How many of you even knew such a thing existed: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060627/ap_on_go_co/bush_signing_statements_4

This is precisely why Bush and his crew need to go. The man clearly feels that he can never be wrong, and is wholly above the law. Anyone who's signed over 750 statements basically saying "I can ignore this law if I want to" - come on.

This is bullshit. A law is a law, and the president has no consitutional ability to amend a law while signing it.

Apparently we're not the only ones who have a problem with a president who repeatedly signs bills with the caveat that he can interpret the new law however he wants to: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060725/ap_on_go_co/signing_statements

The American Bar Association isn't too hot on the idea either: http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/24/lawyers.bush.ap/index.html. They go so far as to flat out state he's violating the constitution.

This horror show makes one long for the good old days of Richard Nixon and his version of the "Imperial Presidency." The biggest difference is that in Nixon's time both Republicans and Democrats fought Nixon's efforts to usurp powers allotted by the Constitution to the Legislative Branch. Congress actually used to be concerned with upholding the Constitution. Now all Congress cares about is how things will affect their chances for re-election. The Republicans seem completely disinterested in the Constitution except when it comes around to amending it for purely political purposes. The Democrats have lost their voice, with only a few showing the spine to oppose the fascists in the White House.

Signing statements, hah!

I wouldn't be surprised if one of those signing statements had something to do with cancelling the 2008 elections.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statements

http://mpsa.indiana.edu/conf2003papers/1031858822.pdf