Rob, that is a very good statement concerning this. With all being said and done this re-inforces a view I am starting to get even more. The idea of a split governement is not bad, it actually keeps spending in check. Clinton was mainly under a split Government and GWHB was too. Our deficit went down under those two presidents.

Second, this latest election result did not come overnight. People did not all of a sudden go to the polls and say I hate the war, it was a cummulative effect. Do you remember Zell Miller going over to the Rebublican party and them rolling him out in 2000 to make a big address for the RNC? I think candidates that were elected in for the most part are in the middle and could very well be moderate Republicans if it were not for very bad fiscal management. Those people made a decision to run before the worst realities of this war started coming out, you have to consider a realistic timeline here. These moderate Dem candidates were good and pissed off about something before the war become so much more of an issue. The Republican party (specifically a set of Neo Cons like Delay and Hastert, not true fiscal conservatives) had earler on really upset some very good people in their party such as John Danforth and that was a very bad sign, this was not too long after 2000. Danforth and these candidates and others who sit in the middle did warn of some things getting out of control with spending and policy and no one at the top was listening.