Replies

Bush ain't gonna veto. He sees signing the bill as a win win. The courts will knock off the most egregious stuff, he THINKS he negates McCain and he KNOWS the public, who don't know or care, reaction to his signing will be a net positive.

Major league disappointment for me when he does.

You read my mind.

I think Bush wants to show "Bipartisanship"....

Bush ain't gonna veto. He sees signing the bill as a win win. The courts will knock off the most egregious stuff, he THINKS he negates McCain and he KNOWS the public, who don't know or care, reaction to his signing will be a net positive.

I share your disappointment!

But I would add that I can see an air of pragmatism for signing this. A) The bill, as publicly percieved, cuts both ways. That why they don't care about it. B) Although the constitution manadates the President the authority to veto unconstitutional legislation, few Presidents ever use it. Presidents often will sign "popular" legislation knowing that there are provision that are blatantly unconstitutional. The line item veto, demanded by every president since Lincoln and signed into law by Clinton is one such law. Clinton used only once or twice before the courts struck it down. I don't think you will see such legislation enacted any time soon. The reasons for this is because the public rarely attributes the executive branch the political clout to interpret the consitution. Rememeber to the Dems and Inds, Bush is an idiot with no experience in government. He may be a good war leader but since when does he know about the constitution?? And if he does veto it, McCain will just bring it up again and again until someone signs it. Bush may just be doing us (and himself) a favor by getting this signed into law and letting the courts have at it. If the courts strike this down as a blattant violation of the 1st ammendment, as I hope they do, this is a dead issue. And McCain will have to hang his hat on something else to be noticed by the media.

So far, Bush has been very smart in dealing with the dems. He has probably concluded that frontal assault on "well meaning, all inclusive liberals" is not fitting the "New tone". So instead, he laying seige, stealing their lifeblood issues (sometimes to our dismay), closing in, and picking the sentries off as they stick their heads up (Daschle does it all to often!!). He feels that this may be the only way to defeat them as they have become so entrenched inside the beltway. But as seiges take time we may have to be patient and be ready to tacticle retreats as they throw hot oil down the wall.