speaking of kings

I am watching to see if American will tolerate Bush's (or probably more accurately, Cheney's) attempt to subvert our democracy. (Remember, Bush's signing statement essentially said that he might not inform Congress about the Patriot Act uses even though the law requires him to.) After all, if the President can ignore laws passed by congress, what is the point of congress?

Well, this isn't the first time. When Bush signed the anti-torture legislation he had threatened to veto, he did so with his fingers crossed:

"In the signing statement tacked onto the McCain amendment, the White House indicated the executive branch would construe McCain's amendment 'in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief . . . which will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President . . . of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks.' This proviso, inserted without discussion after Congress passed the bill, could amount to a reinterpretation of the new law. It essentially inserts yet another loophole to allow torture if the president thinks it's necessary."

Bush more and more resembles Nixon. Once again, I ask you Bush supporters, would you support this from Bill Clinton? Or Hillary?

Yeah, I didn't think so. I guess we know how serious you all are about democracy and principle.