The Chicken Littles are at it again, with their criticism of President Obama and his appointment of czars.
What a surprise. It looks like there is a long and illustrious history of appointed czars going back to FDR.
So what's the big problem?
I say, loving (America) means never having to say you're czarry!
Check out this list. There's a czar for just about every facet of government and life. Hmmm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U. … anch_czars
The Constitution is the big problem, depending on what powers these 'advisors' are granted.
See a problem??
Yes he resigned very very recently as he put it because of a "smear" campaign.
So I suppose his support of communism, the black panthers, his life in and out of jail for being in support of these groups was a smear? I don't think so!
And who is it that gave him the title of environment Czar? Obama. He had this man, this traitor to our country be in a position where he was right in the ear all the time of a sitting president!
How appalling is that??!!
After millions of phone calls and letter writing about him, did the white house fire him? NO! He resigned. How nice.
Funny how these people with such radical views, terroists and the like keep finding themselves in the company of Obama. How many terrorists, communists and the like do you find yourself in the company of???
my favorite is the czar czar.
rumor has it that tex (with a little t) is out right now applying for the "public diplomacy czar" position.
lol blue dog.
bush appointed an abstinence czar. makes me think of a few loud-mouthed and mean hubbers (no names) who could run for that position. imaging abstaining from the forums!
Obama's list of czars has already exceeded the number that Russia had in several centuries-- they will soon outnumber the combined total of house and senate representatives.
Not such a bad idea, really.
Replacing the entire House and Senate with people who Obama picks. Makes for fewer compromises on his policies!
I have trouble imagining how he can manage when I see what he is up against in the way of prejudicial thinking, some really take the cake!
In some places that is called a dictatorship.
Yes and the fast track to communism that you so desire, Jesus MM do you think anything of our Constitution?
Yeah MM. See? Look what you did! You commie fascist socialist. What about the constitution? HUH?
And you could be the "Hey, look at me" Czar or "I'm a whiner" Czar How about "I am being attacked" Czar, maybe "Press release" Czar?
NO, SIR. No whinin' here SIR. Your eloquent arguments have turned me into a staunch Republican, fer shur. You should pat yerself on yer back.
I'll send out a press release right away on this marvelous development. Any preference as to publication?
No whining? That is a new development, pick a publication. But the one that repeats the most lies would be the NY Times, that seems fitting for the lie you will tell!
It's like day old champagne that has lost its bubbles talking to ya, SIR. Go get those commie fascist whiner socialists and rifle butt em til they capitulate...er somethin.
And 'member. I is in yer corner now. Hey, looka me!
I really shouldn't give you hard time but for some reason your arrogance amuses me.
As your (you fill in the blank) amuses and somewhat uh, (you fill in the blank) me.
Too polite ta say, .
you haven't been polite to this point why start now? I am pretty sure I could handle what your mind could come up with.
That's in yer va'ry powful imag'nation, SIR.
I'm actually being quite rude now, but you apparently don't see it. Anyway, it doesn't amuse me as it does some, and is actually kind of boring.
But yet you keep coming back for more that really is sad, I guess you're really a lonely gal. Any rudeness from you is a badge of honor for most you are too easily led, this is when you deny it. I'll sit back and laugh!
Oh, extraordinarily, extra lonely SIR. (As you would wish it, lol.) I specially like that term, 'gal.' Heck, yeah. Oh, hell, yeah!
Just love how you tuned up the insults with the hope "I'd come back for more." Like the rest of you'alls double speak...
And I think I informed everyone here earlier. I am actually a man. Yep, yer talking up a man about ta have a sex change opeeeration that'll certainly change his lonely sad little life. And you have so made ma night!
the President, congress and the senate all work for us....you know, the American people...
Schoolhouse Rock - I'm Just A Bill
Earnest, yes, it's pretty ridiculous.
Obama could say, "The sun rises in the east and sets in the west" and there would be an outcry that he's trying to change the Constitution or something equally ridiculous.
Even if he states a fact that is well known and widely accepted, a very small, very vocal cadre of people will challenge him on it.
I've never heard the term 'czar' applied to appointees until this year and Glenn Beck. 'Nuff said.
Just an allusion, I guess to communism or Sovietism...or something...I guess. Very mixed up. But then if you saw the video of his 'communist building,' guess you'd get the picture with that. (OMG)
No, there have been 'czars' since FDR-- maybe before-- just not so many.
From offshore it is easy to see too. Conspiracy theories and rumor abounds at the edges of many societies, but in America, it looks bigger than could ever be real. The slightest hint of "meaning" brings bizarre responses, I suggest more so than in most places in the world!
I included a link to a list of executive branch czars by president. I didn't to a complete count, but you can see the pattern. Each president appointed (or nominated with Congress approval) czars based on the major issues he was dealing with at the time.
You will note that quite a few of the czars in Obama's administration are titles that were implemented by George Bush. Yes, Obama does have some specific to things he is trying to address, including green jobs, climate change, Afghanistan, etc.
But quite a few not "new" czars.
Those who are making a big fuss about Obama and his czars are trying to make it look like he's doing something "unconstitutional" and of course the very word 'czar' plays right into the frenzy about Obama being communist. The irony is that there are not czars in a communist regime. But the average Joe who believes this crap doesn't know that.
Ridiculous (or its more popular spelling: REDICULOUS).
Truth be told, Bush had more czars than Obama.
35 vs. 32.
No clue why that is not being put out there.
I'm not necessarily the biggest Obama fan in the world, but I don't see a problem with czars, as long they are allowed to communicate with other czars and "whoever else". A big problem is that government agencies are isolated from other government agencies (seems logical enough); but when problems happen agencies can't ever connect with other agencies, so a whole lot of problems/solutions fall between the cracks. I'd hope that czars would have the freedom to act as liaisons between "issues", rather than keeping all agencies/issues completely separate (or its more popular spelling, "seperate" )
Yes I read the link, and it is as you say. I know a few Australians who are the same, know nothing but the stuff they read that has cover girls and page 3 girls to entice them to read the idiotic headlines.
Well, then Beck should be congratulated for successfully 'branding' the term to Obama. Really. Impressive.
The thing is...stuff just really looks strange on Hubpage political forums these days. Visit NYT or Huffpost message boards and it will make everyone feel better, . lol
Yeah, and Bush had three different Budget Czars during his tenure. That worked out real well for him.
Along with the Abstinence and Birth Control Czars.
Seems it's not about the quantity of the appointees it's about the complexity of the issues they are charged with tackling.
And as stated before (Lisa HW I think) -- czars can work in between established departments.
We learned our lesson on the need for that kind of cross-departmental oversight/cooperation. Let's think back to when that might have been. Hmmm. Was it 9/11? Or maybe Katrina????
crazdwriter -- Absolutely! Especially since your name is already an anagram of "czar" (craz). Hey -- are you an Obama spy here on HP?
Cosette -- it was a joke.
I didn't think I had to smather my post with smilies and winks for people to understand it was entirely tongue-in-cheek!
It was a joke now I get it, without all the strategically placed happy faces in about 98% of your posts I guess I and everyone who took exception were confused. Joke, got it!
i thought it was a serious discussion, as people were responding in a somewhat serious manner.
a thousand apologies.
Uh oh -- who needs a czar appointment?
The Czar of Cleverly Concealed Rudeness is open, as is the Czar of Giant Insults
Yes, at one time we did have a checks and balances thing.
It became passes in the last 8 years, tho.
Wow I'm shocked at how ppl are arguing over something like this where I just thought it was all funny. Jeez MM do ppl not have a sense of humor anymore?
Yeah, kind of. It seriously isn't my thing to actually do what I just did above there, but that's the level it is at, so?
Sometimes, all this IS genuinely funny, though, in a black humor sorta way, . (Watch someone come and say that remark was racist.)
Clarification: My comment about replacing Congress with Czars in order for Obama to remove dissent for HIS policies -- that was a joke comment.
There are other comments on here that are serious.
There are also comments that are pointlessly rude and attacking.
No need to apologize, Cosette.
It's my bad. I should have punctuated the comment appropriately with a smiley face. There's a whole different set of "grammar rules"that apply here in Hub Pages! MM
To get back to the question "Why apologize for Czars" I don't have a problem with him having Czars as long as they are in an advisory capacity only. I do not want to have to pay the salaries of individuals who do not answer to the people! You are right every President has had one as far back as I can remember but not that many have been self described communists with a penchant for blaming White people for all of this Countries ills.
A Texan. You said, "I do not want to have to pay the salaries of individuals who do not answer to the people! You are right every President has had one as far back as I can remember but not that many have been self described communists with a penchant for blaming White people for all of this Countries ills."
1. Re: not paying for people who don't answer to the people. Man, you deserve a massive refund from the Bush administration!
2. Not that many have been self-described communists with a penchant for blaming White people for all of this country's ills? How many, exactly, have been?
Last time I am gonna say this Bush was a cluster f@#k, just because he did stupid things doesn't mean Obama has to follow in his footsteps!
I have only heard of Jones being a self described communist with a penchant for blaming White people for all of this Countries ills. Forgive my choice of words.
Lita: Um. I'm 99% sure it was also unconstitutional and communist.
MM what is my first job as czar of writing? hehe okay sorry brain is tired right now and I'm bored.
In all seriousness, I think the question of what these 'czars' actually do and are they effective is a good one.
I don't have time to research it right now as I have to go get my beauty sleep to appear in court tomorrow. No, I have not been arrested . Probate court.
But will look forward to reading anything others are able to come up with. Night all. MM
LOL Crazdwriter. I am putting myself in the line of fire here if I even 'pretend' I have the power to appoint you or give you assignments. But what the hey. I can play HP Obama for just tonight.
Your first assignment is very simple. You are tasked with looking over all 800+ posts in the forum thread about Obama's speech to students... the text.
Then, find all incidences of faulty logic.
Find grammatical errors.
Make a table with all contributors' names and then count up the number of mean comments each one makes. Included in this subtask is identifying who the mean comments are aimed at.
Or -- you can go and write a hub on what it means to you to be the Czar of HP Writing .
Your choice, of course! Ciao bella, MM
hmmmmm...I think I'll be lazy and do neither lmao
Gnight MM have fun in court if you can.
Oh. That's more clear.I thought you were referring to "not that many PRESIDENTS" not 'not that many CZARS.' Now I see.
Right. Well, it would likely take some research but I imagine if one wanted to one could dig out the "dirt" on every czar in the past 30 years and see if they actually did any good, resigned in disgrace, or what.
But does it really matter?
How about we end on a positive note.
You do not have to say Bush was a cluster f#$% again.
It will be delightful to take that area of shared agreement into dreamland with me. Serious on that! Night.
by taburkett 4 years ago
Why do US citizens continue to support a failing Administration. Is it because they are communists.With the latest scandal exposed about the Administration, one would think that the citizens would wake up to the destructive game being played by the leaders of the White House and Senate. ...
by OLYHOOCH 7 years ago
And the so-called “moderate Democrats” are merely socialists.It wasn’t so long ago that much loved Democrat President John F. Kennedy told the nation in his inaugural address, “Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country”, implying a sense of self...
by Sophia Angelique 5 years ago
From Forbes Magazine.http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2 … ack-obama/Quote: "So, how have the Republicans managed to persuade Americans to buy into the whole “Obama as big spender” narrative? It might have something to do with the first year of the Obama presidency where the...
by Credence2 2 years ago
Some of you older ones might remember this character from the annals of animation many years ago. Donald Duck might be more appropriate but this time 'Baby Huey' says it all about the 'Donald'.More of my issues with this man is found in this Yahoo article,...
by Graham Gifford 5 years ago
Would it be wise to have both a republican and a democrat occupy the oval office?With the up-and-coming presidential election and both side expressing their willingness to be bipartisan, would it be best for these United States to come together in a more literally sense and work hand-in-hand?
by Harvey Stelman 8 years ago
This seems to be what he thinks he should be.
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|