White House Threatens Budget Veto »
Posted by: Lurch 9 months agoThe Dems tried to add $11B to the budget for healthcare, border security, and disaster relief. The WH rejected this claiming it is fiscally unsound. Unless of course the Dems agree to throw in an additional (!) $70B for Iraq.
Read Full Story at guardian.co.uk
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 11
-

Lurch9 months ago
-

tehranchik9 months ago
From the article:
'Democrats are signaling they are willing to give Bush a portion of the war funding on terms the White House can accept. Republicans say $70 billion would be a sufficient ``bridge fund'' for the Pentagon.'
"they are willing" I think that's secret code for; give it to them.
Reply
-
-

quackpot9 months ago
-

Spadecaller9 months ago
Emergency funding for border security, foreign aid, drought relief, a food program for women and children, and healthcare benefits for kids are of secondary importance to this administration that will give billions in no bid contracts to private corporations, where the money gets "lost" in the shuffle.
The bums belong behind bars.
Reply-

acdnc9 months ago
Great story--I notice it is only outside the US that one can find such an example of "spin-free" journalism nowadays. This prev fall when we visited the Portugese beaches I was even surprised at how AlJazeera International News is clearly head and shoulders above CNN and even NPR...good enough to compete w the BBC...
The stench of the money laundering is gagging our economy. Iraq has been the ultimate shunting method. We are living in the bloody dark ages. And yet we keep re-electing these filthy vicious murderous rapists masquerading as leaders who are threatening our children's future.
Reply
-
-

DarkWizard8 months, 4 weeks ago
Lurch,
Good post.
acdnc,
Thank you for the heads up.
It is sad when the real news has to come from sources outside the U.S. Then once the MSM sees the Internet and blog sites pick these stories up they print them.
Reply -

aniokly8 months, 4 weeks ago
The Commander in Chief will not allow the Democrats to defund our troops on the ground. He will sign no half budget. They know that, but they think if they can just pass it in the middle of the night the President will sign without reading it. He won't. They will be forced by the next election to fund the troops, or lose re election.
Reply-

Lurch8 months, 4 weeks ago
In reality, it was Bush who vetoed the funding. Congress passed it, he nixed it.
This time likewise, Congress puts the military funding in there, the Reps threaten to filibuster and veto it.
Bush tried to steal $ from VA for more crony entitlements. He cut off combat funding, he started the invasion with too few soldiers and not enough equipment. Blackwater had all the equipment it needed, but not the army. Also, I lived in Phoenix at the start of the war and a local company specialized in humvee armor protection. It complained in the paper that it was running at 30% capacity while the WH told the military, `too bad, we don`t have enough armored humvees`.
Americans will remember who fought against the military. Look for another history lesson to be handed to your party in 2008.
Reply
-
-

Shadowolf8 months, 4 weeks ago
...LeShrub has been playing "Heads I win, Tails you lose" the entire time his regimes been on office...the Democrats said they would stop him,then kept capitulating...hang 'em all, let God decide their fate...
Reply
Submitted By:
LurchRelated Articles:
Why not submit a story?
Also Propping This Article
TimALoftis
MidnightPrism
Helixbuilder
berkeley
DarkWizard
tehranchik
Dobes_Rule
BronxBomber
jordan11
Lurch
Groups Watching This
No groups are watching this story. Why not share it with your group?




