[mnehring]

Can or should a president have an substantial reality-based direct effect on foreign policy, and if not, why not RP, then?

Yes, that is the primary Constitutional role for the President. Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces and overseeing treaties with foreign countries.

For me, domestic policy reigns king, as that is where me and my family live.

Domestic policy, other than USSC nominations, primarly originate in the legislative branch where Paul is now. Constitutionally, the President has the very last hand in this and his hand can be overturned by Congress.

[maclay]

Well using that logic, all the horses in the race (except RP) have a very similar and consistant foreign policy. That being said, isn't it domestic policy that concerns people the most? Otherwise, McCain - Romney - Thompson - Huckabee... what's the difference? What are we voting for and why? as I said: For me, domestic policy reigns king, as that is where me and my family live. Why not put priority on good domestic principals, and worry about the rest of the world later?

[Designer]

"Constitutionally, the President has the very last hand in this and his hand can be overturned by Congress."

Hoo..That's Rich!

You GLOBALISTS using the Constitution when you want to use it to try to make a point. Ell-Ohh-Ell!

Actually, you are missing something anyway:

The President appoints the Chairman of the Federal Reserve.

Or not.

And I disagree with your assertion that the POTUS has the "very last hand in this", because as we all know, the President has a very LARGE bully pulpit, which he can use to sway public opinion, and bully the Congress into submitting legislation he favors.

You're welcome.