Why do so many people care who our president is?

Heres the deal monkey man, the democrats in congress are worried. There worried there free ride of doing nothing is going to end. There solution? Find a good enough scapegoat to blame the entire thing on. You know who they found? George W Bush. Before they got into office Georges approval ratings were high enough. After there efforts to blame wars, floods, reccessions, and pretty much anything that he has no power over his approval ratings have sunken to 30%! There no longer looking to help us there looking for there "free lunch" as valor said. They just sit around ignoring there senetorial duties to the american people and whenever something happens that they were supposed to fix they blame it on george.

dragon, why elect a president anyway if he cannot decide or has political influence on political decisions?

oh, and why spend 500,000,000++ USD to get into that position

and why are you so afraid of Barack Obama, than?

dragon, you have many learning potentials. please use it.

Hey kruijs, I'll take up for dragonface, I mean dragonfanxl... hee hee...

Personally I'm apprehensive about an Obama administration for several reasons... staking down his positions seems difficult, his record does not SEEM to correspond with his stated objectives, I have trouble seeing the ability to spend a trillion more on social programs without dismantling the military and lots of new taxes, and how 95% of Americans will get a tax reduction, even though many people don't pay taxes... mainly Senator Obama seems to come down on the side of ... "The govt. can do things better than individuals can do for themselves."

Wow val, are you Mccain, and are here when you're not campaigning? or are u palin? please post pic, so we can tell.

By the way, Congress has abdicated its role about declaring war, so this is the ceremonial side of our govt system, not the presidency. The executative side, the presidency, has become more like a totalitarian regime, since the congress has abdicated its role... ONe cannot simply blame the republicans either, since the democrats have also given W a free ride for the last 2 years.

I do agree that we do not know what O will do, but it is better than the alternative of knowing what Bush III will do -- business as usual. So, any chance is better than no chance.

OK bigken1, I'll take the bait, although your questions to me are a bit hard to interpret...

I was tepidly going to vote for McCain, actually I was seriously thinking about a write in for Thompson for the top spot, it's what I did in the TX primary even though he was already out then. So yes, my enthusiasm came back with the Palin pick, unlike 99.99999% of Americans I actually know people from her part of Alaska! I concur with you that the balance of power has been seriously tinkered with in the past decade or so and it might surprise you to learn that I think the Patriot Act is overreaching, I fear that too many Americans roll over when they hear code words like War on Terror...I shudder to think how future administrations will use these tools to trample personal rights further. Your last sentence though is actually what I wold say in the inverse... I'm unwilling to roll the dice on Obama I'd rather take McCain who appears to desperately want to retain his personal legacy of being a Maverick. It amazes me that the GOP is taking such a bashing when so much of the recent economic mess has spiked since the Dems took a majority two years ago and promised us all sunshine and roses. True Bushs' approval ratings are dismal but they are not even as low as Congress' you have to get down to things like violent criminals to get lower approval ratings than Congress these days, yet the appearance is that the Dems will retain their majorities, baffling really. Although I was not a fan of BC he did do a few things during his tenure that I agreed with, he acquiesced to Welfare reform and did give our currency an upgrade... although I honestly think that the surpluses during Clinton and the deficits under Bush have been imprecise on both counts. For example, I remember watching one of Bill Clinton's State of the Union addresses and tallying to myself what he was going to do with the budget surplus..5% here, 10% there, etc. When he got to 700% of the surplus I stopped counting. I agree that most of the country is clamoring for a change, but it discourages me that so little intelligent discourse has resulted from this campaign about WHAT either of these gentlemen would actually like to promote. The recent economic turmoil seems to have caught left-footed and I'm not convinced that Senator Obama has the exact character traits that I'd like to see at the pinnacle of government. For example. Senator Obama loves to poo-poo all of the critiques of his associations, but shouldn't someone gunning for the Presidency have a wealth of folks that would stand up as character witnesses for them? He should have a long list of stories about "What I did"... "Who I helped"... "How my actions made things better." And the business about how Rev. Wright was so instrumental to his beliefs but so strategically 'different' on the Sundays that the Obamas were in his pews smacks of incredulous to me.

So, what would be my ideal Presidential candidate? Someone that had run a business, maybe even run a state, had some personal and business difficulties, be at least in their early 50s, tall, articulate, sincere, tested, charming, self disciplined, well-traveled and studious.

Sigh.

Why do so many people, even people from other countries care who the President of The US is? The answer is obvious, it's because he is the Head of Government, not to mention Commander in chief, of the most powerful and influential Government on Earth. The US is the epicentre of world economic activity and as such influences what happens everywhere else - that's whether we like it or not. It's the way things are!
To say the POTUS uses 75% of his power in the first week is patently absurd. He holds enormous power from the moment of his inaugration, in fact from the moment of his election until the moment his term of Office ceases. For example President Elect Obama holds considerable sway right now but President G.W. Bush still has power to sign vastly stupid Executive Orders that will take some time for the incoming Administration to undo.
The POTUS also has a veto which gives him power to overturn legislation. This gives him so much more power than Heads of Government in Westminster style Democracies.
The POTUS is the Commander in Chief of the most powerful military force the world has ever known. He holds this role from day 1 and certainly never uses 75% of this power in the first week. This role is another major departure from the role of, say, a PM in a Westminster style democracy where HM Queen Elizabeth 11, via Governors- General, is the Commander in Chief.
The POTUS forms a Government of the most powerful economy in his own name. By this I mean he appoints his own Executive of competent individuals. This is an enormous power and one simply not given in a Westminster system, where Ministers of the Crown are all elected Parliamentarians.
The POTUS is an elected individual for that post and as such enormously powerful. Prime Ministers in Westminster democracies are elected members of Parliament and elected to Head of Government status by the party with the most members. He or she is not elected Head of Government in his or her own right.
I hate doing this, because I realize that most Americans don't appreciate others making sweeping statements about the state of their Nation....but he goes. I believe that the US is currently in some form of Military Coup. The Military machine has, as predicted by President Eisenhower in his final speech as POTUS, gained power beyond what it should have. Because of this, the citizens of the US are suffering lack of many basic amenities that citizens of other rich countries enjoy, Health Services being the major one. Welfare is another major service US citizens lack. In my humble opinion this is due to the fact the the military takes and uses taxpayer resources beyond what it deserves and needs.
The US military has grown to be so large and so powerful that it has out grown its effectiveness. This has happened in Iraq. It can go and do what it likes, with POTUS approval but it simply can't hold an unpopular position.
The US and President Obama in particular needs to address this appalling situation and pare the military back. It needs to be the most powerful force on earth but not a force that can be effectively defeated by ratbag militias as it was in Vietnam and Iraq. What's the point? All it does is send the US broke, causes the infrastructure of the US to become worn and aged and causes the Government of the US to take it's eye off the ball. What's the ball? It's you if you're a US citizen...because you're missing out on benefits that your taxes should be providing.
I hope that this doesn't offend...it's just my opinion and I feel sorry for you.
One more thing that you have to ask yourself....Can a democracy run a military that can't fight an enemy on the terms of warfare that the enemy dictates? Of course it can't and Abu whatever it was [the jail in Iraq where some US soldiers mistakenly thought they could] is an example. GITMO is another. In fact GITMO is a sad indictment of all the US should not be and fortunately Mr Obama seems to have realized this.

All the best my Yankie mates!

GAG THE INTERNET!
AN OBAMA OFFICIAL'S FRIGHTENING BOOK ABOUT CURBING FREE SPEECH ONLINE
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07112009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/gag_the_internet__178749.htm
When it comes to the First Amendment, Team Obama believes in Global Chilling.

Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law professor who has been appointed to a shadowy post that will grant him powers that are merely mind-boggling, explicitly supports using the courts to impose a "chilling effect" on speech that might hurt someone's feelings. He thinks that the bloggers have been rampaging out of control and that new laws need to be written to corral them.

Advance copies of Sunstein's new book, "On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done," have gone out to reviewers ahead of its September publication date, but considering the prominence with which Sunstein is about to be endowed, his worrying views are fair game now. Sunstein is President Obama's choice to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. It's the bland titles that should scare you the most.

"Although obscure," reported the Wall Street Journal, "the post wields outsize power. It oversees regulations throughout the government, from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Obama aides have said the job will be crucial as the new administration overhauls financial-services regulations, attempts to pass universal health care and tries to forge a new approach to controlling emissions of greenhouse gases."

Sunstein was appointed, no doubt, off the success of "Nudge," his previous book, which suggests that government ought to gently force people to be better human beings.

Czar is too mild a world for what Sunstein is about to become. How about "regulator in chief"? How about "lawgiver"? He is Obama's Obama.
[More at the link...]