If Bush Had Macro-Managed War, Veto of Emergency Funding Would Not Be an Issue

[babylonsister]

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2007/03/29/if-bush-had-planned-war-no-veto-would-be-required/

If Bush Had Macro-Managed War, Veto of Emergency Funding Would Not Be an Issue
Posted by Jon Ponder | Mar. 29, 2007, 6:43 am

In all the hot Rovian rhetoric Pres. Bush is spouting about vetoing the Democrats’ emergency supplemental war spending bill, the fundamental fact that it is an “emergency supplemental” is routinely overlooked.

As he enters the fifth year of his war in Iraq, why are emergency supplementals still necessary? If he were competent — and honest — he would have included the cost of fighting the war as a line item in the annual budget he sends to Congress.

Bush complains about the Democrats “micro-managing” the war, ignoring the fact that if he had macro-managed it, “emergency” funding would not be necessary.

Speaking to a friendly crowd at the National Cattlemans Beef Association in Washington, the president responded yesterday to the Senate’s version of the supplemental by threatening a veto, and making the contorted assertion that if he kills funding for the war, the public will blame the Democrats.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s response was a beautifully crafted short statement that put politely put the president in his place:

Calm down with the threats.There is a new Congress in town. We respect your constitutional role; we want you to respect ours. This war must end. The American people have lost faith in the President’s conduct of the war. Let’s see how we can work together. This war is diminishing the strength of our military, not honoring our commitment to our veterans, and not holding the Iraqi government accountable.

In a reference to Bush’s increasingly apoplectic responses to confrontations from Congress, the Speaker also advised the president to “take a breath.”

[hippiechick]

1. ... because his corporate cronies keep getting greedier ...

... they're like tapeworms attached to the federal trough, the more you give them, the more they want.

[Bitwit1234]

2. The democrats did not cut off funding for the war.

If bush vetos the bill ....he will....and he will be vetoing the bill because he doesn't want to end the war. The war that the people in this country have told him over and over....stop the war. So he and the republicans are the only ones who want the war. Let them fund and fight it.

[gratuitous]

3. You can't expect the MBA President to know everything!

Gee whiz, it's not like ongoing funding is part of the big picture; that's for the little people like the accountants to worry about. None of the business plans George ever followed worried about funding. They had the same basic model:

1. Get Dad and his pals to generously fund a new business.
2. Use up all the capital and produce nothing.
3. Get Dad's pals to buy the now-worthless business, pocket purchase price.
4. Go back to step 1.