Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PROLIFE who wrote (728081)	2/26/2006 12:42:40 PM
From: pompsander	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"Congress holds the purse stings." Come on Pro...its a REPUBLICAN congress. His own party. The party that ran on fiscal responsibility. Because the republicans won't manage themselves we are supposed to give the President more power???? why doesn't he use the veto he has now? Want some examples of vetos that would have resulted in coming back to him in the form of cheaper and more focused new bills?......Highway, Medicare part D, Farm bill, and many more.

To: PROLIFE who wrote (728081)	2/26/2006 1:12:58 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 769670

"Then give him line item veto..." Congress ALREADY did that. Clinton had line item VETO authority for a couple of years --- until the Supreme Court held that it was UNCONSTITUTIONAL. So, if you truly want that, then it's TIME TO PUSH FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT! And, WHILE YOU ARE AT IT, why not ALSO push for a Constitutional amendment that will REALLY do some good at slashing away at the never-ending deficit spending: the Balanced Budget Amendment. I support BOTH (and have for years....) The 'little' one AND the 'big' one. Where are YOU? Do YOUR POLITICIANS SUPPORT EITHER OR BOTH OF THESE AMENDMENTS? (Or are they PHONIES, who only TALK A GOOD GAME when it comes to cutting the over-spending and ending the deficits, not REAL FISCAL CONSERVATIVES at all?)