[Diddle E. Squat]

While I hate that he signed it, the best logical argument I can see is that he's trying to get the quickest resolution to shut up debate on the issue.

Say he had vetoed it(which is what I lobbied him to do, BTW). Now the Dems would keep harping on it and using CFR as an issue. He can say it is unconstitutional until he is blue in the face, but all the Dems have to do is ignore that and keep harping on it as a wedge issue to portray him as the stereotypical GOP tied to "Big Bizness". You can't get a Supreme Court ruling on a law that hasn't past, so debate about its constitutionality is only that, debate.

Instead he has chosen to allow it to become law, fast-tracking it to the Supreme Court, and will likely get a quick ruling. So by this time next year(and likely before the Fall elections) everyone will know whether it is constitutional or not. Easier to fight it in the next go round if you can soundbite it to "the Supreme Court already declared it unconstitutional".

IF this is actually the administration's thinking on this, they must be pretty confident it will be struck down. Certainly not what I would have done(I actually believe in the Constitution), but just trying to expain what MIGHT be their logic behind allowing it to become law. But even with that strategy, he didn't have to sign it. Of course BillyBob's solution would have been classic, too.

[mad puppy]

Well, I see your point and agree. I don't like it, but IF in the end the SCOTUS kills it dead, then "W" is even better than I give him credit for. I don't like the method (signing POS legislation to shut people up knowing it will be killed in the end) but I think most of us, including "W", want the same result.

Prediction: When the SC kills this thing, the old complaints about "W" and the SC being in cahoots will come back up.

[Cuttnhorse]

Hmmm, interesting take...you do know Diddle...Squat.

[usconservative]

While I hate that he signed it, the best logical argument I can see is that he's trying to get the quickest resolution to shut up debate on the issue.

That about sums it up.

Hey, I'm on the side of "he should NEVER have signed this bill in the first place!" but there certainly are powerful arguments on the other side to sign it, undermine it, have it overturned by the USSC, defuse the issue with the DimocRATS and take back the Senate to get Conservative Judges through and seated.

WTG Miss Marple and CP ... you got me to reverse my original position. And that ain't easy to do. Kudos.