(13-11-2012 07:47 PM)Starcrash Wrote: Because one requires the approval of congress and the other doesn't, so a different method would explain why they could have different outcomes.
You missed my point entirely. I was not talking about the different methods by which laws are formed, but about the power and influence that Obama has on this process. As the president of the USA, Obama has a few options to affect it's outcome in his own country. In Uganda, however, a country in which he has zero political power, there is nothing he can do about it other than trying to talk some sense into the country's leader.
(13-11-2012 07:47 PM)Starcrash Wrote: It's also a fallacy of composition, because you're positing that all of Obama's attempts to change the law are ineffective just because some of them are.
Actually, you're wrong. You're putting words in my mouth, therefore attacking a straw man argument
. Care to cite the post in which I explicitly said that all of Obama's attempts to change laws are inefficient because some of them are?