[Willie Green]

Willie, what I meant to say is that the Constitution does not address economic issues in Article II (the executive branch). Those are mainly confined to Article I (the legislative branch), as you so listed.

Your efforts to deny the role of the Executive Branch in the development and implementation of policies and regulations that affect and direct the economic affairs of our nation is truly lame.

ARTICLE I, Section 7.
Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a law, be presented to the President of the United States; if he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his objections to that House in which it shall have originated,...
Every order, resolution, or vote to which the concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the same shall take effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him,
.
ARTICLE II, Section 2. The President shall ...
...have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties
.
ARTICLE II, Section 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient;

Similarly the trade treaties and economic proposals submitted by the Bush Administration for consideration by a GOP-controlled Congress are extremely lame. But I can see why you believe he has no influence since the spineless puppet hasn't bothered to use his veto power even once.

[Theodore R.]

I'll try again, Willie. People think the president is the principal figure in the "management" of the economy. This may not even be true, regardless of who sits in the White House. And there is surely no constitutional role for the president to be "manager of the economy."

Why do you think Bush has refused to veto anything so far? At one time, presidents "let" Congress pass what they want and would not consider a veto unless the veto was a clear constitutional violation.