bush Makes Himself Clear

Setanta wrote:

And the Shrub is calling on the Democrats to continue his policy to "fight and win" in Iraq, and to make the tax cuts permanent. There's no call for bi-partisan cooperation here. I was greatly amused, though, when the Shrub spoke of a budget--maybe someone should get him a copy of the constitution, and point out that all money bills originate in the House of Representatives, not the White House.

Article I, Section 7, first paragraph:

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

I have often stated this when people accuse Bush of spending billions of dollars on things they disagree with. Odd that only now, when it suits the left to make the point, does it become valid.

0 Replies

So, apparently, you are attempting to erect two strawmen here--the first being that a statement by me is representative of "the left," and that the Congress, dominated by the Republicans for 12 years, is not to be held responsible for the budgets of a Republican administration.

Cue the Twilight Zone music . . .

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Setanta wrote:
And the Shrub is calling on the Democrats to continue his policy to "fight and win" in Iraq, and to make the tax cuts permanent. There's no call for bi-partisan cooperation here. I was greatly amused, though, when the Shrub spoke of a budget--maybe someone should get him a copy of the constitution, and point out that all money bills originate in the House of Representatives, not the White House.

Article I, Section 7, first paragraph:

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

I have often stated this when people accuse Bush of spending billions of dollars on things they disagree with. Odd that only now, when it suits the left to make the point, does it become valid.

Bush signs the bills, so he bears at least some of the responsibility, no?

I'm just as willing to hold Congressional Republicans to blame as I am Bush for our incredibly poor financial situation.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

And the Shrub is calling on the Democrats to continue his policy to "fight and win" in Iraq, and to make the tax cuts permanent. There's no call for bi-partisan cooperation here. I was greatly amused, though, when the Shrub spoke of a budget--maybe someone should get him a copy of the constitution, and point out that all money bills originate in the House of Representatives, not the White House.

Article I, Section 7, first paragraph:

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

The really sad thing is Set, the Dems will mostly allow the shrub to continue his failed mid-east policies. Stay the course will no longer be the buzz words but the intent to do so will remain.

0 Replies

Dys, even if the Democratic Congress comes up with a plan to withdraw from Iraq, the Shrub will not implement it.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

So, apparently, you are attempting to erect two strawmen here--the first being that a statement by me is representative of "the left," and that the Congress, dominated by the Republicans for 12 years, is not to be held responsible for the budgets of a Republican administration.

Cue the Twilight Zone music . . .

Yes, Setanat, you are a representative of the left. You may not consider yourself so, but would probably be the only one. Well, except for the sycophants that I am sure will reply quite quickly upholding your honor and calling me all sorts of nasty names and what not.

Bush is not "the Republicans". He is the President. Like you said, The President does not originate the money bills.

0 Replies

Yes, Bush is not "the Republicans," and i am not "the left." You did not refer to any representative of the left, you wrote: "Odd that only now, when it suits the left to make the point, does it become valid." Once again, i am not "the left."

You never fail to entertain, though. So, the Shrub was just strollin' down Pennsylvania Avenue, minding his own business, when the Republican Congress blindsided him with a tax cut he never wanted--is that your story?

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Yes, Bush is not "the Republicans," and i am not "the left." You did not refer to any representative of the left, you wrote: "Odd that only now, when it suits the left to make the point, does it become valid." Once again, i am not "the left."

You never fail to entertain, though. So, the Shrub was just strollin' down Pennsylvania Avenue, minding his own business, when the Republican Congress blindsided him with a tax cut he never wanted--is that your story?

Speaking of straw men...

0 Replies

I'm not erecting a strawman, i'm asking a question, which you are doing your damnest to dodge. Do you assert that the Republican Congress was responsible for a tax cut of which the Shrub did not approve?

0 Replies

I have asserted nothing. I did agree with your observation Setanta, perhaps you could argue with yourself for awhile.

Let me know who wins.

0 Replies

Run away, McG . . . you attempted to claim, based on what i had posted, that "the left" were guilty of blaming the Shrub for the results of his policies, but are now (once again, you referred to my post) pointing out that the House originates money bills.

Therefore, it is germane to point out that the Shrub promised tax cuts when running for office. The Republicans, who had controlled the Congress since 1994, only offered a tax cut after the Shrub was elected, six years after taking control of the Congress.

And that is the entire explanation for the Shrub's imperious attitude--he has gotten his way for six years, and is so accustomed to that, that he makes the gaffe of speaking of "his" budget. He gets to suggest, he doesn't get to write the budgets--not now that lick-spittle Republicans no longer control Congress.

Get over it, McG.

0 Replies

How sad it is for the positions of the once great conservative movement of Barry Goldwater that they have now been reduced to being defended by a handful of simpletons.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Run away, McG . . . you attempted to claim, based on what i had posted, that "the left" were guilty of blaming the Shrub for the results of his policies, but are now (once again, you referred to my post) pointing out that the House originates money bills.

Therefore, it is germane to point out that the Shrub promised tax cuts when running for office. The Republicans, who had controlled the Congress since 1994, only offered a tax cut after the Shrub was elected, six years after taking control of the Congress.

And that is the entire explanation for the Shrub's imperious attitude--he has gotten his way for six years, and is so accustomed to that, that he makes the gaffe of speaking of "his" budget. He gets to suggest, he doesn't get to write the budgets--not now that lick-spittle Republicans no longer control Congress.

Get over it, McG.

I think you just need to find some weaselly way to turn this around so you don't appear to actually agree with me.

Many times, the left have decried the billions of dollars Bush has wasted in some way or another. If you doubt that, feel free to look it up as I am sure my word is not good enough for you, and I have countered that Bush does not spend a dime but that congress is responsible for spending America's money.

Now, because you take exception with W, you curtsy out with your constitutional quote which backs up what I have said in the past.

How it must pain you to acknowledge that I have been right about something. It must pain you so much that you make these laughable strawman posts about things I have not said, asserted, alluded to or wrote.

Now, because you think Congress was Republican controlled and the President was Republican that some imperious shenanigans were happening. Either you don't understand the word "imperious" or you just like interjecting your posts with hyperbolic effect to impress the sycophantic little dogs yapping at your heels.

Now, to address your point regarding Bush and the budget;

The President submits a budget to Congress. It's not "THE" budget, but it is the Presidents budget and could therefore be referred to as "his" budget. Whether Congress approves it or not is to be decided by Congress. No doubt it was easier with a Republican Congress. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that.

0 Replies

It isn't that we agree, McG, about the responsibility of the Shrub. We simply agree about the mechanism. I pointed out that the Shrub spoke of "his" budget, and that this is a false position for him to take, because he does not make the budget. He can only impose when the Republicans control Congress, and they no longer do so.

However, i've not been constructing strawmen. You are attempting (once again) to absolve the Shrub of the responsibility for his own policies, and hiding behind the fact that revenue bills originate in the House. However, from 1994 to the present, the Republicans have controlled the House. When the Republicans controlled the House, and a Democrat was in the White House, there was no tax cut. The Shrub ran on platform which included the promise of a tax cut. Having been elected, the Republican controlled House offered a budget and a tax cut which were consonant with the Shrub's policies, and the Shrub signed those bills. The Shrub was responsible then, because he got what he wanted from a Republican House. Now he will not get what he wants, and will get much that he does not want. This is the distinction i was making, and that you are attempting to dance around.

You're a lousy dancer, McG.

bush Makes Himself Clear

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know