Hey leftists, please give me ONE reason to trust the government to do ANYTHING...

[Liberty]

Nice rightwing rhetoric..Bondage?

Care to name a government on earth that you prefer?

I'd prefer a constitutional republic based on law instead of an oligarchy based on tyranny any day.

Name one ...

I will wait

One what?

 

[rightwinger]

I dont fear my government.

I realize it can be taken over by greed and or idiots.

That is not the governments fault that is the peoples fault.


I love the government my founders built.

Yes, I loved the government originally built by the founders. Unfortunaltely, we have no semblance of that government now.

No we don't have any semblance to that government

We abolished slavery
We allow women to vote
We provide a basic safety net for our people
We look out for the less fortunate
We have established a global economy
We protect civil rights

 

[WillowTree]

As usual you won't get an answer only stupid mindless questions from truthdon'tmeanshit. sorrry

 

[Liberty]

FalseMatters chooses to ignore instead of addressing the constitutional means to "adapt to the times", and instead again, chooses ignorance and fantasy. Why? I wish I knew. Where do morons like this draw the line? There is no shred of common sense left in these loons...they pick and choose what they want to hear based on their own twisted view of what the world should be...and they wonder why they ALWAYS fail at anything that involves intellectual discourse. Me? I simply laugh, for if this is the best that the people who wish to destroy liberty can do...then defeating them should be hilariously easy.

 

[Liberty]

I dont fear my government.

I realize it can be taken over by greed and or idiots.

That is not the governments fault that is the peoples fault.


I love the government my founders built.

Yes, I loved the government originally built by the founders. Unfortunaltely, we have no semblance of that government now.

No we don't have any semblance to that government

We abolished slavery
We allow women to vote
We provide a basic safety net for our people
We look out for the less fortunate
We have established a global economy
We protect civil rights

yeah, its called the amendment process....and lol @ global economy.

also.
We have no property rights.
We have no 4th amendment rights.
We have limited 2nd amendment rights.
We don't even look at the 10th amendment.
We have no right to operate our businesses the way we choose.
We have no right to eat what we choose (thanks michelle).

And the left says they fight for the constitution...yeah right.

 

[rightwinger]

I'd prefer a constitutional republic based on law instead of an oligarchy based on tyranny any day.

Name one ...

I will wait

One what?

One constitutional republic based on law instead of tyranny

There are hundreds of governments on earth. You must have at least a dozen who are better than the US

 

[Ernie S.]

the problems thois country has does not come out of the government our founders left us.

It comes out of the fact that we have allowed money to run too much of our system.


When we clear out the money then it will opperate as designed.


you on the right fight for the money to have a strangle hold on our system.

Why do you people do that?

because it is our money

 

[rightwinger]

Yes, I loved the government originally built by the founders. Unfortunaltely, we have no semblance of that government now.

No we don't have any semblance to that government

We abolished slavery
We allow women to vote
We provide a basic safety net for our people
We look out for the less fortunate
We have established a global economy
We protect civil rights

yeah, its called the amendment process....and lol @ global economy.

18th century America is not somewhere you would like to live

 

[Truthmatters]

the problems thois country has does not come out of the government our founders left us.

It comes out of the fact that we have allowed money to run too much of our system.


When we clear out the money then it will opperate as designed.


you on the right fight for the money to have a strangle hold on our system.

Why do you people do that?

because it is our money

so you think that money should rule this country and not the people?

 

[Big Fitz]

The problems thois country has does not come out of the government our founders left us.

Most started after the Reconstruction when states rights took a major ding. Then Wilsonian democrats drove this nation right down the shitter combined with FDR and LBJ social reforms.

 

[Truthmatters]

Yes, I loved the government originally built by the founders. Unfortunaltely, we have no semblance of that government now.

No we don't have any semblance to that government

We abolished slavery
We allow women to vote
We provide a basic safety net for our people
We look out for the less fortunate
We have established a global economy
We protect civil rights

yeah, its called the amendment process....and lol @ global economy.

also.
We have no property rights.
We have no 4th amendment rights.
We have limited 2nd amendment rights.
We don't even look at the 10th amendment.
We have no right to operate our businesses the way we choose.
We have no right to eat what we choose (thanks michelle).

And the left says they fight for the constitution...yeah right.

You are insane and NONE of those things are true

 

[Ernie S.]

I dont fear my government.

I realize it can be taken over by greed and or idiots.

That is not the governments fault that is the peoples fault.


I love the government my founders built.

Yes, I loved the government originally built by the founders. Unfortunaltely, we have no semblance of that government now.

No we don't have any semblance to that government

We abolished slavery
We allow women to vote
We provide a basic safety net for our people
We look out for the less fortunate
We have established a global economy
We protect civil rights

All by the amendment process.

 

[Truthmatters]

The problems thois country has does not come out of the government our founders left us.

Most started after the Reconstruction when states rights took a major ding. Then Wilsonian democrats drove this nation right down the shitter combined with FDR and LBJ social reforms.

All political bullshit.

YOU are not the only voter in this country , its a democracy and you are not the ruler

 

[Truthmatters]

Yes, I loved the government originally built by the founders. Unfortunaltely, we have no semblance of that government now.

No we don't have any semblance to that government

We abolished slavery
We allow women to vote
We provide a basic safety net for our people
We look out for the less fortunate
We have established a global economy
We protect civil rights

All by the amendment process.

Which the founders wrote into the constitution

 

[Greenbeard]

Hahahaha. If you actually READ the constitution it clearly describes that the only way to gain political authority is through the election process or congressional approval.

We have 39 czars, who have vast political power over industry. When was their election? I seem to have missed it, because congress definitely did not approve their appointments.

First of all, not all appointments need be directly approved by Congress.

...and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.​

That creates at least three classes of positions: 1) those with real power and Senate confirmable, 2) those with real power, authorized in legislation or whose appointment is otherwise delegated to the executive branch, or 3) those with no political power. You mix these up and pretend they're all the same thing, which is no doubt why you're so confused.

Wow, you must really live under a rock...what do you call these people:

Afghanistan-Pakistan (Af-Pak) czar, Richard Holbrooke
AIDS czar, Jeffrey Crowley [openly gay white man]
Auto recovery czar, Ed Montgomery
Behavioral science czar, position not yet filled
Bailout czar, Herbert Allison Jr., [replaced Bush bailout czar Neel Kashkari, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability confirmed by Senate]
Border czar, Alan Bersin
Car czar, Ron Bloom [Counselor to the Secretary of the Treasury , under Senate oversight]
Climate change czar, Todd Stern
Copyright czar, not appointed yet
Counterterrorism czar, John Brennan
Cybersecurity czar, position will be vacant on August 21st [upon the departure of Melissa Hathaway]
Disinformation czar, Linda Douglass [This is a new media buzz since our earlier list, a response by pundits to the White House request for informants: see Glenn Beck and Lew Rockwell]
Domestic violence czar, Lynn Rosenthal
Drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske
Economic czar, Larry Summers
Economic czar number two, Paul Volcker
Education czar, Arne Duncan
Energy czar, Carol Browner
Food czar, Michael Taylor [a former Monsanto executive, or, the fox in charge of the henhouse]
Government performance czar, Jeffrey Zients
Great Lakes czar, Cameron Davis
Green jobs czar, Van Jones [who has a communist background]
Guantanamo closure czar, Daniel Fried
Health czar, Nancy-Ann DeParle
Infotech czar, Vivek Kundra [Shoplifted four shirts, worth $33.50 each, from J.C. Penney in 1996 (source). His last day in DC government was March 4 but on March 12 the FBI raided his office and arrested two staffers.]
Intelligence czar, Dennis Blair [Director of National Intelligence, a Senate confirmed position. He is a retired United States Navy four-star admiral]
Latin-American czar, Arturo Valenzuela (nominee) [although this post is referred to as a czar, he is nominatied to be Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs and so is subject to Senate confirmation. Voting on his confirmation was delayed to clarify his position on Honduras. Watch WaPo's Head Count to track status of confirmation.]
Mideast peace czar, George Mitchell
Mideast policy czar, Dennis Ross
Pay czar, Kenneth Feinberg
Regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein
Religion czar, aka God czar Joshua DuBois
Safe schools czar, Kevin Jennings [appointed to be Assistant Deputy Secretary of the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, a newly created post (that does not require Senate confirmation); openly gay founder of an organization dedicated to promoting pro-homosexual clubs and curricula in public schools]
Science czar, John Holdren
Stimulus oversight czar, Earl Devaney
Sudan czar, J. Scott Gration
TARP czar, Elizabeth Warren [chair of the [Congressional Oversight Panel for the Trouble Assets Relief Program; note that Herb Allison is frequently called the TARP czar]
Technology czar, Aneesh Chopra
Trade czar, Ron Kirk
Urban affairs czar, Adolfo Carrion
War czar, Douglas Lute [retained from Bush administration, married to Jane Holl Lute, currently a Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security]
Water czar, David J. Hayes [a Deputy Interior Secretary and therefore subject to Senate oversight]
Weapons czar, Ashton Carter [actually Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and so subject to Senate confirmation]
Weapons of mass destruction czar, Gary Samore

I've said this before when it comes to this silly list so I'm just going to copy and paste myself.

In the list, several of those people were confirmed by the Senate (Allison, Blair, Carter, Chopra, Hayes, Holdren, Kerlikowske, Sunstein) or recess-appointed to Senate confirmable positions (Bersin). Others occupy positions created by Congress (Devaney, Kundra) or hold positions whose authority derives directly from Congressional directives (Feinberg). Brennan is the deputy National Security Adviser so you might put him in the previous category or put him in one by himself. Some are on Task Forces that advise the President on a specific issue and their sole purpose is to come up with recommendations to submit to the President (Bloom, Montgomery). Others are special envoys, representatives, or advisers working for the State Department at the pleasure of the President (Fried, Gration, Holbrooke, Mitchell, Ross, Stern). None of these should seem particularly strange. [I'll add here that unlike other iterations of that list I've seen, you actually include a Cabinet Secretary in this one, which takes it to a whole new level of stupid.]

Others exist in executive branch organizations created by the President (though not necessarily Obama), like the Domestic Policy Council and its subdivisions, or they act as special advisers on certain issues. These are people like Browner, Carrion, Crowley, DuBois, DeParle, Samore--generally they're Assistants or Deputy Assistants to the President charged with managing some implementation activity or executive branch initiative (e.g. fostering faith-based initiatives). The Domestic Policy Council is an equivalent to the National Economic Council (the only difference being that the NEC is dedicated solely to economic issues and the DPC isn't) so people running divisions of that are essentially playing roles analogous to Larry Summers or Jason Furman (or their subordinates) on the NEC side.

This last bit--the executive branch positions, usually created by executive order--is what I assume people are suddenly concerned about (though you'll note that 1. this is a much smaller subset of the czar lists, and 2. this concept is hardly new). But let's zoom in one of those and do a little cast study on Adolfo Carrion, director of the White House Office of Urban Affairs.

The White House Office of Urban Affairs was actually created by Obama through an Executive Order. Carrion reports to Obama and to Melody Barnes, the head of the Domestic Policy Council. Part of their role is to coordinate urban policy so what does that mean? They've established an Urban Policy Working Group that's working with the NEC, DPC, and OMB to review the regional effects of various federal policies; a "Sustainable Communities Initiative" in which they're bringing together HUD, the EPA, and the Department of Transportation to coordinate some of their interrelated work; similar coordinating work on various areas of federal policy affecting low-income children. They're also apparently doing an Urban Tour at the behest of the President in which they're traveling to various cities to "1. Communicate the President’s vision and priorities for Urban and Metropolitan America; and 2. Identify best practices and innovative policy reforms for the Administration."

So are they usurping authority or even engaging in policymaking apart from departments that weren't created by Executive Order? No, they're facilitating and synthesizing and, to some degree, promoting. Their job is essentially to get the right people from the right agencies (HUD, the EPA, whatever) sitting at the same table, talking about a certain priority (for them, of course, that would be urban issues) and potentially bringing suggestions and ideas to the table. All departments are directed in the Executive Order to "cooperate with the Office and provide such information, support, and assistance to the Office as the Director may request, to the extent permitted by law" but it also specifically stresses that this Office can't step on the toes of those other departments ("Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect authority granted by law to a department, agency, or the head thereof"). So the "czar's" power here is to get agencies relevant to the Office's focus--urban policy--at the table and to attempt to engage them in joint initiatives with each other on that policy area. Power has not been transferred to this new Office from those other departments (whose heads have been confirmed by the Senate).
​

The notion that everyone who advises the President must be confirmed by the Senate is fascinating. Should the Chief of Staff be confirmed? Should "Senior Advisor" positions like that currently held by David Axelrod be Senate confirmable? The consensus up to now has been that the answer is certainly no for anyone who holds no authority over the sovereign powers over government and who doesn't hold a continuing federal office.

 

[Liberty]

Name one ...

I will wait

One what?

One constitutional republic based on law instead of tyranny

There are hundreds of governments on earth. You must have at least a dozen who are better than the US

Better? What the fuck are you talking about?

 

[rightwinger]

Yes, I loved the government originally built by the founders. Unfortunaltely, we have no semblance of that government now.

No we don't have any semblance to that government

We abolished slavery
We allow women to vote
We provide a basic safety net for our people
We look out for the less fortunate
We have established a global economy
We protect civil rights

All by the amendment process.

LOL...wrong again

 

[Truthmatters]

true rw,


we did not establish a GE through amendments

 

[Truthmatters]

One what?

One constitutional republic based on law instead of tyranny

There are hundreds of governments on earth. You must have at least a dozen who are better than the US

Better? What the fuck are you talking about?

You never answered what government in the world is better than ours

 

[rightwinger]

One what?

One constitutional republic based on law instead of tyranny

There are hundreds of governments on earth. You must have at least a dozen who are better than the US

Better? What the fuck are you talking about?

It is quite simple my friend. You obviously think the US Government is a tyranical bully

Yet, you are unable to name a single government on earth that you prefer to the US