News oracles cast the U.S. in a troubling light in recent weeks.
President George Bush sits as a lame duck.  Vice President Dick Cheney's reputation at this point lingers even lower- somewhere between the snail's belly and the cold, hard ground. We've entered the presidential election cycle half a year early it seems. 
With precious little pressure, President Bush continues to stall for time in Iraq and Congress crawls into action as the public remains largely under-whelmed.
The United States Congress currently enjoys a 24% approval rating matching it's previous record low from June 2006.  (Five months after that low, Republicans were largely turned out of congressional office.)  
The problem is this: Americans like Rod Butler, have been quoted saying, "[Congress] abandoned all the social issues...[like]...universal health care...the problems in our education system..." while the United States Congress and the United States President firmly limits national debate to the Iraq War.  Promotion of few social policies come from the Congress or the White House, save for our social policies for Iraq.  Suddenly, however, things have changed because an election is on its way. 

Maybe this really is the best way to share power.  The Founding Fathers just may have been brilliant, but it really seems kind of cheap in practice.  Action only takes place during certain times of the seasons.  The U.S. Congress moves like the phases of the moon.
Virtually everything known today about the Iraq War was known 2 years ago.  Apparently we just needed a little more time to convince ourselves that we were seeing what we thought we were seeing.

Enter Republican Senators John W. Warner of Virginia and Richard G. Lugar of Indiana who developed legislation directing the President to develop a plan for removing troops from Iraq.  This plan seems to be met, atleast initially, with a lot of promise.  It might be the compromise that Senate Democrats and Republicans can make. 
If the legislation succeeds the Republican Party will be able to seriously campaign next year on the fact that the Republican Party ended the Iraq War.  Nevermind that they also started the war.  Business as usual continues on the Hill while Americans essentially despise their government with approval ratings of 24%.

We are still speaking of the government that was once called: of, for and by the people.

Americans from both parties "say they're tired of the bickering between Congress and the White House, and they want the two branches of government to work together." 

A political opinion that should always be taken with a grain of salt, lest we forget that the Nazi's worked really well together in getting things done.  Government working together doesn't necessarily translate into good results.

Republican Senator George V. Voinovich says, "the trouble in this Senate is that too many of us...are pandering to the base on both sides of the aisle.  As a result of that, we don’t do the things that we should do.”  

According to the New York Times, on Friday, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky questioned Democratic leaders efforts to end the war.  He calls into question the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee's focus "on several Republicans facing re-election next year, including him, with television commercials this week about their war votes."- http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/14/washington/14capital.html?hp 

In response a representative of Senator Harry Reid counters, “The only ones  playing politics here are the Republicans that are more interested in defending the president than protecting the troops."  Furthermore, he continues, "The president and Senate Republicans need to understand that Democrats are absolutely committed to forcing the president to change the mission, bring our troops home responsibly and refocus our resources on Al Qaeda and the real threat that it poses.” 
The New York Times shares that, "Mr. McConnell and Mr. Reid have repeatedly clashed on the Senate floor, arguing over procedure, politics and policy."- http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/14/washington/14capital.html?hp

Amidst this madness nothing gets done.  These people are trying to make things happen and they can't even get past procedure.  Is there any doubt why the Iraqi Parliament is having such a hard time working together?  It's not unheard of for Japanese officers to punch each other in session. 

The two dominant political parties counter and parry to assume the winning position in the debate and nothing beneficial takes place as a part of their actions, thus the 24% approval rating.  It doesn't really matter which parties are involved.  There is talk this election cycle of creating a third party.  Ross Perot did the same thing.  People are getting use to that notion and it will probably take place within the next three presidential elections.  A third party will begin to emerge.  The debate however is defined at every opportunity by the strength of the two party system. 
Nut jobs and lunatics cannot enter the fray.  Right?

Dennis Kucinich has accused Hillary Clinton and John Edwards of trying to supress, I assume his, entry into Democratic debates.  Of course, their efforts wouldn't impact someone like Barak Obama; but it would certainly impact Dennis.  He's not going to set the world on fire as a public speaker.  He's not polished.  He's saying things nobody else is willing to say.  He's talking about idealism and David Letterman writes him off as a joke.

Clinton and Edwards may get their people "to limit the debates" because as the AP quotes they've "gotta get back to it."  Get back to what you might ask?  That is for the listener to decide.  John Edwards has been quoted whispering to Hillary Clinton at the NAACP presidential forum, "we should try to have a more serious and a smaller group."-  http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200707/POL20070713b.html

"More serious" could most innocently be translated "to more realistic."  That is the best case scenario.  Worst case scenario, Edwards writes Kucinich off much like Letterman did.  "Smaller groups" on the otherhand are real good for a vibrant democracy, right?  That part of the statement reveals Edwards as an elitist and therefore- in my mind- lacking integrity.  Smaller groups mean a concentrated effort of maximizing debate in more places, because centralized resources give more opportunities to fill in the gaps in smaller, rural area territory.  That sounds like a great motto for a democratic society, doesn't it? 

The U.S. two party system works like a machine.

For example in the 1990 and 2002 U.S. Senate elections in Virginia, John Warner ran unopposed by a Democrat.  Again, in Indiana in 2006- a year in which Democrats saw many opportunities to capitalize on weak Republican support among the masses- Richard Lugar ran unopposed by the Democratic party.
The two party system apparently works by narrowing the national debate.  The debate right now is about ending the Iraq War and how to get it done.  Only Bush and a few die hards continue publically to cling to the viewpoint that we remain steadfast in Iraq.  That side of the debate is narrowing. 

Kucinich on the otherhand is talking about fundamental changes in: the relationship between corporation and individual; American citizens and multi-national corporations; education; repeal of the Patriot Act; and Universal Health Care.- http://kucinich.us/issues 
Kucinich seems to talk rather passionately about unaddressed social issues.  Some of the candidates leading in 2008 presidential polls would like to belittle Kucinich's notions of idealism- as if idealism were foolish and only meant for children.  They publically make Dennis Kucinich a joke because he is an easy target and they are betting that America is unlikely to hold them responsible in the next elections. 

He has after all only raised something like three million dollars.

When you've knee jerk bought in that Dennis Kucinich is weak then you've completed your necessary step to ensure that after 2008 the U.S. government can continue on with business as usual.

Don't get the wrong impression.  I'm not campaigning for Kucinich; however, I do like what he has to say.  I also like Barak Obama as long as he doesn't become as obviously corrupted by elitism as Hillary Clinton and apparently John Edwards have.  We need someone real to mix things up in this country.  We haven't been focusing on what is important and before long we will find ourselves in trouble. 

President Putin of Russia said on Friday that Russia will pull out of an arms treaty with Europe because he could not come to terms with President George Bush.  Putin is quoted as saying, "our partners [the U.S.] are stuffing Eastern Europe with new weapons. A new base in Bulgaria, another in Romania, a site in Poland, a radar in the Czech Republic...what are we supposed to do?"- http://www.axcessnews.com/index.php/articles/show/id/11631

He's right.  The U.S. is doing the things that Putin claims. 

<U.S. Department of State website> "In May 2005 the United States and the Republic of Bulgaria signed a Defense Cooperation Agreement, which gives the United States military access to and shared use of several Bulgarian military bases. The United States military intends to use this access to facilitate joint training with the Bulgarian and Romanian militaries."- state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3236.html

<U.S. Air Force website> 5/9/2007 - "RAMSTEIN AIR BASE, Germany (AFNEWS) — The Romanian parliament passed legislation the first week of May that now authorizes the U.S. military to use several of its bases."- af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123052520  

If this issue remains unresolved it's pretty clear we could see a move back to the pre-90's Cold War stance between the U.S. and Russia.

The euro reached an all time high against the U.S. dollar this week- and somehow U.S. stocks rose into record territory at the same time. 

What does this all mean to you?

There's a system of control at play and if you're not in the know you should probably be a little bit worried.  Get involved by going to the polls in 2008 and vote.  Refuse to play the popularity contest.  Listen to what these people are talking about as well as what they aren't talking about. 

At some point, Americans need to respond before truly finding themselves enslaved by the system.