Bush's Veto Strategy (Wash. Post Op-Ed)

(Amazing, when Robert Novack just sticks to the facts he's a pretty good writer. But as for *Bush, he's just doing this tho be a douche bag.)

Bush's Veto Strategy

By Robert D. Novak
Monday, June 18, 2007; Page A17

Addressing a Republican fundraising dinner at the Washington Convention Center on Wednesday night, President Bush declared: "If the Democrats want to test us, that's why they give the president the veto. I'm looking forward to vetoing excessive spending, and I'm looking forward to having the United States Congress support my veto." That was more than blather for a political pep rally. Bush plans to veto the homeland security appropriations bill nearing final passage, followed by vetoes of eight more money bills sent him by the Democratic-controlled Congress.

That constitutes a veto onslaught of historic proportions from a president who did not reject a single bill during his first term. Of the 12 appropriations bills for fiscal 2008, only three will be signed by the president in the form shaped by the House. What's more, Bush correctly claimed that he has the House votes needed to sustain these vetoes. The unpopular president is taking the offensive on fiscal responsibility. After bowing to Republican demands on earmarks, Democratic leaders face a battle of the budget.

(edit)

...The first appropriations bill to be vetoed, for homeland security, raises spending 14 percent over the previous year, compared with the 7 percent the administration requested. Bush also objects to this measure because it includes higher wages under the Davis-Bacon Act for contract workers covered by the bill.

The second money bill hitting the president's desk, on military construction and veterans affairs, is even more costly; it has a 30 percent boost in spending, in contrast with the administration's 22 percent increase. Nevertheless, Bush will sign this bill, as indicated in a statement of administration policy issued Wednesday night.

(more at link) <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/17/AR2007061700942.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns>

trying to con the people yet again.

"Portman believes the 2006 electoral catastrophe in his state was caused mainly by Republicans losing the mantle of fiscal responsibility. Unless it is retrieved, Ohio -- and the presidency -- will go to the Democrats in 2008. By vetoes that would slice more than $20 billion in Democratic spending, Bush is seeking to transform that outlook. It will trigger an epochal political struggle in the months ahead."

When the republics had control of everything not only did they spend everything, they borrowed every chance they could. Now that they have someone watching them, they pretend to care about the continued overspending. The borrow and squander policy of the bushes is so out of control, a couple of years of pretending is not going to change the direction of that train, nor will it fool the people.

"fiscally responsible" so that they can win the WH in 2008.

Again, the driving ambition of the Bush WH is not "how can we improve our country", it's "how do we hold power."

Hypocrites.

:kick:

I can't believe those words came out of his mouth!

He truly has no shame...or no memory.