PDA

View Full Version : bho czars


Vincent
09-23-2009, 12:34 PM
There are a number of bho czar lists circulating. Glen Beck has a rathger comprehensive one at http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/29391/ Depending on who's counting we have 35 or so and counting.

Its apparent why the selections on this list were made. No further comment.

Afghanistan Czar: Richard Holbrooke- Ultra liberal anti gun former Gov.of New Mexico . Pro Abortion and legal drug use.

AIDS Czar: Jeffrey Crowley Homosexual. A Gay Rights activist. Believes in Gay Marriage and Special Status, including free health care for gays.

Auto recovery Czar: Ed Montgomery- Black radical anti business activist. Affirmative Action and Job Preference for blacks. Univ of Maryland Business School Dean teaches US business has caused world poverty. ACORN board member. Communist DuBois Club member.

Border Czar: Alan Bersin- former failed superintendent of San Diego . Ultra Liberal friend of Hilary Clinton. Served as Border Czar under Janet Reno - to keep borders open to illegals

California Water Czar: David J. Hayes Sr. Fellow of radical environmentalist group, "Progress Policy". No training or experience in water management.

Car Czar: Ron Bloom- Auto Union worker. Anti business & anti nuclear. Has worked hard to force US auto makers out of business. Sits on the Board of Chrysler which is now Auto Union owned. How did this happen?

Central Region Czar: Dennis Ross- Believes US policy has caused Mid East wars. Obama apologist to the world. Anti gun and pro abortion.

Domestic Violence Czar: Lynn Rosenthal- Director of the National Network to End Domestic Violence. Vicious anti male feminist. Supported male castration.

Drug Czar: Gil Kerlikowske- devoted lobbyist for every restrictive gun law proposal, Former Chief of Police in Liberal Seattle . Believes no American should own a firearm. Supports legalization of drugs.

Economic Czar:& nbsp;Paul Volcker -Head of Fed Reserve under Jimmy Carter when US economy nearly failed. Obama appointed head of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board which engineered the Obama economic disaster to US economy. Member of anti business "Progressive Policy" organization.

Energy and Environment Czar: Carol Brower- Political Radical -Former head of EPA -- known for anti-business activism. Strong anti-gun ownership.

Faith-Based Czar: Joshua DuBois Political Black activist-Degree in Black Nationalism. Anti gun ownership lobyist.

Great Lakes Czar: Cameron Davis- Chicago radical anti business environmentalist. Blames George Bush for "Poisoning the water that minorities have to drink." No experience or training in water management. Former ACORN Board member

Green Jobs Czar: Van Jones- (since resigned). Black activist Member of American communist Party and San Francisco Communist Party who said Geo Bush caused the 911 attack and wanted Bush investigated by the World Court for war crimes. Black activist with strong anti-white views.

Guantanamo Closure Czar: Daniel Fried -Rights activist for Foreign Terrorists. Believes America has caused the war on terrorism.

Health Czar: Nancy-Ann DeParle. Former head of Medicare / Medicaid. Strong Health Care Rationing proponent. She is married to a reporter for The New York Times.

Information Czar: Vivek Kundra- born in New Delhi, India. Controls all public information, including labels and news releases. Monitors all private Internet emails.

International Climate Czar: Todd Stern- Anti business former White House chief of Staff- Strong supportrer of the Kyoto Accord. Pushing hard for Cap and Trade. Blames US business for Global warming.

Intelligence Czar: Dennis Blair- Ret Navy. Stopped US guided missile program as "provocative". Chair of ultra liberal "Council on Foreign Relations" which blames American organizations for regional wars.

Mideast Peace Czar: George Mitchell Fmr. Sen from Maine- Left wing radical. Has said Israel should be split up into "2 or 3 " smaller more manageable plots". Anti-nuclear anti-gun & pro homosexual.

Pay Czar: Kenneth Feinberg- < U>Chief of Staff to TED KENNEDY. Lawyer who got rich off the 911 victims payoffs.

Regulatory Czar: Cass Sunstein- Liberal activist judge-believes free speech needs to be limited for the "common good". Rules against personal freedoms many times -like private gun ownership.

Science Czar: John Holdren- Fierce ideological environmentalist, Sierra Club, Anti business activist. Claims US business has caused world poverty. No Science training.

Stimulus Accountability Czar: Earl Devaney- spent career trying to take guns away from American citizens. Believes in Open Borders to Mexico . Author of statement blaming US gun stores for drug war in Mexico.

Sudan Czar: J. Scott Gration- Native of Democratic Republic of Congo. Believes US does little to help Third World countries. Council of foreign relations, asking for higher US taxes to support United Nations.

TARP Czar: Herb Allison- Fannie May CEO responsible for the US recession by using real estate mortgages to back up the US stock market. Caused millions of people to lose their life savings.

Terrorism Czar: John Brennan- Anti CIA activist. No training in diplomatic or gov. affairs. Believes Open Borders to Mexico and a dialog with terrorists and has suggested Obama disband US military.

Technology Czar: Aneesh Chopra- No Technology training. Work ed for the Advisory Board Company, a health care think tank for hospitals. Anti doctor activist. Supports Obama Health care Rationing and salaried doctors working exclusively for the Gov. health care plan.

Urban Affairs Czar: Adolfo Carrion Jr.- Puerto Rican. Anti American activist and leftist group member in Latin America . Millionaire "slum lord" of the Bronx , NY. Owns many lavish homes and condos which he got from "sweetheart" deals with labor unions. Wants higher taxes to pay for minority housing and health care.

Weapons Czar: Ashton Carter- Leftist. Wants all private weapons in US destroyed. Supports UN ban on firearms ownership in America . No Other "policy"

WMD Policy Czar: Gary Samore- Former US Communist. Wants US to destroy all WMD unilaterally as a show of good faith. Has no other "policy".

MACH1
09-23-2009, 12:48 PM
I think the number is more like 47 czars.

nY73Ou2QhnA

Vincent
09-23-2009, 12:55 PM
I think the number is more like 47 czars.

nY73Ou2QhnA

Day-ham!! You blink your eyes and there are 12 more. It's starting to look like what bho means by "the post partisan era" is the new communist era. And we all know what the commies did to partisans. :ak47:

7SteelGal43
09-23-2009, 01:00 PM
I'm just curious how many of these Czars have been proprely vetted besides Obama saying "I like the way you think" or gone through any hearings or Congressional approval process. The only one I've heard of getting a Congressional vote of approval is Cass Sunstein.

KeiselPower99
09-23-2009, 01:15 PM
I'm just curious how many of these Czars have been proprely vetted besides Obama saying "I like the way you think" or gone through any hearings or Congressional approval process. The only one I've heard of getting a Congressional vote of approval is Cass Sunstein.

They are appointed by Obama and need no congressional approvement. We dont even know what the resposibilities are or what they are paid.

7SteelGal43
09-23-2009, 01:45 PM
They are appointed by Obama and need no congressional approvement. We dont even know what the resposibilities are or what they are paid.

EXACTLY

MACH1
09-23-2009, 02:36 PM
They are appointed by Obama and need no congressional approvement. We dont even know what the resposibilities are or what they are paid.

And they circumvent congress, secretary of state and secretary of defense. The only person they answer to is the holy of holy himself.

revefsreleets
09-23-2009, 03:34 PM
Bush had 35...didn't know about this. This illustrates why it's dangerous to get all your info from only extremely biased sources.
http://www.ohio.com/editorial/commentary/60550277.html

Suddenly, the GOP is czar-struck

By Dick Polman
Philadelphia Inquirer

Published on Wednesday, Sep 23, 2009

PHILADELPHIA: The latest fit of conservative paranoia is that Barack Obama, the alien in our midst, seeks to transform America into Mother Russia, crafting a new totalitarian state that will be run by his own private army of policy ''czars.'' The lunacy never ends.

Yes, the Republican right has suddenly discovered the word czar — roughly 36 years after it was first used by the press as a nickname for Republican Richard Nixon's in-house energy guy, a Republican named John Love.

The word has been popular for decades, in part because, frankly, it fits snugly in a headline. The word actually makes no sense in the American context — after all, the real czars ordered pogroms — but it has become a thumbnail descriptive for the scores of policy mavens hired by virtually every president since Nixon.

The word was rarely if ever cited as prima facie evidence of a president's evil intent — until now, naturally. With strong assists from Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck at Fox News, Republican politicians are suddenly complaining that these policy hires are ''an affront to the Constitution'' and that Obama ''has more czars than the Romanovs'' (the Mother Russia insinuation, courtesy of John McCain).

Obama-haters are a tad confused about some of the particulars — many of them think the president is a communist, whereas the czars and the Romanovs were fierce foes of the communists — but emotion does tend to trump the intellect. And if they can get some mileage while yelling ''czar,'' nothing else matters. Not even the obvious fact that their entire lament is riddled with hypocrisy.

For instance, conservatives complain that Obama has hired roughly 32 policy people who can be described as czars, largely because, according to the right's criteria, these White House officials were not confirmed by Congress, or because they supposedly lack formal titles, or because they answer only to Obama. (Beck admitted recently on his Web site that ''the number is somewhat in the eye of the beholder.'') Yet, by employing the same loose criteria, the roster of so-called czars in the George W. Bush administration totaled roughly 36.

Amnesia is sometimes rampant on the Republican right, so perhaps this partial list might spark some memories. President Bush hired — among many others: a science czar, cybersecurity czar, regulatory czar, weapons czar, bailout czar, bird-flu czar, AIDS czar, intelligence czar, Afghanistan czar, war czar, terrorism czar, drug czar, faith-based czar, food-safety czar, Mideast-peace czar, manufacturing czar, and Katrina-cleanup czar. (Using the GOP's criteria, that list could easily include Karl Rove, the top domestic-policy adviser who dodged congressional subpoenas; and even Dick Cheney, a duly elected veep who, by withholding crucial energy-policy information from the public, at times appeared to behave like a czar.)

Midway through Bush's second term, the list had grown so long that satirist Andy Borowitz quipped that what Bush still lacked, yet truly needed, was a lying czar.

Yet, in all those years, there was nary a cry about imperial Russia from the president's congressional cheerleaders, nor from his fans on Fox.

Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander is the guy who called Obama's czars ''an affront to the Constitution,'' but, in 2003, he lauded Bush on the Senate floor for appointing an AIDS czar and a manufacturing czar. Robert Bennett, one of Alexander's colleagues, has assailed Obama's czars as ''undermining the Constitution,'' yet, a decade ago, he told CNN that Bill Clinton needed to get up to speed on the cybersecurity threat by appointing what he called ''a Y2K czar.''

And during the final year of the Bush era, 175 House Republicans (along with 20 senators, including Alexander) voted for a bill to create a new White House job, an Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator. In translation, that's a czar. All told, when a conservative congressman named Darrell Issa was recently asked on TV whether he and his party brethren had ever opposed Bush's use of czars, he replied: ''No, we didn't.''

Nor do they seem very schooled in American history. The fact is, presidents in both parties dating back to Andrew Jackson have hired their own policy loyalists. Jackson had his ''kitchen Cabinet.'' Calvin Coolidge employed Herbert Hoover as a virtual relief czar after the Mississippi River burst its levees and devastated the land. Franklin D. Roosevelt hired a number of in-house economic wonks to fight the Depression.

The Republican right insists that Obama's czarist tendencies are different, that his whole intent is to evade congressional scrutiny. Fox News, which characterizes Obama's America as ''Land of the Czars,'' recently showed photos of 30 czars and asserted that ''they don't have to be confirmed.''

That bit of reportage was as overblown as Fox's graphic of a czarist crown atop the White House. The fact is, nine of those Obama advisers were confirmed by the Senate, and two were appointed to posts created by congressional statute.

Fox also has warned that the czars have ''a major influence on public policy,'' while failing to mention that they typically have less power than your local alderman. Because they seek to coordinate policy among turf-conscious agencies, they lack the clout to force anyone to do anything. (That's one reason Tom Ridge was so frustrated while serving as Bush's terrorism czar.)

Will facts such as these dampen the ire of those who perceive Obama as a closet czarist who perhaps is bent on replacing The Star-Spangled Banner with the mournful marching music from Dr. Zhivago? Of course not. On the other hand, we'll know that the czar message has lost its sting if they suddenly start insisting that the high number of White House Sturmfuhrers is proof of closet Nazism.

Polman is a Philadelphia Inquirer columnist. He can be e-mailed at dpolman@phillynews.com

43Hitman
09-23-2009, 03:37 PM
I'm just curious how many of these Czars have been proprely vetted besides Obama saying "I like the way you think" or gone through any hearings or Congressional approval process. The only one I've heard of getting a Congressional vote of approval is Cass Sunstein.

It's a slick way to get around the Constitution, and Congress. Unfortunately Bush had them to, we should NOT allow this to happen. It's a government within a government and TOTALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!! And we should be very concerned. To quote Tony ":shout:-PANIC!!

revefsreleets
09-23-2009, 03:43 PM
That bit of reportage was as overblown as Fox's graphic of a czarist crown atop the White House. The fact is, nine of those Obama advisers were confirmed by the Senate, and two were appointed to posts created by congressional statute.

Fox also has warned that the czars have ''a major influence on public policy,'' while failing to mention that they typically have less power than your local alderman. Because they seek to coordinate policy among turf-conscious agencies, they lack the clout to force anyone to do anything. (That's one reason Tom Ridge was so frustrated while serving as Bush's terrorism czar.)

43Hitman
09-23-2009, 03:59 PM
Yeah I read the article, there are still 20+ that have not been vetted or confirmed by the Senate. Is that supposed to make me feel better? It isn't legal no matter what freaking party does it, and I don't care that it was done before. It shouldn't have been done then and it damn well shouldn't be done now.

MACH1
09-23-2009, 04:02 PM
Bush had 35...didn't know about this. This illustrates why it's dangerous to get all your info from only extremely biased sources.

Bu...bu...bu...Bush did it.

43Hitman
09-23-2009, 04:04 PM
Bu...bu...bu...Bush did it.

Still doesn't make it right..Right?

7SteelGal43
09-23-2009, 04:19 PM
Personally, I'd like to see the end of the Presidential appointed Czars. For ALL Presidents.

I'd also be interested to know how many of Bush's Czars were radical, racist, activist, marxist extremists.

But let's not focus on that, let's just keep pointing out that Bush had as many Czars as Obama. After all, isn't that the REAL issue here ? :jerkit:

revefsreleets
09-23-2009, 04:41 PM
No, the real issue is that this is a hot-button topic all of a sudden now that Beck, Rush, and a few others have brought it up. It's nothing new...and you can't hang THIS President for something that just about every President has practiced.

Obama has enough policy holes and problems to focus on something of real merit. This practice won't stop, it's not unconstitutional, it's not illegal, and it's really not even a real problem at all...in spite of what Beck says.

Preacher
09-23-2009, 05:42 PM
Sigh.

Again, why I hate politics.

The president can have whoever he wants to help counsel him. None of these guys or gals are in the line of successsion. None of them get to actually MAKE a decision and then have it followed through.

All of that goes back through the president, or one of his CABINET MEMBERS.

Though the funny thing about the writer of hte article, Stones in glass houses hurt. Snipes like "Czar for lying" and "republican amnesia" can be applied equally well to both sides of the aisle.

Vincent
09-23-2009, 05:56 PM
Though the funny thing about the writer of hte article, Stones in glass houses hurt. Snipes like "Czar for lying" and "republican amnesia" can be applied equally well to both sides of the aisle.

If, by "the writer of the article", you were referring to me, my point in posting this was not that any president has any number of czars. Rather that bho, in particular, has staffed his roster with commie rat bastards.

Its apparent why the selections on this list were made. No further comment..

As an independent, I don't carry water for either side. As a patriot, I have issues with the appointments of my country's enemies to any position, much worse, positions that affect our security, independence, and well being.

tony hipchest
09-23-2009, 06:31 PM
glen beck. :chuckle:

"the fusion of entertainment and enlightenment" :wtf:

anyways, revs is spot on (and stole my thunder). :cheers:

i have nothing more to add.

well, maybe 1 more thing.....


































:shout:-PANIC!!!

revefsreleets
09-24-2009, 08:02 AM
OK, I'll concede that point...I think Obama made some horrifically bad choices in appointing his czars. My point was that you can't just ignore past precedent when lambasting THIS President.

By the way, didn't notice this the first time, but LOL at accusing ME of using the 'ole "Bu...bu...bu...Bush". I'M the one who first coined the term! Talk about irony!

KeiselPower99
09-24-2009, 08:12 AM
I think the reason Obama is catching more heat is the people he is appointing not the positions. Bush didnt have communists and ultra progressives.

7SteelGal43
09-24-2009, 12:04 PM
I think the reason Obama is catching more heat is the people he is appointing not the positions. Bush didnt have communists and ultra progressives.

bingo

Vincent
09-28-2009, 07:03 PM
The "safe schools" czar...

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/safe-school-czar-ignored-statutory-rape

At the president’s pleasure

http://photos.smugmug.com/photos/662663301_q7Gkd-O.jpg

Monday, September 28, 2009

A teacher was told by a 15-year-old high school sophomore that he was having homosexual sex with an "older man." At the very least, statutory rape occurred. Fox News reported that the teacher violated a state law requiring that he report the abuse. That former teacher, Kevin Jennings, is President Obama’s "safe school czar."

It’s getting hard to keep track of all of this president’s problematic appointments. Clearly, the process for vetting White House employees has broken down.

In this one case in which Mr. Jennings had a real chance to protect a young boy from a sexual predator, he not only failed to do what the law required but actually encouraged the relationship.

According to Mr. Jennings’ own description in a new audiotape discovered by Fox News, the 15-year-old boy met the "older man" in a "bus station bathroom" and was taken to the older man’s home that night. When some details about the case became public, Mr. Jennings threatened to sue another teacher who called his failure to report the statutory rape "unethical." Mr. Jennings’ defenders asserted that there was no evidence that he was aware the student had sex with the older man.

However, the new audiotape contradicts this claim. In 2000, Mr. Jennings gave a talk to the Iowa chapter of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, an advocacy group that promotes homosexuality in schools. On the tape, Mr. Jennings recollected that he told the student to make sure "to use a condom" when he was with the older man. That he actively encouraged the relationship is reinforced by Mr. Jennings’ own description in his 1994 book, "One Teacher in 10." In that account, the teacher boasts how he allayed the student’s concerns about the relationship to such a degree that the 15-year-old "left my office with a smile on his face that I would see every time I saw him on the campus for the next two years, until he graduated."

Mr. Jennings’ denials about these events reveal a lack of remorse. He has not admitted that he made mistakes in this case, and he now refuses to answer any questions about the scandal. Don’t forget, this is a presidential appointee we’re talking about. Mr. Obama should make clear what his standards are for public servants serving at the pleasure of the president. Encouraging and covering up man-boy sexual activity are serious offenses. The White House should force Mr. Jennings to come clean.

Mr. Jennings has made extremely radical statements promoting homosexuality in schools and about his utter contempt for religion that render him unsuitable for a prestigious White House appointment. His job in the Obama administration is to ensure student safety, and this scandal directly calls into question his ability to perform that job. Mr. Jennings and Obama administration officials refuse to answer any questions about this newly discovered evidence. A lot of Americans want answers about this guy and how he was approved for a job in the White House.

Of course the real scandal here is that Mr. Jennings was ever appointed Mr. Obama’s ‘Safe School Czar’ in the first place.

Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council, provided some other details in Human Events back in June:

Kevin Jennings — Unsafe for America’s Schools

by Tony Perkins
06/29/2009

Few Obama administration appointments have been as startling as Education Secretary Arne Duncan’s appointment of Kevin Jennings, the homosexual founder of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), to head the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools.

Jennings was undoubtedly chosen for this post (which does not require Senate confirmation) because the foundation of the homosexual education agenda is the concept of “safe schools.” However, “safe schools” as GLSEN defines them are like “hate crime laws” for kids. GLSEN’s model legislation would create protected categories like “sex, gender, . . . sexual orientation, [and] gender identity or expression.” … GLSEN’s “safe schools” do not protect everyone equally, but instead single out homosexuals for more protection than others.

Despite this inequity, some might be tempted to support the “safe schools” agenda as long as it is limited to ending bullying, and does not extend to actively affirming or promoting homosexuality. However, in a 1995 speech, Jennings admitted that the rhetoric about “safety” was a political device, saying that it “threw our opponents on the defensive, and stole their best line of attack. This framing short-circuited their arguments and left them back-pedaling.” In a 1997 speech he embraced the idea of actively “promoting” homosexuality, looking forward to a day when “people, when they would hear that someone was promoting homosexuality, would say, ‘Yeah, who cares?’” And an unsigned article on the GLSEN website in 2000 declared, “The pursuit of safety and affirmation are one and the same goal.”

While Jennings promotes tolerance toward homosexuals, he is unwilling to reciprocate by extending tolerance to those who disagree with him. His memoir, Mama’s Boy, Preacher’s Son, seethes with bitterness toward Southern Baptists, the country’s largest Protestant denomination (within which he was raised). Perhaps that’s why, in a speech in a New York church in 2000, Jennings is reported to have said, “We have to quit being afraid of the religious right. . . . I’m trying not to say, ‘[F---] ‘em!’ which is what I want to say, because I don’t care what they think! Drop dead!”

He wants homosexuality to be taught in American schools — in his book Always My Child, Jennings calls for a “diversity policy that mandates including LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender] themes in the curriculum.” But he wants only one side of this controversial issue to be aired, and apparently believes in locking sexually confused kids into a “gay” identity…

Jennings does not limit his promotion of homosexuality in schools only to high schools or middle schools. He wrote the foreword for a book titled Queering Elementary Education, which includes an essay declaring that “‘queerly raised’ children are agents” using “strategies of adaptation, negotiation, resistance, and subversion.”

Perhaps the most dramatic illustration, however, of Jennings’ unfitness for a “safe schools” post involves an incident when he taught at Concord Academy, a private boarding school in Massachusetts. In his book One Teacher in Ten (the title is based on the discredited myth, now abandoned even by “gay” activist groups, that ten percent of the population is homosexual), he tells about a young male sophomore, “Brewster,” who confessed to Jennings “his involvement with an older man he met in Boston.” But at a GLSEN rally in 2000, Jennings told a more explicit version of “Brewster’s” story. Jennings here quotes the boy and then comments: “‘I met someone in the bus station bathroom and I went home with him.’ High school sophomore, 15 years old. That was the only way he knew how to meet gay people.”

Did Jennings report this high-risk behavior to the authorities? To the school? To the boy’s parents? No — he just told the boy, “I hope you knew to use a condom.” Sex between an adult and a young person below the “age of consent” (which varies from state to state) is a crime known as statutory rape, and some states mandate that people in certain professions report such abuse.

I do not know if “Brewster” was below the age of consent, nor whether Jennings was a mandatory reporter or violated mandatory reporting laws. When members of the National Education Association protested an NEA award to Jennings because of this incident, Jennings called the criticism “potentially libelous” and a GLSEN lawyer demanded a retraction. But when officials at Concord Academy — the school where Jennings had taught — were asked about the scenario described in one of Jennings’ accounts, a school spokesman said that such an incident should be reported.

In any case, public service requires adherence to a higher ethical standard than bare compliance with the law. Instead of veiled threats, Jennings now owes the public a thorough explanation of the “Brewster” incident. Regardless of the law, a 15-year-old who meets sexual partners in a bus station restroom requires more than a condom to be “safe.”

Kevin Jennings has neither the temperament nor the ethical standards needed for public service. His history suggests a commitment to serving only one narrow part of the student population, not all students. He is unfit for the post to which he’s been assigned, and Secretary Duncan should withdraw his appointment at once.