Posts
5094
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Indianapolis, IN
US
Edited Date/Time
1/26/2012 4:57pm
So now the republicans have initiated an anti-czar bill to appease the knuckledraggers at home since Glen Beck and company have made a stink about Obama's czars as if this was something that he created. Nevermind that the first known 'czar' goes back to the Nixon whitehouse, and every president since has appointed them.
At last count, Obama has 32 czars.
Where were these guys when Bush appointed 47 czars?
At last count, Obama has 32 czars.
Where were these guys when Bush appointed 47 czars?
Wasn't his responsible for that idiot Van Jones?
Why not re-phrase your question to: How many czar positions did bush have compared to obama and what were the differences in responsibilities and authority given to the czars in each administration?
doh!
Guess they were busy tea bagging each other.
The Shop
The President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. President:
From the beginning of your administration, you have made an admirable commitment to transparency and open government. You showed the strength of your commitment by sending a memorandum to the heads of executive departments and agencies within a week of your inauguration, stating: “My administration will take appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use.”
As you know, there has been much discussion about your decisions to create and assign apparently significant policy-making responsibilities to White House and other executive positions; many of the persons filling these positions have come to be referred to in the media and even within your administration as policy “czars.” I heard firsthand about this issue on several occasions from my constituents in recent town hall meetings in Wisconsin.
The Constitution gives the Senate the duty to oversee the appointment of Executive officers through the Appointments Clause in Article II, section 2. The Appointments Clause states that the President “shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise proved for, and which shall be established by law.” (Emphasis added.) This clause is an important part of the constitutional scheme of separation of powers, empowering the Senate to weigh in on the appropriateness of significant appointments and assisting in its oversight of the Executive Branch.
As a member of the Senate with the duty to oversee executive appointments and as the Chairman of the Senate Constitution Subcommittee, I respectfully urge you to disclose as much information as you can about these policy advisors and “czars.” Specifically, I ask that you identify these individuals’ roles and responsibilities, and provide the judgment(s) of your legal advisors as to whether and how these positions are consistent with the Appointments Clause. I hope that this information will help address some of the concerns that have been raised about new positions in the White House and elsewhere in the Executive Branch, and will inform any hearing that the Subcommittee holds on this topic.
Thank you for considering my views on this important matter. I very much appreciate your commitment to transparency and open government and look forward to your prompt response.
Sincerely,
Russell D. Feingold
United States Senator
And Bush only had 35 czar positions with 46 people filling them compared to Obama's 32 czar positions with 35 people filling them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._executive_branch_czars
From what I gather the first bill he signed had 9,000 porky earmarks, and he has 46 un-vetted czars.
czars is just another way of taking care of his buddies.
maybe furman was right about some people lying
Obama has 35.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._executive_branch_czars
He's above the law now..
"I Karl Williams do hereby retract my last statement about the number of czars that President Obama has hired, and replace the 46 with 35."
Thank you.
Pit Row
I wonder if there's any more room under the bus.......?
`ol Ger
*edit
Thanks, irrational Republicans!
They have a large base of listeners, because they do a good job. Are they over the top? Yes. Do they believe in what they preach. I think they do.. Do I agree with everything they say? Nope.
They are no different than the politicians each of us stick up for, or fight against. They are different from the more liberal talk show hosts. For some reason the base of listeners for them don't seem to hang on.
Yes, everyone can come back and say how these two or three conservative hosts lie, cheat and steal all the information they fling out. Bottom line, they have the same or better documentation of how they arrived at their conclusions just as our politicall leaders have. Some times the talk shows offer more and better detail, as well as making it easier to understand for the "regular" person.
What ever people believe to be true, the end results normally speak for themselves. Who's got the correct outcomes more often??
Indy, I was referring to the lovely Miss Rachel Maddow. I can't at the moment confirm her sexual preferences, but as a betting man, I've got a cold beer that says she likes girls.
She us a confirmed lesbian, and she isn't on NPR to my knowledge. She's on MSNBC.
Post a reply to: Czars in Washington