This post showed exactly what I said repeatedly, that so called conservatives, NEWSMAX here (but National Review, your buddies AND YOU!) celebrated the results of Bush/Cheney rapid debt generation, his re-election. Sure afterward they disowned the specific spending they didn't like that appealed to non-'conservatives', which got Bush re-elected. Big deal. Now they claim moral supremecy over democrats on debt?? HA
RE :”Then in late 2006, Pelosi and Reid took over and the liberal Democrat run Congress went far beyond any previous Congress in its over-spending habits”
Really, how many GWB vetos did they over-ride? Total crap, Bush was Obama’s twin.
WOSG: ”Then in late 2006, Pelosi and Reid took over and the liberal Democrat run Congress went far beyond any previous Congress in its over-spending habits”
You: “Really, how many GWB vetos did they over-ride?”
THERE WERE SEVERAL VETOES. On SCHIP, where the Demos wanted to triple the spending and Bush vetoed it, Pelosi/Reid didnt override but waited for Obama to sign. On FY2009 they also waited for Obama to spend an extra $40 billion more than Bush was willing to spend. For several other bills, they got pork-barrel appropriations overrides.
THANKS FOR BASHING BUSH, LETTING PELOSI OFF THE HOOK AND NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO THE DEMOCRAT OVER-SPENDERS WHO HAVE RUN CONGRESS SINCE 2007:
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/11/another_day_another_bush_veto.html
- November, 2007 -
President Bush has vetoed another spending bill: A $150.7-billion Labor, Health and Education appropriations bill.
This is the second spending bill that Bush has vetoed for over-spending (he also vetoed a children’s health insurance bill over objections for its extension of benefits). And Congress overrode the president’s veto of the other spending bill, a water resources development act.
Bush signed another appropriations bill, for Defense — with the White House calling it “not a perfect bill, but “essential to deliver these funds to our military in a time of war.’’
But, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said en route to Indiana with the president for a speech about the economy and congressional spending, the vetoed bill provided $10 billion more than the president wanted and included some 2,000 “earmarks’’ — special projects inserted at the behest of individual congressmen.
....
According to the committee, lawmakers rejected proposed cuts that the White House wanted in healthcare access, education, medical research, job training and grants to alleviate poverty and promote economic development. The bill offers a 4.3 percent increase in these programs, $6.2 billion above last year – while the White House proposed to cut $3.6 billion.
“With today’s veto,’’ said Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), “the president has shown once again how out of touch and out of step he is with the values of America’s families. Cancer research, investments in our schools, job training, protecting workers, and many other urgent priorities have all fallen victim to a president who squanders billions of dollars in Iraq but is unwilling to invest in America’s future.”
This bill, like the water bill, could inspire another veto override. It passed the House by 274-141, with support from 50 Republicans.
“This post showed exactly what I said repeatedly, that so called conservatives, NEWSMAX here (but National Review, your buddies AND YOU!)”
Wrong. You have your cites wrong. You never cited newsmax. I have shown multiple cites that refute that whole line of thought by you: Conservatives back in *2002* were alert to the over-spending and were critiquing the Congress and the President for fiscal irresponsibility and over-spending.
“celebrated the results of Bush/Cheney rapid debt generation, his re-election”
FALSE. Another strawman on your part. Not a single cite has ‘celebrated’ higher deficits. NONE.
FALSE too is the phony claims that Bush won because of the deficits. Even though the economy was strong in 2004, Bush got no particular mileage out of it nor out of the spending he passed. That whole issue was a wash.
“Sure afterward they disowned the specific spending”
FALSE. Not ‘afterwords’ - WHEN IT WAS GOING ON. I gave you 3 cites from mid-2002 of conservatives, Rush, NRO, Heritage and there were others, frowning on the overspending. 35 GOP Senators in 2002 voted *NO* on the Daschle Farm bill and called it a budget-buster, which is what it was. The same story played out on several big spending bill.
THIS WAS WELL BEFORE BUSH’S REELECTION - 6 YEARS AGO!
“they didn’t like that appealed to non-’conservatives’, which got Bush re-elected”
FALSE. Bush’s attempt to appeal via over-spending did not work. The proof is in the polling and President’s current lower popularity. It failed. Rather, Bush beat Kerry on the key issue of decisive leadership and trust to win the GWOT. That is why fiscal cons turned to Bush. The GOP won in 2002 and 2004 on the back of national security issues.
“Now they claim moral supremecy over democrats on debt??”
Those 35 Senate Republicans who voted NO on the Daschle budget-busting Farm bill and those talk radio show hosts who complained about it then, and those conservative opinion leaders who raised the issue back in 2002 have PLENTY of moral authority to speak out now on the far far larger fiscal recklessness of the obama administration.