Bush is a joke - from republicansareidiots.com

[trogdor]

<font size=-2>February 13, 2004</font>
This is almost funny. We are at the point where people are expressing concern about the Bush Administration spending money like drunken sailors, pointing out that the "president" has yet to veto even one bill since taking the oath of office. Since the Republican Party used to be well-known as the party of fiscal restraint, this has conservatives of every stripe scratching their heads. Realizing this, Bush has chosen the highway bill, recently passed by the Senate 76-21, for what is probably an <a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=536&e=3&u=/ap/20040213/ap_on_go_co/congress_highways">empty veto threat</a>.

Remember what you learned in school about the Constitution. If Congress votes in favor by a two-thirds majority, the bill goes into effect anyway, embarassing the "president" royally. For the Senate, this means 67 votes, and 76 > 67, last time I checked.

Constitutional calculus aside, I have to ask myself, why the highway bill? OK, we're going to spend an extra $100 billion over six years for roads, mass transit, and safety. We're running big deficits. That much I get. Also remember we gave Bush $87 billion to waste in Iraq, <i>just for one year</i>. At least we have something to show for the money we spend on highways and subway systems. Can you say the same for the money we waste in Iraq?

I heard the other day that the $87 billion will be gone - poof! - by October (or something like that), and Bush is reluctant to ask Congress for more before Election Day. Isn't that a hoot?

So to sum up Bush's fuzzy math: $87 billion for just one year in Iraq, good. $100 billion for infrastructure which helps the economy <i>in the United States</i> spread out over six years, bad.

This is what they teach at Harvard Business School?