Of the recent spending vetoed by the president, presidential aspirant Barack Obama took to a leadership role and had this definitive statement:
‘“I don’t know whether there are sufficient options out there. I’m concerned about simply putting in advisory benchmarks that the president is free to ignore, without any consequences.”’
I don’t know what we can do other than tie the presidents hands and damn the consequences.
Harry “
‘“The bill that we sent him was a bill that was representative of the wishes of the American people, and we’re going to keep that in mind as we go through these negotiations. It’s not going to be easy, but it’s important.”’
That’s right Harry we’re all spineless. Tough talk from the Majority Leader comes in the form of the fights here at home, not abroad.
Adding to the integrity of the debate is Chuck Schumer with:
‘“I think that is not as much the problem as how to do something that has some integrity and yet the president still signs.”’
Integrity made all the more difficult when lacking any.
Paraphrased and attributed to Schumer by the Times, he said:
“Democrats would not fall into the trap of being blamed for cutting off money for the armed forces.”
Don’t play the Dems for being seen as cutting off money to end the
"Truth and wisdom are anchors. They cannot be made to dance very well," from The Anchoress, Anchors And Dance
The issue with Harry Reid is integrity.
ReplyDeleteHe has none. His sordid record on ethics is breathtaking.
The problem with Democrats in Congress is that they would rather see Bush lose than America win in Iraq. This pretty much explains their zig-zag attitude toward the Iraq war and its funding.
ReplyDeleteAs it goes without saying, I just voted for this thoughtful post at RCP.
As to the integrity of Harry Reid, I wrote in one of my post, which I believe you had no time to read, that once the late Soviet Union leader Khrushchev defined politician as a person who promises to build bridges in places where there are no rivers.
ReplyDeleteBy this definition, Harry is a post-politician since he called funding for construction of a bridge over the Colorado River, where he happened to own 160 acres of land several miles from proposed bridge sites, which he forgot to mention, though, and that the bridge could add value to his real estate investment, reported in Los Angels Time.