Replies

..."It's really pretty low to accuse President Bush of violating his oath of office if he signs a piece of legislation one section of which Congress has found constitutional but which many believe SCOTUS may find unconstitutional.

<--SNIP-->

" You really ought to think about it before accusing an honest and honorable President of violating his oath"....

I think it's really rather low for you to make innuendos when you are short on ammunition, brother. Let's don't even consider what Rowdee says or thinks--let's go straight to the horses', er the President's, mouth, shall we?

From the White House web page: ..."However, the bill does have flaws. Certain provisions present serious constitutional concerns. In particular, H.R. 2356 goes farther than I originally proposed by preventing all individuals, not just unions and corporations, from making donations to political parties in connection with Federal elections.

I believe individual freedom to participate in elections should be expanded, not diminished; and when individual freedoms are restricted, questions arise under the First Amendment.

I also have reservations about the constitutionality of the broad ban on issue advertising, which restrains the speech of a wide variety of groups on issues of public import in the months closest to an election. I expect that the courts will resolve these legitimate legal questions as appropriate under the law."...

I AM STATING HE VIOLATED HIS OATH TO PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES using his own words and state of mind to show his intent....his use of the words 'serious concerns are bogus because he is all too eager to fall back on letting the courts figure it out....and this from the man who assured us he would appoint strict constructionists! BUT, it isn't just him--the sumsabeaches in the Halls of Shame are every bit as much to blame.

Brother, continue to tell yourself he really didn't mean it, that it really is ok, yada yada yada....in time, you may actually believe it. That Constitution really is just an old piece of paper; it was just a 'guide'; it really did mean for government to cover every aspect of our lives......

Its really rather low of [CT] to make innuendos that Rowdee accused the President of violating his oath of office. Then, four paragraphs later, Rowdee repeats the same innuendo when he accuses the President of violating his oath in all caps. Well, which is it?

The Constitutional basis for accusing the President of violating his oath? If a President signs a bill he believes has some "flaws" and about which he has "reservations" he has just violated his Constitutional oath of office. No citation to any provision of the Constitution for that whopper.

And you say I'm short on ammunition? Did you or did you not accuse the President of violating his oath? The basis for your accusation is your fantasy that if a President signs a bill passed by Congress that he believes has "flaws" and about which he has "reservations" he has violated his oath of office? You think there is any President who hasn't done that? Hey, I'm not the one a few rounds short of a full clip here.

So impeach President Bush. I hope you'll like the government you get.