What is the point of having a Constitution and Bill of Rights, for the same reasons? Which part of 'uninfringed' is not understood? The National Reasonable-regulation Asses dispense our Rights as mere privileges, bought and sold as their stock-in-trade. PHUI Tagline...
I'll bet the senate does not realize just how totally tired the American voter is of hearing this tripe.
This is the same Congress that says nothing about the Supreme Court encroaching on its powers. I guess you cannot score political points against judges for life as easily as you can against a sitting President.
Bring Back Orin Hatch!
I haven't heard or seen Orin Hatch lately!
The Globe printed what I presume were the 10 "worst" examples of signing statements offered by GWB.
Each and every one of them appeared to this citizen to be draw a line on the attempted exercise of power by the Congress into Executive Branch activities (e.g., demanding that some executive branch employees report their agency activities to Congressional committees rather than to their own agencies).
That there were 750 signing statements merely illustrates how arrogant and out-of-control the Congress has become, and how entirely forgetful it is of its (and the Executive's) role in the federal government.
President Bush is not the only one who can ignore unconstitutional statutes. You and I also can. In fact, we are virtually obligated to ignore unconstitutional statutes.
America established a government with only the specific enumerated powers listed in the Constitution. Congress, and the people for that matter, long ago abandoned the notion of a limited government. However, the congress, and the people for that matter, failed to amend the Constitution to reflect the additional powers congress assumed.
There are certainly consequences for a display of civil disobedience. The courts can then decide if the statute in question is constitutional.