PDA

View Full Version : Bush calls on Democrats to work with him


lily
01-03-2007, 03:44 PM
What a load of crap! Bush is so afraid now that his rubber stamp is gone and Democrats won't be as intimadated as the Republicans were. Just an hour ago he was on TV again asking like a spoiled child for something that he was already refused. His line item veto. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16445649/)

Bush calls on Democrats to work with him
‘Political’ legislation will lead to stalemate, he says in op-ed column


Updated: 2 hours, 16 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - President Bush, facing a Democratic-controlled Congress for the
first time, is urging lawmakers to work with his administration and warning
that “political statements” in the form of legislation would result in a
stalemate.

“Together, we have a chance to serve the American people by solving the
complex problems that many don’t expect us to tackle, let alone solve, in
the partisan environment of today’s Washington,” Bush wrote in a guest
column for The Wall Street Journal posted on the newspaper’s Web site
Tuesday night.

“To do that, however, we can’t play politics as usual,” he said. “Democrats
will control the House and Senate, and therefore we share the responsibility
for what we achieve.”



Bush, while sounding a tone of bipartisanship on the eve of the new session
of Congress that begins Thursday, repeated long-held positions on the war in
Iraq, tax cuts and other issues often criticized by Democrats. He has vetoed
only one bill, but he reminded readers that the Constitution calls on the
president to use his judgment in deciding which bills to sign into law.

‘Next two years can be fruitful’
“If the Congress chooses to pass bills that are simply political statements,
they will have chosen stalemate,” Bush wrote. “If a different approach is
taken, the next two years can be fruitful ones for our nation. We can show
the American people that Republicans and Democrats can come together to find
ways to help make America a more secure, prosperous and hopeful society.”

Bush planned to meet with his Cabinet to discuss domestic priorities on
Wednesday and to court key lawmakers at a social reception that evening. He
is under pressure to announce a new Iraq strategy, although officials say he
is still making decisions and will not reveal any changes this week, and is
expected to say he is sending additional U.S. troops to Iraq.

Wednesday’s schedule represents Bush’s official return to work after a
Christmas vacation at his Texas ranch. Bush spoke at the funeral of
President Ford on Tuesday but remained out of sight the remainder of the
day.

In a seismic shift of power, Democrats will claim control of both the House
and Senate on Thursday for the first time in 12 years. Eager for their turn
at power, Democrats have complained that Bush has kept them at arms length
and has not consulted on key decisions. Even a senior Republican, Sen.
Richard Lugar of Indiana, said on Sunday that Bush has been inclined “to not
take Congress very seriously” on Iraq policy.

Bush invited about a dozen members of Congress — Democrats and Republicans
alike — and their spouses to a reception Wednesday evening. Officials said
it was a social gathering, not what Bush was talking about last week when he
said he planned more consultations with Congress before announcing a new
Iraq plan. The consultations will take place later, officials said.

Minimum wage increase?
In recent weeks, Bush has signaled a willingness to go along with a
Democratic priority for raising the minimum wage, if it is accompanied by
tax and regulatory relief for small businesses. Bush also has suggested that
progress could be made on an immigration policy overhaul, including a way
for some illegal workers to move toward citizenship. That was stymied this
year primarily by conservative Republicans who favored a get-tough-only
approach.

In the Wall Street Journal column, Bush cited as a priority helping Iraq
gain full control over its affairs.

“We now have the opportunity to build a bipartisan consensus to fight and
win the war,” he wrote.

Bush said he would submit a budget in February that would make tax cuts
permanent and lead to a balanced budget by 2012, which he contended would
put the country in a better position to tackle the challenge of changing the
Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid programs. He also said he would offer
his own plan for dealing with pork-barrel spending by Congress and ask for a
line-item veto.

White House spokesman David Almacy said that Bush has used the forum of a
newspaper guest column, or “op-ed,” at least four other times during his
presidency: to commemorate the first anniversary of the 2001 terror attacks;
to promote his re-election in 2004; to mark his second inaugural, in 2005;
and again in 2005 to note the U.S. response to the Indian Ocean tsunami.

BoogyMan
01-03-2007, 03:46 PM
HIS line item veto? Egads Lily, presidents have asked for this ability as far back as I can remember.

lily
01-03-2007, 04:18 PM
True Boogy........but after being denied a few times, they usually stop. Not act like a spoiled child that didn't get what he wanted in the toy store, especially now that he doesn't have Republicans running the show and the threat of not endorsing them haning over their heads.

Flea_Bit_Monkey
01-03-2007, 04:45 PM
True Boogy........but after being denied a few times, they usually stop. Not act like a spoiled child


So if you feel something will help the country, like a line item veto, youu are asking like a spoiled child to ask for it several times?

How far does this line of reasoning go lily? Do you think MLK acted like a spoiled child to demand equal rights? Are the gay marriage proponents also acting like spoiled children?

Or is it only people that you don't agree with that reach this threshold?

Buck Laser
01-03-2007, 05:25 PM
True Boogy........but after being denied a few times, they usually stop. Not act like a spoiled child


So if you feel something will help the country, like a line item veto, youu are asking like a spoiled child to ask for it several times?

How far does this line of reasoning go lily? Do you think MLK acted like a spoiled child to demand equal rights? Are the gay marriage proponents also acting like spoiled children?

Or is it only people that you don't agree with that reach this threshold?


I didn't like the line item veto when Bill Clinton asked for it, and I don't like it now. It never ceases to amaze me how willing republicans are to seek constitutional amendments to remedy things they see as dire threats to the health of the republic: they look for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, another one to ban flag-burning--and so on. In the last century, they got prohibition of alcohol. Look how well THAT worked.

It seems a bit strange to me to be arguing the conservative position here, but I'm hesitant to change a system that actually functions pretty well. A line item veto would allow the president to cut the heart out of a bill and claim that he approved "most" of it.

BoogyMan
01-03-2007, 05:38 PM
True Boogy........but after being denied a few times, they usually stop. Not act like a spoiled child that didn't get what he wanted in the toy store, especially now that he doesn't have Republicans running the show and the threat of not endorsing them haning over their heads.


Lily the job of the president is to fight for what he thinks is right for the country. As for the spoiled child commentary I would like to see you provide me some example of this. I read the speech and his commentary was calm and rational.

It seems you are projecting an attitude onto the president that cannot be substantiated in source document Lily.

Flea_Bit_Monkey
01-03-2007, 06:21 PM
It never ceases to amaze me how willing republicans are to seek constitutional amendments to remedy things they see as dire threats to the health of the republic: they look for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, another one to ban flag-burning--and so on. In the last century, they got prohibition of alcohol. Look how well THAT worked.


Excuse me? You are actually blaming the 18th amendment on republicans?

You do realize that democrat drys outnumbered republican drys and more democrats voted for prohibition than republicans, right?

Drocket
01-03-2007, 07:04 PM
A line item veto would allow the president to cut the heart out of a bill and claim that he approved "most" of it.

I think they already figured out how to do that with signing statements. All you have to do is 'interpret' the sections you don't like to mean whatever you want.

Buck Laser
01-03-2007, 07:54 PM
It never ceases to amaze me how willing republicans are to seek constitutional amendments to remedy things they see as dire threats to the health of the republic: they look for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, another one to ban flag-burning--and so on. In the last century, they got prohibition of alcohol. Look how well THAT worked.


Excuse me? You are actually blaming the 18th amendment on republicans?

You do realize that democrat drys outnumbered republican drys and more democrats voted for prohibition than republicans, right?


You have ADD, right? I am blaming stupid constitutional amendments on impetuous people who wanna fix everything with a constitutional amendment. In recent years, the impetuous people have been republicans.

By the way, I think it was republicans who passed the amendment limiting the president to two elected terms. Then they fell so in love with Reagan that they started trying to repeal it.

I have a problem with people who don't pay attention and with people who don't read history.

Flea_Bit_Monkey
01-03-2007, 07:59 PM
You have ADD, right?


Why would you think I have ADD when it was who railed against republicans seeking constitutional amendments, claiming they got prohibition when prohibition was bipartisan, pushed for by the populous, and supported more by dems than republicans?

You made a bad example, that doesn't mean I have ADD.

underdawg
01-03-2007, 08:04 PM
Bush certainly didn't try to work with democrats when they were not in control of congress. He was so certain that the Republicans would win again that he thought nothing of the possiblity of having to work with them at a future time. Karma comes back to bite him in the ass. Maybe he actually needs to apologize for the past wrongs before he will be taken seriously. His credibility is in the toilet right now.

Labrocca
01-03-2007, 08:20 PM
It's me that stated I have ADD. That's also very irrelevent to the conversation. Consider this a warning not make personal attacks on members.

Flea_Bit_Monkey
01-03-2007, 08:24 PM
Bush certainly didn't try to work with democrats when they were not in control of congress.



Of course he did, Bush is a uniter, not a divider. The dems would have none of it though, they chose as a strategy for reelection to be dividers.

Drocket
01-03-2007, 08:30 PM
The only thing Bush has 'united' has been the majority of the country against him.

Flea_Bit_Monkey
01-03-2007, 08:48 PM
The only thing Bush has 'united' has been the majority of the country against him.


The democrats are the ones that played the role of divider in that.

lily
01-04-2007, 02:28 AM
Lily the job of the president is to fight for what he thinks is right for the country.**


He fought for it and it was already denied to him. As was stated above, he gets his own way**already with his signing statements.....add all the presidents together and Bush out numbers them all!

As for the spoiled child commentary I would like to see you provide me some example of this.**I read the speech and his commentary was calm and rational. It seems you are projecting an attitude onto the president that cannot be substantiated in source document Lily.

I'll tell you what.........you give me some source documents that Bush knows what's right for this country and I'll give you source documents that Bush is a spoiled child.........sound fair? You want links to my opinions, then I want links to your opinions.

BoogyMan
01-04-2007, 02:59 AM
He fought for it and it was already denied to him. As was stated above, he gets his own way**already with his signing statements.....add all the presidents together and Bush out numbers them all!

As long as he is in that office he is to fight for what he thinks is right.

I'll tell you what.........you give me some source documents that Bush knows what's right for this country and I'll give you source documents that Bush is a spoiled child.........sound fair? You want links to my opinions, then I want links to your opinions.


I wasn't aware this was a discussion of opinion Lily. You stated it as if it were a matter of fact. I cannot provide you concrete proof that he "knows" whats best, but I can point you to the oath he took.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

I can definitively point out that the spoiled child commentary is not justified from what he said in the speech you quoted by simply referring you back to it. Lets look together dispassionately at the text.

Together, we have a chance to serve the American people by solving the complex problems that many don’t expect us to tackle, let alone solve, in the partisan environment of today’s Washington.

This seems like a quite reasonable call to teamwork to me. Lets continue on.

If the Congress chooses to pass bills that are simply political statements, they will have chosen stalemate. If a different approach is taken, the next two years can be fruitful ones for our nation. We can show the American people that Republicans and Democrats can come together to find ways to help make America a more secure, prosperous and hopeful society.

This again is a call to work together and compromise. There is no "do it my way or hit the highway" type of wording. As a matter of fact he even signalled he was willing to work with the new congress on a minimum wage increase.

lily
01-04-2007, 03:11 AM
BoogyMan




As long as he is in that office he is to fight for what he thinks is right.

If you've been paying any kind of attention, Boogy you might have noticed that most of America doesn't trust him to know what's right.




I can definitively point out that the spoiled child commentary is not justified from what he said in the speech you quoted by simply referring you back to it.**Lets look together dispassionately at the text.

I'm not talking about his speech, other than he asked for what was refused to him once, like a spoiled child. The Supreme Court struck down the law in 1998, voting that Congress did not have the authority under the Constitution to give the president that power.



This again is a call to work together and compromise.**There is no "do it my way or hit the highway" type of wording.**As a matter of fact he even signalled he was willing to work with the new congress on a minimum wage increase.

Odd, don't you think, since this is a safe bet in passing?

Flea_Bit_Monkey
01-04-2007, 03:14 AM
As long as he is in that office he is to fight for what he thinks is right.


Not when he turns his back on the wishes of the american people!

Chimpy is a whiner lier cokehead doo doo butt!

BoogyMan
01-04-2007, 03:34 AM
If you've been paying any kind of attention, Boogy you might have noticed that most of America doesn't trust him to know what's right.

If you live by polls Lily, you might think that way. I don't.

I'm not talking about his speech, other than he asked for what was refused to him once, like a spoiled child. The Supreme Court struck down the law in 1998, voting that**Congress did not have the authority under the Constitution to give the president that power.

Every president in history has done this Lily, its not uncommon and certainly not childish.

Odd, don't you think, since this is a safe bet in passing?


He could veto it Lily, not that he has done much of that, but he could. Bush has historically been for such a measure.

Flea_Bit_Monkey
01-04-2007, 03:39 AM
Every president in history has done this Lily, its not uncommon and certainly not childish.


Of course it is childish when chimpster liar asks for something he was denied and virtually every american disapproves of him!

lily
01-04-2007, 04:38 AM
If you live by polls Lily, you might think that way.**I don't.

Yeah, I wouldn't either with polls like he has..........but then there was the elections.



Every president in history has done this Lily, its not uncommon and certainly not childish.
Link



He could veto it Lily, not that he has done much of that, but he could.**Bush has historically been for such a measure.

What's he going to veto it on, moral grounds, or is this what he needs the line item veto for?

ECW
01-04-2007, 06:46 AM
Chimpy's claim to want to be bipartisan is as valid as Flea Bit Monkey's claims to be a Liberal. No one believes either one.

BoogyMan
01-04-2007, 12:19 PM
Every president in history has done this Lily, its not uncommon and certainly not childish.
Link

Try looking at every state of the union address since you were born.

What's he going to veto it on, moral grounds, or is this what he needs the line item veto for?

Hahahahahaha. He has consistently asked congress to give him the line item veto.

ECW
01-04-2007, 05:22 PM
Hahahahahaha.**He has consistently asked congress to give him the line item veto.


You wouldn't have a citation to back this up, do you? I don't seem to remember him asking for it before. Refresh my memory.

BoogyMan
01-04-2007, 05:30 PM
Hahahahahaha.**He has consistently asked congress to give him the line item veto.


You wouldn't have a citation to back this up, do you? I don't seem to remember him asking for it before. Refresh my memory.


2006 State of the Union Address - Bush asks for line item veto (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/31/AR2006013101468.html)

June 28, 2006 - Bush asks for line-item veto (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/27/AR2006062700701.html)

March 5, 2006 - Bush asks for line item veto (http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2006/03/05/bush-to-push-line-item-veto/)

lily
01-04-2007, 10:45 PM
Try looking at every state of the union address since you were born.


Is that code for you don't have any proof?

2006 State of the Union Address - Bush asks for line item veto

June 28, 2006 - Bush asks for line-item veto

March 5, 2006 - Bush asks for line item veto

Thanks for proving my point, that he keeps asking and they keep saying NO!