Goodbye Barry - Welcome Home AMERICA!

Showing posts with label Czars. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Czars. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

D.C. Just Gets "Curiouser and Curiouser"

Lesbos and Marxists and fags... OH MY! Has anybody else noticed that the Obama administration seems to be loading the federal government with radicals of various and sundry bents, or am I the only one paying attention? In his efforts to destroy the American Republic as we knew it, he has done everything in his power to create irreparable harm within the federal infrastructure. There is at least one Hispanic/gender radical on the Supreme Court (Elena Kagan), an "I'm here and I'm queer" (Kevin Jennings) "Safe Schools" czar, and Obama's latest federal appointee, (Amanda Simpson, Obama’s Transgender Appointee) who proudly proclaims "...as one of the first transgender presidential appointees to the federal government, I hope that I will soon be one of hundreds". Now there's something to which we can all look forward, eh?

Okay... time to play "Did you know?" Did you know that the DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - Fourth Edition), underwent a "text revision" (known as the DSM-IV TR), in the year 2000? Granted, the DSM-IV (and all of it's predecessors) is a relatively obscure publication to most (99.999%) of us - not nearly as well-known in the general public as any of Stephen King's works - it is, nonetheless, the premier volume relied upon by mental health professionals around the world. You may be muttering to yourself, "Get back on point, Gil... what did the text revision do?" What DSM-IV TR did was remove from homosexuality, lesbianism, bi-sexuality, trans-gender, and virtually all sexual lifestyle choices, the heading of "Sexual Deviations". Suddenly, after 47 years of documented case studies, indulging in aberrant sexual behavior is no longer "deviant". What happened to cause this reversal? It is not that the behavior is no longer deviant... it is that it is not officially classified as such - thanks to pressure from the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Trans-gender alliance. (Enter the Democratic Representative from Massachusetts Barney Frank - who probably spends more time on his knees than the Pope. Not praying... playing!)

Barney Frank, the Flaming Fag From the Fourth (Congressional District, MA), sponsor of the "Gay Bill of Special Rights" and the "Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009" (HR2981 ). There is absolutely nothing wrong with the concept of ENDA. Everybody should be allowed an opportunity to work in their chosen field. HOWEVER - it is the employer who should determine what is or is not appropriate dress and behavior while on the job, not the applicant or the government. The employer is, after all, the sole entity responsible for production and marketing, establishing and maintaining a harmonious working environment, and providing appropriate compensation/benefit packages for their employees. What would be the outcome if say 65% of the sworn officers of the San Francisco Police Department decided they should be able to wear colorful dresses to work instead of those boring blue uniforms with badges on them. And, although those 4" heels would be a bit more difficult to run in while pursuing a fleeing suspect, the more fashion conscious officers may feel compelled to wear them. Should they be denied that "right"? At the risk of repeating myself from earlier blog postings - DAMN RIGHT THEY SHOULD BE DENIED! Employers must have the right to determine what type of person can best represent their company's interests in an appropriate manner - but only during working hours. When the employee is on his/her own time "he" can dress like the Queen of Sheba, and "she" can dress like a lumberjack if they so desire. But, at work... if you take the man's money, you must play by the man's rules.

"Equal protection under the law" is the main thrust of Amendment XIV to the U.S. Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution does it provide for special protections for any individual or group, yet the Obama administration is working hard to establish special protections for radicals of any and all stripes, and he (and/or his minions) are unceasingly chipping away at the foundations of our Republic. THEY MUST BE STOPPED!!

Friday, January 8, 2010

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION INSANITY!

Now that we have almost 40 "Czars" - unelected political appointees thrown positions as a "thank you for your support" gesture by Obama - (comprised of tax dodgers and perverts of various stripes - but all good, strong leftists) he wishes to add a documented power abuser as the head monkey of the Transportation Security Administration.

Former FBI agent Errol Southers, while in the FBI, was essentially fired by the FBI for improperly accessing an FBI criminal database in 1987 and 1988. The technical term used was "censured", but that's a career-ender in the FBI. Southers is currently the chief of homeland security and intelligence for the Los Angeles International Airport Police Department.

Southers originally wrote in an October affidavit to a Senate committee that he asked a San Diego police employee to run a background check on his estranged wife's boyfriend and was censured by the FBI 20 years ago for it. Southers wrote to senators last week clarifying "inconsistencies" in his recollection of the background checks. After the committee approved his nomination and sent his name to the Senate, Southers wrote back and said that he actually personally ran background checks twice. You don't "forget" something like that... unless you think you're about to get caught in your lie.

Here we have a man who abused power, ignored established security procedures, is a union sympathizer and a proven liar being considered for a top level security position. Actually, he sounds like a perfect fit in the Obama administration's grand scheme of crippling the country.

Unionizing any positions involved in functions even remotely related to national security is absolute insanity! What happens when they decide to have a work stoppage to demand less of this, or more of that? What's next... collective bargaining for the military? How about this idea: collective bargaining for inmates in federal prisons!

Is there nobody in the intelligence community with a clean record, who speaks the truth, and who can see the obvious folly in unionizing national security positions? There probably is... but such an individual would stand in contradiction to the Obama administration's grand scheme of creating the United Socialist States of America, and therefore would never be nominated. Besides, what upright individual would want to be surrounded by Obama's cadré of left-wing loonies?
Southers professional credentials aren't all that bad... but his demonstrated deficiency of character is! Aren't 40 anti-Americans enough in this corrupt administration?

TRANSPARENCY MY TUCHAS!

Friday, October 23, 2009

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION FOMENTING REVOLUTION?

Intentionally or unintentionally it appears that the current administration is doing everything it can to incite the American people toward revolution. Is it possible that Obama is unaware that his policies, appointments and decisions thus far have made mainstream America very nervous... or is it that he just doesn't care? Since his apotheosis, Obama must be absolutely certain that he is smarter than his worshipers - which really does "track" if you think about it. After all, how smart could those who have deified Obama be?

His concern now is focused upon those of us who would neither wear the rose-colored glasses, nor adopt the necessary Pollyanna-ish attitude of "everything will be wonderful when Barack and his band of socialist/Marxist/communist/totalitarian appointees take over our government". It's probably not a great, devouring, sleep-loss type of concern, for surely he sees us as intellectually inferior, pitiful beings who just missed the opportunity to support him. I'm sure he can't ignore the fact he didn't get our votes simply because we could see through the smokescreen and ignore the mirrors... and now he must silence us.

Do we all understand that the purpose and function of government? It's "raison d'etre" is control? This is true of all governments, regardless of the type of governance...

Dictatorship - generally considered a Draconian-type of rule, a dictator usually assumes office through acts of violence, and retains that office through the same methods. The dictator lacks those bothersome restrictions provided by a constitution, and there are no laws providing for recognition of opposing points of view. A tyrant, a despot, one whose "my way or the highway" leadership style is enforced by armed thugs and an unarmed general population. Total control.

Monarchy - this one begins with the words "once upon a time", because once upon a time the "rule" of ruling was that most governments were monarchies of some sort... and the monarch initially gained control by force of arms, and was then self-designated as Emperor, King, Queen, Shah, etc.. Hereditary rule is often the defining characteristic of a monarchy. Once totalitarian in nature, many monarchies have become "constitutional monarchies", providing their subjects with the comforts of constitutional protections.

Communism - a communist state exhibits a form of government characterized by single party rule, and are generally based on either Marxist or Leninist philosophies. Additional parties may be allowed, but the communist party is always given dominance in government. In many respects the communistic form of government is not that distant from a dictatorship, and often enforces its internal will by force of arms. Total control through force of arms when deemed necessary.

Democracy - there are two types of democracy: pure and representative.
In a pure or direct democracy power rests in the assembly of all citizens who wish to participate. This assembly might pass executive actions, make laws, elect and dismiss officials, and conduct trials. A representative democracy, such as the United States should have, is founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people (as opposed to a direct democracy).

Republic - there are Constitutional Republics and Parliamentary Republics. I will only outline the Constitutional Republic here, inasmuch as it is the type which we in the USA experience (the other type isn't necessarily bad... it's just not relevant.). In a constitutional republic the head of state and other officials are elected as representatives of the people, and (at least theoretically) must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the governments power over the people.

There are several other forms of government, but they are generally ineffectual, and not in direct practice these days, and therefore are not really worth including... so I won't!

The government of the USA is - purportedly - a representative constitutional democratic republic. Unfortunately, one of the shortcomings of a representative democracy is that although an official is elected to represent his/her constituents, it is not required that they represent the expressed will of those constituents.

About now you're probably thinking, "Okay, so get to the point of the post title. Exactly how is this administration "fomenting revolution?" (Understand that I will probably just scratch the surface of those actions that have been taken in contravention of the constitution, since I only have access to those acts that have been made public.) I enumerate:

1. Government bailing out American financial institutions and two-thirds of the American automobile manufacturing industry. There is no Constitutional precedent for such actions. These businesses developed financial troubles because of exorbitantly high executive salaries, bonuses, lavish expense accounts, and greedy union labor. And those same mistakes continue to be made today! The government lawyers failed to draft the bailout bills in such a manner that would eliminate those improper behaviors. Was that just an oversight, or was it intentional? In a practical sense it makes no difference, because the bottom line is the bottom line. Taxpayer money was used to support private corporations, and used without appropriate restrictions on the manner of in which it could be disbursed. The first thing AIG did with our money was pay those outrageous bonuses to its executives. (Granted, had those businesses gone under, there would have been tens of thousands of jobs lost, increasing the strain on an already stretched-thin unemployment compensation program.) However, the government now has "control" of the automotive industry, and most of Wall Street, both of which are areas in which government has no business. The government is unsuccessful in conducting its own restricted business, why should we believe they can run successful enterprises within a competitive free market system? Why should they even believe that?

2. Government involvement in individual health care issues. Nowhere in the Constitution is that a power specifically granted to the federal government. Therefore it is a "States Rights" issue. The government is not allowed to compete with private industry at any level, which is why all government contracts must be bid upon by private vendors.

3. Appointment of unelected, and generally unvetted, "czars" to positions of power equal to, and in some cases superior to, the powers of established Cabinet posts and Departmental Directors. Further, in many cases these "czar" positions amount to nothing more political payback for support during the election campaign, with a slant toward also "paying back" those who did not support his bid for election. Most Obama czars are very radical, foaming-at-the-mouth, left-wing thugs, whose primary interest is one of destroying the very foundations of our once-great nation. These appointees are working hard for Obama's agenda, devising ways to circumvent the First Amendment (Freedom of religion, speech and expression), Second (Right to keep and bear arms), Fourth (Search and seizure), Tenth (Powers of the states and people) and Thirteenth Amendments (Abolition of slavery) to the Constitution. The measure of a man's true character can be taken from the people with whom he surrounds himself.

4. Attempting to silence those who would disagree with new Presidential plans and policies, by re-instituting the 1949 "Fairness Doctrine", which was essentially deemed worthless by the FCC in August of 1987, who repealed it by a 4-0 vote, and labeled it "unconstitutional", saying:

"The intrusion by government into the content of programming occasioned by the enforcement of [the Fairness Doctrine] restricts the journalistic freedom of broadcasters ... [and] actually inhibits the presentation of controversial issues of public importance to the detriment of the public and the degradation of the editorial prerogative of broadcast journalists."

This ruling was upheld by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in 1989.

5. Coming soon to Obamaland - the Internet Czar! A position designed to restrict the free flow of information between citizens of the United States over the internet. Purportedly, this poition is designed to “enhance remedies for violations of intellectual property laws and for other purposes”. It’s the “other purposes” that should have people concerned.

6. There is a rumor circulating - one that is well within the realm of believability - that Obama plans to sign away the sovereignty of this great nation in Copenhagen at the impending United Nations Climate Treaty (December 7-18, 2009). If such an act is not treason, then the ensuing revolt across the country will not be considered a revolution. The only freedoms that any official can sign away are his own! If Obama opts for personal slavery under the U.N. and a "World Government", replacing U.S. law and the Constitution with the laws of the International Court then let him sign away his freedoms. (It is also being said that once the document is signed it cannot be revoked.) No man can make such a decision for another person, nor can a President make such a decision for a nation of men... without cost. The cost of MY freedom will be dear to all concerned!

These changes are, for the most part, being made without challenge from the American citizens. Have we - the "silent majority" - been silent so long as to have lost our voice entirely? Or, have we been so ignorantly complacent that we no longer care? The government is NOT YOUR DADDY! You cannot depend on the government to meet all, most, or even any of your needs in the long term. If you don't believe me, ask any Native American what trusting your government does for you.

For those of you who may be the least bit concerned about such a thing as signing us over to a foreign entity - as if we were personal property - actually happening I would suggest you contact all your elected state officials demanding that they refuse to accept such a proposal. Thirty-three states have already re-declared their "States Rights". Could secession from the union be far behind?

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Regulatory "Czar" Sunstein Defends Stealing Organs From Hopeless Patients

Let me begin by saying that, IMHO, Cass Sunstein is an obvious wacko. The only "regulating" that Sunstein should be involved with is following the dosage requirements on his Thorazine!

President Obama's newly confirmed Regulatory Czar defended the possibility of removing organs from terminally ill patients without their permission! Sunstein also has strongly pushed for the removal of organs from deceased individuals who did not explicitly consent to becoming organ donors. Now, as you are asking yourself "What the hell is wrong with Sunstein's mind?", you must also ask yourself, "What the hell is wrong with the person who appointed him to an unvetted position within the government?" Notice I did not say "office within the government", because it is not an official position. There is no job description for "czar", because there is NO SUCH JOB! Being appointed a "czar" is a political plum - it's nothing more than payback for a supporter's efforts toward getting Obama elected. And, if there is no job description and no real job, then it follows that there are no qualifications required to fill that "position". That's the nice thing about being made a Czar... you need NO expertise in the area of primary responsibility. But WAIT! If there's no such job, and no job description, then there cannot be any responsibilities either. Ergo, once you are made a czar you cannot fail, even if you do not succeed. The obvious defense would be one of, "I'm not responsible, because I cannot be held responsible for failing to succeed in a non-job where there are no legally defined responsibilities." I believe that excuse would work very nicely for those who are politically inclined... and morally bankrupt. Cass Sunstein is apparently one of those people who is both politically inclined and morally bankrupt!

How does he "justify" such a morally heinous position? In his 2008 book, "Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth and Happiness," Sunstein and co-author Richard Thaler discussed multiple legal scenarios regarding organ donation. One possibility presented in the book, termed by Sunstein as "routine removal," posits that "the state owns the rights to body parts of people who are dead or in certain hopeless conditions, and it can remove their organs without asking anyone's permission." THE STATE OWNS YOUR BODY PARTS, even if you are not DEAD? How insane is that notion?? Did our left-wing Congress repeal the 4th Amendment when we weren't looking? (That wouldn't surprise me one bit.) The 4th Amendment prohibitions against "unlawful search and seizure"only applies to those acting as agents of the government - which, if the government directed such acts against a human body by anyone, that person(s) would be a de facto agent of the government, and thereby a conspirator in the violation of the 4th Amendment.

After defending the position, Sunstein conceded the "routine removal" approach "violates a generally accepted principle, which is that within broad limits, individuals should be able to decide what is to be done with and to their bodies." Well, DUH! Nonetheless, Sunstein did not add that the removal of organs from a living individual should be banned

Sunstein's radical views - and the absence of either morals or ethics in his personal belief system - is not atypical of Obama's czars and cabinet appointees. Fifty years ago, the USSRs communist leader, Nikita Krushchev made the statement that "We shall destroy you from within!". It appears the pieces are now being placed for exactly such a move. Our own government is rapidly developing the necessary infrastructure of control to insure the transition to a socialist form of government will be met with little resistance... if not with open arms. The government has usurped control of two-thirds of the automotive industry, all of Wall Street, and is now attempting to consume the health care industry, all the while telling gullible Americans that it is good for us. As our government moves inexorably toward a socialist-totalitarian regime the sheeple of America sit quietly as their Constitutional rights are quickly chipped away. A piece here, a concession there... how long will it take before we are quietly enslaved by our own government?

Sunday, August 2, 2009

CZARIST AMERICA - More Czars Than Stars

How much incompetence can the elected representatives of the American people put up with before the "President" is taken to task for his fiscal irresponsibility? Here's a list of the most recent issuance of political plums - and remember, none of these people have been vetted by Congress, nor are they responsible to anyone other than Obama. Also, keep in mind that collectively they are being paid hundreds of thousands - perhaps millions - of tax dollars, AND they will each require government funded office space, transportation, and a significant staff of underlings to whom they will delegate all the "grunt work", retaining only the decision making for themselves.
1. Technology Czar: Aneesh Chopra - Chopra talks about the role of technology in government policy, and advancing Obama's health care IT, smart grid, education technology, and economic development agendas. (I don't know much about Chopra, so I'm taking a "wait and see" attitude about his performance.)


2. Drug Czar: Gil Kerlikowske - While ramping up efforts to ensure that no human suffering can be relieved by doctors prescribing marijuana, Kerlikowske said his office will soon begin two new initiatives: first, to outlaw breast feeding and baby formula; and then campaign to urge teenagers to avoid marijuana by increasing their use of alcohol and tobacco. (BEAM ME UP, SCOTTY! There is no intelligent life in Washington D.C. What a nut job!)


3. Copyright Czar: Not yet appointed.


4. Energy Czar: Carol M. Browner - Browner is a member of Socialist International, inasmuch as she has a leadership role at the Commission for Sustainable World Society. Following her appointment, her name was been removed from the Socialist International web site, but that information is available if you look hard enough.


5. Car Czar: Ed Montgomery - an economist who specializes in job training and local economic development. He is currently Dean at the University of Maryland, and he once served as Labor Department Deputy Secretary in the Clinton administration. (Montgomery has never actually been involved in the auto industry, but it is rumored that he has in fact driven a car. Political plum.)


6. Terrorism/WMD Czar: Gary Samore - was a veteran arms control negotiator in the Clinton Administration, and as its new "czar" he will be responsible for preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism. Good luck to him!


7. Health Care Czar: Nancy-Ann DeParle - stated that, "A public plan is something that’s sponsored by the government, and therefore has very low or almost nonexistent administrative costs, compared to others. It doesn’t have the need to have brokers out selling; it wouldn’t have the need to have a lot of costs and profits, the way private plans would. So it has that advantage. It could operate by the same rules that all the other plans do; it could have payments rates that are very similar. Or it could have payment rates that are the same as Medicare — that’s one idea that’s been used. So there are various ways of looking at it." (Promoting the Party line doesn't make it any more true than standing atop a tall building repeating the line, "I can fly... I can fly" gives one the ability to defy gravity. But, you won't know for sure until you take that first step... and then it's too late. Besides, Obama already has a Cabinet-level Secretary of Health and Human Services who shouldn't need additional supervision!)

8. Education Czar: Arne Duncan - has run the Chicago School District since 2001, the third largest in the country, with a focus on transforming weak schools, closing failing ones, and improving teacher quality. He is known as an innovative reformer, who has called for high quality education as the key to fighting poverty, strengthening the economy, and promoting opportunity. “It is the civil rights issue of our generation and it is the one sure path to a more equal, fair and just society,” Duncan says. “While there are no simple answers, I know from experience that when you focus on basics like reading and math, when you embrace innovative new approaches to learning, and when you create a professional climate that attracts great teachers -- you can make a difference for children." (Basic education is a civil right, but higher education is not. It is, and must remain, a competitive level of education.
Obama already has a Cabinet-level Secretary of Education who shouldn't need additional supervision!)


9. Economic Czar: Paul Volcker - is an American economist. He is currently the Economic Czar in the Obama White House. Volcker is charged with coordinating with the Treasury Department and other relevant agencies. He is best known as Chairman of the Federal Reserve under United States Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. (He may be one of the very few Obama appointees who actually has the credentials to support the rationale behind his appointment.)


10. Mortgage Czar: Not yet appointed.


11. Urban Affairs/Housing Czar: Adolfo Carrión - In the past two fiscal years, the now White House urban policy director - spent about $19,000 on his State of the Borough tours, records show.

Carrión also had taxpayers fund his $140-a-year satellite radio subscription because he spends "a great deal of time traveling throughout the Bronx and the city." Apparently It was important for him at the taxpayers expense to have a 'mobile' source for news and information.

He is the first borough president to charge taxpayers more than $13,000 a year for his membership in the County Executives of America organization. (Basically, Carrión is a spendthrift. And, once again, Obama already has a Cabinet-level Secretary of Housing and Urban Development who shouldn't need additional supervision!)


12. Guantanamo Closure Czar: Danny Fried - served as the Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs since 2005. He was Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for European and Eurasian Affairs at the National Security Council beginning in 2001. He also worked as Principal Deputy Special Advisor to the Secretary of State for the New Independent States from 2000 to 2001. He served as Ambassador to Poland from 1997 until 2000. (Although all the titles are impressive, where are the qualifying experience factors, and why is a "Czar" necessary to close a military installation? We have successfully closed military installations around the world for over 100 years without the use of a single "Czar".)


13. Great Lakes Czar: Cameron Davis - is a leader of a Chicago-based environmentalist group, who has been appointed to oversee President Barack Obama's initiative to clean up the Great Lakes.

Davis is president of the Alliance for the Great Lakes, one of many organizations that have pushed for a restoration program expected to cost more than $20 billion. He was appointed by Lisa Jackson, head of the Environmental Protection Agency. (Davis may actually be the 2nd appointee with some qualifications for the position to which he has been appointed.)


14. Stimulus accountability Czar: Earl Devaney - was a one-time cop and Secret Service agent appointed to monitor spending of the administration's $787 billion stimulus plan. (No budgetary experience at all, but let’s give him a $787 billion stimulus plan to control.)


15. Cyberspace Czar (Internet Czar): Not yet appointed.


16. Border Czar: Alan Bersin (Former US attorney) - essentially had the same job under President Clinton. He is expected to handle illegal immigration and drug violence issues along the Mexican-American border. (Good luck to him! Perhaps he can get Secretary Napolitano to actually do something in the way of providing "Homeland Security".)


17. Intelligence Czar: Admiral Dennis Blair - is the third and current Director of National Intelligence and a retired United States Navy four-star admiral. He was confirmed by the United States Senate to serve in the Obama administration as Director of Naval Intelligence.

According to journalist Alan Nairn, Blair disobeyed orders from civilians in the Clinton Administration and was implicated in backing the perpetrators of church massacres in East Timor in 1999. Allan Nairn also claims new information that indicates he may have lied to Congress. (At least as a four-star Admiral he showed he was dedicated to serving America, and disobeying orders from civilians is not necessarily a bad thing - especially if those civilians are not appointed as one's superiors. If civilians had less control over our military commanders perhaps the Korean "Police Action" and Vietnam War would not have been as costly in terms of American lives. Let the warriors fight the wars, and let the politicians thank them for doing so!)


18. Regulatory Czar: Cass Sunstein - is an American legal scholar, in the fields of constitutional law, administrative law, environmental law, and law and behavioral economics.

This is what the constitutional law scholar has this to say about the US Constitution:

Why should we be governed by people long dead? … In any case, the group that ratified the Constitution included just a small subset of the society; it excluded all women, the vast majority of African Americans, many of those without property, and numerous others who were not permitted to vote.”

Sunstein is also a radical (extremely radical) animal rights activist who desire is to establish legal rights for livestock, wildlife, and pets. He states, "There should be extensive regulation of the use of animals in entertainment, scientific experiments, and agriculture." Current Debates and New Directions, a 2004 book that Sunstein co-edited with then-girlfriend Martha Nussbaum states his ambitious plan to give animals the legal “right” to file lawsuits. Is this a joke?

Animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives, to prevent violations of current law … Any animals that are entitled to bring suit would be represented by (human) counsel, who would owe guardian-like obligations and make decisions, subject to those obligations, on their clients’ behalf.”

Keep in mind that as OIRA Administrator, he will have the political authority to change existing laws. (Animals should be free from abuse, or being used as experiments for anything other than for medical progress. This one has the technical credentials, but... can you say NUTJOB?)


19. Pay Czar: Kenneth Feinberg - a lawyer who served as the Special Master of the Federal September 11th Victim Compensation Fund, which distributed nearly $7 billion to more than 5,000 families and victims of 9/11. And if that wasn't enough, three years later he agreed to be the administrator of the Hokie Spirit Memorial Fund, set up for the benefit of victims' families in the wake of the 2007 Virginia Tech mass shooting. Now Feinberg will be dealing with high-paid executives blamed for contributing to the global economic meltdown and will be tasked with vetting compensation for executives of large corporations that have received federal bailout funds, including AIG, Citigroup and Bank of America. (I wish him the best of luck in that endeavor! These corporations have done nothing but ABUSE those bail out funds.)


20. Iran Czar: To be re-appointed.


21. Tarp Czar: Herb Allison - the Fannie Mae Chief Executive will head the government's $700 billion financial-rescue program. However the rumor mill says: "In choosing Mr. Allison to head the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the administration is turning to an experienced manager at a time when it is having trouble filling key finance posts. Mr. Allison, 65 years old, is the former chairman of investment company TIAA-CREF and was a Merrill Lynch & Co. executive for years. In September, he agreed to run Fannie Mae after the U.S. took over the mortgage giant and its sister firm, Freddie Mac." (Excuse me, but this guy was at the helm of Fannie Mae when it went under! If he could have saved it, why didn't he do so then?)


22. Middle-East Peace Czar: George Mitchell - has earned a reputation as a diplomat capable of untangling the world's most tangled webs. Since leaving the U.S. Senate fifteen years ago, he has helped broker a peace agreement in war-torn Northern Ireland, spearheaded a Clinton Administration committee on Middle East peace. Coming up with a viable resolution to the simmering Israeli-Palestinian conflict may be his most difficult challenge yet. (He has the bona fides, but they have thousands of years of hatred and mistrust to overcome.)


23. Science Czar: John Holdren - the latest and perhaps most disturbing example of extremism.

In a 1977 book he co-authored, called "Eco science: Population, Resources, Environment," the most outrageous ideology for America was stated on the written page. Holdren called for a "Planetary Regime" to enforce mandatory abortions for population control and limit the use of natural resources. Holdren wrote: "There exists ample authority under which population growth could be regulated. It has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society." His book goes on...

pg 786 - One way to carry out this disapproval might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption—especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone. If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it. Adoption proceedings probably should remain more difficult for single people than for married couples, in recognition of the relative difficulty of raising children alone. It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society. Let's look at some excerpts from his book -


pg 786 - Involuntary fertility control - A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.

The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.

pg 787 - Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.

pg 838 - If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility—just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns—providing they are not denied equal protection.

pg 838 - In today's world, however, the number of children in a family is a matter of profound public concern. The law regulates other highly personal matters. For example, no one may lawfully have more than one spouse at a time. Why should the law not be able to prevent a person from having more than two children?

pg 917 - If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization.

pg 942 - Toward a Planetary Regime - Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime—sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market.

The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries' shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits. (Impossible, you say? This is one more NUT JOB appointed to a powerful, ungoverned government position!)


24. Green jobs Czar: Anthony “Van” Jones - A few short years ago Jones was a Bay Area radical agitator-a committed Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, waging war on the police and capitalist system, who freely admits he’s a proud San Franciscan with an arrest record. (That's a good solid recommendation for a power position.)


25. Afghanistan Czar: Richard Holbrooke - Holbrooke is a diplomat and a negotiator with a knack for getting things done. He brokered the 1995 Dayton Peace Accords in Bosnia, an accomplishment that some said deserved a Nobel Peace Prize. A New York Times reporter wrote “if you want somebody to pull the trigger, or close a deal, think Holbrooke.” His 45 years of experience have made him a fixture of the Democratic Party’s foreign policy establishment. When Russia invaded Georgia in August 2008, Holbrooke was one of the first Americans to meet with Georgian leader Mikhail Saakashvili. (Holbrooke could be a genuine winner among these generally lame appointments!)


26. Sudan Czar: J. Scott Gration - A retired USAF Major General, has been caricatured in the press as the ultimate "Obamanaut and the most mystic believer in Obama-ism" prone to "hero-worship." While serving as an attaché during Obama's trip to South Africa, Chad, and Kenya in 2006, he was taken by Obama's ability to speak transformatively about problems with tribal and nationalistic roots, and Gration has been an Obama adviser ever since. (Swell, now we have the White House sycophant. Isn't it a bit odd that a professional military man, who swore an oath to "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States", has aligned himself with those who wish to circumvent, ignore and/or undermine that same document? On the other hand, you don't become a General Officer in the military without knowing how to kiss political butt.)

Significant to his appointment is that Gration originally set his sites on running NASA, to which he had Obama's full support, that is until defense lobbyists squashed the idea. This raises doubts and questions about whether this new assignment is an afterthought for the administration. Is it simply as a patronage job for a loyal supporter, after all Gration's diplomatic experience is very thin and not a good thing for someone who must jump into the middle of a diplomatic crisis with hundreds of thousands of lives at stake?


27. Mideast Policy Czar: Dennis Ross - is a controversial U.S. diplomat with close ties to Israel and a history of pushing hardliner policies toward Iran. He has served both Republican and Democratic administrations in negotiations on Middle East peace and other foreign policy issues. (This sounds like one of the more sensible appointments to me - somebody who kicks butt instead of kissing it.)

Ross’s first appointment in the Obama administration was as the State Department’s special advisor for the Gulf and Southwest Asia. But in June 2009, he abruptly shifted to the NSC, a move first reported by Israel’s Haaretz.


28. Information Czar: Vivek Kundra - took charge of the District of Columbia's technology operations in late 2007, ushering in a new era of experimentation—adopting popular Web sites such as YouTube, Wikipedia, and Twitter to improve city services. Now, as the newly appointed chief information officer of the federal government, he plans to bring the same technical innovation to the national stage. The problem is that the District's technology budget was small in comparison, and its staff concentrated, while the federal government's budget of $71 billion is spread across dozens of departments and agencies. (At least this guy's résumé sounds like he has some experience in the field he now oversees.)


29. AIDS Czar: Jeffrey Crowley - is an openly gay man appointed to help lead the Administration's response to HIV/AIDS and disability policies. Most recently, he was a Senior Research Scholar at Georgetown University's Health Policy Institute and a Senior Scholar at the O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown University Law Center. Crowley also served as Deputy Executive Director of Programs at the National Association of People with AIDS (NAPWA). (Seems like a reasonable appointment for an AIDS program. After all, who would know more about AIDS than a practicing homosexual?)


30. Faith-based Czar: Joshua Dubois - a relative newbie and senior political aide who started out in Obama’s U.S. Senate office, as the only Democratic full-time staffer devoted to faith outreach. DuBois is a 26-year-old Pentecostal pastor who has been appointed to lead the new White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnership with a broader mission than with the past administration. He will lead a council of 25 influential religious and nonprofit leaders helping both faith-based and secular groups invigorate their communities by providing everything from social services to job training, with his main focus being to reduce poverty and promote responsible fatherhood. (Looks like just another political plum to me. But a plum of good intentions... and we all know where the road paved with good intentions leads.)


31. Climate Czar: Todd Stern - is a Washington, D.C., lawyer with climate change and environmental expertise, some say. He served in a variety of positions during the Clinton administration, including the President's Coordinator for Climate Change. He was the chief negotiator at the 1997 Kyoto climate change talks and will be empowered to negotiate on behalf of the United States at climate change talks.

His mantra on the climate change issue, "The time for denial, delay and dispute is over."

For the record, Kyoto is known as the treaty that failed to pass in the UN Senate 10 years ago, it managed to get zero votes. (How about CLIMATE RESTORATION, rather than "climate change"? We know that not all change is good, but our climate used to be just fine. It's not nice to fool with Mother Nature!)


32. California Water Czar: David J. Hayes - is a member of the Obama Transition Project's Agency Review Working Group in charge of the energy and natural resources agencies. He is a former Global Chair of the Environment, Land and Resources Department at Latham & Watkins, an international law firm. He is a Senior Fellow at the World Wildlife Fund, advising the President of WWF on climate change matters, and he is a Senior Fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute, specializing on energy matters. He holds the title of Vice-Chairman of the national conservation group, American Rivers, and he is the former Chairman of the Board of the Environmental Law Institute. He was the Deputy Secretary of the Interior during the Clinton Administration. He served as a Consulting Professor at Stanford University's Woods Institute for the Environment. He also served as a Board member of RESOLVE and the Natural Heritage Institute. He certainly has the credentials, now let’s see what his 'policies' bring to the table. (Is this the guy responsible for cutting off the water supply to tens of thousands of acres of irrigated produce in California, idling some 80,000 farm workers, causing a tremendous increase in unemployment claims in that state, and a noticeable jump in produce prices at the market? All to save a 2" smelt that isn't even native to fresh water? Fine job, Bubba!)


There are five more Czars appointments lurking about the White House, including the “Cybersecurity Czar” (aka: Internet Czar), but I have not yet been able to glean any information about them.


There is nothing truly creative about any of these appointments. Although a few have expertise in the area to which they have been appointed, most are inexperienced in the areas they now control, many are products of the Chicago political machine (no surprise there), and the remainder primarily seem to be recycled from the Clinton administration. About half of these so-called "Czars" are nothing more than duplication of existing Cabinet-level Secretary positions. If these Cabinet members need additional supervision, then it should become obvious that they aren't capable of doing their job. Replace them!

Our government has now created more "Czars" in 7 months than Czarist Russia had in its entire history! What's wrong with this picture?

WAKE UP AMERICA!!
There are now foxes guarding every taxpayer funded hen-house in Washington D.C.! And, as the pangs of Constitutional hunger strike the rank and file citizens... there will be nothing left for us to eat (except maybe some of that "pie in the sky" Obama has promised us).

There's always an outside chance that I could be misunderstanding everything I see going on... in fact, you should pray for that!