If you have "no place to go," come here!

How do you solve a problem like George W?

[Sorry for the Sound of Music reference there. I don't know what came over me.]

But seriously. The ABA has issued its first report on Bush and signing statements. The problem:

In a report to be issued today, the ABA task force said that Bush has lodged more challenges to provisions of laws than all previous presidents combined.

"The president is indicating that he will not either enforce part or the entirety of congressional bills," said ABA president Michael S. Greco, a Massachusetts attorney. "We will be close to a constitutional crisis if this issue, the president's use of signing statements, is left unchecked."

Close to? Close to??

And here's the headline. Remember, the editors write the headlines, not the reporters. (The editors also determine which stories get written, who writes them, how they get written, and where they get placed. In other words, they're the ones with the power, even if they dn't show up on the teevee)

So, again, here's the headline, which shows the deep level of bogosity we're dealing with at the editorial level in the press:

Bush's Tactic of Refusing Laws Is Probed
Bar Association Panel Criticizes President's Many Challenges to Legislation

Where to begin with what's wrong?

1. Bush's use of signing statements is not a "tactic," but a strategy. It's designed to destroy the Constitutional system of checks and balances in favor of a unilateral executive not bound by law.

2. Bush is not "refusing laws" He is refusing to obey laws.

3. The important part is not the ABA's investigation ("probe") but their result ("criticized"). This wording makes it look like the ABA's report isn't even completed.

4. Bush is not "Challenging" "legislation." Under the Constitution, such "challenge" takes place in the courts, not because one of Bush's lawyers gins up a memo. In addition, Bush is not challenging "legislation"; that trivializes the problem. Bush is not challenging this or that law, but the very notion that Congress, as a co-equal branch of government, can write legislation that binds him.

So, how do we handle a problem like George W? Once you have a chief executive--I refuse to use the word "President" for a person neither legitimately elected the office nor willing to uphold his oath--who refuses to obey the law, what do you do? Pass a law? What do you do?

NOTE And who were the traitors who wrote this report?

he 10-member ABA panel includes at least three well-known conservatives or Republicans: former congressman Mickey Edwards (R-Okla.), former FBI director William S. Sessions and former Reagan Justice Department member Bruce Fein.

No votes yet