Fact checking

[Justin]

Thomas Shaddack (2004-04-28 18:32Z) wrote:

> What won't hurt could be making them liable for their promises, as they
> can be considered to be a contract with the voters. With specific
> penalties for not delivering the results in the specified timeframe.

Presidents don't pass laws.  Presidential campaigns would be reduced to
issues that are mutable (vulnerable?) to executive orders.

Individual candidates for federal office can't pass laws either.  You
want to hold a Senator liable when his compatriots (even if they form
the majority) don't support everything your senator supports?

Nobody who understands the basics of U.S. government construction could
possibly believe that a candidate's "promise" is a guarantee.  It is
merely a statement of ideology.

What then, consequences for not "attempting" to effect promises?  Who's
to judge?

-- 
"Not your decision to make."
"Yes.  But it's the right decision, and I made it for my daughter."
 - Bill and Beatrix