Oh, so NOW he's a fiscal conservative ...

7 years in and finally the president threatens his veto pen during the SoTU if congress doesn't reduce their pet projects (ear marks) by 50% when they send him spending bills. I commend him on the war with Islamo-fascists & taxes, but spending and the border - oy vehy. What I found particularly curious was his new executive order which by the stroke of his pen directs all aspects of government to "ignore" increases in these projects or anything over the 50% reduction from 2007. Can he do that? So let me get this straight: congress sends him a bill, he signs the bill with the pork barrel add ons included in order to get the bulk issue through (say, military budgets that have aid for mussel farmers) then forbids the pork barrel (above the 50%) to become a reality via an executive order. If this is both possible and lawful then why not have done this all along instead of unsuccessfully attempting to pass a line item veto power? It seems a bit odd to me. So the agriculture secretary literally "ignores" a legally binding mandate because his boss says to and cuts a check for half the provided amount? This seems quite odd to me. I like what its effect will be in spending, don't get me wrong, but there seems to be a division of powers fight brewing here somewhere, I would think.