Yeah, I know, I know. I wouldn't have given Clinton such a broad benefit of doubt. But while Clinton did everything not to deserve my trust, Bush (to whom I gave no latitude early on; I carried a sign saying "NO HONEYMOON: CUT MY TAXES" at his Inauguration) has earned my trust through his actions.
This isn't over, yet. If the Supremes uphold it, I'll forever maintain that signing it was a damned stupid thing for Bush to do. If they strike it down, I'll call him crazy like a fox.
I think you are failing to distinguish between a strategy and a tactic. Consider the following thought experiment:
Should Bush sign a bill nationalizing all private property and wait two years for the SCOTUS to strike it down? Would the Constitution be any stronger for it?
If Bush cared at all about the Constitution, he should have vetoed the bill.
It's all about what he says and how much power he can get from the Dem voters over things. Not the actual issue.
He either punted to the court, like a coward, or he actually likes the bill, it protects him too. Either one is despicable.
It is time for all the armchair strategists to ponder what the political reaction would have been to the following statement and stand it represents:
"I will veto any bill which infringes the right of any American to speak his mind on any subject at any time. The first amendment benefits all Americans and insures all of our other freedoms. I will never sell out the American people for any reason whatsoever."
He would be more popular than he is now across every spectrum of the body politic. He would also have secured his place in history.
But he didn't do that, he doesn't have the courage or the brains.
This is a very dangerous game. Better, in my opinion, that if he opposed it that he should have vetoed it, and forced an overturn of his veto. If the courts then strike it down, Bush can say "See, I told you it was unconstitutional" and if they uphold it he can truthfully maintain he was against it from the start.
Unless he actually supports it, then bully for him.
Be prepared to call him "crazy like a fox".
We feel the President is quite brillant. He has surpassed any expectations we had of him. It won't surprise us to find he got this one just right.
We can't think of this bill in such narrow terms as "him caving". Frankly, I'm surprized that Rush doesn't "get it".
The Fox is in the chicken coop.. right under the nose of the farmer.
With his administration, and with the staff he has, we aren't questioning to many of their decisions. To date,.. the only thing we honestly disagree with him on, is illegal immigrants.
But we are still open to debate on it. We would admit it is a HUGE policy to consider and a very complex one at that. There are several millions of dollars sent home to Mexico every year. I believe I heard that money is ONE THIRD of their economy. If it were suddenly taken away.. there could be a multitude of problems for Mexico that would reverberate back to us. It would create a vaccum that would be filled in Mexico by people from other countries that would effect a bigger threat to our security.
I mention Mexico as an example of how complex issues really are.
Which I mention to point out the simularity of the complexities to the CFR bill. Obvious constitutional questions are rising about the un-constitutional gagging of First Ammendment rights in the CFR bill. It is an extremely complicated issue. We need to judge this President by the fact that he has outsmarted the best of his political adversaries on the hill in a multitude of policies and issues already. We feel that with his sharp mind, and with the experience and expertise of his staff and administration, that he is going to get this one right too. We think he is going to let the courts answer the "constitutionality" of this issue. Which is pretty savvy when you look at it. It will show that HE wants reform.. he can show that he has publicly expressed his dissatisfaction with it,..and he will be more than helpful in providing the Supreme Court with materials/correspondence to answer the Constitutional question. In fact, I think it will be a shining moment for him to show how well our Constitution and Politics can work together to "get it right". PLUS.. it will take the "political" onus off him. He will shown how he tried to compromise with the Senate, in an effort to be bi-partisan... while deferring the Constitutional question to the legal branch of our Government. (The only question I have is, isn't there a method of doing that before signing a bill?)
As you just said Physicist,.. the difference is .. he is truthful. So we comfortably give him the benefit of the doubt. While remaining vigilant and even debating issues. (Really nice for a change!!)
We will never agree 100 percent with anyone elected. I don't think that is humanly possible. But we both feel this guys is just as you say.. "Sly as a Fox".
I dare to say, he will end up being considered the smartest President this country has enjoyed in history so far. (Much to the dismay of the Liberal press and Hollywood.) Anyone want to place any bets?? :o)
I guess my last comment would be,... It is so easy to judge. And it appears that negativity comes easier to some than postive thinking or being able to "debate" without bashing. Thats where the difference in these kinds of threads are IMHO. Debating vs. D'bashing
FRegards!!