Congress hands Bush first veto override - Yahoo! News

Congress hands Bush first veto override - Yahoo! News

The Republicans joined the Democrats in overriding, for the very first time, Bush's veto of a giant water projects bill. The White House was quick to respond:

Bush's spokeswoman portrayed the issue as a divide between a budget-conscious president and a big-spending Congress.

"The president is standing up for the taxpayers," White House press secretary Dana Perino said. "No one is surprised that this veto is overridden. We understand that members of Congress are going to support the projects in their districts. Budgeting is about making choices and defining priorities — it doesn't mean you can have everything. This bill doesn't make the difficult choices; it says we can fund every idea out there. That's not a responsible way to budget."

So is Dana suggesting that all the bills filled with pork barrel projects that Bush signed into law when the Repugnicans were in control of Congress were responsible?

Is she suggesting that the President -- all of a sudden -- has become fiscally conservative?

Naw. She's just playing word games and politics. At least she's doing her job, unlike Bush.

Video

Bush vetoes emergency funding bill for military

President George W. (for No Withdrawal, unless it's for birth control purposes) Bush vetoed the emergency funding bill that Congress sent him today.

In only the second veto of his presidency, Bush rejected legislation that would require the first U.S. combat troops to be withdrawn from Iraq by Oct. 1 with a goal of a complete pullout six months later.

It's notable that he's vetoed the bill for a number of reasons. One, he obviously does not support the troops. Two, it's only his second veto. Three, his only other veto was in denying more federal funds earmarked for embryonic stem cell research. Four, this bill was at the President's request; the military desperately needs the money, according to Bush, yet he has just single-handedly prolonged the shortfall.

To sum it all up: Bush hates the military, he hates embryos, and he hates time tables.

Next up: Why Bush hates to read. And it's not because The Pet Goat is what he was reading when the planes struck the WTC.

Bush vetoes emergency funding bill - Yahoo! News

Bush does not support our troops. Top 10 reasons

If President Bush supported our troops

1. Would wounded troops fail to receive proper medical treatment?
2. Would dead soldiers' families fail to receive death benefits (which are paltry by the way)?
3. Would he send more troops to die?
4. Would he fail to provide them with necessary body armor?
5. Would he embolden the enemy by telling them to "bring it on?"
6. Would he send troops on 2nd, 3rd, or 4th deployments without the requisite time off?
7. Would he reduce the standards necessary to enlist in the military?
8. Would he make up stories about heroism (Pat Tillman, Jessica Lynch)?
9. Would he joke about finding weapons of mass destruction?
10. Would he veto a spending bill that would take care of funding for supplies, body armor, guns, bullets, munitions, health care, etc., for troops in Iraq, on their way home, or already back in the states?

The President clearly does not care about our troops. If he really cared, he'd define the mission, fund it, hold his generals accountable, and bring home the troops as soon as possible.

He's pissed away years fighting this war of his choice. The Christian that he is, he knows where he'll end up when this is all over. I'd feel sorry for him if I weren't so disgusted with the whole thing.

I'm sick of this debate: "I will veto the spending bill." I wish our representatives in Congress had the guts to say to him, "Bring it on. Veto it. I dare you."

And when he does, put out a campaign replete with television, radio, newspaper, and internet ads proclaiming -- quite accurately -- that the President, by definition, does not support the troops he so seemingly proudly professes to command.

Without enough votes to override Bush's veto, Democrats are considering revisions to the bill that will fund the troops but not give the president a blank check. A likely option is demanding the Iraqi government meet certain benchmarks.

F#@$^ benchmarks. The Iraqi government has had enough time to meet every benchmark imaginable. Benchmarks should have been in force since day 1. How were the imbeciles in the Bush administration going to know when we won the war if not for some demonstrable measures that were met or surpassed?

Heck, how do you even know you're out of bed in the morning without feeling your feet on the cold hardwood floor or plush carpet? Do you just will it to be?

Why are our reps so pussified? Did they all grow up wearing panties? It's time to take off the girly pants, grow some nads, and DO THE RIGHT THING!!!

Bush: Iraq timeline could cause 'chaos' - Yahoo! News

Bush will veto war spending bill

Two interesting things about Bush's warning about vetoing the bill Congress has passed that contains time tables.

1. Bush never liked time tables. Multiplication is as over-rated as reading.
2. By vetoing this bill, Bush will be solely responsible for denying the troops the funds that he claims they need. What kind of stupid logic is this?

Bush's veto of this bill will be only his second use of the veto pen. His first was in vetoing stem cell research.

Until his first veto, Bush hadn't met a spending bill, or any bill for that matter, that he didn't like. Pork has run rampant under his watch. So much for being a conservative.

Now he and his clowns crow about "artificial time tables" and "pork." What a hypocrite.

Bush vows to veto troop withdrawal plan - Yahoo! News