Once upon a time America was based on “We, the people”, and the rule of law. That was then, and this is now, where the current president believes that he has

the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office

set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution

Like it or not it is the courts who are tasked with the interpretation of constitutions, not individual heads of states - at least that’s the way it works in civilized western countries.

It would seem that the United States truly is at a cross roads; Americans either have a head of state who is bound by the law of the land, or they have one who, congress be damned, gets to write his own.

Further on we read

The Constitution is clear in assigning to Congress the power to write the laws and to the president a duty ”to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Bush, however, has repeatedly declared that he does not need to ”execute” a law he believes is unconstitutional.

Former administration officials contend that just because Bush reserves the right to disobey a law does not mean he is not enforcing it….

How’s that for spin folks? If this doesn’t convince them that they have a dangerous man at the helm I’m not exactly sure what will.