Posted on 04/26/2006 7:53:35 AM PDT by Small-L
Now that the '06 election is looming, and Bush is worried that if the D'rats win he'll be impeached, he suddenly gets a bit of fiscal backbone. Unfortunately, I'm afraid it's too little, too late.
Ok, so let me ask this question. If this bloated bill reaches his desk and he vetoes it, would that win back Conservatives or is it too late? To me, it is a bit late, but better late than never.
If BUSH is doing a good thing then say it is a good thing and encourage it. Otherwise you will sound like a Dem.
It would take more than that to win voters back.
If it's that vital, why doesn't the state appropriate the money and do the job itself?
If it's too late to you, what's the reason you posted this? The title of this is a bit misleading because it's not the "war" part of it that's the problem, it's the bloated Katrina give away.
Bush be damned no matter what he does....
Your're rght, he will not win re-election.
He's only threatening to veto it because there is 2 billion in there to secure our borders.
Anything that reins in earmarks and spending is a good thing. Anyone who advocates reducing the bloat is doing a good thing, Bush included. My question is why did he wait until now? He and Congress have added $3Trillion to the federal debt, have raised domestic spending more and faster than any president in history, and gave us the largest entitlement increase since Johnson. He threatened to veto the hugely bloated Transportation Bill and when Congress exceeded his limit, he signed it anyway.
Pardon me, but I'll save my praise for Bush until he actually does something about cutting spending.
LOL! That's so regrettably true it's funny.
I don't change titles, that's the title Reuters gave it.
If it's too late to you, what's the reason you posted this?
First, Bush isn't running for reelection, the House is. Second, I'll be voting for my current R- Congressman because he's a strong supporter of fiscal restraint and strict constructionsism. Third, neither of my R- Senators is up for reelection, but if they were, I'd be supporting one of them and not the other for the same reason. Fourth, it's not too late for me, but I fear that it may be too late for the Republican majority in the House.
Last poll I saw 59% of the population supports their own congressman. That means a lot of people dislike other district's congressmen but also means that since they can't vote for the other district's congressmen, except in St. Louis (joke), the make up of congress will change very little.
Bush hasn't yet seen a bloated spending bill he didn't sign, so why should this one be any different?
Go back to MoveOn.org arse-clown!
Actually, I'd say the RINOs in Congress and Bush's neo-cons did a pretty good job without our help, FR's Bushaters (I don't happen to be one) don't amount to enough to reverse one precinct let alone an election, but the Conservative base who feel abandoned by the Party, are the ones we need to worry about. They're the ones who won't show up on election day.
UNLESS Bush and the Republican leadership in Congress turn their ship around soon. The opportunities are golden to do something dramatic--immegration, gasoline prices, 2007 budget, tax reform..., but alas if we just had (more of) a majority, then we could really do something. That excuse has about run its course, now do something!
WSB's Washington reporter just said that someone is keeping track. So far in six years, Bush has treatened to veto bills 135 times, but has actually vetoed none. 135-0! I'd say his threats don't mean much to the RINOs in Congress or to us for that matter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.