The President is the head of the Executive Branch of government. As such the Prez is in charge of law enforcement. And any time someone disagrees with how he does it he catches flak.
He can't set a budget, he can only propose it and sign or veto the final budget. And Vetos can be over ridden.
He can't control the economy or the prices of anything. The Federal Reserve has the control of that. Well the Fed and business.
If the laws are screwed up he can't propose or pass legislation. That's the function of Congress.
Unemployment? The Prez doesn't have much control there.The only people he can hire and fire are government workers in the executive branch.
I learned the basics in 10th grade US Government in 1961. And learned all the rest by listening to people complain. When did things really change? Or is the rest just partisan retoric?
2006-09-08 02:21:01 · 20 answers · asked by namsaev 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I'm going with mymadsky on this one! Ignorance can be bliss... but consider this... it seems the latest trend in America is to place blame on ANYONE other than ones self. The lady who sued McDonalds for spilling her own coffee on her own lap, the 2 fat chicks that tried to sue McDonalds for being fat, parents sueing gun manufacturers for their kids killing other kids... the list goes on!
Personally I blame 90% of Americans for 100% of our problems!
2006-09-08 02:32:40 · answer #1 · answered by MadMaxx 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
As one of the weakest leaders in American history Bush has no responsibility at all for anything does he .
The office of president should mean nothing when it comes to leading America .Just a guy signing some paper work , useless for anything but cabinet appointments and ambassadorships . Any time congress wants it can return the troops so why do we blame bush right .
It is not his fault he is just the president with limited power .The real problem is the legislative branch of our government .THATS why all the republicans will be gone soon right .
HOW far up you butt exactly is your head .
The president sets the agenda for the nation .He is the one who leads america and can go before congress and get whatever he wants done . He can go on national TV and demand that congress act to make the needs of america the most important thing on the callender .HE can make things happen rather then sit back and attach signing statements to every single thing that passes across his desk .
2006-09-08 09:55:33 · answer #2 · answered by playtoofast 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The checks-and-balances of our government tend to distribute responsibilities. It would be wrong to absolve the president of his area of responsibility in these important areas.
"He can't set a budget..." - The president, by law, submits a budget every year that is acted by congress then sent back for signature. Generally when the President and the congress are of the same party, it is substantially (90%+) unchanged.
"He can't control the economy..." - The government has influence over the economy in two ways: Fiscal Policy and Monetary Policy. Monetary Policy is controlled by the Federal Reserve. Fiscal Policy is controlled by the President and Congress. Fiscal Policy includes how much money is spent and borrowed, where it is spent, who or what is taxed and by how much, how industries are regulated. Fiscal policy has a huge influence on the economy.
"If the laws are screwed up, he can't propose (changes) - Of course, he can. In fact, it is his duty as chief executive to let congress know if a law is not working as plan, and propose alternatives.
"Unemployment..." is a combination of fiscal policy and monetary policy. The Fed targets what is called "Non-inflationary unemployment rate" and will change interest rates accordingly. That magic elusive number of "non-inflationary unemployment rate" is the result of fiscal policies from things like protectionist policies, tax and spending policies, regulations, and social programs.
Yes, be supportive of your leaders but at the same time critical and skeptical. That keeps a democracy strong. When you dismiss "any time someone disagrees...", you're undermining the importance of questioning those in power. You are certainly encouraged to defend unfair criticism, but don't automatically dismiss it.
2006-09-09 11:10:29 · answer #3 · answered by gray shadow 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As the person at the top like any one in control the "Buck stops there" as it goes. A President will always be blamed for things and get credit for things outside thier control. It goes with the territory and the office. A great deal of this perception is the fact that painfully few people really know how the Governmemt functions and what the president really can or cannot do. The Presidency is a huge job and as such the president must depend on a wide array of advisors to help him with issues that they themselves couldnt possiblt keep track of. Many times these advisors give bad advice or the president must choose between advisors and make noone happy. As the ultimate authority in our country the President is also the ultimate scapegoat. if its right he gets credit if its wrong they take the blame. its the nature of the beast.
2006-09-08 09:35:25 · answer #4 · answered by Kevin P 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It's rhetoric. People are idiots. I feel like most of them aren't even aware that the country has THREE branches, and each holds the other in check.
What gets me, is when people criticize President Bush's choice for Supreme Court, because they're afraid that the nominees will introduce new laws, including but not limited to repealing the decisions made in Roe vs. Wade. They don't seem to understand that the Supreme Court is NOT allowed to pass laws. All they can do is decide whether or not the laws are constitutional, and if they are, they enforce them. That's it.
As I said, people are idiots.
2006-09-08 09:26:14 · answer #5 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Its the partisan rhetoric. The stupid people out there feel since Bush is President, he can do anything. They seem to forget how the government works. But hey, not everyone is smart out there so there is not much we can do for those people either. They also don't know how the government runs and operates and also has checks and balances so that one part doesn't have more power than the other.
2006-09-08 09:24:30 · answer #6 · answered by TJ 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Hey Namsaev. Its a good question and in my opinion the roots of this problem lie in the fact that american constiution has adopted the Montesquie (pardon my spellings) concept of "Separation of powers".
After adopting it in 18th century they have held it sacred. This is a problem of "Constitutionalism" to make things rigid when they can be amended.
All the later political scientists admit that "separation of powers" means nothing except the "independence of judiciary".
An Executive in American political system can only be effective when he controls both the executive and legislative branches otherwise there can be too much friction in the system.
2006-09-08 09:35:14 · answer #7 · answered by Rustic 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Partisan rhetoric. And politics. People want someone to blame, and they think the President is "in charge" so they blame him. Most people do not understand the very clear points you layed out so well.
2006-09-08 09:44:32 · answer #8 · answered by ItsJustMe 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The easy thing to do is blame the President.He does posses alot of power.He can control the flow of things but as you said he is just one piece of the puzzle. The congress and courts can either hinder or help him.Checks and Balances, it works .
2006-09-08 09:32:40 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The actual belief comes from the fact that the things that Bush can NOT control, is controlled by congress.
Congress has a republican majority, and the republicans are led by Bush.
Since Bush has control of both the executive branch, and the legislative branch, he is pretty much responsible for everything.
2006-09-08 09:31:04 · answer #10 · answered by Ricky T 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋