[rudehost]

Articulate arguments are not often useful against media-backed Democratic hyperbole and outright lies. This is not an issue where a majority of the public at large is going to actually educate themselves on the facts, and reach a proper conclusion.

I disagree. Well stated and thought out arguments can carry the day regardless of the media's attitude. I present the Contract with America that was relatively successful despite massive media attacks.

As far as GW's job it is absolutely NOT to get elected. His job is to preserve and protect the constitution. Unfortunately this is a job that he deserted in favor of a quest for media love.

[VRWC_minion]

Unfortunately this is a job that he deserted in favor of a quest for media love.

Here is my problem with this statement. If it turns out that the SC agreed with the bill as signed, then its constitutional. How do we trash the man for signing an unconstitutional bill that gets upheld as constutitional ?

We may disagree with it but we certainly lose credibility by claiming he breached a duty by signing something that later proved to be upheld. I think the case against him only works if the SC rules against him.

[Pukin Dog]

Vote against the man, then. That is your right. Just vote for someone else, and spare me the righteous indignation.