Posted on 03/27/2002 12:46:17 PM PST by Recovering_Democrat
Any check of the threads on FR will reveal that....but today I had a long nap, just woke up, and have a few thoughts. I'd appreciate FREEPers responses to this....KNOWING of course that a Bush veto could have been sustained and perhaps would have been preferable! But hear me out on this:
I'm not as angry about this as I thought I'd be. I, as a Recovering Democrat, have come to appreciate the Constitution and was an outspoken critic of this horrid law. I wrote both my Sin-ators, snail mailed President Bush twice, faxed him once and even sent a telegram...hoping to get his attention about the travesty that was McLame-Find-gold.
I lost the battle, but may have won the war.
President Bush's attitude in signing the bill into law was about as low-key as I've ever seen in a "major" piece of legislation. What does this say? I interpret it as the President planning to use the good aspects of this law (increased hard money) as much as possible, and not planning to put up much of a challenge to the UNCONSTITUTIONAL aspects of the law. Bush is rolling the McLames, Dash-holes, and Mini-Meehans of the world...and he barely said a word about the legislation! :) THINK ABOUT IT, FREEP FRIENDS:Why else would these jackasses have looked, essentially, GLUM on the day of passage?
Bush called their bluff--knowing he'd get hard money increases, the Unconstitutional CRAP would be tossed, a 'rat/RINO issue would be OFF THE TABLE, and where would they be in '04? On the losing side of the issue!
Bush is covered from not enforcing the 60-day nonsense by saying, "This is an issue before the courts...", all the while he's garnering TWICE as much hard money as before!!!!
Add to the fact he didn't allow McLame to mug for the cameras in a big South Lawn ceremony, and you've got good political moves here.
Now some might say I'm trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, or that I'm just kissing G.W.'s butt because he's the best choice I've got. But I don't think that is entirely true: the President may have outfoxed the foxes on this...any thoughts??
Recovering Democrat.
I have the guts to criticize somebody who needs to be criticized...and I am one of several few on here willing to do that, so if that makes me fringe, I part Party with a smile within.
One itty-bitty point of contention, to wit:
Do you really believe our judiciary is conservative, or are you referring to SCOTUS exclusively?
Thanks for the encouraging words.
rd
I'm glad you made a separate thread for it.
The end result for this is that the Republicans will get the changes in the law that are long overdue, and favor them, while the unconstitutional parts will be slapped silly. McLame will be permanently shutup, yet Bush has kept the McCainiacs in the GOP camp by signing the bill.
Yes, Bush could have made this veto stick, but at a huge political cost. A veto by the US Supreme Court carries FAR more weight with the media and the public who don't understand these issues.
Bush thought this one through.
Gun laws.
Secondly, always look at the trends created from such actions. A popular, and justified lament of conservatives is that the United States is ruled from the courtrooms, not from our legislative bodies. This bill, with the severability clause, effectively gives the courts the line-item veto. Given politicans' aversion to political heat, and this method as a means to avoid it, more and more ludicrous bills will be crafted in a similar fashion, and punted to the courts. Appointed jurists, not subject to feedback from their decisions, will essentially write our laws, once more legislation follows this model. And it will follow this model, if Bush proves this method successful to him. Because success is emulative, others will do the same. This is not good in the long term.
Political victories are often the triumph of methods, rather than individuals. We ought not forget this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.