Wow, you're using an argument I use against Clinton. However, since you appreciate facts I'll lay a couple on you.
1) According to the document you qouted the President can propose a budget and Congress approves it or denies and creates their own.
2) Bush has proposed over $200,000,000,000.00 for disaster recovery on the Gulf Coast. That was before Rita. I don't know where the proposed limits are now.
3) Since Bush has taken office the federal budget has increased by over 20%.
4) Try and show me a spending increase veto by Bush and I'll show about ten times that many he should have vetoed.
5) Look at his spending track record here in Texas when he was governor. Same MO, spend your problems away. It's all about the compassionate side of conservatism you know. I prefer real conservatives.
6) Do a search about Bush's spending here on Free Republic. There are more than a few here who are mad about the spending issue.
7) Even if he didn't spend it (yet) he still proposed spending it. Implies he would spend it if he had it too spend.
8) Last time I checked he was the leader of the Republican Party. The GOP controls Congress. The leader of the party is responsible for what their party does. If he came out against the spending the GOP would most likely do it. Care to look up how many times this GOP congress has overridden a Bush veto?
9) I am in favor of small government and limited spending by that government. I think the amout of money that is going to New Orleans is actually obscene and the most of the problems could be solved by spending far less money-- probably less than half. However, I think a major amount of money needs to be spent that the locals and the state can't handle.
I'll stick by calling Bush a big spender. That's what you call someone who spends a lot. Or do you have another name for it, SIR?
Yeah and according to that document the congress can over ride his veto. The congress holds the powwer of the purse strings partner and no blustering can change that a bit.
How did the Vietnam war end again? OH YEAH Congress took the power they hold and denied funding it any longer....the very same thing they could do today with regards to Iraq.
Question: who holds the power of the purse strings?
Answer: Congress.
Congress passes a budget regardless of what the president offers. See that yet? Spending is up it is on CONGRESS not the president.
Why would Bush veto budgets when congress has the votes to override it anyway. Are you really that new to politics? Cmon now. Get serious.
BUSH CANNOT SPEND SIR. He can say ' I want you to spend X amount on Y things, but without congress he cannot spend a dime. That is a simple fact my friend. Congress however CAN spend money outside any presidential authority whatsover with the veto override. Prove me wrong on that and I will withdraw my membership to this site. Simple as that. A president can allocate monies already appropriated by congress but then again we are at exactly the same point. CONGRESS spends and not the office of the president.
The Democratic party controls the Senate. The minority ALWAYS controls the senate. No they do not control the agenda in the senate but they control the up or down vote. After the judge appointments that went YEARS without a vote in the senate will you really sit here and claim the GOP was in control of that? Again I say Cmon now get serious!
I already addressed veto. There is reason to veto when congress holds the votes to override. Politically that is just never gonna happen.
If you really ARE in favor of smaller government and psending then by all means take this exchange for what it is. Me educating YOU to the fact that CONGRESS holds the power of the purse strings. You can shift the blame thru the stretching you have done in this post all you want to and to be honest Congress loves you for it.
You cannot change the simple fact that Congress holds the power of the purse.
Sir, call Congress the big spender then i will agree with you. When a President cann allocate tax dollars aside from congress as congress can aside from the president get back to me OK?
Sir?