Bush signs Campaign Reform, NRA Sues

AP/Yahoo ^ | 03/25/02 | SCOTT LINDLAW

[gunshy]

Up yours.

[Wphile]

I know. There's got to be enough to at least counter Chafee and possibly McCain. If the SCOTUS slaps this down, which I believe they will, McCain is libel to be so pissed at them that he won't support W's nominations because of it.

Specter was supporting Pickering so I really think Chafee is the most dangerous at this point. Collins, Snowe and the like will probably still go along with W's nominees and there are probably a couple of Dems who will too.

[teletech]

He also commented on the CFR pointing out all the things in the bill that he needed to see for the bill to move forward. The others if "truly unconstitutional" will be struck down. CFR was going to go this route anyway. I think better sooner than later for several reasons.

Sounds like weak, VERY weak damage control to me.

[eaglewatch]

THANK YOU NRA!!! This makes up for that stupid damn video you sent me (an ABC production, no less) trying to con me out of nine bucks.

[Dave S]

"I just lost my freedom of speech. I suppose FR will be shutting down any minute now. :-)"

LOL, after all the hand-wringing over this bill, I'm amazed Ashcroft hasn't taken my computer by now :-)

LOL also. Lets hope FR doesnt have a server problem later today. Some militia folk may panic and go out and attack their local court houses as the initital step in a new American Revolution. :-)

[Walkin Man]

Bush then embarked on a two-day swing to South Carolina and Georgia, where he planned to raise more than $3 million for GOP candidates for Congress.

I guess the RINO's figure trashing the Constitution is worth it so they can raise the hard money limits, eh? So who is the first group to challange this unconstitutional outlawing of free speech?

Handgun Control Inc? Any DemoRats? People for the American Way? NOW? The communists at the DU?

NO! They are all for it!

The groups that support the President and his party like the NRA are the ones with the knife in the back! The base is getting tired of being bitch-slapped by the Repub RINO's and there is joy and glee at the DNC!

[OldFriend]

I can't post either, I have my head in the sand. My butt's exposed but what the heck.....President Hilary to the rescue!

[Barnacle]

"When our Second Amendment Rights are infringed, our First Amendment Rights will soon follow."

A quote from my Dad thirty years ago. Few people would have appreciated this inter-relationship back then. Now, we get to witness it in action.

Our rights are not being grabbed by an invading army. They are being wrung from us by mealy-mouthed bureaucrats and lawyers.

[hoosiermama]

Bush understands the balance of power. It is NOT his place to determine whether the law is constitutional or not. That's the judicial branch. He knows it is flawed. He said so. He know the Supreme Court (where this will eventually land) is still conservative. His job is to appoint more consevative judges. Let's get behind him and elect conservative legislature so his appoinments can take office.
Some of you need to retake "Government 101" The president of the US is not a dictator. Our forefounders established three branches of government for a reason. Let's see how this plays out.

[Court]

Why did Bush sign this when he no-doubt knew it would be quickly challenged? What happened to principled leadership? It's one of two things, either GWB is truly a idiot who has totally alienated the GOP's values. Or if we are lucky it's just a ploy to take ammo away from the democRATs arguments knowing that it would be trounced by the supreme court later on. I think it's more than likely the first. :(

My thoughts exactly, I have no doubt that this was a completely political deal. The president is not stupid and neither are any of his advisors!

[Howlin]

I would say we should be on the lookout for a press release from Larry Klayman -- you KNOW he's not going to miss out on THIS action -- but, alas, we'll never be able to read it now! Darn!

[Travis McGee]

The liberal controled courts will quickly throw this out, while seriously considering the slave reparations lawsuits.

The world turned upside down.

[BigTime]

Hard money is increased from $1,000 to $2,000 per donor, per candidate.

OK, so this is doubled. That's a pittance when you consider that the Rats will find other ways to raise money anyway. Do you think the unions won't find a way to get their membership to funnel hard donations now?

Conservatives are being asked to drink this cup of swill and pretend we like it. Why is it always the conservatives that are capitulating?

[Redcloak]

So how stoned were the Republicans when they passed this steaming pile?

[freedomcrusader]

What? George Washington himself vetoed bills on the basis of their Constitutionality. There is no right on the part of Congress to have the Supreme Court determine the Constitutionality of a law instead of the President. The Constitution allows the President to veto bills for ANY reason, provided he tells Congress what his reason(s) is(are). If Congress really wnats the bill, they can override with 2/3 vote. Finally, the Constitution makes NO MENTION of the Supreme Court being the only or final arbiter of the Constitutionality of laws passed by Congress. The precedent that the S.C. is the final arbiter of Constituionality wasn't set until Marbury vs. Madison.

[RAT Patrol]

Those with the internet are not the ones who need more information.

[ArrogantBustard]

It is NOT his place to determine whether the law is constitutional or not.

That is false. The President may veto a bill for any reason, or none at all. Constitutional problems would be one reason for a veto, and that reason has been used many times since the founding of theRepublic.

AB

[Satadru]

I think you are missing the point. Political calculations may have forced Bush to side with stem cell research, but this is something that needed leadership. If Bush chose to be a leader, he could have taken this to the American people and tell them why he would veto this bill. His 80% popularity would have made things easier. He backed off when he had a chance to be a leader. He bucks to pressure too quickly.

[Poohbah]

Why did Bush sign this when he no-doubt knew it would be quickly challenged? What happened to principled leadership?

You just answered your own question.

Sometimes, principled leadership means signing crap like this, to make sure it gets killed in the courts vs. hoping it never comes up again.