Signing Statements Strike a Nerve

The Battle Creek (Mich.) Enquirer : "We find Bush's proclivity for signing statements particularly ironic in light of his oft-declared disdain for 'activist judges' who he says go beyond their constitutional duties by reinterpreting laws written by Congress."

The Lebanon (Pa.) Daily News : "The president's constitutional duty is to enforce laws he has signed into being,' said the report.

"That simple truth would seem to be self-evident. That an ABA report had to be written to remind the White House of that truth is a shameful commentary on the administration. "

The Waterloo-Cedar Falls (Iowa) Courier : "The sheer numbers of signing statements give the impression of a well thought-out strategy within the administration in its quest to extend executive power.

"This president should not be allowed to set that precedent. Nor should any that follow."

And the Berkshire (Mass.) Eagle : "Like a kid who makes a deal and holds his fingers crossed behind his back to signify he doesn't really mean it, President Bush seems to believe that if he issues a statement upon signing a law then the law doesn't apply as it was written. . . .

"It may be that he only way for Congress to reassert its power is by playing the game the way the president does. From here on all bills heading to the president's desk should have be accompanied by a 'no backsies' amendment, which nullify all presidential 'crossies.' Or perhaps an even better check on the president would be a 'jinx, doublejinx' clause in which he can't speak until after he signs a bill. Let's just hope the president doesn't resort to cupping his ears, shutting his eyes and implementing the 'I can't hear you, I can't hear you, la-la-la-la' tactic."

Cartoon Watch

Political cartoonists, not surprisingly, are up in arms, too. Here are Steve Sack ; Signe Wilkinson ; Ted Rall ; Ben Sargent ; and Tom Toles .

And the satirical Onion weighs in with this faux-news story: "In a decisive 1--0 decision Monday, President Bush voted to grant the president the constitutional power to grant himself additional powers."

Still Blocking a Cease-Fire in Lebanon

Jim Rutenberg and Thom Shanker write in the New York Times: "The United States firmly reiterated its position on Tuesday that there can be no cease-fire in the Middle East until there is a solid plan in place to disarm Hezbollah. . . .

"Ms. Rice had seemed to be ready to hasten the diplomatic effort to end the crisis as she prepared to leave Jerusalem for home on Monday, saying a solution was possible this week. But after she had dinner at the White House with Mr. Bush on Monday night, and France effectively postponed a United Nations session to work out the details of a international peacekeeping force, the administration strongly reiterated its message: a cease-fire will not be hastened without a plan to make it a lasting one."

By contrast, Elaine Sciolino and Dan Bilefsky write in the New York Times: "The 25 countries of the European Union called Tuesday for an immediate end to the fighting between Israel and the Hezbollah militia in Lebanon, hoping to create the momentum for a political solution and the deployment of an international military force to secure the peace. . . .