[Howlin]

You don't see any good from letting the Supreme Court tell those creeps in Congress THEY wrote, lobbied, and passed an unconstitutional bill, as opposed to Bush saying it on TV, to the DEMS and the press who already think he stole the 2000 election?

[Sir Gawain]

You don't see any good from letting the Supreme Court tell those creeps in Congress THEY wrote, lobbied, and passed an unconstitutional bill, as opposed to Bush saying it on TV, to the DEMS and the press who already think he stole the 2000 election?

Howlin, we're thinking on two totally different levels here. That's the problem. You're thinking political strategy, which is possibly something that could pay off for Bush by him doing this. I'm thinking Constitutionality and putting the preservation of the Founding Documents above politics. I know, I know, I'm idealistic. Maybe politics is not for me.

[uncbob]

You don't see any good from letting the Supreme Court tell those creeps in Congress THEY wrote, lobbied, and passed an unconstitutional bill, as opposed to Bush saying it on TV, to the DEMS and the press who already think he stole the 2000 election?
Hell by that logic he should sign EVERYTHING congress passes

You didn't see Clinton worrying about the fact the public voted out the democrats and voted in the GOP control of congress when he vetoed bills

And how about SCOTUS tells congress AND Bush they are creeps for passing it

[NittanyLion]

You don't see any good from letting the Supreme Court tell those creeps in Congress THEY wrote, lobbied, and passed an unconstitutional bill, as opposed to Bush saying it on TV, to the DEMS and the press who already think he stole the 2000 election?

Of course, if Bush were to sign the bill he'll be included in the group you describe as "creeps". Right?

[itsahoot]

to the DEMS and the press who already think he stole the 2000 election?

No, they think this Supreme Court stole it for him.