King George

Ever since I heard about Pres. Bush’s “signing statements” I’ve been wondering what’s up with that. It seemed like a big deal to me to have the President basically come out and say that he has no intention of obeying a law that he just signed. Isn’t the President supposed to be subject to the law of the land? Isn’t putting oneself above the rule of law sort of the definition of a dictatorship?

To see most Republicans smilingly approve of it isn’t that surprising, I guess, but it is hard to say that they thought about it and then decided that it passed the Hillary Test: If Hillary Clinton was President and she did this, would I be OK with it? Somehow I think the answer would be no approximately 100% of the time.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to King George

  1. Ed Cognoski says:

    “The Hillary Test” is a tool Republicans should get familiar with. I hope it catches on.

    A related tool Republicans should be asking is “The Clinton tu quoque”: If Bill Clinton was such a bad President, then is defending whatever mistake George W Bush makes by saying “Clinton did it, too” really a defense at all?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s