So much! Too much?

I noticed that, early this year, one of my Senators stopped hosting her monthly constituent coffees at her office. It takes little time to conclude that she is too busy now that the Congress is actually doing something while in session.

Just today the Senate passed the Iraq funding bill, in spite of the president's threat to veto when it lands on his desk. Of course he will vetlo it -- this president is determined to follow his own agenda, regardless of its cost to the American people. He seems to forget he's an elected official and not a CEO with a golden parachute.

And that Henry Waxman has been busy! I have lost track of the number of issues his committee has looked into. Why were eight state attorneys fired? Looks like political motivation, especially when a Republican Senator took it on himself to call and complain. Wait, since when does the legislative branch meddle with the executive branch? When the Party is more important than the People.

Of course the biggest joke is Alberto Gonzales glibly claiming to not remember/recall things 75 times when forced to speak under oath as the Senate conducts its own investigation. And what does this president say? Well, kind of like, "Good job, Brownie!" he expresses confidence in his Attorney General. Who, let's not forget, the author of the justification for using torture in spite of the Geneva Convention.

Why does Nero keep popping into my head when I watch President Bush Jr. talk about how things should be his way?

140 people were, tragically, shot dead on the campus of Virginia Tech by a young man who was mentally ill, who was never properly diagnosed, and who was able to all too easily purchase weapons and ammunition. Could it have been prevented? Probably. Would tougher gun control legislation have made a difference? In this case, likely not. It looks like, in this case, the best prevention would have been proper medical diagnosis.

The biggest tragedy in all of it? NBC's decision to show footage from a media package the shooter sent to them. I am all for freedom of speech, and perhaps it was in that spirit that they chose to show bits and pieces (regardless that they could have not, since they were the only ones to receive it), but I was more appalled that they felt it was necessary to show him pointing guns and play his vitriol. A couple of carefully edited stills captured from the video, and the news anchor reading excerpts, would have been all that was necessary. The sad concurrance by the "experts"? There was nothing new, or helpful, in the materials.

Not all the news is bad. Even at this early date, the Democrats have an embarrassment of riches in the candidates seeking the party nomination for president. I would vote for any of them. Given the mood of the country (although the election is still a long way off), it seems unlikely that a Republican will win the general election, so it's important to look at the Democrats.

Good things have been happening, too. But it just seems that there is so much drama now, it's hard to make room for the lighter side.

So, is it too much? Not really! We are just catching up on the backlog.