Dude, I agree with you on Miers, but on CFR you couldn't be more wrong. The President was disturbed by CFR. He only signed it because he either had to sign it or veto the bill entirely since the Courts took away his line item veto powers.
People use CFR to bash the President. I see it as a greater argument for originalist/conservative judges.
Once more, with feeling:
Pres. Bush told his legal counsel to look for candidates who will make goood justices. One criteria only: they must be Constitutional Constructionists. She along with the Pres. introduced us to all these wonderful people like Brown, Owen, Estrada, and Luttig. He is so impressed with her job, he decides that she'll make a really good justice.
If you like all those people previously mentioned, how can you not like the person who selected them in the first place?
BINGO
Line item vetos apply to appropriation bills. The President should have vetoed the bill if he felt it was not Constitutional. Simple as that.
It's called a 'talent scout'. Many mediocre players have been great scouts and coaches. That's not the pool of talent you look in to find the next quarterback.
The President was disturbed by CFR. He only signed it because he either had to sign it or veto the bill entirely since the Courts took away his line item veto powers.
There was precious little that was constitutional in that bill. He should have vetoed the CFR, and vetoed any rewrite as well.