And, yet, folks wanted him to VETO the McCain terrorist amendment. Which he also threatened to VETO and instead merely attached a signing statement.
Folks want him to VETO spending bills, which he has threatened to do, and has not.
In each instance going against our other elected representatives will.
If this is suddenly unacceptable, than conservatives have flip flopped on their views of VETOS.
The American public (who love the troops) did not support McCain's "anti-torture" amendment. That was purely representative of McCain's vendetta against GWB, and job security for his Sunday morning appearances. The two made a backroom deal and Dubya caved.
By the way, Bush's veto threat over Port-gate doesn't encourage the rational discussion you would like to see, does it? He's already signalled our views are pointless.
Conservatives call for the veto when the legislation is socialist. What's flip-floppish about that?