[Ms. AntiFeminazi]

If Bush signs this bill and it appears he will, then hope lies with the Supreme Court overruling that part which is a plain violation of free speech.

It is Bush's responsibility to veto any bill that is unconstitutional. Passing it off to the Supreme Court is not upholding his duty as President.

[NMC EXP]

It is Bush's responsibility to veto any bill that is unconstitutional. Passing it off to the Supreme Court is not upholding his duty as President

Bullseye. -- J.R.

[michigander]

Bump to that!

[steve50]

Make sure the Republican fundraisers understand your disapproval when they call. Not another dime from me

[Reagan Man]

It is Bush's responsibility to veto any bill that is unconstitutional. Passing it off to the Supreme Court is not upholding his duty as President.

Short of the President having an epiphany, or turning an immediate about face, the deed is done! This constant whining about it solves nothing and serves no good purpose. As was pointed out in the link I supplied, Texasforever clearly points out and defines the areas of this CFR legislation that met the outline of what President Bush was looking for. I wouldn't sign it, myself and I believe the President is playing politics on this issue, but so what! It does no good for Bush to give the loyal opposition and the liberal media additional political ammunition to fire back at the President, at will.

The right way to handle any campaign finance reform, would be to allow unlimited contributions, with full and immediate disclosure. Not many people would agree with such drastic changes in campaign finance law. Even fewer Congressmen would agree to imposing it. But it's the right decision to make.