[SailorMitch]

Originally Posted by chucklesR

Let's examine the deficit why don't we:

09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86

Seems a small increase each year from 2000 to 2006, then suddenly, once the pay-go dem's take charge of the both houses and the budget - a little bit of a leap, like ONE TRILLION at year.

Yeah Rick, keep doing math. You are as Constitutionally, um, stupid as you logically challenged and non-accountability oriented.

chuck, you're the constitutionally stupid one. sorry. Perhaps your time away from the election process has dulled your senses. I know you think Congress is in charge of the government since it writes laws and budgets, passes them, etc. What you keep forgetting is that the President is the one setting the legislative and budget agendas every year. it starts in the White House and the President's party is just as likely to add amendments and more spending as the opposition. Plus, the executive branch gets to implement those passed laws, assuming the Pres signs them, through regulations that undergo intense scrutiny from all sides. And those regulations have been known to make or break a particular law or program. THe executive branch also can hold up funding in what is known as the allotment and allowance process, which is the legal way OMB doles out money to agencies. OMB also has been known NOT to allot duly appropriated funds for programs it doesn't favor. THat is called a recision, which has become harder to do since that fellow MILHOUS, a Repub as I recall, over used that tactic a bit. Ummm, OMB works for the Pres btw. Under your view of the government, the Pres would only have to show up for work once every 10 days, sign, veto, or not sign any legislation, and then go play at Camp David.

Let's talk about vetoes for a bit. Bush has issued very few vetoes. All that spending you hang on the Dems the last 2 years easily could have been vetoed by Bush. But he didn't. And despite what you apparently think it takes a 2/3 majority in both houses to override a veto. The Dems do not have enough seats in either house to override anything at the moment, and it's doubtful that will change tomorrow.
List of United States presidential vetoes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Read it and weep.

So your boy Bush could have stopped all your whining had he vetoed all the spending bills he didn't approve of. But since he did sign them, he obviously did approve of them. They're his spending bills in that case.