Only now does Obama pull out the veto pen !

[SteamWake]

What for you ask? Why defense spending of course.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090625/pl_nm/us_congress_defense_1

[AVGWarhawk]

Hey, that is just great especially when NK said it would nuke our butts if we farted the wrong way. :shifty: Man, Obama gets more brilliantly stupid with every pen stroke.

[Dowly]

cry babies. :O:

[Max2147]

Make no mistake, the F-22 and F-35 engine issues aren't defense spending, they're pork barrel projects disguised as defense spending.

Our GOP-appointed Secretary of Defense has already made it very clear what his position is on this. I'd much rather have Robert Gates running our military than Congress. Gates cares about defending our country, Congressmen only care about getting money spent in their districts.

[PeriscopeDepth]

I'm a huge fan of the F-22 but...

Frankly, our military is beyond bloated anyways. For the most part, they have still not learned to focus on items other than big ticket Cold War era systems. And when they do, they end up with astronomical costs ANYWAYS due to mission creep, contractors' gimmicks, and Congressional pork (read payola all the way around). It needs to be reigned in. This kind of spending is not sustainable in our debtor economy, especially when our military already eclipses every other by several magnitudes.

Hey, that is just great especially when NK said it would nuke our butts if we farted the wrong way. :shifty: Man, Obama gets more brilliantly stupid with every pen stroke.
I think the Pacific Ocean and our own little stock pile of atomic weapons has us covered.

PD

[SteamWake]

Ill be the first to admit that some of these programs may have been bloated perhaps even unecessary but to veto the entire bill?

There was no problem finding 10's of billions to bail out failing banks and 'stimulate' the economy.

By the way any of you feeling stimulated?

[Max2147]

Ill be the first to admit that some of these programs may have been bloated perhaps even unecessary but to veto the entire bill?

There was no problem finding 10's of billions to bail out failing banks and 'stimulate' the economy.

By the way any of you feeling stimulated?
The economic data released recently was better than expected, so something's working. The recession will end soon enough. When it does the Dems will say it was all Obama's stimulus package, and the GOP will say it was just the cyclical nature of the economy. As with all things like that, it'll be a combo of both.

As far as the defense spending bill, there's a huge difference between threatening to veto a bill that's being debated and actually vetoing it. It's also not like the military won't get funded if he vetoes it - they'll just send him another package to sign, hopefully without the F-22's and alternate F-35 engines (which is one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard).

[geetrue]

Obama is not the anti-christ ... :o

He is the anti-defense ... :yep:

[August]

He wouldn't have to block the whole bill if he had a line item veto.

[Platapus]

Unfortunately the Supreme Court shot that down.

cf Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998)

[Skybird]

What do you want. You have how many trillions of debts - and you still want to spend as if nothing has happened? The only thing that is to be discussed is wether his other spending projects are wisely chosen or not. Being bancrupt and still wanting to buy half of all the globe's military does not go well together.

[SteamWake]

The economic data released recently was better than expected, so something's working. The recession will end soon enough. When it does the Dems will say it was all Obama's stimulus package, and the GOP will say it was just the cyclical nature of the economy. As with all things like that, it'll be a combo of both.

As far as the defense spending bill, there's a huge difference between threatening to veto a bill that's being debated and actually vetoing it. It's also not like the military won't get funded if he vetoes it - they'll just send him another package to sign, hopefully without the F-22's and alternate F-35 engines (which is one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard).

yea that 10% unemployment rate... :oops:

[August]

Unfortunately the Supreme Court shot that down.

cf Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998)

Yeah I know in that particular form but the general idea still has legs apparently. The right thing to do of course is to pass a constitutional amendment but something like this is probably what will be tried first:

http://mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=d2005ba8-ae55-0798-dcd9-615285ee7f7a&Region_id=&Issue_id=

[Platapus]

I am not sure that I disagree with the SCOTUS decision in Clinton v. City of New York.

The Presentment Clause (Article I, Section 7, Clauses 2 and 3) seems pretty clear in the intent. There would have to be a real compelling benefit to take the power of creating legislation from 535 elected people and giving it to 1 elected person.

I hate the way Congress hides crap in otherwise good legislations and how they can politically blackmail the President in signing it. But I am not convinced that this "cure" won't be worse then the disease.

The entire congressional legislative process is based on compromise. One person, no matter how powerful is unable to push anything through congress without the cooperation of other congressmen/senators.

A Line Item Veto removes that.

I also believe it is in the best interests of our country that the Executive Branch of the Government not be instrumental in the constructing or packaging of legislation under the auspices of separation of powers.

In my opinion, the Line Item Veto sounds great on the surface, but does not stand up to deeper analysis.

[Aramike]

I am not sure that I disagree with the SCOTUS decision in Clinton v. City of New York.

The Presentment Clause (Article I, Section 7, Clauses 2 and 3) seems pretty clear in the intent. There would have to be a real compelling benefit to take the power of creating legislation from 535 elected people and giving it to 1 elected person.

I hate the way Congress hides crap in otherwise good legislations and how they can politically blackmail the President in signing it. But I am not convinced that this "cure" won't be worse then the disease.

The entire congressional legislative process is based on compromise. One person, no matter how powerful is unable to push anything through congress without the cooperation of other congressmen/senators.

A Line Item Veto removes that.

I also believe it is in the best interests of our country that the Executive Branch of the Government not be instrumental in the constructing or packaging of legislation under the auspices of separation of powers.

In my opinion, the Line Item Veto sounds great on the surface, but does not stand up to deeper analysis.I agree with this.

Here in Wisconsin, up until 2008 our governor had a form of line item veto we nicknamed the "Frankenstein Veto". This power allowed him to literally change sentences by combining parts of other sentences. He could literally take any bill and make it into something else. Thankfully, the usually moronic voters in this state stripped away that power in a constitutional amendment.

The point is that the executive should be signing or vetoing bills sent to him, as approved by congress. If he doesn't like an item in the bill he should simply send it back. That's the way of our system of government.

[CastleBravo]

What do you want. You have how many trillions of debts - and you still want to spend as if nothing has happened? The only thing that is to be discussed is wether his other spending projects are wisely chosen or not. Being bancrupt and still wanting to buy half of all the globe's military does not go well together.

I'm sorry to have to be on you Mr. Skybird, but Mr. Obama supported and signed into law, more US spending in his first 100 days in office than all other presidents allowed spent during their entire terms, combined. I know of no families who can spend their way out of debt, yet our president seems to think it is possible. How can anyone support that? Unless of course the decline of the US into a debtor nation is attractive. That seems to be the case with Mr. Obama., and he is acting on that perspective.

[Morts]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVFdAJRVm94&feature=fvst
He's Barack Oooobaaamaaaa !

[Skybird]

I'm sorry to have to be on you Mr. Skybird, but Mr. Obama supported and signed into law, more US spending in his first 100 days in office than all other presidents allowed spent during their entire terms, combined. I know of no families who can spend their way out of debt, yet our president seems to think it is possible. How can anyone support that? Unless of course the decline of the US into a debtor nation is attractive. That seems to be the case with Mr. Obama., and he is acting on that perspective.
Hm...

The only thing that is to be discussed is wether his other spending projects are wisely chosen or not.

[CastleBravo]

Spending for spending's sake makes no scence unless one is about making people impoverished. Am I wrong?

Of the 7.8 billion spent on the stimulus only 190.1 million has been allocated. Something is going on.

[geetrue]

Spending for spending's sake makes no scence unless one is about making people impoverished. Am I wrong?

Of the 7.8 billion spent on the stimulus only 190.1 million has been allocated. Something is going on.


What about all of the jobs this so called stimulus bill was suppose to create?

Uncle Sam is hiring I hear and growing by leaps and bounds, mostly for next years census is the only explanation they give.

[Zachstar]

Hey, that is just great especially when NK said it would nuke our butts if we farted the wrong way. :shifty: Man, Obama gets more brilliantly stupid with every pen stroke.

What advantage does the F-22 have over other fighters in north Korea?

Lets take a brand new fighter and risk many millions being blown to bits just to give the migs no chance to see a missile coming their way?

While I think the ground war will be difficult. The airwar will be a cakewalk. This is not falcon 4.

[Zachstar]

He wouldn't have to block the whole bill if he had a line item veto.

Are you frakking insane? Do you HONESTLY want the President to have THAT much power?

Seriously I voted and supported Obama but would NEVER support such a measure for him!

[Max2147]

The air war will be a cakewalk.... against other fighters. But these days the greatest threat to a fighter isn't other fighters, it's SAMs. The F-22's stealthiness allows it to operate safely in a SAM infested environment, where our current generation fighters like the F-15 would get mauled.

I think the Air Force ought to acquire more F-22's. I just think that decision should come from Gates, not from some self-interested Congressmen who have drunk the Lockheed Kool-Aid.

[Skybird]

First you pay for the beers you already had - then you can get more beer if then you can pay for that, too. Just getting more beer for free, with plenty of unpayed beer on your bill already - that is a dream.

Metaphorically spoken.

Call it holding a diet.

In the past 500 years, several european nations went bancrupt and had to go back to the starting line and completely relaunch their financial systems, always at the cost of ruined people and at the cost of former creditors, of course. The reason was always the same: excessive, military spending and burning more money for a bigger military than one's economy could afford to maintain. Empires and dynasties fell for that reason.

But if you want to learn that lesson today, it seems you must not really step into a waiting line, that low interest seems to be. Well, you'll reap like you have sowed and when you have a weak stand while pumping your biceps and chest muscles, you nevertheless fall over easily.

Redefining more moderate priorities that can be supported - this is advise of the day, not only for the Us but the EU as well. Because he who defends all in the end can defend nothing and looses it all.

[SteamWake]

Call it holding a diet..

If its a diet why is the budget so god damn fat?

[geetrue]

Are you frakking insane? Do you HONESTLY want the President to have THAT much power?

Seriously I voted and supported Obama but would NEVER support such a measure for him!

I didn't vote for him, but I agree ... besides it's not up to us with the Supreme Court already saying no to the line veto vote. If there was such a thing the House and the Senate would have even more pork barrel items in it just to see what they could get away with.

If its a diet why is the budget so god damn fat?

Since when is cussing allowed around here?

[SteamWake]

Since when is cussing allowed around here?

Since they censored my dream about a cat.

[CastleBravo]

I love Mr. Obama and his wife and daughters. Stop talking about them!!

No one ever spoke about Mr. Bush, and his family.