Posted on 02/09/2003 11:24:43 PM PST by kattracks
Edited on 07/12/2004 4:00:50 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Some Democrats are continuing to complain that the party's message is not clear, and that Democratic opposition to a major judicial nominee threatens to alienate Hispanic voters.
Few, if any, Democratic state leaders want to be heard criticizing their party's leadership at the beginning of the 2004 presidential election cycle. But grass-roots leaders and activists say the class-warfare attacks on President Bush's tax cuts have not worked and that a less strident, more focused economic message is needed to reconnect with swing voters who supported Republicans in November.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
That distinction is yours.
BTW, it is within the power of the legislative branch of our government to change the laws, and the ways that breaking the law is handled in this country. It is also proper for the Executive Branch to promote a position i support of, or against a change in the law to the legislators.
Why would seeking to change the law constitute not executing it?
Why would seeking to change the law constitute not executing it?
It wouldn't, if he was executing it in good faith while seeking such legislation. He's straddling, doing neither.
Take a hypothetical governor who opposes capital punishment: he can work to repeal the law while faitfully carrying out the executions until such time as new legislation is enacted.
No thanks, got one.
You sound like the oft-suprised Dems.
They only thing he is straddling is a 50 state sweep in '04. Your rhetoric not withstanding.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.