CHANGE MY LOCATION
Politics
Examiners
Right Side Politics Examiner
Most Recent Post
CNN's Lou Dobbs blames financial crisis on The Democrats and ACORN
California News
Multimedia News
Bush slams Dems on military funds
SEE THE LATEST ON THIS STORY
Related Topics: PHILADELPHIA
)
President Bush urged Democratic lawmakers to pass a defense spending bill before the August recess.
PHILADELPHIA (Map, News) - President Bush on Thursday sought to shame Democratic lawmakers into passing funds for U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan before the congressional recess in August.
“We got troops in harm’s way,” Bush told an audience in Philadelphia. “At the very least, members of Congress ought to finish the spending bill for the Department of Defense before they go on recess, so I can sign it into law.”
He added: “There’s time to do it. I’ll hang around if they want me to.”
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid countered that Bush never should “have placed our troops in harm’s way” in the first place.
“The president’s call today to pressure Congress to quickly complete a defense spending bill that does not take effect until October is simply the latest example of the president shamelessly hiding behind our brave troops in an effort to distract attention from his failed national security record and failed conduct of this war,” the Nevada Democrat said.
Congress plans to go on vacation next month without passing any of the 12 major appropriations bills, including the defense spending bill. The White House is worried that the bills will be merged into an unwieldy omnibus spending measure laden with pork.
“I believe these bills need to be passed one at a time because the alternative is to pass a massive spending bill that no one can read, and into which anyone can hide wasteful spending,” Bush said. “They need to get the work done before the fiscal year ends on September the 30th.”
Bush plans to veto a Democratic resolution calling for $205 billion in additional domestic spending over the next five years. To pay for the spending, some Democrats want to increase taxes.
“In order to pay for the promises they have made, their budget framework includes the largest tax increase — not the second largest or close to the largest — the largest tax increase in American history,” Bush said. “The average American family of four, making $60,000, would see their bill go up by $1,800.”
bsammon@dcexaminer.com
Comments from Examiner Readers
9:56 PM MST on Wed., Apr. 11, 2007 re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
9:54 AM MST on Wed., Apr. 11, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
5:17 PM MST on Tue., Apr. 10, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
6:46 AM MST on Tue., Apr. 10, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
6:29 AM MST on Tue., Apr. 10, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
9:48 PM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
1:40 PM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
1:20 PM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
12:27 PM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
11:42 AM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
11:00 AM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
10:51 AM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
10:34 AM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
10:21 AM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
9:57 AM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
7:51 AM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
7:28 AM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
6:30 AM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
1:21 AM MST on Mon., Apr. 9, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
10:55 PM MST on Sun., Apr. 8, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
10:46 PM MST on Sun., Apr. 8, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
9:17 PM MST on Sun., Apr. 8, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
7:58 PM MST on Sun., Apr. 8, 2007
re: "White House says economic surge robust"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader said:
Economic surge under Bush, That's a laugh! Spending $600 billion for socalled WMDs. The only people that have done good are the Rich with big tax cuts with the National Debt adding more red ink. Lets not forget the stockholders of Haliburton and Becthel who made a millions on the blood of American troops. Rich Republicans Chickenhawks don't and will never serve the military. But it's alright for the poor to go and fight and die.
395 agree | 323 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Jimmie Carter is my man. 22% interest rates. Mobile homes recommended for housing. Clinton lets the Feds pay for everything - medical, housing, poor (that's everyone except the Hilton End. I WAS working then so I picked up the tab. Now I burn corn to stay warm.
457 agree | 378 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
If unemployment is so high across the co., the cost of living higher than ever & job insecurity @an all-time high, what's so great about this ecom v. Clintons'?!?
432 agree | 381 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Is that why the gap between the rich and poor is the greatest since 1929, right before the Great Depression?
338 agree | 339 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The economy is truly robust. Now, if we can keep big government, tax and waste Democrats from gaining control, we can keep it going. Clinton stood for nothing but what the polls told him he should do. We are suffering now because of what Carter didn't do in Iran many years ago. The Iraq war may not be popular with everyone, but if we fail there the repercussions will be astronomical for the whole world.
308 agree | 366 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
How about the Bush national debt????????? oh, and we had to do away with the middle class so the rich could get richer!! I resent any comparison to the Clinton surplus and the Bush tax cuts for the rich.
408 agree | 335 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Well, let's see...You have domestic manufacturing on the ropes and down for the count (it was growing strongly and healthily ten years ago). You have unemployment rates that clearly are fake, given that they are mathematically impossible due to the combination of continued population growth and anemic new job creation numbers. You have bloated budget and trade deficits which replaced a surplus at the end of the Clinton years that if left alone, would have wiped out the national debt by the end of the decade. You have a dollar that has lost 30% of its value against global currencies, contributing to the worst bloating in energy prices ini 30+ years. You have record levels of personal debt and personal bankruptcy in an economic environment where the top 10% of the income pyramid is literally enjoying 110% of the personal income growth, while the bottom 90% is LOSING ground. All this is confirmed by the government's own figures when read accurately. And Bush is asserting that his econom
421 agree | 387 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The BIGGEST "minus" to the Clinton economy was that it's base the .com boom was a sham.
405 agree | 367 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
hows the national debt under bush, does he have a surplus yet I don't think so!!! six years and counting bush!!! under clinton we had a niece surplus!!!
363 agree | 340 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Dems and Reps are equally guilty of spinning numbers to make their side look more favorable than the other. They know most folks are basically stupid and will readily embrace their party's line. For example, "Labor Department reported that 180,000 new jobs were created in March and the unemployment rate fell to 4.4 percent." Sounds pretty good right? How many of those jobs were given to illegal foreigners who keep pouring over our borders? How much of the unemployment rate drop represented folks accepting jobs as opposed to being removed merely because their unemployment benefits ran out. Yep, once a person's benefits runs out the government no longer counts him as being unemployed even though he still doesn't have a job. Spin spin spin. Both parties play the game.
344 agree | 393 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Mudlake Slim said:
I can't speak for the overall economy of the business world but my part of the country is in bad shape and getting worse. Whether it has anything to do with who was/is president is an interesting concept but you can "see" our bad economy just by looking at the empty storefronts and aging for sale signs in the neighborhood.
719 agree | 345 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Everything is more expensive and people earn less. Stronger?
429 agree | 343 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I'd like to know what program Elijah is on where he is getting $350 a month in tax breaks. In northern Michigan everything is at a standstill, houses for sale for the last 2 or 3 years and still on the market, business's closing down, no new business starting up, you don't see people coming up north for vacation or hunting/fishing. It's over a $100 bill just for gas for a roundtrip here to Detroit. I can't say much for the rest of the country but the economy here blows and is getting worse each day. I'm one disaster away from extinction.
369 agree | 347 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
During the Bush years, the number of Americans below the poverty line has increased by 5.37 million, while under Clinton the number fell by 7.68 million. THIS IS ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW. the White House will spin anything to control and confuse the masses ... you can not have a "strong" economy if 5.37 MILLION citizens fell into living life below the poverty line. I think the President that moved 7.5 MILLION OUT of living below the poverty line gets to win this - unless your playing number games and ignoring reality.
307 agree | 394 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Charles S said:
My take on the economy is this. In Indiana during the Clinton years Fast food restaurants had signs out touting wages of $8.00--$8.25 per hour. Grocery and chain stores were the same. During the Bush years those same business now pay minimum wage and the Republican controlled congress continually defeated efforts to raise the minimum wage. Charles S.
386 agree | 347 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
george Humann said:
do you think you or some reporter could do some homework and determine who is correct? isn't that part of your job as opposed to acting as a 'mouthpiece for the opposition'. if Bush's claim is correct, what right do the Clinton people have to a headline disputing a known fact? this is not even a political issue but by not publishing the facts, you make it one.
452 agree | 355 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Elijah said:
I am low - middle class, and own no stock of any kind. My family is MUCH much better off now then we were under Clinton. His tax cuts put about $350/month back into our pockets, and made the difference between going back to college or not. I don't know hat country the doom-and-gloomers live in, but it's not mine...
430 agree | 316 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader, Ph.D. said:
Sperling is right! There is no comparison! The Bush economy far outpaces the pseudo-economy of clinton. In fact, clinton did evrything possible, through record-breaking soaring tax increases on the poor and middle classes, to wreck the robust Reagan economy. clinton's "economy" was totally ersatz. Economic actoivity and prosperity are created only through the action of the private sector. Any government action that raises taxes to fund giveaways to political cronies and toadies is not "investment' as clinton falsely claimed. In fact, if it's absurdity that Sperling is pointing to, it would be the 8 year curse from Jan. 20, 1993 to Jan. 20, 2001 of bill in the Oval Office that this dear country had to endure.
419 agree | 358 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader3 said:
Bush Economy better? For who? The Bush Chickenhawks who own Haliburton stock. What kind of drugs are these people on saying Bush economy is better that Clintons. Where have all the W bumper stickers gone? Bush is no Reagan! Bush is not a good Republican.
301 agree | 357 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
JPark said:
You might want to mention that Kudlow is a little biased. He was an economic advisor to Reagan. Not only that he has carried water for the Bush administration for years and is a huge proponent of supply side economics. Given who Kudlow is, the fact that not even he can spin Bush's economy as being better than Clinton's is very telling.
394 agree | 382 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader2 said:
Too bad many of those corporate leaders that spurred the Clinton growth are in jail from fraud. Let us not forget why there is now a SOX Act, why companies had to restate earnings all the way back to 1998, and why cash flow statements are broken up into three separate segments now. I won't mention the annual testing of goodwill for impairment now instead of just writing it off over years like a hard asset. Whoops, I guess I did.
376 agree | 394 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Matt said:
"Since the early Reagan years, we have had 25 years of virtually uninterrupted prosperity," Kudlow said. This is absoulutely right. Both the Clinton and Bush growth is just a continuation of what Reagan started!
466 agree | 380 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
"In terms of job creation, in terms of wage growth, in terms of business investment, in terms of poverty, there's absolutely no comparison." He is absolutely right. There is no comparison. Thing are better all the way around no matter how bad the media or Democrats want to make it sound. I and everyone I know are far better off now than in the Clinton years. I just hope that the present tax suts turn into something I heard Congressman Linder(sp) tlaking about a Fair Tax Plan. Make America the worlds Tax haven. It will create even more jobs.
490 agree | 374 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree