You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘White House Czars’ tag.

Normally I steer away from Rolling Stone and their articles. However, this one makes some very good points and arguments in regards to the Obama administration’s catastrophically negative impact on the U.S. economy. As in the author of the article Obama’s Big Sellout stated, “This new team of bubble-fattened ex-bankers and laissez-faire intellectuals then proceeded to sell us all out, instituting a massive, trickle-up bailout and systematically gutting regulatory reform from the inside.” Which in my opinion, is putting it mildly. It is and has been a buy out of the major banks and automobile companies in aspirations to gain even more of a government foothold. And as the article points out, “… the extensive series of loophole-rich financial “reforms” that the Democrats are currently pushing may ultimately do more harm than good.”

It is also explains that during the campaign Obama had advisers which focused heavily on helping the poor and middle class, and condemned the bankers of Wall Street. But the day after Barack Obama was elected to office, he did away with those advisers and replaced them with the total opposite, Wall Street bankers. Which “Leading the search for the president’s new economic team was his close friend and Harvard Law classmate Michael Froman, a high-ranking executive at Citigroup.” And it wasn’t long after he was made official in his office that Obama made the $306 billion bailout of Citigroup and agreed to make taxpayers pay up to $277 billion in losses for the Citi assets.

It is very interesting to say the least to see how the web of Obama’s economic team was formed. There is no interest in helping the poor or middle class. It is about making more money and expanding government control. The author of the cited article does well showing the timeline of events and the connections of the appointees. However, he is clearly a democrat and was at one time for Obama. He also uses a fair amount of profanity, which is completely unnecessary for getting his point across. But I do think it is a worthwhile read for informational purposes if you read it to the end.

Article cited:

WARNING THE FOLLOWING LINK DOES CONTAIN PROFANITY (very unnecessarily)

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/31234647/obamas_big_sellout/4

Advertisements

The new White House czars brought in by President Obama has been a hot topic the past several months. After all, Obama has brought in more czars in his thus far short presidency than President George W. Bush had in his entire 8 years, and the same goes for all the other past presidents as well. The term czar is not an official job related term in Washington, however it is what the White House uses to refer to those who are not voted on to be put into a government position.

The question from conservative news and talk radio icons along with the general public has been whether or not these czars are being put into place to create policy without the obligation to submit to congressional questioning. This is especially a troubling thought being as the mass majority of the people who are in these positions have disturbing past and current beliefs that are quite contrary to what most of the people of the US believe to be good for the country.

Given the rise in demand for answers to why so many czars are becoming part of the Obama Cabinet, the House and Senate became quickly aware of the way the people felt about the situation and started voicing their own concerns. This lead to the proposition of a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing to explore the powers given to these White House officials which was regrettably shrugged off by the Obama Administration.

Of course, the majority of the one’s questioning the power and amount of authority given to the czars came from the GOP, which as always were mocked and unsupported. However, liberal Democrat senator Russell Feingold was the most out spoken of the Democrats about the role of the White House czars and was the one who called for the hearing. Unhappy with the answers from Obama so far, Feingold said, “It’s not good enough to simply say, ‘Well, George Bush did it too.” One would have thought, that since he is a liberal Democrat, that the Administration would have at least entertained his request.

After ignoring the hearing and refusing to even send a witness, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters, “”I would assume that Congress and Senator Feingold have more weighty topics to grapple with than — than something like this.” You know, really important stuff, kind of like that time they spent the ENTIRE day deciding how to punish Joe Wilson. This raises eyebrows even more as to the legality of the positions and authority that has been given in these government positions known as “czars.”

When Russell Feingold was asked how he felt about the White House decision about the hearing, he stated, “That’s unfortunate. It’s also a bit ironic since one of the concerns that has been raised about these officials is that they will thwart congressional oversight of the executive branch.”

What is the Obama Administration hiding with their many White House czars? And to what extent can they create policy without congressional approval? Evidently, that is something that President Obama does not want us to find out.

Sources:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/06/white-house-shrugs-off-feingolds-czar-hearings/

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/us_obama_czars/2009/10/06/269206.html

Posts By Category

Search Posts By Month