Fri, May 23, 2008 4:43pm ET

Send to a friend Print Version

Join the Discussion

Wash. Post, LA Times uncritically quoted White House assertion that it opposes war funding bill because it includes domestic spending

Summary: In articles reporting the White House's threat to veto a supplemental war funding bill, The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times uncritically quoted Dana Perino saying, "This is the wrong way to consider domestic spending, and Congress should not go down this path." But neither the Times nor the Post pointed out that President Bush signed supplemental war funding bills that included domestic spending in June 2006 and December 2005.
Read more

Threaded Comments: on / off

Post a new comment

You must be a registered user to post and flag comments on this site.
Please log in or sign up to post in this forum.

Posted by tommy

The reason is that those pork filled bills were put up by a Republican Congress and that was perfectly fine and dandy back then, but now that one is put up by Democrats, their pork smells different.

Hey, at least Bush discovered a little spending restraint, give him some credit.

:) 

Posted by Science101 in reply to tommy

All have loads of Pork.  And now that its election time, people are crying about the national debt and taxes, but yet we load a "War Spending Bill" with gobs of pork barrel spending?

Never ceases to amaze me.  Ought to just call this "Pork Project Bill 1,343,344,785,837,485"

Posted by wesley in reply to tommy

 -- put up by Democrats, their pork smells different. -- Tommy

Perfect analysis...bullseye.

Spending, and in particular, ear mark spending is the main reason I'm disappointed in Pres.Bush and the republican party. The republican party regained control of congress in 1994 in a large part because of their promise of fiscal responsibility.

After a few years of success the republican party lost their way and reverted to cash politics for power...and the democrats were willing accomplices in passing bloated budgets...mostly in the dark of night.

Both parties dishonestly argue the causes of deficit spending as tax rates, revenue, war funding, grand social programs...and on and on. The real cause is unrestrained spending...conveniently hidden in the smoke screen of partisan politics.

These corrupt arguments allow the democrats to prosecute their agenda of bigger government programs and spending...and republicans to give lip service to fiscal restraint while spending like drunken sailors.

Yep, the latest spending smells different to Pres.Bush and the republicans...but no amount of perfume can hide the stench of out-of-control spending by both parties.

The elephant in the room is the 3 trillion dollar budget and the inability of our unprincipled and corrupt politicians to run an efficient government on this huge sum of money. 

Posted by mikerhyner8202 in reply to tommy

Tommy you are "right" again. Hurricane relief and influenza funding is the same as:

10,000,000 for FDA Buildings
210,000,000 for census funding
50,000,000 for US marshal program
178,000,000 for prison salaries
200,000,000 for NASA funding
50,000,000 for national science foundation
57,000,000 for department of energy
243,000,000 environmental clean-up
110,000,000 department of labor
and on, and on, and on

Yep all this has to do with national defense and should be included in a war funding bill. Thanks to MMFA for highlighting all the errors of this president. He is wrong again.

Posted by anotheramerican

Off topic - Have a great weekend everyone. Think of Kyle's WWII grandfather and our other veterans on Memorial Day.

God bless them and their families.  

Posted by dbeden4153 in reply to anotheramerican

That's not off topic AA, it's sweet.

Have a blessed Memorial day, everyone!

Posted by Kyle_Broflovski in reply to anotheramerican

Thanks, AA!  Best wishes to you and yours over the Holiday. 

And a sincere 'thank you' to all the brave men and women who have sacrificed so much to defend our nation.

Posted by IRONY 101

The Pentagon has expressed concern that the new GI benefit, which provides returning troops with a free college education after three years of active duty, could spur retirements at a time when the military is struggling to retain troops.

That's what this is really all about. Bush got us into an unnecessary war that is depleting the military and he's scrambling to keep the troops locked into the military as cannon fodder or else we are screwed.

Posted by nerzog in reply to IRONY 101

I guess President Numbnuts only "supports the troops" when they're helping advance his political career.

Posted by IRONY 101 in reply to nerzog

"Hehehehehe...now where are those WMD?"

Posted by foghornleghorn in reply to nerzog

And enrich his cronies.

Posted by eweston8542983

The cronies, the majority being nonvets can get rains of toads for all I care.

The rest of you decompress, relax, enjoy the world,family,and friends this Memorial Day Weekend.

'-) 

Posted by BottleBlonde

All politicians spin the events of the day to some extent. This Bush White House had honed those skills to an unbelievable extent. A President who helped put us into incredible deficit spending should not complain like this, yet his spokespeople do.

Posted by BottleBlonde in reply to BottleBlonde

Sorry, hit the post button too soon.

I wanted to add that news media should always accurately quote White House spokespeople, but then when the spokespeople say stuff that's contrary to reality, they should also always inform their listening audience of that. When they don't, it forwards the agenda of that politician.