Should the president be allowed to do this?

[SurfDemon]

Now, before I start on this, this is not an Anti-Bush post (I think he should be commended for pumping money into African Aid). But this is more of a general question about world leaders, as the British Leaders are well known for passing similar legislation (And I'm sure all previous presidents have similar "legacies").

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080217/...af/bush_africa

The bit I'm talking about is

Bush is pushing to renew the program at $30 billion over five years, twice his original commitment.

Given that he's not going to be in power for the next 5 years, it's not going to be his problem to find the money, yet he'll get the kudos for providing the funding.

It's one thing to be making plans for the next 1 year in the last year of your presidency, but surely you shouldn't be committing the next administration to spending money.

Just curious as to why they all think we don't see through these tactics...

[Shaggy Hiker]

Just curious as to why they all think we don't see through these tactics...

Because history has shown quite clearly that most people won't. W may be the most cynical (or maybe not), but he's not the first. Say whatever is most convenient at the moment, you can always claim you didn't say it later, and the majority of the people will accept it as truth. That means that you won't be held to any current statement at a later date, and are therefore free to say whatever is most politically expedient.