[GeronL]

I believe Bush signed this after saying the Supremes would strike it down

No. Bush never said that. He warned Congress that if they let it passed he would veto it.

Timid Congresscritters were scared of the media and liberals if they voted it down.

It was all those 'moderate' Republicans who said it would be best politically if it passed and was struck down in court. They said it would be.

Where are THEY?? Where are the FReepers who said not to worry because it would be struck down?

hiding?

[ArneFufkin]

Geron, you were full of crap from day one.

It's a Constitutionally valid law. You don't know jack squat, do you?

[GeronL]

No. Bush never said that. He warned Congress that if they let it passed he would veto it.

NOT VETO IT.

darn... I need to proof read

[Dane]

Where are THEY?? Where are the FReepers who said not to worry because it would be struck down?

Right here, had no problem with the soft money bans, it was the ad bans, which no one knows as of yet were upheld by SCOTUS

[spunkets]

"He warned Congress that if they let it passed he would veto it."

He signed it anyway.

[Mo1]

No. Bush never said that. He warned Congress that if they let it passed he would veto it.

He didn't say that...

[Flux Capacitor]

Bush, as the President, signed McCain-Feingold into law even though it blatantly violated standards of CFR legislation that he himself laid out during his campaign. The ultimate responsibility for this rests with him.

The Pres has made it through 3/4 of his first term without vetoing a single damn thing -- not even this, which demanded a veto. That's not just ridiculous, it's unheard of. He'd better learn to use that veto pen soon before he signs away any more of our rights in the misguided hope that the Supremes will save him and us.

-Dan