Constitutional showdown over the signing statements.

Ironic, because much of the coverage says that the Govt already has the power (granted needing a nearly always given warrant) to do this - and because some of the signing statements authority granted to themselves in direct opposition to the intent of the signed laws, this isn't quite as egregious. Egregious - yes - the *most* egregious?

Why would this one be *the* one? Timing. And who were sponsors of the law that this directly subverts - in the senate Moderate repubs who need bushco less than bushco needs them (Coleman and one of the Maine Sens), and one of the cosponsors in the House - Waxman - now back in charge of the committee on govt reform (key oversight)- who has already gone on record on this issue that if the exec branch were to act on the signing statement that they would be in violation of the law (ergo his gauntlet - that the congressional law - signed by the president - is the law... not the signging statement.)

Cheney and Addington are the two behind most of the signing statements - so why would they attach one to this - just when the dems take congress, one that allegedly isn't needed to do what they want to do (spy on mail) - on the surface it makes no sense. On the hubris and "bring it on" front - it makes a lot of sense. They are running out of time - I think they are now begging for a Constitutional fight because they are so egotistical and megolomaniacal that they believe that they would "win" - not just on this issue - but on the issue of the power of the signing statements... I think they know they have little time to leave much of a mark for "their" presidency and in their ideological desire to "strengthen" the exec branch - they want to leave this power and authority. A perverted legacy, if you will. However, I think that they will lose if/when the whole issue gets brought before a court (i.e., a case brought regarding the exec branch acting upon a signing statement authority rather than the actual law as passed by congress and signed into law.)