When Byrd says it's unconstitutional--it is unconstitutional.

There are 16 Czars--not confirmed and not subjected to Congress oversight.

Beyond the pale.

FTA -
Over the past thirty years presidents have each had one or two czars for various issues, and once the number went as high as five.
....................

So, if even 1 czar is considered unconstitutional and the practice has occurred for 30 years; why the big flap now?

Unprecedented times call for unprecedented solutions.

"So, if even 1 czar is considered unconstitutional and the practice has occurred for 30 years; why the big flap now?"

These czars were few and far between, and rarely did anything that seriously ruffled any feathers. But President Obama has taken this to an unprecedented level, to the point where these appointments are dangerous to our constitutional regime.

Administrative czars have been used since the early 70's. Why this now?

By now I think it is preety much a done deal of American politics.

The ObamaMamas don't care about the Constitution because it stands in the way of their social engineering agenda. Biden and the Clintonistas dumped due process in passing VAWA, sold out to the corporations with NAFTA and other "global initiatives" that sent manufacturing overseas, and undermined regulatory oversight of Wall Street.

But none dare call it treason.

I saw that, but that seems to be just an opinion.

I do agree with the fact that Obama is probably trying to go around the republicans by doing this and avoiding any type of confirmation hearing to expedite his agenda.

I see this in the same light as recess appointments. No congressional input there either.
.

"I do agree with the fact that Obama is probably trying to go around the republicans by doing this and avoiding any type of confirmation hearing to expedite his agenda."

Maybe.

"I see this in the same light as recess appointments. No congressional input there either."

But aren't those temporary?

But aren't those temporary?

#7 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine

Yes year to year, But there is nothing stopping a president from doing this over and over. I think Bolton maintained his UN appointment this way...

i see this as the beginning of the next great depression. fdr had created similar peeps at his disposal.

the beginning of the next great depression
#9 | Posted by nanc

Are you serious, we are already in the Second Act. Or did you forget everything that happened before Jan. 20?

When Byrd says it's unconstitutional--it is unconstitutional.
#1 | Posted by MURPHY

Whoa! Wait a sec here. I thought whatever Byrd had to say was not to be listened to, stood beyond the pale, couldn't be used for anything other than to tar the Dems with his membership more than 60 years ago in the Klan? What gives? Are there some new talking points that have been distributed? I didn't get any? Whuzzup?
~Murky

Barry is appointing a Constitutional Czar to look into this.

#12 | Posted by cookfish

The Constitutional Czar said the Founders were confused and disoriented and should be fired without the required thirty days notice.

It's only a goddamn piece of paper.
~Shrub

"Whoa! Wait a sec here. I thought whatever Byrd had to say was not to be listened to, stood beyond the pale, couldn't be used for anything other than to tar the Dems with his membership more than 60 years ago in the Klan? What gives? Are there some new talking points that have been distributed? I didn't get any? Whuzzup? ~Murky" #11 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Nobody ever said "whatever Byrd had to say was not to be listened to". They just point out the hypocrisy of Democrats when they point out Byrd was head of the KKK. That's all.

Yes year to year, But there is nothing stopping a president from doing this over and over. I think Bolton maintained his UN appointment this way...

#8 | Posted by Prolix247

But the appointment ended when the next congress came in--usually serving less than a year depending on the timing of the recess.

---------

This is clearly against the constitution. Obama is excluding the congress for confirmations, expanding the WH--which all libs claim to hate--and there is no accountablility--no transparency.

These czars do not report to congress nor required.

#11 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Byrd has done his pennance--he apologized long ago and proved he is not of that ilk.

"Whoa! Wait a sec here. I thought whatever Byrd had to say was not to be listened to, stood beyond the pale, couldn't be used for anything other than to tar the Dems with his membership more than 60 years ago in the Klan? What gives? Are there some new talking points that have been distributed? I didn't get any? Whuzzup? ~Murky"

I am sure the distingui...extinguished gentleman from West Virginia was properly approved for his Klan membership. All he requests is the same process for "czars."

It's only a goddamn piece of paper.
~Shrub

Byrd has done his pennance--he apologized long ago and proved he is not of that ilk.
#17 | Posted by MURPHY

I'm well aware of that and I'm gald you are, as well, Murphy.

"Last week President Obama appointed yet another "czar" with massive government power, answering only to him. Even before this latest appointment, the top-ranking Democrat in the Senate wrote President Obama a letter saying that these czars are unconstitutional. President Obama's "czar strategy" is an unprecedented power grab centralizing authority in the White House, outside congressional oversight and in violation of the Constitution."

Of course they're unconstitutional. Who needs a Constitution when we can have "czars?" Doing things in violation of the Constitution isn't news. I would be surprised if the administration did anything that WAS constitutional.

There are only 3 ways this unconstitutional power grab can be solved.

1) Congress grows a set of balls and drags the Czars in front of a hearing every single day until the Obama admin backs away from the practice. If the Czars refuse, or lie to congress, they can be held in contempt and arrested.

2) Someone files a challenge in court, perhaps when the new Czar cuts someone's pay. The courts would be able to block these Czars. This would have to go to the USSC, eventually.

3) The people rise up and overthrow the gov't and install people who can both read and follow the Constitution.

Option 3 gets a little more likely every single day that options 1 or 2 doesn't happen.

Pray that someone in congress or the courts step in soon.

Wish this guy had been shouting about all the unconstitutional crap the executive branch had been doing since he's been in office. Executive orders that are not really laws but treated as such. Nothing in the constitution gives them this power. Executive orders were only for cabinet members. And cabinet members should not have the power to make law. That's the job for Congress.

Bush=it's only a gd piece of paper
Obama=we need this to help the country

Democrats are so cute when they suffer from their bipolar conditions.