Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Can we get a few Constitutional issues out of the way.
One the Congress has sole authority to the President, any president cannot remove any item or items from the Federal budget.
Second the exact Quote by Obama was: "John, nobody is denying that $18 billion is important. And, absolutely, we need earmark reform. And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely."
Obama never came out in blanket opposition to earmarks, where he disagreed with McCain was on how earmarks were placed into bills outside of the appropriations process. In the above quote that stand is born out in that Obama, unlike McCain didn't not call for the outright ban on earmarks, something the President has no power over to begin with.
That claim by Obama is disingenuous. It will bear his signature and has billions going for universal healthcare that I doubt Bush would have wanted included. It is not complete, and he could get rid of earmarks if he wanted. This is another one of his "exceptions" that excuses him from doing what he said he would do.
I think his claim was genuine, but he and his administration have decided this is not a fight that he wants to spend political capital on right now, as the threat of a government shutdown looms. It's a bit of a gamble, I'll admit, to not take up this fight. However, when his own budget is proposed and the deficit is cut for his first budget, most people will forget this. You have to remember that negotiations for this bill have been going on for months - from before the election. It sill requires Republican votes in the Senate, who have been more than willing to add their own earmarks. Bush only started to threaten vetoes when the Democrats took control. The spending bills from 2000-2006 were full of earmarks from both parties that Bush never said a word about.
Can we get a few Constitutional issues out of the way.
One the Congress has sole authority to the President, any president cannot remove any item or items from the Federal budget.
Second the exact Quote by Obama was: "John, nobody is denying that $18 billion is important. And, absolutely, we need earmark reform. And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely."
Obama never came out in blanket opposition to earmarks, where he disagreed with McCain was on how earmarks were placed into bills outside of the appropriations process. In the above quote that stand is born out in that Obama, unlike McCain didn't not call for the outright ban on earmarks, something the President has no power over to begin with.
i have not met one person who thinks that the money is being spent wisely, especially those pesky porky parts. ......
anybody who thinks that you can spend your way out of debt is going to be in for a rude awakening, just as GM was not able to spend its way into solvency. they will still go into bankruptcy but taxpayers will have helped prolong their agony, with interest due in the meantime.
So the bottom line here is that not one mouthy right-winger at all can source any statement by Obama promising that he would eliminate earmarks. Two years worth of campaigning, two-and-a-half months as President-Elect, and six weeks as President, and in all the words spoken and statements issued over that time, none of them can find any instance of that promise being made. Not <rggr>, not <cobolt>, not <marysally>, not <fopt65>, not <sheena>, not <momma_bear>, not <southward_bound>, not <jadex>. None of them.
Rant and rave over a promise allegedly broken, yet no sign of the promise itself being anything but invented out of their own mouths. And the right-wing wonders how it can have come to be held in such widespread contempt and low regard....
there are 9,000 earmarks and there is enough blame for everybody. it does not matter whether he made a promise or not, he should have the common sense to eliminate the pork line by line. (unless this is a bush part 2 presidency which it certainly seems to be).
did throwing money at GM save GM, or even GMAC for that matter?
there are 9,000 earmarks and there is enough blame for everybody. it does not matter whether he made a promise or not, he should have the common sense to eliminate the pork line by line. (unless this is a bush part 2 presidency which it certainly seems to be).
did throwing money at GM save GM, or even GMAC for that matter?
Thank you. I was about to say the same thing. Defenders of Obama always revert to "...but what about Bush?", as if two wrongs make a right.
Obama is supposed to be looking after the country's welfare. I'm still waiting for him to do that.
Thank you. I was about to say the same thing. Defenders of Obama always revert to "...but what about Bush?", as if two wrongs make a right.
No. We don't.
We only ask that if one alleges the President said something, they provide proof of the statement or retract the allegation. How can we have a civilized discussion if one can't provide the minimum basis for review and further contemplation?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
