[Sloth]

Yeah, stategery, or whatever. You're the first one that's suggested that, I'm sure. But how does political calculation make it into the 'the right thing'?

[Recovering_Democrat]

You're the first one that's suggested that, I'm sure. But how does political calculation make it into the 'the right thing'?

I did have a caveat at the top about a veto perhaps being preferable. But doesn't what I said make sense?? The 'rats and RINOs, once the unconstitutionality of the 60-day (and perhaps soft money rule) is ruled upon, they're EUNUCHS. McLame will resign from the Senate, head up a liberal think tank and become a full-time professional whiner...wait, that's what he is now. :)

[genefromjersey]

I've been doing a LOT of thinking about Campaign Reform- ( not just Campaign Finance Reform ) - and it strikes me, it's a hell of a note when a candidate has to render obesiance to Pro or Anti Abortion groups, Capital or Labor,Gun or anti-Gun, etc. etc etc. before he or she is allowed to swear to defend the Constitution and laws of the Constituency.

Just once, it would be great for a candidate to say: "I pledge to represent everyone as fairly as possible: meaning, I will not be handing out special favors or consideration to anyone ."

[eccl1212]

BECAUSE...

political calculation is how good work is accomplished and landmines are avoided. I get a little tired of the "blow yourself to bits" on principle, attitudes WE express here. That includes me.

WE are acting like taliban terrorists when we demand our leaders drink the hemlock of our principles, and end up killing every other good thing on the agenda in the process.

The "lose on principle" thing... it ain't workin' for us.

We need to wisen up. Making a political compromise is NOT the same as personal moral action on our part.

Bush did the right thing.

We need to avoid electing a clintoon in the midst of a world war... over the VERY minor issue of campaign finance reform. We can find other ways to excercise our free speech. Hell, those other ways might even be more effective than the pay for air time scenario. I for one think the killing of the NEA's EXTRACTION of payroll tax, for the support of democrats via "union dues", is actually a good thing.

[LaGrone]

I agree Sloth. Bush is either for the bill as passed or against it as passed. If he signs the legislation he can never say he was really against the bill.

[terilyn]

By letting the courts kill it forever. This bill has been rearing it's ugly head for seven long years. IMHO President Bush decided to go for the "Kill it once and for all" method. McCain was NEVER going to let this issue die. It's all he has. Note, that the Native Americans are exempt from the contribution limits for soft money. The single largest recipient of Native American political money was none other than John McCain. Pathetic. I'm starting to be glad that Bush signed it so it can finally be declared dead and buried!

[CyberAnt]

"right thing"

I tend to agree with you generally - although I was suspicious up until the very last that the President just might veto it and surprise everybody.

I have been wondering if Bush had already conferred with McConnell regarding his plan to file a law suit. If Bush was sure of the law suit, he would have had more confidence in signing it. Yes, it is flawed - and I do believe the Supreme Court will rip those parts out. Sooooo, I guess I agree that this has been a big win-win for the President, and since he didn't give the dems any face time over it - that makes it even sweeter to me. Especially since the President made such a big issue out of the education bill with Kennedy. It definitely takes the issue off the table and McCain out of the spotlight! I don't necessarily agree with the President's method, but I can see why he may have done it.

Will I vote Republican in 2002, 2004 and even 2008 - yes indeedy.