President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.

[snip]

Legal scholars say the scope and aggression of Bush's assertions that he can bypass laws represent a concerted effort to expand his power at the expense of Congress, upsetting the balance between the branches of government.

[snip]

Phillip Cooper, a Portland State University law professor who has studied the executive power claims Bush made during his first term, said Bush and his legal team have spent the past five years quietly working to concentrate ever more governmental power into the White House. ''There is no question that this administration has been involved in a very carefully thought-out, systematic process of expanding presidential power at the expense of the other branches of government," Cooper said. ''This is really big, very expansive, and very significant." 

[snip]

... Bush is according himself the ultimate interpretation of the Constitution. And he is quietly exercising that authority to a degree that is unprecedented in US history.  

[snip]

The Constitution grants Congress the power to create armies, to declare war, to make rules for captured enemies, and ''to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces." But, citing his role as commander in chief, Bush says he can ignore any act of Congress that seeks to regulate the military.

On at least four occasions while Bush has been president, Congress has passed laws forbidding US troops from engaging in combat in Colombia, where the US military is advising the government in its struggle against narcotics-funded Marxist rebels.

After signing each bill, Bush declared in his signing statement that he did not have to obey any of the Colombia restrictions because he is commander in chief.

When Reagan ignored the explicit law of Congress and funded the Contras anyway, the result was a national scandal.  Bush does much more, repeatedly, and it's barely even reported.

America, as we think of it, is in desperate trouble.  Even if you don't think Bush will take things further than, say, Gitmo, warrantless spying, rendition for torture, etc., the precedent here is incredibly dangerous for the future.

Bush has also said he can bypass laws requiring him to tell Congress before diverting money from an authorized program in order to start a secret operation, such as the ''black sites" where suspected terrorists are secretly imprisoned.

Congress has also twice passed laws forbidding the military from using intelligence that was not ''lawfully collected," including any information on Americans that was gathered in violation of the Fourth Amendment's protections against unreasonable searches.

Congress first passed this provision in August 2004, when Bush's warrantless domestic spying program was still a secret, and passed it again after the program's existence was disclosed in December 2005.

On both occasions, Bush declared in signing statements that only he, as commander in chief, could decide whether such intelligence can be used by the military. 

[snip]

Many laws Bush has asserted he can bypass involve requirements to give information about government activity to congressional oversight committees.

In December 2004, Congress passed an intelligence bill requiring the Justice Department to tell them how often, and in what situations, the FBI was using special national security wiretaps on US soil. The law also required the Justice Department to give oversight committees copies of administration memos outlining any new interpretations of domestic-spying laws. And it contained 11 other requirements for reports about such issues as civil liberties, security clearances, border security, and counternarcotics efforts.

After signing the bill, Bush issued a signing statement saying he could withhold all the information sought by Congress. 

[snip]

David Golove, a New York University law professor who specializes in executive-power issues, said Bush has cast a cloud over ''the whole idea that there is a rule of law," because no one can be certain of which laws Bush thinks are valid and which he thinks he can ignore.

[snip] 

A president who ignores the court, backed by a Congress that is unwilling to challenge him, Golove said, can make the Constitution simply ''disappear." 

Read the whole article.

Yes, Clinton issued signing statements, too (a much smaller number, and not proclaiming such vast new powers).  That doesn't make it right.  (The spectacle of right-wingers suddenly citing Clinton as an arbiter of decency is truly brilliant.)

These are the facts: signing statements were used only rarely until the Reagan administration.  Since then, their use accelerated, creating a constitutional grey area.  Bush is now exploiting and widening this loophole vastly more often and more consistently to concentrate executive power than has ever been tried. 

It's not hyperbole to claim that Bush is systematically arrogating to himself the powers of both Congress to make law and the Supreme Court to interpret it, all while insisting upon his power to use the military and intelligence agencies in any way he personally sees fit. 

It's all over his own signature. 

If you have the slightest grasp of history, you can see why this is terribly dangerous. 

Shame on anyone who dares support this assault on the Constitution while questioning the patriotism of others.