Comments on: Presidential czars not just Obamaâ€™s, have historical presence

By: Ad

Ad — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 11:23:23 +0000

Our present administration at this moment is gutting the CIA, and will be of no value to the USA in a month are so…
Mr. Obama has a lot of plans for us, just hang on for further
notice on day camps and work schedules for us peons

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 02:37:43 +0000

Marie, you have no idea what “radical views” even are, sweetheart.

Perhaps you should really evaluate what role Karl Rove and Donny Rumsfeld played in the last administration. Until then, please stop being so paranoid.

By: Marie Sage

Marie Sage — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 16:43:19 +0000

I am writing in response to an article written by Justin Lamb about President Obama’s czars. I think the claims he made are ridiculous I won’t deny that past presidents including Bush have had czars, and I will be the first to point out that czars not confirmed by the Senate are unconstitutional. This includes conservative presidents as well as liberal ones. However, what makes President Obama’s czars such a major issue is the pace at which he has appointed them (without congress confirmation) as well as the controversies surrounding their past histories, which Lamb conveniently failed to address. Obama has only been in office for eight months and he’s already appointed 32 czars, and the number is steadily increasing. There is speculation about the creation of a cyber czar, health insurance czar, and copyright czar. Furthermore, while Lamb is correct in stating that these czars report directly to the white house he fails to notice that that’s the problem! These czars only report to Obama and so everything they do is unauthorized by Congress. They act to further the agenda of the far left no matter how radical it may be, and that much power does not belong in the White House. By having these czars, democracy in this country is rapidly falling apart as the government continues to grow bigger and bigger, infringing upon the freedoms of the American people. I would also like to point out that these czars are the most radical individuals to have ever been appointed to a position of power in United States history. First you have green jobs czar Van Jones, a self-proclaiming communist, and then you have science czar John Holdren who has written in one of his books about his support for population control and compulsory abortion. Now I agree that there has been a lot of hate-mongering against Obama, but I wouldn’t say that the way Bush was treated when he was in office was sweet. There have been attacks from both sides and everyone should take responsibility for their own actions. Oh, and as far as Glenn Beck goes, I think he has the right to be concerned that people with such radical views are being appointed by the President of the United States in which they don’t have to report to Congress. I also think that Obama has a lot more to deal with than Glenn Beck’s criticism of his czars, he’s far to busy chatting with Jay Leno and David Letterman. Oh and thanks for the invitation but I won’t be stopping by room 211 in the Student Center anytime soon.

Marie Sage

Spanish and Linguistics senior

By: eleen c

eleen c — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 05:47:24 +0000

mr floore, do i detect a note of sarcasm in your post????????????????

By: Kevin Floore

Kevin Floore — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:37:34 +0000

Mr. Lamb

I am eternally grateful for your superior insight into this complex political issue. My lowly existence in the political realm led me to an obviously misconstrued opinion concerning President Obama and his so-called “czars.” Thanks to your brilliant analysis, I now realize anything I hear on Fox News Channel or any opinions held by Glenn Beck are completely erroneous; if Mr. Beck or the Fox syndicate have a problem with these czars, they must be OK. A thousand thank you’s for forcing yourself to endure fifteen minutes of such filth.

Also, since presidents in the past have had these czars, including my beloved former president George W. Bush, they must be OK as well. Expansion of the executive branch and its authority clearly doesn’t combat the Constitution. Having appointed, unelected officials in the president’s ear has been going on for centuries, so why get upset about it now? After all, we are a nation of men, not laws, and if these czars are accountable to President Obama, they couldn’t possibly desire anything but exactly what is best for the American people.

The problem with the stupid, unwashed masses, among whom I counted myself before reading your enlightening article, is that they aren’t completely on board with President Obama’s vision for saving this country. If the liars and hate-mongerers would just stop lying and hate-mongering, we could all relax, go to next Monday’s College Democrats’ meeting, and wait for this administration to clear up all of the nation’s problems. I can’t wait for your follow-up article on Public Healthcare.