Throughout his first six years in office, Bush had a habit of signing congressional legislation into law, but using "signing statements" to explain which parts of the law he didn't feel like following.

Fortunately, the president curtailed the practice this year, sticking with the more traditional sign-or-veto approach embraced by his predecessors. That is, until recently. The Boston Globe's Charlie Savage, whose award-winning coverage of the issue has been a journalistic highlight of the last seven years, has the story.

President Bush this month issued his first signing statement since the Democratic takeover of Congress, reserving the right to bypass 11 provisions in a military appropriations bill under his executive powers.

In the statement, which the White House filed in the Federal Register on Nov. 13 but which initially attracted little attention, Bush challenged several requirements to provide information to Congress.

For example, one law Bush targeted requires him to give oversight committees notice before transferring US military equipment to United Nations peacekeepers.

Bush also challenged a new law that limits his ability to transfer funds lawmakers approved for one purpose to start a different program, as well as a law requiring him to keep in place an existing command structure for the Navy's Pacific fleet.

Bush thought enough of the bill to sign it into law, but not quite enough of it to obey all of the bill's provisions. He's picky that way.