He didn't do that. That was the Supreme Court. He was just in office when it happened.

Someone has to be in office when we get out of the recession, and I don't think it's necessarily the President who has the most influence as to when that is.

Again, didn't do that.

See above. The President does not fix the economy. They can have an influence, but to say that just because a guy was in office when the economy started getting better is like saying you have a tiger-repelling rock.

And I'm certainly no economic expert, but I question just how many of those jobs were actually desirable, and how many were McDonald's or Walmart jobs that only served to strengthen the service industry poverty culture of so much of the country.

It's been a while since that **** happened and I can't remember how it happened or what his part in it was, but I certainly don't remember him being in the center of it.

^I didn't say he was responsible for it, I said he was in office during those times. Being in office has influence on all of that.

Hang on, you're saying that the leader of the military had no involvement in the military operation to assassinate Osama Bin Laden?

No that's bull****. If your only "influence" on policy is that you just happened to be in office when it happened then you don't deserve any historical credit for it.

I can make like Picard and say, "Make it so", too. Doesn't mean I deserve any credit for it.

Ok, maybe you should put the crack pipe down.

What would be outstandingly good things an american president actually could do and be responsible for in your book?
(Not that I necessarily disagree with your view of Obama, just curious.)

So then we just shouldn't have anybody in office if that's your point of view.

I'm not opposed to that.

What exactly did he do besides just give the go ahead? Wasn't it our intelligence services and military who did all the work?

My big thing about American politics is that our system is so crippled by party infighting that we can't even pass a budget without wrecking our credit rating. Our political climate is simply toxic on both sides, no matter who you think is most responsible, and I want a president who will take a step back and try to encourage less polarization.

I want this in all our politicians, but given just how important the president is to party politics I think it would be a huge first step for an American president to really try to build bridges between the Republicans or Democrats, even if it seems to be a futile gesture at this point. All other considerations are secondary at this point due to our political system's pathological ineffectiveness.

Basically I'm not so much worried about policy as I am leadership.