once again you are proving wrong bush isn't threatening a veto of these bills because congress wants to tell the president how to run a war. which is a good reason for a veto. but because they(democrats) want to spend to much money


The Administration’s sharp criticisms have been echoed by a number of Republican congressional leaders, such as Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA), the ranking minority member of the House Appropriations Committee, who accused the Democratic majority of “spending lust.” Some 147 House Republican members — more than one-third of the House membership — have pledged to sustain the anticipated vetoes.

Reply By: danielost

First I sighted three separate bills that Bush has threatened a VETO and only ONE has to do with ending the Iraq war. When Congress passes a spending bill they are fulfilling their Constitutional responsibility to control the budget and spending. What Bush is trying to do with his threat to Veto anything that does not agree with when he wants to spend he is attempting to control spending which is NOT his responsibility. He is NOT the DECIDER when it comes to the budget and spending. His objection to the SCHIP spending. His objection to another 1/2 % for our military pay. His objection to adding $3 Billion to better protect our border has NOTHING to do with Iraq. It has to do with Bush attempting to replace the WILL of Congress with what HE WANTS. That is just like communist countries where the legislature MUST rubber stamp the decisions of the Dictator.

Let me remind you of what GWB said during the campaign of 2000:

"We must heal, whatever wounds may exist. At times there would be disagreement and that is OK. If this were a dictatorship it would be a heck of a lot easier just so long as I am the dictator."

nothing in my first reply has nothing to do with iraq.

the president wants to increase by 3.1% and the democrats want to increase by 3.5%.

if we did want i think was right

we would

1 stop all pork spending for a year.

2 use as much of the budget as possible to pay down the debt.

3 only spend money on the have to haves.

4 repeat until the debt was gone.

5 then restrict pork spending to 100 million for each house per year. I just pulled that number out of the air.

6 remove all troops from all counties that we are not at war with or helping to defend right now.

Reply By: danielost Posted: Friday, July 27, 2007
once again you are proving wrong bush isn't threatening a veto of these bills because congress wants to tell the president how to run a war.

What WAR are you talking about?

“2 use as much of the budget as possible to pay down the debt.”


Given the fact we are spending $500 Billion more then we tax we have NOTHING to PAY DOWN the National Debt. The Debt just keeps growing. Bush will have added about $4 Trillion to that debt during his 8 year term.

I see you are still taking this quote out of context even though you have called on it before.  Just remember before you start with your "dictatorship" nonsense, that you seriously have no idea what a real dictator is.

it doesn't matter what war. congress has no right telling the president how to run a war

This is just another game the Democrats and Bush are playing. This is all political, a ping pong match. Who can screw who best. Sad the American people are the game pieces here, I think our political representatives, be them Democrats or Republicans, have forgotten about us being people not tools or weapons to fight the opposing party. This is about control of the country not making it better. And I'm talking about both parties not just Bush.

It doesn't matter what war. Congress has no right telling the president how to run a war

YOU are so full of BS WHAT WAR? You know dam well you were talking about the Iraq war... Congress declares war. They also fund everything including the military. They have every right to limit what the President can spend and that includes war. It is time for Congress to pass the 2008 Defense Appropriation that says funding for operations in Iraq END on a date certain. That gives the President the time to remove our troops safely from Iraq. If Bush veto’s that bill Congress needs pass another bill with the same verbiage. At some point, Bush will find he does not have the authorization to continue fighting in Iraq!

Again this Blog is not about Iraq it is about Bush attempting to take control of the budget from Congress.

yes they have this right


no they do not have the right to tell him how to fight the war

“No they do not have the right to tell him how to fight the war.”

Not HOW to fight the war but they can tell him he can not fight the war. Only Congress can declare war and fund the war. Thus if Congress tells Bush no more war and does not appropriate money to fight the war it must END!

then let them do that not tell him. that he has to announce a time table so that the other side knows when and how long they have to wait for the troops to be pulled out.