And the idea has received bipartisan support. I was very pleased that my opponent in the 2004 campaign, Senator John Kerry, came down to the White House the other day and expressed his support for a line-item veto. He campaigned on a line-item veto, and now he's supporting the administration with a line-item veto. And other Democrats and Republicans must give the President the chance to trim out that part of the budget which does not meet our priorities. And I hope Congress passes this important piece of legislation quickly as a sign of reform.I was trying to come up with a suitable metaphor to illustrate what it would be like to give the line-item veto to the W. But I could only come up with this simile: It's like giving a gun to a convicted murderer. So you can see, I was lacking originality here. Let's see if you can come up with a nice metaphor or simile and we will call this:
Windspike's Sure Happy It's Thursday Simile/Metaphor Contest
- Come up with a pithy metaphor/simile for what it would be like to give this president the line-item veto.
- Write your entry in a comment to this post
- Those with the best submissions as a comment below will win the respect of all bloggers in the blogisphere.
5 comments:
For the record, I believe you mean simile not metaphor since you are using "like" or "as." Yes, I still fear my grammar teacher, so please forgive me.
It's like putting a lazer scope on a shotgun.
It's like making Gale Norton your Interior Secretary.
Like trying to teach a fat kid the difference between good and bad carbs.
It's like inviting a bull into a china shop.
It's like the dumbest idea I've heard in a while (since I heard we're going to nuke Iran). No Democrat would vote for this, right? If Kerry is actually out pushing for a line-item veto for THIS President I don't even know what to do. Maybe he wants Bush to screw up so bad that the country will feel guilty for NOT electing Kerry in '04 and then elect him in '08.
A line-item veto in the executive?
Say something differently, you've said something different.
There's no difference between a line-item veto and a line-item addition. Either way, it's letting the President write legislation. That's not his job.
Giving Dumbya any more control over anything is like handing him a crate full of live frogs and a bundle of M-80's.
That's my simile. My metaphor?
Bush IS a supporating boil upon the body politic.
Thanks for the grammar check ST. I fixed up the original post to reflect the propper use of the terms. I can't quite figure out why Kerry is sucking up to W by advocating the LI veto, but I could think that maybe it's becuase he is anticipating a democratic win the next time around and sure wished that he had the power if he were president? I don't know.
Isa, I love the frog M-80 vision...Ah, harnken back to the foolish days of childhood.
Anon, you are spot on. The executive is supposed to enforce, not make law. Fucking activist presidents. I hate them.
Isa, I love the frog M-80 vision...
Well...I don't! :-(
"Giving Bush the line-item veto is like giving a chimp a pair of reading glasses."
Anon, you are spot on. The executive is supposed to enforce, not make law. Fucking activist presidents. I hate them.
More to the point, the Constitution is explicit in that it gives budgetary authority to Congress. The line-item veto would change that and is, therefore, unconstitutional.
Post a Comment