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.
Watched a DVD during SOTU and rebuttal. Caught the highlights online this morning.
The one thing I am picking up is Harry Reid's reaction to an earmarks veto by the President.
"Speaking to reporters on Capitol Hill, Reid said that the plan is 'a lot of pretty talk' and would cede too much power to the executive branch. It would give "the president more power, and he's got enough power already,' he said. "
The great leader of the democratic party said he would ban all earmarks in January 2009, and the democrats in congress blew him off. So after 0bama has proven his is a weak leader, why would anyone pay attention to him now?
They still need to define what is, and what is not, an earmark.
The great leader of the democratic party said he would ban all earmarks in January 2009, and the democrats in congress blew him off. So after 0bama has proven his is a weak leader, why would anyone pay attention to him now?
They still need to define what is, and what is not, an earmark.
I'm guessing that was the sneaky part of this. He proposed that he wants to increase spending on infrastructure and innovation--things that would have been handled through ear marks in the past--and then cut ear marks. They're moving the ear marks that work to build the country out of that process, and cutting the stuff that doesn't help.
If I recall correctly, Mr. Obama made it a campaign issue back in 2008, yet he never followed through, so why should anything be different this time?
The president has always had the power to veto any bills, so why would Mr. Reid figure that this gives the president too much power. It isn't like the president can veto only a portion of a bill or anything like that.
Reagan wanted a line item veto so he could cut the BS and pork out of bills and I know it didn't work out because either the congress or courts said no.
This entitlement veto sounds like just a political tool in this case because the President loves to spend spend spend.
Remember when he PROMISED he would not sign any bill until it has been 5 days? Guess he lied about that and the earmarks both.
More BS from the scam master himself.
Sure do remember, but those were the Sunny-Days of yesteryear. I remember a lot of things obama promised, but these promises never came they just never came to be. I remember talk of a new era of hope and change and promise, this has not come to be. I remember talk of not spending as previous administrations, this too is a lie. I remember many things, but what i remember most, was though i did not vote for Obama, i truly wanted That Change he so talked about so often.
Yep;and his plan to shutdown faniie and Freddie when he previously opposed even auditing them is suspect also.The guy hasn't sold change;he has been selling a bill of goods as the saying goes.
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.
