This has a whole lot less to do with Bush than it does to do with Congress.. Especially the house.
It's about the First Amendment and freedom of speech.
If you want to gamble that on a court ruling, fine. But remember, if you lose we had several chances to stop it before reaching that point.
And I don't care if it's Bush, Clinton, Congress, McCain or Elanor Roosevelt, if they took an oath to uphold the Constitution then they shouldn't be passing laws they know are Unconstitutional and expecting the SCOTUS to clean up their mess.
The only reason Dubya is tied up in this is that he has the ball now. It's been passed by both houses and now they have handed it off to him.
He can veto it because he doesn't like the font they typed it in if he wants to. It's fully legal and within his power to do so.
And That's why the focus has shifted to Dubya and the White House. It's because he has the bill now.
If he signs it, expect to see the focus shift yet again to the SCOTUS.
If you insist on using all due respect, then it's Dr. AmishDude. But I will settle for informalities.
If you want to gamble that on a court ruling, fine.
A court ruling has a finality that a veto doesn't. The last time they tried CFR, the SCOTUS slapped them down hard on many provisions and they didn't try it for another 20 years. I would even contend many of the provisions they kept (donation limits, for example) are unconstitutional. However, the courts OKed it. This SCOTUS will slap them down harder this time. Perhaps they will even take this opportunity to go further.
they shouldn't be passing laws they know are Unconstitutional
Ya know, if somebody in 1972 tried to pass a law forcing abortion to be legal in all 50 states, they would have claimed it was an unconstitutional law.
Still, I know who the real enemy is here and I want the solution that defeats them the most soundly.