Replies

Bush violated his oath? A scurrilous and false accusation. The branch of government that reviews legislation for constitutionality is the Judicial, not the Executive.

A student of the Constitution and government might have noticed that first-past-the-post elections have resulted in a two party system. In a country this size the chances that you will have a President who agrees with you 100% on all issues is about as high as the New York Times endorsing George Bush for President. Grow up, you aren't going to win them all.

Bush called this issue on political rather than ideological grounds to take away an issue the Dems wanted to use to take over the House this fall. Shocking. I would advise you not to go near a legislative hall or sausage packing plant. Both processes are too messy for your delicate sensibilities.

Goldwater stood on his ideology in 1964 no matter how unpopular, even opposing the Civil Rights Act on Constitutional grounds. Reagan in contrast knew when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em. Both were great conservatives. Who accomplished more for the conservative cause?

Bash Bush when you think he's wrong. This is America after all. But if you drop Bush at election time in favor of some no-chance but ideologically pure third party candidate, you may just get to enjoy a President Hillary administration.

It's not like he folded on some social engineering program or over some stupid little commerce issue in order to keep the political high ground. He folded on our First Amendment right to Free Speech. He should have taken a stand on this.

I think you know this was wrong but are willing to give him leeway because he's a "conservative" and may just be playing the game. I however am not willing to give him quarter on this issue. Any time a politician hacks into the 1st, 2nd, and 4th especially, but any part of the Constitution/BOR in general, they are fair game regardless of ulterior political motives or supposed affiliation.

EBUCK

The branch of government that reviews legislation for constitutionality is the Judicial, not the Executive.

WHERE do you get this notion? Is the Judicial Branch the only one that can READ? The Constitution was written to be understood by EVERYBODY. The Founders appear to have thought that Joe Sixpack was capable of rational, coherent thought, unlike politicians and lawyers of today, and could reasonably be expected to KNOW when the legislature and executive were in violation. The Supremes ASSUMED that power in 1803 or so, in Marbury v Madison, but it was NEVER assigned to them and ALL BRANCHES of the federal government were supposed to avoid doing UnConstitutional things. If you REALLY BELIEVE what you just wrote, your ignorance is appalling.