[Sabertooth]

You are assuming that all Congressmen and Senators would have voted the same way when the bill was returned for an override. McCain was gearing up for a huge PR push, and I think that an override was a distinct possibility.

Not a very strong one. CFR didn't get 60% in either chamber, and the likelihood that Bush wouldn't have been sustained by enough Republicans to sustain his first veto stretches credulity.

As I said, I didn't agree, but I understood the reasoning. So sue me. The law is constitutional because the Supreme Court says it is, regardless of our opinions.

And the law would not be Constitutional if it had been vetoed. It wouldn't be a law at all.

I did not expect this to be upheld. Neither did the President. Neither did Congressman Billybob, nor Mitch McConnell.

I did. I thought this failure to veto was a reckless gamble.

So, we can all whine and froth at the mouth, or we can start figuring out ways to get our message out and also figure out ways to get this law reversed.

How about we look at why we lost on this in the first place?

We lost because we chose not to seize the victory available to us in the form of a veto. The "strategery" failed.

Rethinking is in order.

[Miss Marple]

I agree re-thinking is in order. Presidents make mistakes, and I think this was one.

Now, while we are saddled with this for the time being, we need to think of ways to get around it and also work on getting people in the general population understanding what this means and get this provision repealed.

Or, we can just whine here and do nothing constructive.

[Mo1]

And the law would not be Constitutional if it had been vetoed. It wouldn't be a law at all.

You are assuming that the veto would not have been over ruled and passed into law