[Political Junkie Too]

He didn't really sign the bill, he signed a configuration template that was used to program the machine.

I thought these machines were used for form letters to White House letter writers, donation requests, etc. Not for signing real legislation.

The problem with the autopen is that we're never really sure that Obama actually SAW the bill he was purported to have signed.

"Signing" presumes that he was actually there and functioning, and had actually touched the bill that he was signing.

With the autopen, he could be in a hospital with a blod clot for all we know when the bill was "signed."

Even this Wikipedia article on Autopen questions the legitimacy of using the autopen to sign legislation.

-PJ

[SnakeDoctor]

If his signature were forged with an autopen when he was in a coma or something, that would be a Constitutional issue of forgery ... not of use of an autopen when authorized by the President himself.

He doesn’t have to see the bill, or read the bill, or touch the bill. That’s not a Constitutional requirement.

Wikipedia is wrong.

SnakeDoc

[null and void]

The problem with the autopen is that we're never really sure that Obama actually SAW the bill he was purported to have signed.

Like the way congress "SEES" a bill before they vote on it?

This time they had what? Three whole minutes to review all 143 pages between the time the bill was presented to congress and the vote?