A day in the life of President Bush (photos): 3/27/02

yahoo.com, whitehouse.gov | Republican Warrior Princess

[rintense]

President Bush signed the controversial Campaign Finance Reform bill today as Mitch McConnell immediately filed suit against it. Bush later headed to South Carolina where he spoke to Emergency First Responders in Greenville. He also stopped in Atlanta, Georgia at the Georgia Tech Institute of Technology where he watched drills demostrating response to terror attacks. Enjoy your daily dose of Dubya!

[GraniteStateConservative]

It would require a constitutional amendment to have Congress cede powers like that to the president.

A basic understanding of the Articles of the Constitution would be enough to know an amendment was necessary-- just like one would be required for McCain-Feingold. Conservatives in 1994 just decided to "ignore the Constitution" (according to disruptors here), but all they were doing was playing politics. It's the same with CFR now. It's just politics. The SCOTUS doesn't have to worry about politics-- only their legacy-- and they won't rule in favor of some of the provisions enacted today.

[rintense]

You are absolutely correct! Great post, patriciaruth.

[marylina]

Welcome, Wphile. Seems that all they could muster is one lonely whiner....

[patriciaruth]

You are the most intelligent and most informed person I have run into at this thread, as section9 doesn't visit. And that is not a put down of lots of others, like OhioWfan and rintense and many others who have great funds of knowledge that they draw their opinions from.

I always love reading your posts, and I know you are someone I can trust to have their facts and their morals and their logic all in place.

[Kath]

Nobody here wants to silence your freedom of speech. You are entitled to your opinion. What you can't seem to get through your thick skull is that nobody here CARES what you think. Now go whine somewhere else. By the way change your screen name I have dogs that do less whinning then you do.

[marylina]

Ditto, patriciaruth!

[hoosiermama]

I think most people feel that way, but, W is not stupid. He had to know that McConnell would be acting as soon as he lifted his pen off the paper. Plus taking it to the court system remove all lobbying from the final decision. There are just to many congressmen (right or left) who are owin' to too many lobbyists.

[ohioWfan]

It will be again, Nea! This flurry will die down, Rush will eventually shut up, and we will once again have our soothing balm before we go to bed at night!

[gramho12]

I look forward to "day in the life" and think you do a great job. I want to thank you - don't ever think we don't appreciate what you do!

And I like blue eyes myself. GW looks terrfic. God Bless Him!

[jurisdog]

Do you recall Agenda Item 1 for the Contract With America in 1994? It included the line item veto-- something Ronaldus Maximus asked for and GHWB asked for.

As a kid growing up on news and political talk shows (thanks dad!) I was very aware of the line item veto issue. The only reason I personally liked the idea of it back then was because of the constant yearly games played by the Democrats in Congress. Send Reagan an 1100 page budget the night before the government runs out of money, and force him to sign or suffer a shut-down.

However, the more I thought about it, the more I realized, I liked it for another reason as well. In my opinion, most things that the federal House/Senate do are unnecessary. Many are unconstitutional. A line item veto simply undoes things. So, I figured, even in the hands of a president I didnt like, like Clinton for example, he would just be cutting stuff out of bills, which probably would be more good than bad. Still though, the idea of a line item veto in the wrong hands was a bit scary to me.

Every knowledgable person knew it was unconstitutional, yet conservatives cheered as it was signed into law in April of 1996-- knowingly crapping on the Constitution (as you'd characterize Bush's signing of CFR).

I would disagree. There was not clear constitutional precedent stating that a line item veto would violate the separations of powers. However, there is clear precedent that says free speechs includes money/political-speech. The unconstitutionality of the CFR is much clearer than that of a line-item veto in my opinion.

Though you sound like a libertarian who probably has written in Ron Paul's or Andre Marrou's name for every office you've cast a ballot for (if they weren't on the ballot) and so it may not apply to you,

LOL. Well, there are some things I agree with Libertarians about, but I would never vote for one over a Republican. However, like many conservatives I know, there are times I end up voting republican simply because its the lesser of two evils. In my opinion, our party has lost a lot of the principle-driven character it has shown in the past. Maybe thats because the power of the media, and the vote-buying power of the class-against-class demonrats is so strong that we have to cave in somewhat to win elections. I don't profess to know for sure. But it does make me sad.

most of the conservatives here at FR were happily supporting unconstitutional legislation-- including worshipful supporters of the Great One who walked on water; made the lame leap; the dumb speak; and should be on Mount Rushmore.

Are there other things you are calling unconstitutional besides line item veto? Im not sure I woudl agree that most people "knew" it was unconstitutional...

Oh, and so you'll know how the story ends-- the SCOTUS did their job and struck it down. They'll do the same with this.

Agreed. But, I have to say, deep inside I really really truly hope that President Bush realizes signing the bill was wrong, but that he made a political value judgment, and that he has a long term plan. Maybe, just maybe, he knows for 100% sure that it will get struck down, and he is trying to better the long-term position of the party by keeping poll numbers strong.

[Wphile]

Sabertooth...you are da man! Seems 'jurisdog' could take a few lessons in etiquette (sp?) from you.

Jurisdog...you have every right to express your loyalty. Just do it on another thread, please.

[marylina]

...we will once again have our soothing balm before we go to bed at night!

YES, ohio! Can't wait for the day.

[Howlin]

[rintense]

There is a time. There is a place. There is a tone. You have chosen to ignore all three of those things.

[Howlin]

May I suggest #153.

[rintense]

You got it, terilyn!

[Miss Marple]

LOL! I need to keep that one! Can I steal it from you?

[Howlin]

Yowzer.

[M. Thatcher]

Then Rush, trying to appeal to what he THINKS is the opinion of all conservatives

OH GIVE ME A FREAKING BREAK.

I like you, but you have NO CLUE. Is it that difficult to imagine that Rush ACTUALLY says what he THINKS? Every freaking day? This crap about Rush taking some position to appeal to this group or that group is just that, crap. It is just as much crap as saying he is nothing but a shill for the Republican party, which no-brains say all the time. He sits in front of the microphone and says what he thinks. Agree or disagree, fine. But the idea that Rush trolls FREE REPUBLIC to figure out what to talk about, and what opinion to adopt, is beyond annoying.

[Kath]

A loyal supporter????? With supporters like you the President doesn't need the Democrats.