You are exactly right!
Roe v. Wade is a greater constitutional travesty than "campaign finance reform". Setting aside the issue of morality, Roe is bad law: it was a judicial usurpation of an issue that should be left to the states.
Rush misses the entire point: there is no constitution left. The federal judiciary has destroyed it. There is no system of federalism, no separation of powers, no moral code as the underpinning of the law; indeed, rule of law no longer exists.
This is precisely the reason why money is crucial in politics. The leviathian federal government intrudes into every facet of our lives and the buying of influence is the only means of portection as the hedge of law has been uprooted.
There should be a veto; however, all the discussion misses the point that the constitution has already been destroyed and liberty in large measure circumscribed by an activist judiciary and a congress that knows no limits.
IMHO, Bush has been rope-a doping. It's a smart strategy.
First, you go on the record as supporting "cleaning up the system." Then you outline a list of your desires. You also express a couple reservations, like "If it's so important, why not make it effective immediately?"
Now that it is passed, everyone assumes you will sign as you have said.
The stage is set perfectly to veto the bill. You come out and announce the veto and SLAM the cowardly Congress for wanting to clean up the system, JUST NOT YET. Then you slam them for dissing the First Amendment. Checkmate.
IMHO, W has only been saying he would sign it so the blame for the veto would go to those who wrote such a "bad bill."