Although yesterday's employment report came in well shy of estimates, I do agree with those who say that a president should not get 100% credit or blame for anything related to the economy. There are just too many working parts to the entire economic picture, including significant international inputs, making it well beyond the scope of even the most powerful office in the world.

However, that's not to go to the other extreme and say that the U.S. President is not meaningful -- he/she is! Our economic policy is one of the key drivers for the entire global economic domino-effect. What we do & what we endorse as policy, whether it be tariffs, taxes, interest rate levels, etc., ultimately does have great impact on the economies in the rest of the world. So, what Bush & Co. favor, or disfavor, matters -- much.

Also, despite the limitations of the degree in which a president can influence anything economic, this fact doesn't stop him/her from conveying a message on this topic. Clearly, Bush chooses to play up any signs of economic progress, ignoring the complications apparent in the area of employment. Kerry, on the other hand, comments on those things not exactly rosy right now. Granted, much of this is politically driven, but I don't recall GW ever mentioning anything about workers and their welfare when he was running against Gore. His priorities are, and have always been, with the "haves" not the "have-nots," or as he says in Fahrenheit 9/11, with his base.

Put that way, one clearly has a choice this November when it comes to economic issues.