jackalope
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2009
- Messages
- 6,494
- Reaction score
- 1,328
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Oh you not just another keynoard jack your another Maine Keyboard :mrgreen:
:mrgreen: :2wave:
Oh you not just another keynoard jack your another Maine Keyboard :mrgreen:
What radical viewpoints?
Senate Democrats Kill GOP Effort to Rein in Obama's Czars - Political News - FOXNews.com
Senate Democrats, under pressure from a White House arguing separation of powers, rejected a GOP attempt Thursday to provide greater transparency and congressional oversight of 18 czars appointed by the Obama administration without Senate confirmation.
Democrats employed a procedural tactic to kill the GOP proposal that would have withheld federal funds for the creation of any new, unconfirmed czar positions until the administration agreed to allow the individuals to testify before Congress under "reasonable" requests.
The proposal also would have required every czar to produce a detailed "public, written report" biannually of their actions and involvement in the creation of policy, rules, and regulations.
But Democrats used a Senate rule that prohibits legislating on a spending bill -- something that is often done by both political parties despite the rule -- to kill the measure.
Sen. Susan Collins, a moderate Republican from Maine who sponsored the amendment to a spending bill that funds the Interior Department, decried the move on the Senate floor, saying she was "deeply disappointed" in her Democratic colleagues.
"My amendment has been carefully tailored to cover officials that the president has unilaterally designated for significant policy matters," said Collins, who is the top Republican on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
"It would not have covered the president's chief of staff, for example, and it would not cover less senior White House officials, despite some misinformation to the contrary," Collins said, noting that her staff had worked with White House officials Wednesday night without agreement
Same **** different pile.
Far from it you have no idea what your talking about. The White House has made a very large tactical mistake on this one. What ever support Susan was going to give to this White house was blown.
What support has she given the White House so far?
You forgot to mention that now our Leader is buddies with the leaders of Venezuela and Cuba, Iran has gone nuclear, and Russia is now our friend for not building missile defenses in Europe.
Oh, and we're now more liberal when it comes to climate change than Europe.
She voted for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act which Piss Off most of the Consv. Republicans and Children's Health Insurance Reauthorization Act of 2009.
Plus she has been one of the very few Republicans that have said they are in favor of some sort of Health Care Bill and has offered up some riders for the varoious Health Care Bills.
Senate Democrats Kill GOP Effort to Rein in Obama's Czars - Political News - FOXNews.com
Senate Democrats, under pressure from a White House arguing separation of powers, rejected a GOP attempt Thursday to provide greater transparency and congressional oversight of 18 czars appointed by the Obama administration without Senate confirmation.
Senate Democrats, under pressure from a White House arguing separation of powers
Feingold To Hold Hearings On Obama's 'Czars'
Rachel Slajda | September 29, 2009, 5:09PM
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI), chairman of a Judiciary subcommittee on the Constitution, will hold a hearing next week on President Obama's use of "czars."
Feingold has joined several Republicans and conservative talking heads in criticizing Obama over how many czars he's appointed. The term, although in no official title, applies to positions in the executive branch that don't need the approval of Congress. But several of the "czars" mentioned by Glenn Beck and the like actually have been approved by lawmakers.
more ...
Feingold To Hold Hearings On Obama's 'Czars' | TPM LiveWire
Looks like the issue will get looked at, Scorp
By a liberal no less
Looks like the issue will get looked at, Scorp
Feingold is running for re-election next year.
The attack of these czars, at town halls and right-wing events, has been a conservative crowd-pleaser.
from your linked article:
At least we can understand his motivation for wasting time on this.
Yea, I did see that quote in there. I just don't think that's his motivation. I am thinking back to his speeches when he was advocating censure of Pres Bush. I don't know, I don't follow Feingold closely enough to say for sure, but my gut says it's not just politics with him. Could be wrong!
Wow is all I have to say, typical for this White House who has ate evry step go around the US Consititution. The Funny thing is this the White House and the Democrat might have biting off more then they can chew with dishing Sen. Collins she is one of the few Moderate Republicans that might vote with the Deocrates on the Health Issue but I don't see this happen now as amtter of fact I can see Suan going after the Deocrats hard. Knowing Susan the way i do I can tell you this I'm 97% SURE SHE IS PISSED AND WHEN SHE IS PISSED WATCH OUT. aSK ANY ONE FROM MAINE.
If they did I don't recall it being at the fevered pitch we are now hearing from Republicans.
Although I voted for Obama and still support most of his agenda I was never under the impression he would deliver on all his campaign pledges. Granted Obama did spin a certain amount of BS into his campaign, that's to be expected. I've yet to see anyone who campaigned for president deliver as advertised on all their talking points used to sway voters. By that measure I'll agree that there wasn't much change.
Everyone has their own perception on what they expected from Obama but I'm still confident that when the smoke clears from the tough choices he had to make from day one his "change" will show he made the right choices.
DING DING DING! We have a winner. Some on the right have to bitch about every possible imaginable thing. Logic, history, reality, those things do not matter to these people, they just want to throw a fit.
Czars are simply advisors.....no power to do anything other than advise.
I was MUCH more concerned with the unprecedented number of "signing statements" that our last President used, which in actuality was a much more dangerous usurption of power.
Funny.....don't remember you expressing any concern about that.....right deflector?
If the Obama administration was the first president to use czars I would be concerned. Czars have been used since at least Reagan and maybe before. This is nothing more than Republican partisan flapping of the political gums today just as it was the Democrats flapping theirs a fews years ago. !!!
....and the unprecedented number being appointed by Obama.
I'm probably way too late to contribute to this thread, but I found this list of czars from previously presidents on Wikipedia while researching something completely different and thought it would be interesting.
I had never heard of a czar being used in any presidency since JFK; in fact, the first time I heard the term applied to any U.S. presidential administration was during the current one. So, you can imagine my surprise to find that not only did G.W. Bush use czars, he had the most - 46 - compared to President Obama's 35 while Clinton had 10. FDR used 19 czars while all other presidents between FDR and Clinton used between 0 to 6 czars.
In eight years, the only czar I'd heard of under GWB was his Communications Czar, Dan Bartlett, but I never heard the term "czar" applied to him (either than or I just wasn't pay attention). But of President Obama's czars, I've heard of Van Jones (Green Jobs), Richard Holbrooke (AfPak), Ron Bloom (car/manufacturing), Herbert Allison (bank bailout/TARP), Kenneth Feinberg (pay/compensation) and Paul Volcker (economics), all within the first 10 months of his presidency.
Again, maybe I just wasn't paying close enough attention way back then, but dang!!!! Either I was way out of touch back then or else the Conservatives have been hitting hard at President Obama's aids/advisors.
GWB = 46; BHO = 35
I'd hardly call the president having 11 fewer czars than his predecessor "unprecedented" especially considering that GWB had the most czars in his administration since FDR.