# re: A very brief political interlude

The Contras didn't mind Reagan's help.

Nor did any of the recipients of the record spending that Reagan approved.

Soundbites like the one you repeat are great because they are so easy to repeat even if the facts don't support them. 6/10/2004 11:00 AM | anon

# re: A very brief political interlude

Actually, the facts very much support my quotes, you're just misconstruing them.

My quotes are on an individual level, and you're trying to apply them to groups.

You're also trying to push me on one side or another of an argument and I'm deliberately not taking sides. I made a simple statement, which boils down to this. If you believe that on a personal level government should be your friend then you are a Democrat. If you believe that on a personal level government can never be your friend then you are a Republican. 6/10/2004 11:37 AM | Chris J. Breisch

# re: A very brief political interlude

Oh, one other thing. Your quote "record spending that Reagan approved" shows that you don't really understand the budget process.

Presidents have so little to do with the federal budget that they might as well not even be involved. Blaming a President for high deficits or lauding one for low ones is ridiculous.

The process:
1) The President (actually the Executive branch) creates a budget proposal and submits it to the Legislative branch.
2) The Legislative branch ignores said budget proposal and writes a series of budget bills which may or may not be based on anything written in the Executive branch's budget proposal.
3) The House and Senate go back and forth on revisions to these bills until finally identical versions of some of them are approved by both chambers.
4) The President nearly always signs them at this point because the Legislative branch has taken so long to get them to him that if he actually tried to veto one, whatever agencies or bureaus covered by that bill would run out of money.
6/10/2004 12:13 PM | Chris J. Breisch

# re: A very brief political interlude

What an amazing about of excuses.

I didn't try to force you into choosing sides, not at all. Your superfluous spewage of excuses shows clearly that you already have a side chosen. But that is beside the point.

Please don't insult our intelligence with your budget explanations. I understand the process beyond the level you can explain in a blog post. You seem to think that I am ignorant because I disagree with you. Quite the opposite, I understand the facts and know better than to agree with you. And I know better than to believe actors/politicians when they read their lines for the cameras.

"I had to sign the budget, it wasn't my fault" is BS. Your "almost always" caveat proves that. The man signing the paper is responsible and that is the reason for the signature. Excuses won't change that.

And your statement is wrong. I think a closer-to-true version might be:
If you think the government is your friend, it is Democrat. If you can't trust it, it is Republican.

6/10/2004 6:23 PM | yeah

# re: A very brief political interlude

Hmmm...I'm re-reading what I wrote, and I don't see any excuses. And I don't have a side chosen. Again you're trying to force an argument on someone who has just made a simple comment.

Please take it at face value. Nothing more.

Also, I never said that the budget wasn't the President's fault. I said that he's one tiny cog in the budget process. Putting the blame or assigning credit to a single person is downright silly.

This was just supposed to be somewhat amusing and non-partisan. A brief interlude. If you want to have an argument, go to Eric Alterman's blog. He seems to like them. 6/11/2004 5:44 AM | Chris J. Breisch