Any Wonder Their Approval Rating is 14%?

What Democrats think:
"It is time for someone to manage the war, and we're ready to do it." Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) in debate on the Senate floor during the all-night filibuster from July 17-18, 2007.

What the Constitution of the United States of America says:
"The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States . . ." U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 2

I don't know if Democrats don't know the Constitution, or just figure that enough people out there are too stupid to catch them when they try to so flagrantly violate it. My guess is a little bit of both. But what else is new from the party holding hearings on how shamelessly President Bush uses his ability to appoint and fire political appointees for political reasons, or his constitutionally guaranteed power to pardon.
So now that this latest bout of theatrics has accomplished exactly nothing, what is next in their little bag of tricks? For the party that was going to turn things around in Washington, riding this great "mandate" of the American people, they haven't been able to pull so much as a dust bunny from their magic hat. Earmarks and corruption continue. The only legislation anybody can list that has passed both houses was the minimum wage increase. The powers this Democrat-majority in both the House and the Senate wields against a "lame duck" president is, to say the most, wholly unimpressive. Nobody cares about their hearings. They idiotically choose Bill and Hillary Clinton, of all people, to lead the charge against the Libby sentence commutation. Maybe they can sign up Saddam Hussein to lobby against the death penalty. And who do they get to testify in the hearings about the Libby sentence commutation? Joe Wilson. Can somebody pass this guy a note to let him know that his 15 minutes are up? I love how he had no answer when a Republican member of the committee asked him to comment on the fact that no underlying crime was ever found to have been committed.
It appears that John Edwards much touted Poverty tour is not doing a single thing for him. Poor people seem to think Obama can do more for them. Maybe this has to do with the fact that Obama has probably never spent over $1000 for a haircut. Please, John Edwards is as much a populist man-of-the-people as Louis XVI. Honestly, if he cares so much for the poor, why doesn't he put his money where his mouth is? Instead of demanding that the rest of us working people do our part, why doesn't he take some of that money of his that he uses to build entertainment barns attached to his house and go help people. How many families in these rural areas he is visiting could he cover the medical costs for with what he paid in construction costs for his personal squash court alone? William Jennings Bryan he is not.
As for Obama, yes, he is bringing in donation money in record amounts from record numbers of donors. And yet he still lags behind Hillary. Maybe Oprah can change that, but I'm doubting it. Of course, Hillary can't even carry her own water. When it is time for the heavy lifting, she has to bring Bill back into it. So, should she be elected, who is really going to be running things? If things get tough, will she have to get Bill to take over, just as he is with her campaign?