The real truth about the czars

posted at 4:20 pm on September 17, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The White House has begun pushing back against the criticism over the explosion of czars in the Obama administration, with a blog entry yesterday that attempts to minimize the end run around Congress engineered by Barack Obama.  The argument from the Obama administration and its defenders seems to be that (a) no one complained about czars during the Bush administration, (b) some of the ones highlighted have required Senate approval, and (c) the White House doesn’t call them “czars”:

Last week, when the President addressed the Joint Session of Congress in a speech on health reform, he referred to some of the untruths – okay, lies – that have been spread about the plan and sent a clear message to those who seek to undermine his agenda and his presidency with these tactics: “We will call you out.” So consider this one of those calls.

Over the past several weeks, we’ve seen with increasing frequency and volume issues raised around the use of “czars” by this Administration. Although some Members have asked serious questions around the makeup of the White House staff, the bulk of the noise you hear began first with partisan commentators, suggesting that this is somehow a new and sinister development that threatens our democracy. This is, of course, ridiculous. Just to be clear, the job title “czar” doesn’t exist in the Obama Administration. Many of the officials cited by conservative commentators have been confirmed by the Senate. Many hold policy jobs that have existed in previous Administrations. And some hold jobs that involved coordinating the work of agencies on President Obama’s key policy priorities: health insurance reform, energy and green jobs, and building a new foundation for long-lasting economic growth

But of course, it’s really the hypocrisy here that is noteworthy. Just earlier today, Darrell Issa, a Republican from California and one of the leaders in calling for an investigation into the Obama Administration’s use of “czars”, had to admit to Fox News that he had never raised any objections to the Bush Administration’s use of “czars”. Many of these members who now decry the practice have called on Presidents in the past to appoint “czars” to coordinate activities within the government to address immediate challenges. What is clear is that all of this energy going into these attacks could be used to have a constructive conversation about bringing this country together to address our challenges moving forward – and it doesn’t take a “czar” to bring that about! Just some folks willing to act in good faith.

It’s true that some of the 32, 34, 35, or more positions critics have pointed out are not actually czars at all, and do require both Senate approval and Congressional oversight.  One example of this is Cass Sunstein, the so-called Regulatory Czar, who just got confirmed by the Senate.  Using those positions as examples of an Obama power grab undermine the argument and allow the White House to offer sophistry in response.

The Washington Post offers a handy guide that demonstrates the dishonesty in the White House response:

What we can see here is that Bush created five non-confirmed positions in his administration — in eight years.  Of those, three fall solidly within the executive branch’s authority for national security and diplomacy: WMD, terrorism, and Sudan.  Nevertheless, those positions should have had Senate confirmation if they enforced regulation, which would have been questionable for any of these five.

In contrast, the Obama administration has created 17 “czar” positions in seven months, all but one of which avoid Senate confirmation and Congressional oversight.  At least two of these positions will or have already enforced regulation: the Pay Czar and the Auto Recovery Czar, the latter of which unduly influenced the bankruptcies of Chrysler and GM. The Car Czar will likely enforce administration policy on manufacturing and car model selection.  Van Jones, who had been the Green Jobs Czar, isn’t listed in this chart, but he had authority to spend tens of billions of dollars on green initiatives, outside the overview of Congress.

It took Obama less than a year to triple the number of executive-branch commissars that avoid confirmation than Bush created in two terms.  That’s a ridiculous level of bureaucratic expansion and Congressional avoidance, and none of the White House’s pushback even remotely addresses it.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Bush didn’t create some of the czars in his administration. Drug czar, for example, has been around for decades.

lorien1973 on September 17, 2009 at 4:23 PM

I think Great Lakes Czar is my favorite.

75% of the federal govt is basically the Dept of Redundancy Dept.

brak on September 17, 2009 at 4:25 PM

Hey is this another Glenn Beck win?

d1carter on September 17, 2009 at 4:25 PM

The Washington Post covered this? Wha? Huh? Not computing! Not computing!

Cicero43 on September 17, 2009 at 4:26 PM

“We don’t call them czars! We prefer the term “tsars”, thankyouverymuch.” – Sincerely, The “White” House.

Wyznowski on September 17, 2009 at 4:26 PM

Don’t worry. Katie, Charlie and Brian will circle the wagons because, hey, at least they’re not conservatives.

perroviejo on September 17, 2009 at 4:26 PM

These aren’t the czars you are looking for.

journeyscarab on September 17, 2009 at 4:26 PM

It’s a government within the government. Soon, we won’t need a legislative branch. The czars will handle everything, without scrutiny, the need for votes, or the need for any transparency.

We may learn to love this. NOT!!!!!!!! UGH!!!

capejasmine on September 17, 2009 at 4:27 PM

http://mediamattersaction.org/smears/

Media Matters made a new website to “fight the smears against progressives.”

Hot Air and Michelle Malkin are listed on the front page as “Smearers”

Joe Caps on September 17, 2009 at 4:29 PM

That was kind of a wussy “punch back” from the White House.

myrenovations on September 17, 2009 at 4:30 PM

Notice there is no czar starting with “B.” Just sayin’

Christien on September 17, 2009 at 4:30 PM

Czar, pre-Soviet Russian term denoting an Imperialist monarch who exercised absolute authority over their specific dominion, in this case the Russian Empire, derived from “Caesar”, sole absolute authority of the Roman Empire. Compare “Kaiser” in Germany, sole authority of the German Empire.

Orange Doorhinge on September 17, 2009 at 4:30 PM

*created by Obama.

Christien on September 17, 2009 at 4:30 PM

I still can’t believe we have a “Pay Czar”.

forest on September 17, 2009 at 4:31 PM

This is the way the MSM does it. Eight years versus seven months.

We don’t hear that Obama has equaled the total deficit of eight years of Bush in just one year.

jukin on September 17, 2009 at 4:31 PM

Hey! How come the Czar of July didn’t make the list? I think the WaPo is hiding something……

BobMbx on September 17, 2009 at 4:32 PM

Is there a “Hit That” czar?

blatantblue on September 17, 2009 at 4:32 PM

I would like to see a fourth column in the table–the size of the budgets these guys get. How much money do these guys get to buy influence and implement programs? And who reviews and approves what they do, besides Rahmbo and Bobo (in that order)? That will tell you the real power they have.

MADgirl91 on September 17, 2009 at 4:32 PM

The pay czars real title is “Special Master for Compensation”..

Uh that’s gotta be a typo right?

Partisan on September 17, 2009 at 4:33 PM

It probably isn’t the czars as much as it is who they are. Some are folks that have radical ideas and thinking. Most of their ideas do not belong in the mainstream of what passes for rational thought. They are “risky” at best.
Cass Sunstein got in because the Senate confirmed him. Since most are sloppy about reading the bills, I am sure 90% of them have no clue as to what he has said in the past or what he believes.

BetseyRoss on September 17, 2009 at 4:33 PM

Why do we need an Urban Policy czar? We have a Cabinet department called Housing and Urban Development. Obama’s appointee to run HUD is Shaun Donovan, who worked in the New York City government. If he doesn’t understand urban policy, who does? The HUD Secretary already participates in numerous interagency councils designed to coordinate federal resources going to cities and to urban problems such as homelessness. HUD is tasked by law with producing a biennial Urban Policy report. So WTF is this “czar” supposed to do?

I believe that czar job was created specifically for Adolfo Carrion, because Carrion squawked after getting passed over for Donovan as HUD Secretary.

rockmom on September 17, 2009 at 4:33 PM

Government performance czar? Would that be the guy who reports on Nancy Pelosi’s teary-eyed performance just a while ago?

Catherine Wilkinson on September 17, 2009 at 4:34 PM

If they were so on the up and up, then why not subject them to the scruteny of a Senate confirmation? What is there to hide?

BTW, “White House”? RAAAAAAAACIST.

crazy_legs on September 17, 2009 at 4:34 PM

Is there a “Hit That” czar?

blatantblue on September 17, 2009 at 4:32 PM

Wrong Administration. Wasn’t that Craig Livingston’s job?

;-)

rockmom on September 17, 2009 at 4:34 PM

That was kind of a wussy “punch back” from the White House.

myrenovations on September 17, 2009 at 4:30 PM

As I suspected, he hits like a girl too.

Tomorrow he’ll probably hiss like a cat and cry, being so misunderstood and unappreciated.

BobMbx on September 17, 2009 at 4:34 PM

It took Obama less than a year to triple the number of executive-branch commissars that avoid confirmation than Bush created in two terms.

And he still hasn’t filled all of his cabinet positions. And how’s the Treasury Department doing? Is Timmy still sitting in an empty office?

Knucklehead on September 17, 2009 at 4:34 PM

If you want to be an IT czar, you have to have a slight Indian accent.

/Biden

Christien on September 17, 2009 at 4:35 PM

If they aren’t confirmed by the Senate, you can’t have them. Period. Why are these positions overlapping w/Cabinet positions? Shadow govt.? Anyone?

JAM on September 17, 2009 at 4:35 PM

“Whack a Czar” sounds like a good game…

d1carter on September 17, 2009 at 4:35 PM

If you want to be an IT czar, you have to have a slight Indian accent.

/Biden

Christien on September 17, 2009 at 4:35 PM

Experience with Dunkin’ Donuts is a plus!

BobMbx on September 17, 2009 at 4:36 PM

Dude, Where’s My Czar?!

Christien on September 17, 2009 at 4:36 PM

Why do we need an Urban Policy czar?
rockmom on September 17, 2009 at 4:33 PM

Why in the heck do we need a Great Lakes Czar? I’m still scratching my head on that one or does Barry feel the need to control our waterways and shipping too?

Knucklehead on September 17, 2009 at 4:37 PM

You mean John Holdren was actually CONFIRMED? Jaw drops.

jwolf on September 17, 2009 at 4:37 PM

I’m tellin’ ya… we need a Czar Czar to overlook all thse Czars!

crazy_legs on September 17, 2009 at 4:37 PM

Joe Caps on September 17, 2009 at 4:29 PM

LOL I’ve read some and its super duper duper lame.

One of the smears is that Cass Sustein wants to make it so animals can sue humans.

Their defense: He doesn’t want animals to be able to sue humans directly, silly, he wants them to be able to sue humans through other humans!

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

I really had a good laugh at that one. Yeah, what a relief, I really thought he was going to bring my dog into court and have the judge say “now bark once for yes, twice for no.”

What a joke. What did they think we thought it meant? That somehow the animals would represent themselves in court? This is beyond lame.

Joe Caps on September 17, 2009 at 4:38 PM

Tyranny…

Seven Percent Solution on September 17, 2009 at 4:38 PM

I think Great Lakes Czar is my favorite.

75% of the federal govt is basically the Dept of Redundancy Dept.

brak on September 17, 2009 at 4:25 PM

If you ever see the name salmonczar. Ask her about it… freaking funny and has been around since Clinton!

upinak on September 17, 2009 at 4:38 PM

rockmom on September 17, 2009 at 4:34 PM

lol!
i believe so

blatantblue on September 17, 2009 at 4:39 PM

This is the EPITOME of proof of the “Slipery Slope” arguement.

Just as Bush opened up the takeover of much of our economy with TARP… earlier Czars opened up this avenue of a Power grab.

You can’t just look at a new power based on you trusting the person who now holds the position with that power… you have to look at the consequences when a Crook, of Facist, gains that power as well.

Romeo13 on September 17, 2009 at 4:39 PM

We should have zero czars. At best it’s just a marketing ploy (“see how much emphasis I place on this?”), at worst it’s a way to circumvent checks and balances.

If the President needs a point person over, say, IT, then I’m sure the General Services Administration has an apporpriate position who could send him info.

hawksruleva on September 17, 2009 at 4:40 PM

I wonder if the Government Performance Czar has checked up on the Guantanamo Closure Czar to see what’s taking so long.

taznar on September 17, 2009 at 4:40 PM

(a) no one complained about czars during the Bush administration, (b) some of the ones highlighted have required Senate approval, and (c) the White House doesn’t call them “czars”:

So now their standard is “Bush did it”? But I thought W. was the stupid evil Chimpy McHitlerburton, and that were going to change the way things got done in Washington.

http://mediamattersaction.org/smears/

Media Matters made a new website to “fight the smears against progressives.”

Hot Air and Michelle Malkin are listed on the front page as “Smearers”

Joe Caps on September 17, 2009 at 4:29 PM

That is a badge of honor. Congratulations to Michelle, Ed, & Allahpundit.

rbj on September 17, 2009 at 4:41 PM

Maybe if he had a truth czar the administration would stop lying so much.

farright on September 17, 2009 at 4:41 PM

Hey, if Bush did it even once in eight years it’s also okay for Obama to do it any time he wants in seven months to whatever degree he feels is prudent. After all, every president cheated on his wife, too. /sarc

Liam on September 17, 2009 at 4:41 PM

Obama bin biden.

TTheoLogan on September 17, 2009 at 4:42 PM

myrenovations said:

That was kind of a wussy “punch back” from the White House.

More like a limp wristed purse-slap, but it’s fun to see the left playing defense.

Cool nickname, btw!

Jack.

Jack Deth on September 17, 2009 at 4:42 PM

http://mediamattersaction.org/smears/

Media Matters made a new website to “fight the smears against progressives.”

Hot Air and Michelle Malkin are listed on the front page as “Smearers”

Joe Caps on September 17, 2009 at 4:29 PM

Well they are in good company with Glenn and Fox.
I am glad that the good guys are finally on the offense instead of defense. I hope some of these czars end up getting the boot.

Brat4life on September 17, 2009 at 4:45 PM

Can Barry just eat his ACORNs?

NoDonkey on September 17, 2009 at 4:46 PM

To see the effects of czars, look at http://www.apps.gov created by information czar Vivek Kundra. Examine carefully the wares sold on this site, and wonder what the single company represented there (carahsoft) gave to the Obama campaign.

unclesmrgol on September 17, 2009 at 4:46 PM

CNN actually did a good job of covering this on Dobbs’ show. they took the time to explain the Bush’s 8 worth of Czars vs. 7 Obama’s months BS the MSM usually throws around

forest on September 17, 2009 at 4:46 PM

Maybe if he had a truth czar the administration would stop lying so much.

farright on September 17, 2009 at 4:41 PM

haha, Truth Czar vacant

faraway on September 17, 2009 at 4:46 PM

White House Expanded to Accommodate Extra Policy “Czars” (with photo): http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/09/white-house-expanded-to-accommodate.html

Mervis Winter on September 17, 2009 at 4:48 PM

In contrast, the Obama administration has created 17 “czar” positions in seven months, all but one of which avoid Senate confirmation and Congressional oversight.

Of the 32 “czars” on Beck’s list, nine were confirmed by the Senate:

The whitehouse website says only 9 out of 32 czars were confirmed, for a total of 23 uncomfirmed, where does Wapo get 16?

mbs on September 17, 2009 at 4:48 PM

Glenn Beck wins again. You Beck haters call him whatever names you wish, but he has done more to expose corruption that ANYONE in many years!

ReaganConservative3 on September 17, 2009 at 4:51 PM

I’m tellin’ ya… we need a Czar Czar to overlook all thse Czars!

crazy_legs on September 17, 2009 at 4:37 PM

Isn’t that what the president is supposed to do?

Then again, Barry is too busy giving speeches to worry about running the government.

MarkTheGreat on September 17, 2009 at 4:52 PM

TSARS! Sounds like something Pinky would say from Pinky & the Brain.

Spc Steve on September 17, 2009 at 4:55 PM

’m tellin’ ya… we need a Czar Czar to overlook all thse Czars!

crazy_legs on September 17, 2009 at 4:37 PM
Isn’t that what the president is supposed to do?

Then again, Barry is too busy giving speeches to worry about running the government.

MarkTheGreat on September 17, 2009 at 4:52 PM

Please…. keep your titles correct… or you may commit Les Majeste…

Barrak is the Sun King… not a Czar…

Romeo13 on September 17, 2009 at 4:56 PM

What about “Couples Night Out” Czar, or “Lunch Out” Czar, or “Vacation” Czar?

PappaMac on September 17, 2009 at 4:57 PM

PappaMac on September 17, 2009 at 4:57 PM

Don’t forget the “TOTUS Czar” and the “Townhall Czar”

Knucklehead on September 17, 2009 at 5:00 PM

75% of the federal govt is basically the Dept of Redundancy Dept.

brak on September 17, 2009 at 4:25 PM

Gotta remember that one.

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 17, 2009 at 5:00 PM

Can Barry just eat lick his ACORNs?

NoDonkey on September 17, 2009 at 4:46 PM

My lab can.

barnone on September 17, 2009 at 5:02 PM

HA HA! I love the Truth Czar! That’ll never get filled.
How about an OOPS Czar?

SWChance on September 17, 2009 at 5:05 PM

coordinated calculated seizure of the US.

marklmail on September 17, 2009 at 5:06 PM

Appearantly Ed Montgomery “Auto Recovery Czar” compared the auto crisis to Hurricane Katrina: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ojd0HUGgcO4

dglenn on September 17, 2009 at 5:07 PM

OT: GB is kicking some butts today…and getting very specific, names and all. Look out GB!

d1carter on September 17, 2009 at 5:10 PM

Charles Gibson was asked what he thought about the Csar issue and he said he wasn’t aware that the Tsar no longer ruled Russia. Yeah, that’s true, Charlie.

And, yeah, Buddy Holly died in a plane crash.

You really need to brush up on your current events.

Yes, ACORNs do grow on oak trees but that’s a different ACORN.

Oh, never mind.

IndieDogg on September 17, 2009 at 5:11 PM

If you want to be an IT czar, you have to have a slight Indian accent.

/Biden

Christien on September 17, 2009 at 4:35 PM

*rimshot*
Ba-doom-boom!

Oh Groucho you are clever and funny and stuff!

cableguy615 on September 17, 2009 at 5:17 PM

Seems Odinglenuts is going to have to appoint a Czar Czar in the near future.

Maybe Rahm can do some kind of reality show with them (but I can’t bring myself to type the unbelievably bad pun that would be its title).

mr.blacksheep on September 17, 2009 at 5:22 PM

Are they going to release a czar calendar in time for the Christmas shopping season? Perhaps they could feature Michelle Obozo nude on the cover.

txag92 on September 17, 2009 at 5:26 PM

less than a year to triple the number of executive-branch commissars

Ed, you’re funny. I get jokes.

So now they shall be referred to as DER KOMMISSAR

Don’t turn around…. do you think that Van Jones misses his funky friends?

juanito on September 17, 2009 at 5:26 PM

I think Great Lakes Czar is my favorite.

75% of the federal govt is basically the Dept of Redundancy Dept.

brak on September 17, 2009 at 4:25 PM

That czar wasn’t needed…for US anyway. Obama needed it in order to control the authorities who already have responsibility to manage that area, including DEQ and the DNR.

What I’ve heard zero wants to force the head of these organizations to do is implement a policy where the government is aware and in control of every shovel full of dirt that moves around the great lakes. That will no doubt drown us all in permits, fines, and even jail sentences for doing what we want to do with our property. Up to now it’s been restricted only by how what you do affects others, which is reasonable. This czar is under instruction to profit and regulate to the maximum. Part of the socialist, fascist green movement.

The best way to control people is through their property, the commies learned that early on, and that’s what this creep is trying to do.

He (zero the anti-hero) needs to be removed and his czars immediately investigated to see what they’ve done so far (nearly secretly) and prosecute every single constitutional violation to the extent it can be prosecuted. This is the only way we can ensure future generations are aware of the danger that this sort of abuse of power can and will lead to.

Spiritk9 on September 17, 2009 at 5:27 PM

Like Rush said, it’s good to know the DNC agrees with Bush’s policies. Seems like the third term of Bush.

HellCat on September 17, 2009 at 5:31 PM

Im feeling left out.

theTarCzar on September 17, 2009 at 5:32 PM

You’re missing some damnin video here, Ed. This morning Fox & Friends kept showing Obama and Biden referring to these people as “Czars” in their own words, as a contrast to the WH now insisting there are no Czars.

RightWinged on September 17, 2009 at 5:33 PM

Yeah, but see you’re WRONG…

Nine of those are confirmed by the Senate. And Booosh ( did it too.

Now, watch this shiney thing in my other hand disappear.

Is it just me or is this administration trying very badly to misdirect people with their answers.

Keith_Indy on September 17, 2009 at 5:33 PM

Ya notice the similarities between ACORN’s reponse to exposure of their fraud and the Obama administration’s response to exposure of their lies and corruption? Both deny obvious truths, call the whistleblowers liars, and hunker down behind the walls of their supporters and media silence, believing themselves safe.

Keep blowing your trumpets — the walls will come a-tumblin’ down!

starboardhelm on September 17, 2009 at 5:34 PM

The whitehouse website says only 9 out of 32 czars were confirmed, for a total of 23 uncomfirmed, where does Wapo get 16?

16 is the number of new ‘czars’ that President Obama created that don’t need confirmation.

Keith_Indy on September 17, 2009 at 5:38 PM

That’s a great chart — it makes the WH’s dishonesty about this crystal clear.

KS Rex on September 17, 2009 at 5:39 PM

That’s a ridiculous level of bureaucratic expansion and Congressional avoidance, and none of the White House’s pushback even remotely addresses it.

Obama: Just quit talking and get out of the way!

maverick muse on September 17, 2009 at 5:41 PM

whatever

maverick muse on September 17, 2009 at 5:41 PM

Great sign seen at 9/12 DC:

“Who’s Czary Now?”

Daggett on September 17, 2009 at 5:47 PM

Can I be the Louisiana Crawfishin’ and Hawg Huntin’ Czar?

HondaV65 on September 17, 2009 at 5:54 PM

Are they going to release a czar calendar in time for the Christmas shopping season? Perhaps they could feature Michelle Obozo nude on the cover.

txag92 on September 17, 2009 at 5:26 PM

*shudders and attempts to scrub brain with sos pad.*

anj413 on September 17, 2009 at 6:01 PM

But where is the SALMONczar?

salmonczar on September 17, 2009 at 6:04 PM

One would think that even if Congressional Democrats were enamored with The One, they would still be pushing back against his infringement on their Constitutional authority.

29Victor on September 17, 2009 at 6:06 PM

Any Republican for 2010 or 2012 simply only say, “Our government is so screwed up we have a person specially appointed to give reports to the president on the temperature of the water in California.”

Scranton on September 17, 2009 at 6:16 PM

Don’t forget the “TOTUS Czar”

Knucklehead on September 17, 2009 at 5:00 PM

Ratz, beat me to it! All very B-Tsar indeed.

gonegaltinstl on September 17, 2009 at 6:44 PM

Special Master for Compensation

My title is Kenneth Feinberg, Special Master for Compensation. Now you can call me Ken, or you can call me Special, or you can call me Kenny, or you can call me Feinster, or you can call me Master Kenneth, or you can call me The Compensator, or you can call me KF, or you can call me SMC, or you can call me Special K, but you damn well better call me Master!”

ya2daup on September 17, 2009 at 7:13 PM

I think Great Lakes Czar is my favorite.

75% of the federal govt is basically the Dept of Redundancy Dept.

brak on September 17, 2009 at 4:25 PM

Hey, I live on the Great Lakes…Where is my Czar..All Hail My Czar!

Jeff from WI on September 17, 2009 at 7:27 PM

Wow, there’s even a czar for fishing bait stores. Not just any bait stores either, these must be the top of the line, they call them MASTER bait czars.

Jeff from WI on September 17, 2009 at 7:29 PM

Is there a “Hit That” czar?

blatantblue on September 17, 2009 at 4:32 PM

You would be looking for the “Lay Czar”.

fronclynne on September 17, 2009 at 7:43 PM

Man, too bad SARS dint blow up like it s’pose to.

Cos then we could have had a “SARS Czar”

fronclynne on September 17, 2009 at 7:45 PM

Did they fire the Snitch Czar?

TN Mom on September 17, 2009 at 11:48 PM

All I know is that I am not a Marxist

Karl Marx, cir 1819

OkieDoc on September 17, 2009 at 11:58 PM

Cool quote. He was referring to the French Marxists about the time of the Franco-Prussian War.

As for the “czars” I always thought that the whole thing was pretty stupid, that is I can’t see how the “drug czar” position that (Reagan?) was started way back when has done much good.

Certainly I think a president should have advisors, but they should have little or no authority by themselves.

I think the president should have an advisory board consisting of:

Former presidents and secretaries of state, and an array (around 30) of mostly retired persons from blue collar on up in order to represent a cross-section of society and to give a practical insights as to what can/cannot be done and if so how. Oh, and a member of the most diametrically opposed ideology to the President that he/she can find.

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 18, 2009 at 1:34 AM

Is Obama then the See-Czar?

lizzee on September 18, 2009 at 9:36 AM

17 vs. 5, that’s 3.4 to 1. C’mon, Obama, usually you are 4 times worse, you’re killin your average here.

2ipa on September 18, 2009 at 6:34 PM

Comment pages: 1 2