theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
The most he can do is block a change.I mean he can veto, but as for getting his ideas passed they have about as much power.
The most he can do is block a change.I mean he can veto, but as for getting his ideas passed they have about as much power.
Yes, really. Did you actually read the link? Do you not understand the separation of powers?
Yes, really. Did you actually read the link? Do you not understand the separation of powers?
The tax code is law. The president can propose any changes to the law he wants, just like Rachel Maddow can. And just like Rachel Maddow, he has no power to enact any of this proposals.
When Rachel Maddow sends a proposal to the Senate and it's treated with the same authority as one sent to them by the President, you might have a point, until then you just keep on spinning your semantics.
That would imply that any Presidential candidate campaigning on a tax reform platform is a freaking liar and ought to be laughed out of town?The President has no more power to change the tax code than Rachel Maddow does.
No, it isn't. This is about " a power" not "power."
The President has no more power to change the tax code than Rachel Maddow does.
Think about it a little more, and you might not find it funny at all. They aren't doing enough to make the world a better place, and they're doing too much to make the world a worse place. The mix of criticism rightly expresses this sad situation.
As the one who introduced the term into the conversation, I regret to inform you that you're wrong.
Just because you wrote it, doesn't mean you know what you are talking about (death of the author).
And just because you contradict him, doesn't make you right either.
Just because you wrote it, doesn't mean you know what you are talking about (death of the author).
Well duh.Just because you wrote it, doesn't mean you know what you are talking about (death of the author).
Just because you wrote it, doesn't mean you know what you are talking about (death of the author).