Poll on tax cuts: for everyone or for under $250k only

[Synthaholic]

Bush signed the budgets; he gets the responsibility right along with the congresses from 2001.

...and if he didn't signed it...

it would become law anyways.

I guess he could have vetoed it, but then Congress could override that.

You do have a point to your post right?

There weren't enough votes for that. Bush could have vetoed. But he didn't want to. He was about to go on a spending spree himself and didn't want to alienate the people with the checkbook, so he let them spend right along with him.

Republicans will run Washington like a business - Ha! Bunch of bullshit.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Bush signed the budgets; he gets the responsibility right along with the congresses from 2001.

...and if he didn't signed it...

it would become law anyways.

I guess he could have vetoed it, but then Congress could override that.

You do have a point to your post right?

Yeah. Bush's veto would have easily stood.

 

[AmericanFirst]

No need to compromise with losers who were swept out of power.

That's the spirit! Dig in your heels! Gridlock and bitter partisanship! That'll solve our nation's problems! The answer is petulance, and a shitload of it!

idiot.

Why not? Pelosi is doing it. It is the dimwits that are the problem.

 

[AmericanFirst]

But if the choice is all or none then eliminate all the cuts.

Time to pay the piper, America.

Since when? Obama went on a two year spending binge second to none and did not raise income taxes.

Two wars without a tax increase. Blame Obama? LEARN RECENT HISTORY!!!!

Take your own advice idiot. Two wars under Bush and he still didn't spend as much in 8 yrs as obama has in two years. Dimwits are stupid.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Since when? Obama went on a two year spending binge second to none and did not raise income taxes.

Two wars without a tax increase. Blame Obama? LEARN RECENT HISTORY!!!!

Take your own advice idiot. Two wars under Bush and he still didn't spend as much in 8 yrs as obama has in two years. Dimwits are stupid.

You are as dim as your opponents, FirstDimWit. Give us the stats, or shut up.

 

[saveliberty]

Bush signed the budgets; he gets the responsibility right along with the congresses from 2001.

...and if he didn't signed it...

it would become law anyways.

I guess he could have vetoed it, but then Congress could override that.

You do have a point to your post right?

There weren't enough votes for that. Bush could have vetoed. But he didn't want to. He was about to go on a spending spree himself and didn't want to alienate the people with the checkbook, so he let them spend right along with him.

Republicans will run Washington like a business - Ha! Bunch of bullshit.

You have no proof just an opinion. Most of America expected the President to attack the terrorist strongholds and Congress almost universally agreed.