Watching Too Many Old Hollywood Movies

"Are you decent?" says man at door.
"No," says woman from inside.
"How quickly can you get decent?"
"How quickly can you take advantage of me?"
"I don't see an advantage in coming quickly."
"Well you won't be coming at all. The door's locked."
"Trust me. Trifles like that have never stopped me before."
"Who said it was a trifle?"
"Freud. Now are you letting me in or aren't you?"
Woman opens door. "What's the rush?"

Yay!

Yay! I am extremely happy and glad that Charlie Kaufman won an Oscar for Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. He is my official hero. The Oscars still suck, though.

film noir

film noir, the non-heroic hero, alienation, loneliness, existential choice, man under, death, meaninglessness, purposelessness, the absurd, chaos, violence, paranoia, sanctuary, ritual, order

[Edit]

"Camus recognized that the confrontation of life's emptiness made suicide a dangerous and tempting escape. To withstand this temptation, Camus and Sartre offered a few alternatives: a stubborn perseverance despite the absurdity of existence; a recognition of the community of men; an obsession with social justice."
--Robert G. Porfirio

"What's the use of living without hope?"
"It can be done."
--I Wake Up Screaming

Existential Quandary

Writers are all tortured. Is there a happy author out there? Most musicians are happy, partying, living it up all the time. Same goes for movie stars. All performers. They know how to have fun. The writer, though -- pensive, introverted, insulated. Why? Why can't all writers be like Donald Kaufman? Because they aren't real writers. They produce Hollywood crap.

What am I supposed to do if the story of my life is a crappy, Hollywood script? Overly wrought with unnecessary emotion. Cheesy lines. Cheesy thoughts. No depth.

Is that true? I don't know. Everything in my head is really fucked up. I need to make a movie to get it all out of my head. It'd be good to get it out of my head. I can't seem to relate exactly how fucked up my head is with just words, writing. I need to turn it into a film. Unfortunately, it would have to be extremely unoriginal, because every stupid idea I think I have is not really mine. Isn't that point belabored? There are original ideas, and people are capable of them. It's just a cop-out to say that all knowledge comes from prior knowledge. Creativity exists. I hope it exists.

Everything that ever happened and ever will happen was already pre-determined by the position and energy of all the particles inside the universe right before the Big Bang. These thoughts I'm having right now are direct products of the way the universe unfolded. Isn't that sad? Freedom? Will? Creativity? Where does it all go?

God works. But I need definitive proof, and life just doesn't give me enough to accept it.

So. I write myself into circles. I write like I'm chasing my own tail. I write like I'm a snake eating its own tail. I never go anywhere with my writing. I'm always looking within. I should just tell a story. The most successful writers simply just told stories, and tried to comment on the universe as an aside, sneaking in from time to time. I need to stop tackling the universe head-on, going straight at it. I will always lose that battle.

SHIT I'M SO STUCK IN AN EXISTENTIAL QUANDARY RIGHT NOW FUCK FUCK FUCK.

OK. Better.

The Ebb And Flow

I used to want to update my blog every day. Multiple times a day, even. I had such an urge to just write write write, all the time, that I actually had to curb it. I had to consciously prevent myself from updating, telling myself I was overdoing it. I'd even write stuff and save it in backlog to use later, until I started developing so much of a backlog that I'd never be finished. Those were the days. I should have indulged myself in those days. Because now, every post is a struggle. I have nothing to say, nothing to write, ever. This blog becomes a responsibility more than anything else. Just another responsibility over my head, like everything else in my life. I have to fight hard to scrounge up something to write about in my blog now. I'm struggling at this very moment to come up with the next word, the next sentence. It's become so hard. And the quality! Don't even get me started on the lamentable decline in quality...

Maybe this blog is over? Has my search for the eternal sunshine of a spotless mind come to an end? Should I pull the plug on this dying thing being propped up by nothing but life-support machines? I suppose only time will tell, and only I can know when. But it's weird. I never really thought about the end of this blog before. Today is the first day I have become aware of the mortality of my blog. The end is coming. It always has.

Why Fitzgerald Is My Favorite Author

"Her body hovered delicately on the last edge of childhood -- she was almost eighteen, nearly complete, but the dew was still on her."
--Tender Is The Night

In The Presence Of Holiness

I am roommates with a saint. Let me tell you his story, and you tell me whether this is a divine miracle or not.

He had a class last semester which required him to turn in an essay as his final exam grade. He left campus and went home early, before most people had even taken their first final, without turning in such an essay. He planned on finishing the essay during the break. However, he spent all of winter break doing God-knows-what, but definitely not that essay. He came back to campus for the new semester, with the goal of finishing the essay very soon. Days became weeks. He had a big "INCOMPLETE" on his transcript for that class. There was a deadline that was approaching in which all "INCOMPLETES" automatically became Fs. He knew he had to have a grade for that class by then, so he tried to finish his essay a few days before the deadline to give the teacher enough time to grade it and save his "INCOMPLETE" from F-dom. Didn't happen. He eventually got his essay in, but the deadline passed and an "INCOMPLETE" still glared on his transcript. The essay itself was crap of course, filled with a bunch of quotes from his variant sources, with little of his own work. He prayed for a miracle, but to no avail. Soon, as promised, the "INCOMPLETE" became an F. His GPA plummeted to the low depths of Hell, never to be saved. All was despair, but he never faltered in his unwavering faith.

And now to the story of today! Something glorious happened. It had already been over two months since the day he was supposed to have his final exam essay submitted. He had been checking Penn InTouch regularly to view his transcript, hoping the professor had been able to grade his essay and give him a real grade for the class. He scrolled down as usual, expecting the usual F, and saw something only God could have wrought.

A-

And that is the story of St. Frank-Paul Sampino, Patron Saint of Procrastination, who shines like a beacon of hope and gives inspiration to college-age procrastinators around the world. Remember, if you are ever in need of some miracle, if you ever find yourself having to pull an all-nighter to write a paper, study for an exam, or do a project, if you ever want to hit yourself in the head for all the procrastination you shouldn't have done, if you ever feel overwhelmed by all the homework and reading that piles up, just take a deep breath, and pray... to St. Frank.

logical circles

the world out there is a force with a power, man, it's the power to destroy everything, man. it is because it's there. if it weren't there then it wouldn't even be. so there, man. it's all out there. the world, man. the world. yeah, man. dude, man. fuck the government, man. society sucks, man. just hit the road, man, play some jazz, man, nothing matters except us, man. dig, man?

knowledge and the inductive paradox

yellowing paper hides all of my feelings behind a creeping wall, in the darkness of a nursery, so that my brain is a bunch of yellow post-it notes with messages scrawled in black pen, cursive; music has eaten me alive, i hate being a pretentious fuck about music, but honestly, "the reason" by hoobastank got nominated for a grammy? that is quite possibly the worst song in the world, taking cheesy teenage-prom power ballads to the extreme, i heard that in the seventies they used to end every prom with "stairway to heaven" by led zep, how much cooler were people back then, how much cooler was life back then?; when you take away all the bullshit about money and how the government affects things, medicine is truly one of the most altruistic paths one can take in life, and i thank all the doctors of the world, the real doctors who care, wharton has no such people, that is a fundamental difference between business and medicine, and it makes me sick to my stomach, it disgusts me, it revolts me, i respect pre-meds much more than fucking undergrad finance majors; i'm a fucking undergrad finance major, it's terrible, what if i have to resort to my back-up plan and become a corporate whore? i don't know if i could deal with that, scratch, yes i could, i know i could, i'd be unhappy, but i could, and that's the saddest thing in life; yellow cat's eyes staring at me through the yellow fog of the night, the yellow fog of the city, the yellow fog of t.s. eliot's fractured youth, and i'm wearing a yellow raincoat with a canary perched on my shoulder, as i squeeze a banana as if it were a golden gun; nobody can ever know anything, so why bother? it's gonna hurt me. it's gonna kill when you desert me -- reason, sense, logic, order, structure, rules, models, theories, paradigms, science, naturalism, religion, free will, love, marriage, children, money, fame, power, sex, drugs, music, beauty -- gone, because we don't know anything about anything; do i have an original thought in my head? does originality exist? are patterns really patterns or are they coincidences? what is humor?; spiders crawling through the tubes in my brain, spinning cobwebs on my mind to catch every idea, every thought through the interface of mind and body, the spiderweb snags all the misfiring synapses too, every random thought, it's always there and never fails, the mind-body transition is seamless, too seamless, is there a duality at all? why hello there, God;

If There's One Thing Left

If there's one pure and good thing left in this world that is in danger of corruption, that is hanging on the precipice, ready to fall off the edge of the cliff, it is loyalty. Loyalty.

time is an unraveling ball of yarn

you can penetrate any place you go,
as long as you want to,
you can find any spot on the string,
and dangle in space or time,
imitate everyone you know,
it doesn't matter to me,
you're just another layer on top of him,
on top of me, what a waste of string.
i saw you standing there,
inside a paper cup,
rain water up to your knees,
and your place on the string,
stretching across the rim,
across the universe,
putting you on top of the earth,
but it doesn't change my world,
it's all about me, it's all mine,
and that's all i can hear.
so just let it be, it already is,
it always was, always will be,
like a rolling stone,
like a rolling white cloud,
like a rolling drop of rain,
like a rolling clap of thunder,

like a rolling ball of yarn.

four or five

i came back again,
though you went away this morning,
floating downstream; is it not dying?
children at your feet, crying;
won't they come out to play?

the question of mind-body dualism

i wonder how far down it goes
is this the real life?
a winter's day
supply and demand
automatic
here we go again
i've got the answer
there must be some kind of way out of here
yes it's true, my heart cries out
when we're separated
long way from home
i've got pictures to prove i was there
i can't remember how i found my way
i couldn't understand why no one would go
first thing i remember, i was lying
it's my life
who is it for?
down here on the floor
i have run through the fields
in the state of a daydream
i awake to find no peace of mind
people passing by stop and say
someday when the world is cold
you sail out on the shackles
the world has turned
hello, is there anybody in there?
i thought there was something in your voice
something in your eye
last night i broke into a parking lot
almost fell into that hole in your life
my brain is overheating
feel the pressure
just let me lay back
haven't you always wanted
a backstreet guy
look her in the eye
so you think you can tell?
i'm broke but i'm happy

and don't forget to give me back my black t-shirt.

Holy Moments

He sat in his empty apartment, at the bare wooden kitchen table where he dined alone every night, a mug of coffee in his hands. There was a light mist outside that couldn't really be called rain; it was a half-hearted attempt at precipitation that resulted in floating droplets of water, suspended in the air as if time had frozen them that way. One lonely lamp was casting yellow light over the floor, throwing everything else into varying reliefs of shadows. It was 3 AM, and he was listening to the dead silence of life at its holiest. This was a moment.

He stood in line at the drugstore, waiting to pay for a tube of toothpaste. He could feel the weight of the earth in his knees; the multi-colored shelves and displays pressed themselves against the back of his eyes, adding pressure to his brain. He wanted to get out of there as soon as possible, but he could only stand where he was, waiting, as people orbited around and around him like automatons in coats and hats. He couldn't look anyone in the face. The world was all a tumult around him, and he was the only stationary thing in the universe. The morning sun was shining outside, and light streamed in onto the floor, harshly reflecting off the linoleum and into his downcast eyes. He shut them and sighed. This was another moment.

He lounged on his friend's couch talking animatedly with some people. They were all friends, getting together and having beers. He gestured and gesticulated, enunciated and explicated, trying to communicate the many ideas he had in his head, about art, love, God. His friends were looking at him, some smiling, some trying to listen, some looking right through him with blank expressions of half-drunkenness. He suddenly stopped; he realized he was done. There was nothing more left for him to say. Only one person was still actually listening with anything resembling fascination, a woman. He thought about going home with her later. He leaned back instead on the couch, sinking into the cushions and finishing his bottle of beer. He breathed in deeply and the world lurched slightly to the right. He thought that he was having an alright evening. This was also a moment.

He was driving his old red-colored Chevrolet compact car, listening to the radio. A generic soft-rock song was playing, something by Rod Stewart or Elton John. He wasn't going anywhere in particular; he was just driving around the city, wasting time, wasting gas. It was late Sunday afternoon, and the sun was just starting to relax its efforts on the surface of the earth for the day. As he made a random right turn, an SUV with a gum-chewing cheerleader behind the wheel made an ill-advised left turn and slammed its large grill into his driver's side door, shattering the glass instantly and rocking his body violently against the metal, like a rag doll being thrown down the stairs by a petulant child. He died instantly. A fire truck and several squad cars came to block off traffic and divert it through a detour. A police officer comforted the upset girl and finally drove her home. No ambulances were called. This... this was also only another moment.

rittenhouse square

rittenhouse square listening to the white chocolate mocha cinammon sprinkled in film noir and the long goodbye if chinatown was the beatles and barnes & noble were two pretty girls on a park bench with the sun in their face sipping sgt. pepper's lonely hearts club band wearing sunglasses on the subway with radiohead backpacks when you say excuse me looking for a spa how much is this scarf could i get a pina colada margarita please ma'am thank you my indian name or my anglo name if it were in the nature of the language to do it but a wendy's burger would be good walking by the metal wood clothespin and it's gotham city tonight green and yellow but the family circle is full and i don't know what to do until waking life calls and we have to deal with real people now eating graveyards smoking bananas can't breath swimming under water all weekend in the shops on walnut lights cars motion frisbee adaptation badly drawn boy kurosawa god yellow red walk ride float sun moon air matching take a cab hail a subway miss a phone call

and no studying.

Alienation

by D.X. Liu

A black fly
On a white wall
Slowly crawling
Dying
Dying since the day it was born
This morning
Slowly clawing
Scratching
Looking
For more than just flying alone
Individually
Spread out over the world
Efficient space between each fly

A black fly
On the edge
Trying to live
At least just today

A New Angle

The following poem is an acrostic. You can read it both left to right or up to down. This took me a long time. Please be fascinated.

A N E W A
N G L E F
E L L T O'
W E T L E
A F O'E R

rain.

Responsibility, Power, and the President

In recognition of George W. Bush's State of the Union Address last night, here's a paper I wrote two years ago.

RESPONSIBILITY, POWER, AND THE PRESIDENT
By D.X. Liu
Introduction

Most will agree that the office of President of the United States of America is something in-between useless figurehead and omnipotent totalitarian. The distinction that must be drawn before assessing the amount of control the President has against the amount of responsibility attributed to that office is one of actual power versus mere influence. It is the position of this paper that the public generally holds the President decidedly responsible for both foreign affairs and the economy; while the President does receive due credit or opprobrium in foreign affairs per his* real power in that arena, he receives undue credit or opprobrium for the economy, his control over that field being limited to only oblique influence.

Presidential scholars suggest that the public has come to believe that "the man inside the White House" can do "something about everything."^[1] American presidents "must partake in a presidency where actual powers of the institution do not meet the expectations and the responsibilities that many citizens have for the office."^[2] Yet these expectations are often excessive and contradictory; the high expectations of the public for what should be done by a president, weighed against the low expectations for what can be done, always tends to push the probability of failure toward 100 percent.^[3] This is what is called the "expectations gap," a phenomenon of public inconsistency that has had a negative impact on the modern presidency.^[4] Thus established, the President will always carry great responsibility, as defined by general public perception, in both foreign affairs and the economy; it is the actual power that he has in these realms that determines the aptness of all the credit or opprobrium he may garner for its events.

*Throughout, owing to the deficiency of the English language, the male gender is justified historically but not prospectively when referring to a President, in order to avoid awkwardness of style. He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns—they may refer to either sex or to both sexes.

Foreign Affairs

There is little in the Constitution that encourages presidential dominance of the foreign policy-making system.^[5] Besides being commander-in-chief of all armed forces, constitutionally, the President has little power beyond the realm of diplomatic dialogue with foreign governments; when it comes to concrete issues like treaties, wars, and financial initiatives required for almost any executive action, it is Congress that wields the most power and the most responsibility.^[6]

The State Department states that the Constitution creates different and important roles for the President and Congress in the making of foreign policy. The president makes foreign policy through: responses to foreign events, proposals for legislation, negotiation of international agreements, policy statements, policy implementation, and independent action.^[7] Congress makes foreign policy through: resolutions and policy statements, legislative directives, legislative pressure, legislative restrictions/funding denials, informal advice, and congressional oversight.^[8] This division of foreign policy powers creates a complex, unresolved relationship between the two branches that often overlaps and makes ambiguous who originates or finally determines foreign policy.^[9]

In addition, "the roles and relative influence of the two branches in making foreign policy differ from time to time according to such factors as the personalities of the President and Members of Congress and the degree of consensus on policy."^[10] Historically, then, scholars have cited "the period 1789-1829 as one of Presidential initiative; 1829-1898 as one of congressional supremacy, and 1899 through the immediate post World War II period as one of growing Presidential power."^[11] The most recent period of congressional dominance of foreign policy began toward the end of the Vietnam War, only to have the pendulum swing back toward presidential dominance during the Reagan and Bush, Sr. Administrations, peaking once during Operation Desert Storm in Iraq,^[12] and now at a peak again in the aftermath of September 11 and in the rumblings of another war with Iraq.

Thus, despite the President's seemingly meager supervisory role in the Constitution, responsibility and initiative in foreign affairs has naturally devolved on the President, because in matters of crisis or emergency, "Congress was too slow and contrary and the Supreme Court was bound by its procedures."^[13] John F. Kennedy defined the President's responsibilities in foreign policy during his campaign in a speech on February 12, 1960. The speech centered around four "facts" that establish the President as the lone power in foreign affairs: his responsibility cannot be delegated, his responsibility cannot be abdicated to Congress, he is responsible to all the people, and he is responsible to the Free World.^[14]

It is now generally accepted that the President, and the executive office in general, dominates United States foreign affairs^[15], that while American foreign policy is a "divided power," the "lion's share" falls usually to the President.^[16] Even during times of peace, foreign policy has been uniquely important to the President; it is the arena that offers presidents "the greatest freedom to exercise their power and the best opportunity to affect policy personally. Important foreign affairs decisions often have been made by the president alone or during intimate consultations with a few trusted advisors."^[17] Today, the President is the "chief U.S. foreign policy-maker and national security manager."^[18]

Some argue that this is due to the realities of the international system. In foreign affairs, "policy takes precedence over politics because the international system both severely limits the sensible choices a country can make and shapes the processes by which these decisions are reached."^[19] Thus, the international system is relatively free of politics and partisanship and of quibbling with Congress. The foreign policy president enjoys independence, respect, and prestige that enable him to manage foreign affairs quite autonomously from domestic issues.^[20]

The are four main differences between domestic and foreign policy that basically elevate the President to virtual omnipotence and relegate Congress to a position of "self-denying ordinance" in which they believe it is not part of their job to determine the nation's foreign policies: first, foreign policy often requires "fast action" that is more appropriate for executive than legislative decision-making; second, the President has far more power to commit resources and obtain information about foreign affairs; third, voters who know little about foreign policy "expect the president to act in foreign affairs" and will "reward him with their confidence" at the polls; and fourth, the interest group structure is weak, unstable, and thin with regard to foreign policy questions.^[21] Thus, "to respond to external threats, the United States needs a relatively centralized, coordinated foreign policy-making system."^[22]

This environment has allowed for what some term "the two presidencies," in which presidents can act abroad independently of domestic political issues.^[23] The Two Presidency Theory supports the reality that the fundamental responsibility for conducting the nation's foreign policy remains in the hands of the President, operating independently of domestic politics; thus, Jimmy Carter could negotiate the SALT II agreement, reverse the policy of détente with the Soviet Union, cancel participation in the Olympics, impose a grain embargo, institute major increases in defense expenditures, facilitate Camp David, and attempt to rescue and finally negotiate the release of U.S. hostages in Iran, without getting re-elected; Ronald Reagan could continue defense build-up and negotiate the START and INF arms agreements while getting re-elected; and George Bush, Sr. could invade Panama, claim the democratization of Eastern Europe, oversee the collapse of the Soviet empire, end the Cold War, negotiate a new arms control agreement with Russia, arrange the first international peace conference in the Middle East, help settle conflicts in Cambodia and South Africa, and wage the Gulf War, without getting re-elected.^[24]

However, others argue that the President is always subject to domestic politics, and that his power and his choices in the realm of foreign affairs are constantly affected by Congress and partisanship. There has historically been "a cycle or rhythm" in foreign policy-making, "fluctuating between presidential and congressional ascendance."^[25] When Congress and the President are of different parties, two things can happen to foreign policy. If there is a strong difference of opinion, a paralysis can occur in American influence in foreign affairs, such as with Woodrow Wilson, a situation that eventually led to an isolationist foreign policy.^[26] If the issue is important enough for the president to pursue bi-partisanship, the President will find himself at a disadvantage in negotiations with powerful senators, such as the situation with Harry S Truman and Senator Vandenburg, the Republican Chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs.^[27] The President is truly the master of foreign policy only if he is in unquestionable control of his party, and his party has the majority in Congress, especially in the Senate.^[28]

In light of these requirements, then, one could say that George W. Bush indeed has full mastery of foreign affairs right now, and therefore should definitely take most if not all credit or opprobrium for the coming developments abroad. The theory alluded to earlier that presidential power in foreign affairs increases in times of crisis also applies now, even a year and a half after September 11. Thus all signs say that Bush has more power in foreign affairs today than perhaps any president in the history of the United States. Yet during his campaign in 2000, Bush felt that the President is responsible merely for sketching a vague "big picture" in foreign policy and that he has plenty of advisors to "fill in the details,"^[29] a political move, perhaps, to justify his oft-publicized lack of knowledge about foreign leaders and events at the time. Despite this, Bush has been seen as having taken the reins after September 11; Congress tried to play a role in specific foreign policy response in a report dated September 12, 2001, particularly highlighting "radical Islamic fundamentalist groups" as posing a major terrorist threat to U.S. interests, and outlining particular policy tools to be used against them.^[30] However, two days later, Congress basically authorized full discretion by Bush in response to the attacks, stating that "the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any further acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons."^[31] Indeed, with such deference by Congress, the President today should be held responsible for foreign affairs, if he is to possess so much power.

The Economy

In contrast, the Constitution grants the President even less specific powers over the economy. The framers "clearly intended Congress to be the branch of government most concerned with the economic affairs of the nation," giving it, among other things, the power to: levy and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, pay debts, borrow money, regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the states, coin money and regulate its value, and regulate the value of foreign currency.[32]

While presidents understood that promoting the nation's prosperity was important to their job, attempts to affect the actual performance of the economy through spending and taxing decisions per the theories of John Maynard Keynes didn't come until Franklin Delano Roosevelt's unprecedented New Deal government expenditures during the Great Depression of the 1930s,[33] and weren't universally accepted as part of presidential responsibility until Kennedy's landmark tax cuts in 1962. It was there that the "argument for fiscal management was won."[34]

However, such new presidential responsibility may have left an infuriating legacy for the likes of Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and George Bush, Sr., who shared the fate of Martin Van Buren and Herbert Hoover before them as presidents who were punished by voters for economic downturns during election years.[35] The fact of the matter is, with regards to the economy, the President will always be trapped in a "power gap" in which he has "important but severely limited" legal and administrative means to influence the economy's health and growth.[36] Despite high expectations of the American public and the President's primary role in economic policy-making, "the president's ability to influence economic conditions does not measure up to presidential responsibility for them."[37] Indeed, sitting in the center of the economic complex, they are expected to maintain prosperity and are criticized if it declines, even though what they can do about it is "hardly more than peripheral," more correctly called influence than power.[38] Economic experts also generally agree that the division of government with the most real power over the economy is the Federal Reserve Board, whose monetary powers of control are independent of the executive; while the Chairman of the Fed is often appointed by the President, he is by design not responsible to him.[39]

Yet presidents must maintain an aura of activity as well, working with the Department of the Treasury, his Council of Economic Advisers, Congress's Office of Management and Budget, and the Federal Reserve Board to constantly tweak taxation, spending, and the money supply in the hopes that if these efforts do not in actuality affect the economy, he will at least be perceived by voters as being concerned and doing the best he can. However, these efforts, scholars suggest, have served to merely perpetuate the "jagged prongs of a predicament" the President is always in, in which his "authority over the economy does not equal his responsibility for its condition."[40] As candidates, future presidents usually overstate and overestimate their ability to improve the economy in order to get elected.[41] It is thus partly their own fault that they are now expected to "steer" the economy, a gross misconception of what the economy is: "it's not a ship," but a figure of speech representing "a bunch of people engaged in production and trade."[42] The illusion of power is on both sides: candidates promise things they cannot control, and voters punish or reward for things that could not be controlled. Thus, as it is said, Americans will often "vote their pocket books," encouraging convoluted politics of fiscal and monetary policy that are "produced through an unwieldy political process of negotiation and compromise between the legislative and executive branches" instead of through sound consideration of "long-term and short-term needs of the country."[43]

So while the President lacks any real power over the economy, he does have several media through which he can at least provide some oblique influence and general guidelines to affect the overall pace of economic activity. The four main areas of influence are in stabilization and growth, regulations and control, direct services, and direct assistance.[44] The goals for stabilization and growth are to "maintain steady growth, high levels of employment, and price stability."[45] The methods of such have differed greatly over the last forty years. In the 1960s, great faith was put into fiscal policy, the manipulation of government revenues to influence the economy.[46] In the 1970s, stagflation killed that dream, and monetary policy grew prominent instead, controlling the nation's money supply through devices such as interest rates.[47] In the 1980s, Reaganomics, or supply-side economics was introduced, based on tax cuts to stimulate production rather than consumption.[48] In the 1990s, taxes slowly crept up again, reducing the budget and creating a surplus. Today, Bush has emulated Reagan's administration, passing a "pro-growth" tax cut in 2001.[49] Regulation and control often involve intensive legislation that the President can initiate. Fighting monopolies, protecting public health and the environment, and promoting competition and technological advancement are all ways the President can try to set general guidelines for the economy, though by no means of course controlling it outright.[50] Direct services run the gamut from defense spending to financing of public schools.[51] Direct assistance can involve low-interest loans, Social Security, and Medicare.[52] All these things were initiated and/or promoted somewhere along the line by American presidents.

Despite misplaced presidential accountability for the economy, this most recent economic downturn doesn't seem to be hurting Bush very much at all. Bush's rhetoric was very positive and optimistic early in his presidency, stating, "We've got a plan to get our economy moving so Americans can find work… I want the American people to know we're deeply concerned about the unemployment rates and we intend to do something about it."[53] And despite the continual fall of the economy since, a poll conducted by Fox News/Opinion Dynamics last year found that "only 5% of Americans say Bush is most responsible for the recession (tied with Bill Clinton and Congress)."[54] The top culprits in the poll were "economic cycles (36%)" and "the September 11 attacks, anthrax scares, and war in Afghanistan (19%),"[55] surprisingly lucid results from a public that is supposed to simply blame or praise presidents for everything. Another poll conducted last year by ABC News/Washington Post also revealed that "55% of voters say Bush bears little or no responsibility for the return of deficit spending in Washington," or the drying up of the federal surplus supposedly caused by the tax cuts early in his term.[56] A Battleground Poll last year showed that voters see Bush (49%) rather than the Democrats (29%) as "better equipped to keep the nation prosperous."[57] Consequently, Republicans swept the mid-term elections and now control both houses of Congress as well as the White House. However, as elections near again, the climate may be changing again. Americans will hold Bush responsible if their prosperity suffers any more, now that the government is firmly in Republican control; "it's Bush's economy now."[58] It will be interesting to see if voters continue to have confidence in the President as the economy continues to suffer; getting into the third and fourth years of a presidency, "it gets harder to escape what happens on your watch."[59] Already the self-perpetuating paradigm of presidential responsibility exceeding presidential power in the economy is being bolstered by Senator John Edwards, a Democratic candidate hopeful for the presidency. Latent in his criticism that Bush's economic plans make "no sense" and in his own proposed plans to jumpstart the sagging economy[60] is the assumption once again that the President has any control at all.

Conclusion

It is probably safe to say that the President of the United States, no matter who he or she is, will always be viewed with a certain mystique by the general public. It is the one person in the entire Constitution who stands out like an archetypal hero of lore, a champion of the people. History has shrouded the office in myth and legend. It is a place where a lone individual can rise up and become great… become immortal. That is why the public will probably always view the presidency with high expectations and high regard. Whether this is fair enough overall, this paper has not examined. But at least with foreign affairs, the President is generally supreme, and credit or opprobrium will generally be due. And unfortunately for him, or maybe even because of him, with the economy, the President is markedly more impotent, and credit or opprobrium will generally be undeserved.

God bless America.

---

Notes

[1] Neustadt, Richard E. Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents: The Politics of Leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan. New York: Free, 1990. 7.

[2] Orman, John. Presidential Accountability: New and Recurring Problems. Westport: Greenwood, 1990. 144.

[3] Waterman, Richard W., Hank C. Jenkins-Smith, and Carol L. Silva. "The Expectations Gap Thesis: Public Attitudes toward an Incumbent President." The Journal of Politics 61.4 (1999): 945.

[4] Waterman, 946.

[5] Peterson, Paul E. "The President's Dominance in Foreign Policy Making." Political Science Quarterly 109.2 (1994): 220.

[6] Laski, Harold J. "The American President and Foreign Relations." The Journal of Politics 11.1 (1949): 171.

[7] Grimmett, Richard F. "Foreign Policy Roles of the President and Congress." Bureau of Public Affairs. 1 June 1999. U.S. Department of State. 9 Feb. 2003 .

[8] Grimmett.

[9] Grimmett.

[10] Grimmett.

[11] Grimmett.

[12] Grimmett.

[13] Tugwell, Rexford G. "The President and His Helpers: A Review-Article." Political Science Quarterly 82.2 (1967): 260.

[14] Kennedy, John F. "The Leader of the Free World." Address. 12 Feb. 1960. NS News. Newsworld Showdown. 9 Feb. 2003 .

[15] "Foreign Affairs of the United States." Browse Topics. Ed. Michael Van Fossen. 15 Aug. 2001. U of North Carolina, GPO, and Oklahoma State U. 9 Feb. 2003 .

[16] Grimmett.

[17] Diller, Daniel C. "Chief Diplomat." Powers of the Presidency. Eds. Margaret Seawell Benjaminson, Michael Nelson, and John L. Moore. Washington: CQ, 1989. 105.

[18] Orman, 1.

[19] Peterson, 232.

[20] Peterson, 226.

[21] Peterson, 226.

[22] Peterson, 217.

[23] Peterson, 225.

[24] Peterson, 215 – 223.

[25] Koenig, Louis W. The Chief Executive. 5^th ed. San Diego: Harcourt, 1986. 203.

[26] Laski, 174.

[27] Laski, 174.

[28] Laski, 174.

[29] Parry, Robert. "Bush Backfire." Fifth Estate. 1999. VOTE.COM. 9 Feb. 2003 .

[30] Perl, Raphael F. "Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy." Congressional Research Service. 12 September 2001. United States. Cong. 9 Feb. 2003 .

[31] United States. Cong. House. Cong. Rec. 14 Sept. 2001: H5638. 9 Feb. 2003 .

[32] Diller, Daniel C., and Dean J. Peterson. "Chief Economist." Powers of the Presidency. Eds. Margaret Seawell Benjaminson, Michael Nelson, and John L. Moore. Washington: CQ, 1989. 245.

[33] Diller, and Peterson, "Economist," 247.

[34] Tugwell, 258.

[35] Koenig, 254 – 5.

[36] Koenig, 253 – 4.

[37] Diller, and Peterson, "Economist," 245.

[38] Tugwell, 259.

[39] Tugwell, 259.

[40] Koenig, 254.

[41] Diller, and Peterson, "Economist," 245.

[42] Richman, Sheldon. "No One Is Qualified." Freedom Daily. Dec. 2000. The Future of Freedom Foundation. 9 Feb. 2003 .

[43] Diller, "Economist," 259.

[44] "How the U.S. Economy Works." International Information Programs. U.S. Department of State. 9 Feb. 2003 .

[45] "How."

[46] "How."

[47] "How."

[48] Diller, and Peterson, "Economist," 257.

[49] Cheney, Richard. Address, Conservative Political Action Conference. 15 Feb. 2001. Conservative Political Action Conference. 9 Feb. 2003 .

[50] "How."

[51] "How."

[52] "How."

[53] Bush, George W. "President Voices Concern Over Economy." Address, Outside the Oval Office. 7 Sept. 2001. Office of the Press Secretary. White House. 9 Feb. 2003 .

[54] Dunham, Richard S. "A Bum Economy Is No Boost for Dems." BusinessWeek Online 4 Feb. 2002. 9 Feb. 2003 .

[55] Dunham, "Bum."

[56] Dunham, "Bum."

[57] Dunham, "Bum."

[58] Dunham, Richard S. "How Bush Can Lift a Sagging Economy." BusinessWeek Online 6 Jan. 2003. 9 Feb. 2003 .

[59] Dunham, "How."

[60] "President's Economic Plan 'Makes No Sense.'" News from Senator John Edwards. 6 Jan. 2003. U.S. Senate. 9 Feb. 2003 .

Holy Moly

Nobody says "holy moly." Sorry, I'm being inductive. I meant that I don't know anybody that says "holy moly." I just said it now, though, because holy moly I have spent--squandered, really--the last hour or so on Facebook profiles and Xangas.

OF PEOPLE I DON'T KNOW. AT ALL.

To make up for it, here's a haiku:

Air stands still for you,
As you breath darkness deeply;
Thusly the Night strides.

I am being so irresponsible right now...