Obama's 'czars:' Halls of fame

This reveals the very essence of inexperience in leadership and accountability and a wonderful dodge for accepting responsibility. Bad decisions and policy failures, blame the "czar", can the "czar", label him or her ineffective and move on to the next political hack. How about those Miranda rights on the battlefield for terrorists and the women blinders of Afghan or Nancy's moment of prayer for our troops while she moves to gain the released of those prison picts which will place those same troops in greater mortal danger? Anyone had enough of this dog and pony show the Dems call change?

Not much of a surprise.

If the agencies responsible for, say, regulating the Wall St. crowd are "captive" and dysfunctional, who ya gonna call?

Some kind of czar.

Looks as if Obama has finally created some jobs. In total, 18 jobs--or is it 21? And very high paying jobs.

Wonder if he will have any juristication over the inflated Union Salaries.

More right-wing domestic terrorism is in the news today:

An executive director of the rabidly conservative anti-immigrant Minuteman is accused in a double murder (two died, one survived) in Arizona.
.
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/407189_activist13.html

It's no wonder these nuts can't win elections anymore.

Obama sympathizer and apologist Silva makes light of the czar thing. These czars in many instances have more power than Cabinet members, they required no Senate or Congressional approval, and are often answerable to no one but the Messiah himself. Even many Democrats such as Steny Hoyer question the whole czar thing. Plus, how many millions upon millions of dollars do they cost taxpayers?

The use of czars is indicative of an imperial presidency. The more Congress continues to transfer legislative power to the Executive via regulatory regimens - which these czars then control - the power of the President becomes greater and that of Congress diminishes. It is even worse where the President simply presumes to act on his own and without any explicit delegation of authority. He doesn’t have the power to personally regulate anything without statutory or constitutional authority.
.
All of this troubling complexity is caused by the fact the federal government has taken too much upon itself; including powers that ought to be exercised by the States. The use of such “czars” would not be necessary if the federal government kept to its own functions as prescribed in the Constitution.
.
The Constitution does not prescribe a strong, central government to control everything in the country. It prescribes a “limited government” role for the federal government - i.e. one intended to handle only those functions the States are not competent to do themselves. But that’s not an open ended formula either. The Constitution spells out the division of labor between the federal and state governments in order to prevent the encroachment of the one upon the prerogatives of the others. The “Founding Fathers” would have suffered apoplectic fits if they knew those occupying high office in the federal government would one day ignore the Constitution’s limitations and have “czars” to control banks, the auto (or any other) industry, drugs, urban affairs, or any number of the others that now exist. The federal government, as currently constituted, is definitely not the government of the Constitution. We are headed in the wrong direction until that is changed.

Wonder if he will have any juristication over the inflated Union Salaries.

Posted by: Inky | June 14, 2009 12:30 PM
-------------------------------

If you're going to make a lame wingnut attempt at a wise guy put down of our President, the least you could do is make an effort to spell it correctly, you moron.

J-U-R-I-S-D-I-C-T-I-O-N:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:jurisdiction&ei=ypU1SrKRMozGM7PauIkK&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

* * * * *
Posted by: 52095187 | June 14, 2009 3:31 PM
.
Thanks for the misleading disinformation. I mean, can’t you read?
.
When I read the article, I found out that:
.
1. The group that Shawna Forde leads is a “small border watch group” by the name of “Minutemen American Defense.”
.
2. She is not a member, much less a director, of the “better known and larger Minuteman Civil Defense Corps.” In fact, “‘[s]he was basically forced out of … the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, and then founded her own organization.’”
.
In which case, it was entirely fraudulent of you to represent that she was an “executive director of THE rabidly conservative anti-immigrant Minuteman.” There isn’t a single group to garner the singular “THE” definite article that you used. There are two groups that have “Minuteman” in their name, not one. And she is the leader of the smaller, nuttier fringe group of the two.
.
I must admit, though, it was a very clever sleight of hand on your part to substitute the one’s small, fringe group for the larger, better known “Minuteman Civil Defense Corps.” The smaller group, however, has no legitimate claim to being or representing the same historical “Minuteman” group that most recognize for their efforts monitoring the border and reporting crossings.
.
What you have done doesn’t work because stupid people don’t abound enough to make your weird propaganda work. Better go back to DailyKos. It might work there.

52095187: the article has nothing to do with their being MInutemen; it (the crime) was a planned robbery, plain and simple. Quit trying to distort things to match your views.

52095187,

The Republican/Libertarian/Conservative movement is going the way of the Whigs. Their beliefs are so far to the right of mainstream Americans today that only 23% of Americans will even admit to being Republicans - so instead of trying to moderate themselves and come up with some new ideas and candidates, they've resorted to shooting people and blowing stuff up.

The GOP and its cohorts at Faux News, on AM hate radio and the blogosphere are concerned that the Obama administration will start treating THEM the way the Bush administration treated the left during its years in power. You know … widespread (and usually warrantless) phone and e-mail surveillance, infiltration, investigation of financial links … the sorts of things that could be very embarassing and inconvenient if it happened to THEM.

They know perfectly well how aggressive and widespread the Bush-era surveillance really was … and it extended to ENTIRE RELIGIOUS SECTS like the Quakers.

The right-wing noise machines politicized fake outrage over the DHS report was also useful, since it seems to have scared the federal government off from more aggressive action (as we saw from the government’s tepid response as the situation in Wichita was escalating).
.
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2008/Jul/28/church-shooting-police-find-manifesto-suspects-car/
.
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=22396
.
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2009/04/27/alleged-cop-killer-reportedly-disturbed-over-obama-win/
.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/kamiya/2009/04/07/richard_poplowski/
.
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=22277

You're right 52095187, it's not surprising that they can't win elections anymore.

* * * *
Posted by: 52095187 | June 14, 2009 3:31 PM
.

52095187,
What I want to know is when are the Republican elected officials of this country going to denounce the kind of scary demogogery coming from its far right wing.

The Wingnuts are flipping out because their numbers are diminishing and the kind off losses they're suffering are not just the usual out-of-power loses stuff, they're sinking faster than the Titanic.

First, you have Republicans purging moderates from their ranks at the grassroots level, and then you have the Obama Administration adopting them at the national level. How much longer before there is nothing left but radical hard right wingers? Once that happens, how many elections will they be able to win (no matter how much money they raise) when they can't appeal to the middle?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/opinion/14rich.html?_r=2&ref=opinion

So, since the 'republicans' have lost out to the 'democrats', socialism is the answer?

Get a real life!

I was taught: Take stock in yourself and work hard for what you want - something our society has been brainwashed out of thinking. This has eroded into: Give up most of what you worked hard for all your life to for the 'greater good of all' mentality?

I don't think so buckos... you freeloaders can kiss my hind quarters and can wallow in the mud for all I care. You placed yourselves in that position ... you drank the kool-aid, so you live with it.

... and by the way, there are plenty of 'nuts' in the democratic party too ... most of them are in office now if you care to evaluate the situation with any intelligence.

So, since the 'republicans' have lost out to the 'democrats', socialism is the answer?

Get a real life!

I was taught: Take stock in yourself and work hard for what you want - something our society has been brainwashed out of thinking. This has eroded into: Give up most of what you worked hard for all your life to for the 'greater good of all' mentality?

I don't think so buckos... you freeloaders can kiss my hind quarters and can wallow in the mud for all I care. You placed yourselves in that position ... you drank the kool-aid, so you live with it.

... and by the way, there are plenty of 'nuts' in the democratic party too ... most of them are in office now if you care to evaluate the situation with any intelligence.