 at 3:09 pm

Bet you’ll find a liberal that will cut the budget a helluva lot faster than you’ll find a conservative that will concede to raising tax revenues.

Balancing the budget is not THE problem. Sure, it is a problem; but THEproblem is a gargantuan federal government engaged unsustainable policies, no matter how financed.

ExcusemewhileIchoke June 20, 2014 at 10:48 am

what a f@cking joke!

Reply
euwe max June 20, 2014 at 11:00 am

Tea bag it then…. you don’t want educated men that deal in facts… you want people who can’t count to five running the country. You can find them fixing flats in any little podunk town in the country. Perhaps you could get a few from the Assemblies of God, or from bug exterminators gone bankrupt… I’m sure if you go to the bar with the cheapest drinks, and wait for the first one to pass out, you could score there, too.

If you have a sense of humor, that’s got to sound funnier than hell… if not, a zombie apocalypse….

…because I *know* you don’t want a *Republican*!

TontoBubbaGoldstein June 20, 2014 at 1:16 pm

This is an honest question – where will the leaders come from to move us back from the precipice?

——

from the liberals.

When you consider our current spatial position relative to the precipice (well past it, treading air), you are absolutely correct.

Reply
euwe max June 20, 2014 at 1:31 pm

As Bush said, removing and handing the wheel of the car plummeting off the cliff: “If you think you can do better, *here*, YOU drive!”

…thinking, I suspect, that he left us enough gas to reach the ground.

Smirks June 20, 2014 at 11:15 am

This is an honest question – where will the leaders come from to move us back from the precipice

Excellent question. The answer should be “by getting everyday hard-working people to run for office.” People who make an honest living typically don’t run for office, mostly because they don’t need to and therefore have little interest to, and partly because they know what they’re up against if they were to try.

Reply
Manray June 20, 2014 at 4:28 pm

Who wants to take a job which, despite the job description, requires you to spend a significant part of each day phone calling or attending boring events to beg for money?

Reply
TontoBubbaGoldstein June 20, 2014 at 1:20 pm

Sorry to be a buzzkill…but TBG believes it is too late.

Reply
The Colonel June 20, 2014 at 2:07 pm

You were supposed to come up with something sage and wise, in either Apache or Yiddish. “Hold my beer” was not what I had in mind TBG – thanks for nothing.

Reply
TJ June 22, 2014 at 12:37 pm

Excellent question, Colonel- my honest answer is that there will be no such leaders since the process used by both parties to select their nominees for any office is designed to weed out the excellent in favor of the mediocre. Excellent leaders would not need a party to gain office, hence the party loses control said leader and, as a result, power. Mediocre people trade power for office, and do whatever the party wants them to do to gain access to office, notoriety, and petty power (not real power held by the party leaders). It’s the Founding Fathers nightmares about elected officials giving allegiance to their party instead of the people come to life.

Reply
March of the Dregs June 22, 2014 at 3:49 pm

“the process used . . . to select . . . is designed to weed out the excellent in favor of the mediocre.”
.
Ahhh . . . the same process used to promote lower and middle management in state agencies!

Reply
Empires all fall June 20, 2014 at 11:17 am

It will be economic that truly changes the “regime”, just like every other major empire in history.

Elections don’t substantially change the “regime”, only the names change.

Reply
Empires all fall June 20, 2014 at 11:17 am

*economics

Reply
jimlewisowb June 20, 2014 at 10:05 am

Buck Farack

Reply
GrandTango June 20, 2014 at 10:08 am

But when I told you that in 2012…You bashed the change w/ myths and lies, your Obama gods told you..

I don’t want to hear you know…

Reply
Squishy123 June 20, 2014 at 10:33 am

You consider yourself an intelligent man, yet after all these years you still can’t comprehend that nobody here gives a fuck what you have to say.

Reply
CyberBully June 20, 2014 at 10:47 am

the same can be said about you.

Reply
Squishy123 June 20, 2014 at 8:42 pm

Ha ha, I have six positives, you have two. You suck.

Reply
Smirks June 20, 2014 at 11:12 am

7% approval rating, but everyone keeps voting the same fuckers back in, because “it isn’t MY politicians that are causing this mess!”

I still find it amusing that people think the solution for this is term limits. It’s an acknowledgement that the voters aren’t smart enough to get rid of shitty politicians, which appears to be true unfortunately, but its proponents usually don’t realize that all term limits would do is lubricate the revolving door of politicians-turned-lobbyists/executives/etc.

The real key to democracy working is ensuring the voting populace is an educated populace, but since the establishment Reps and Dems rely on the dumb vote, we’ll continue to see educated voters dwindle.

Reply
aikencounty June 20, 2014 at 2:34 pm

I believe the regime change will come in ’16, when Hillary takes “SLICK WILLIE” back to the White House.

Reply
SCBlues June 20, 2014 at 4:46 pm

I’m ready for Hillary!
(Go ahead – curse me – boo me – hate me – IDGAF!)

Reply
jimlewisowb June 20, 2014 at 5:17 pm

I understand, take a couple of aspirins, curl up on the floor and chill for a couple of hours

When you get up, go online and post your Hillary comments on this web site:

http://scdigest.blogspot.com

Reply
SCBlues June 20, 2014 at 6:57 pm

I thought for sure you’d at least post something about how much pubic hair she has . . . such a disappointment!

Reply
Beartrkkr June 20, 2014 at 7:28 pm

Think 70s porn and the visual will come to ya.

Reply
70's Bush June 20, 2014 at 7:34 pm

Dat’s right!!

jimlewisowb June 20, 2014 at 9:40 pm

My recollection is that we blanketed that area awhile back and the consensus was that the carpet was ripped up never to be seen again

I’m sure some remnants remain or occasionally show their nappy little heads but there is little doubt on my part that such stubble is mowed down immediately and meticulously

I would like to think Billy takes care of this task personally but after reading about Martha Stewart’s escapades perhaps there is someone else who lip syncs with the POTUS to be

Reply

Leave a Comment