Since you don't know what coward means... How was Obama's signature cowardly? Instead of standing for his pledges he caved to the Congress. Why not stand and veto a bill that you kow to be bad? Why break a campaign promise to curb earmarks? Because the man lacks the political courage to stand up to congress. The Executive is supposed to check the legislative branch not cower to it.
Asked and answered already--Time is critical. What would a veto have done . . . delayed this for how long why Congress engages in partisan bickering and then sends another flawed bill? You act like an economic crash and another impending Great Depression didn't happen between the campaign and the realities of now. The Executive has no authority to make Congress change the way they do business. Congress makes the laws, not the president. This important bill was either going to get passed or not get passed by Obama. He couldn't shave items or change the bill. Nor could he simply order Congress to change it. The changes will take time, there is no magic wand here. Passing this one quickly and setting about to make changes before next year is a prudent compromise . . . something we aren't used to in the White House.
Are we both talking about the 400 billion supplemental spending bill? This bill has nothing to do with stimulus. The purpose is funding the federal budget through the close of the fiscal year. I think you are confused. Another Great Depression? HA. Gimme a break. Stalemate is supperior to a wasteful spending bill. Obama has the popular support. Congress won't be accountable to the people, so the executive has to force the issue. I am very used to dishonest politicians. Where have you been?
No need to delineate, Red. I'm not a dummy. The collapse occurred in September, 2 months before the election. Obama was be boppin' and scattin'* about "change" and "no more politics as usual" right up to, and beyond election day. *Seinfeld reference and not intended to indicate 1920s sterotypes.
Let's get on the same page here. I'm talking about Obama's politics as usual when he promised change. The economy will take years to fix, even if done the right way.
I'm talking about Obama having any power to make Congress change its way of doing business instantly. That also will take some time, those Congressmen are intrenched in the earmark system.
Thats the bill I was talking about. Not sure how the collapse argument worked its way into the normal spending bill. He has the power Red. We are in uncharted territory and the chalk board should be wiped clean of the old ways. If there was ever a time a President could dictate, even demand change, that time is now. The public does not support the way Congress has done business and elected Obama to fix it. He has the mandate and power of the people to pull it off. Evidently he doesnt have the nads or he would live up to his campaign promise. It is better to take on Congress when he is flying high in the court of public opinion. The dems swept into their super majority on his coat tails, not the other way around. Why let this opportunity slip through his fingers? I'll chalk this one up to a rookie mistake but it is a mistake no matter how you categorize it.