http://www.statenews.com “College kids don’t care.” “They are not informed.” “They only care about themselves.” en-us Gryphon 2.2.3b-tsn (woodward)/Foundry5 Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:45:18 -0500 webmaster@statenews.com http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47515 Ms. Towner, You present a very valid concern every American should be concerned about. Sadly, the people who would oppose you would rather do everything in their power to dismiss your concerns for invalid reasons. They will probably post how this is just glenn beck, or weirdos on the “right” that want to take down Obama at any cost. Your plea for the type of genuine governmental transparency will fall on deaf ears to these democrat hacks. They don’t realize that just because its Obama, doesn’t make it right. All Americans should call for an investigation into the czars, sadly the hacks just wont. Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:41:11 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47515 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47527 That’s still less than the 47 czars that GW Bush appointed. Where was the outrage from the Repubs then? Oh wait….. Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:27:00 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47527 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47540 The letter is right in that these appointees are questionable. However, they aren’t questionable because they might be “self-proclaimed communists” (I loathe this return to McCarthy Era Red Scare tactics). They are questionable because regardless of their political affiliation, they aren’t confirmed by Congress. There is some tradition for such appointees, but they have recently been expanded, particularly by Bush. As czar crazy points out, Republicans are being hugely hypocritical in their outrage of czars. That doesn’t mean they don’t have a point though. I wonder if Ashley would be so upset if they were called Freedom Lords or some other less ominous title. Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:22:19 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47540 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47559 White House secretaries aren’t confirmed by the Senate, either. AND THEY MIGHT BE COMMUNISTS. Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:04:23 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47559 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47560 Bush set a dangerous standard with the appointment of dozens of czars, and the hundreds of laws and policies he pushed through using “executive orders,” completely sidestepping the legislative process. While Obama has done much to improve upon the failures of Bush’s presidency, the appointment of czars is one area in which he is letting us down. Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:07:38 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47560 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47562 “AIDS Czar” – Actually the Director of the Office of National AIDS Policy, created in 2001 by George W. Bush. “Border Czar” – Actually the Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for International Affairs and Special Representative for Border Affairs, created in 2003 by George W. Bush. “California Water Czar” – Actually the Deputy Secretary of the Interior, who was given this extra portfolio by Secretary Ken Salazar in June. “Central Region Czar” – The Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for the “Central Region,” on the Nation Security Council. “Drug Czar” – Actually the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, created in 1989 by George H.W. Bush. “Faith-Based Czar” – Head of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, created in 2001 by George W. Bush. “Intelligence Czar” – This is actually the Director of National Intelligence, a position created in 2005. “TARP Czar” – Actually the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability of the United States Herb Allison, who was confirmed by the Senate in June. “Weapons Czar” – Not actually an executive branch position, but the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics. “Afghanistan Czar” – Actually the United States Special Envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the man holding that job, Richard Holbrooke went through a Senate confirmation hearing in 1999 when he became Bill Clinton’s U.N. ambassador. “Economic Czar” – Actually the President’s Economic Recovery Board, chaired by Paul Volcker, the deeply uncontroversial former chairman of the Federal Reserve. “Energy and Environment Czar” – This is Carol Browner, the Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change, who was confirmed by the U.S. Senate in 1993 to run the Environmental Protection Agency under Bill Clinton. “Guantanamo Closure Czar” – Actually the Special Envoy to Guantanamo, Daniel Fried, who was the final Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs in the Bush administration. “http://washingtonindependent.com/57977/when-is-a-czar-not-a-czar” Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:40:39 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47562 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47578 Towner writes, “An important component of our democracy is the questioning of authority.” True enough. “Former green jobs czar, Van Jones, was a self-proclaimed communist who blamed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on U.S. officials.” Um, he signed a petition that asked for an independent investigation … of some questions that seem to still lack good answers. But we know the President and his advisors already told us the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Van Jones chose to question authority. So he’s out of a job. Is Towner sad, or glad? Fri, 30 Oct 2009 21:50:28 -0400 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47578 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47736 At least he’s not appointing people based on their religious loyalty, like Bush did. Tue, 03 Nov 2009 14:30:08 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47736 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47872 “That’s still less than the 47 czars that GW Bush appointed. Where was the outrage from the Repubs then? Oh wait…..” Exactly! If Obama is a demoncrat, Bush es el diablo… ahh REPUgnants… Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:53:53 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/47872 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/48541 Do we have to use the word czar? What a stupid sounding word. It has negative connotation. ps: stfu Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:45:18 -0500 http://www.statenews.com/index.php/comment/view/48541