On a Scale of 1-10, How angry are you at "Washington"?

Who was complaining when the jamboree was in full swing? This is just the morning after.

The idea of measuring someone's anger assumes anger. The suggestion that we should have any sort of emotional measure at the nebulous term "Washington" is also misguided.

Certainly a person may have very warm and fond feelings towards any given element of the Central government and simultaneously be disappointed/upset with other parts.

In general, I'm at the point of rolling my eyes with this kind of thing. The government is the people, and too often we only think of it in terms of the elected officials. I live here, and I know a lot of people who at great sacrifice give their all to make our life here in the USA very nice. They work extra hard, and there is no glory or glamor in what they do. The idea that we can box up our distaste for public affairs and throw it in the general direction of Washington is ******* stupid.

Even the most adamant anti-Bush Democrat could easily have found the most hard working and admirable people here in DC during the Bush Admin. The same goes now for all the frothing idiots running around like chicken little.

It's so easy to point at DC and jeer beltway insider blah blah. It's harder to look at the dynamics and challenges people face.

There are the faces on TV, and then there are those that "do." People complain about what they don't see in this city. If they were forced to see it all, they would be humbled and shamed for their complaining.

A
R
T

You being an engineer you might have heard that the zero was invented...so no

JSYK negative numbers have also been invented.

However, the thread title was poorly worded...sorry

well FART I agree with all you posted except the Dept of Motor Vehicles.

I'm not angry at Obama, more at Washington for not addressing the pressing needs of the country and especially those who would rather do nothing for partisan gain than work for the benefit of the country. Yes, Clinton squandered a lot of talent, but he was also a decent caretaker and his centrist policies were in line with the Congress he had to work with. Plus, when the economy was running well, he didn't mess with it. Sometimes you have to know when to keep your hands off.

I disagree with some points here.

1) I support Clinton's welfare reform.
2) Not sure what about immigration you didn't like.
3) How can you say that DADT took us in the wrong direction? Was it not a step in the right direction? What other options were feasible during Clinton's time?
4) I do agree that his personal failures made things much more difficult and hurt the country. However, the government shutdown (basically) wasn't entirely Clinton's fault.

To answer your previous post.

1) During Clinton's administration my unhappiness was at a 4. However I was 10 when he was elected, and didn't really start to get engaged in politics until I was 16 or so.
2) During Bush II, term 1, my unhappiness was about a 5.
3) During Bush II, term 2, my unhappiness was about a 9.
4) During Obama, thus far, my unhappiness is currently a 7.

I am very unhappy with the majority of the Sup. Ct. The decision to give corporations so-called first amendment rights, allowing unlimited political contributions, was probably the most activist and dangerous decision ever made by the court. Time will tell how damaging that decision will be to the country.

Not really anger. Better described as "disappointment" in the liberal establishment, which now runs Washington. I would put the number at a 10. Liberalism has, is, and will continue to mismanage and misuse the government in every way. It will not improve until the culture changes how it votes, and votes for moral and conservative people that will govern according to constitutional principles instead of people that promise them stuff. If people want the government to take care of them and give them free stuff instead of government sticking to what it was constitutionally mandated to do, the situation will not improve. So the problem is really the culture, not Washington. Washington is merely a reflection of ourselves and of our culture.

You seem like a person in transition toward a conservative Republican. One observation, welfare reform was really a Republican initiative, to which Clinton was drug kicking and screaming. Republicans also deserve most of the credit for balancing the budget during the Clinton admin.

I join in that, in response to your inquiry, Hawkeye.

In the fullness of earnest sincerity, on a scale of 1 to 10
I am O angry at Washington and O angry at anything or anyone.
My emotions have nothing to do with it,
and I certainly expected much worse from Obama.
I have not given up on that; he has a lot of time left for that.

I've been disappointed since age 6 in all of them.