Czar Wars
By Pat Racimora on September 18, 2009 at 6:01 PM in President Barack Obama
Czars. Bush appointed a galaxy of them. Obama appointed as many or more. Is this a big problem?
The term “Czar” comes from whatever authority you want to believe. It may be from “Caesar,” referring to his appointments to top-ranking positions. Or maybe it came from “Tsar,” to refer to Russian monarchs. No matter. To be labeled a “Czar” carries considerable clout conferred by other than means specified in our Constitution.
I don’t jump on any bandwagon just because Republicans are upset. That’s their role now. And if I thought Congress was competent and that Obama was experienced enough to know what he is doing, I might be somewhat less suspicious. But I am concerned.
So, let’s look at the issues.
First, most of us have never heard of most of these high-priced (and guess who is paying?) now-powerful people. I sampled a few resumes and was impressed with most of them (although we have already seen falling Czar, Van Jones). I like that some are intellectuals rather than lawyers-turned-politicians (although scholars sometimes have one hell of a time applying their brainpower to the real world). I am much more curious about what they have the authority to do without any oversight outside of the Executive branch.
Second, some czars hold positions that we already have offices and positions to handle. That’s seems like a recipe for clashes and inefficiency. For example, why to we need an Intelligence Czar or a Mideast Policy Czar when we already have a Central Intelligence Agency and a State Department?
Third, that Czars can move and act outside of any formal rules and channels has been cited as an advantage because things can get done more quickly. But aren’t there some flashy red flags here? Especially with an administration that has not lived up to its promise of transparency?
Fourth, put aside that Glenn Beck is busily Czar gazing. When Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, the liberal Democrat who also chairs the Senate Constitutional Subcommittee, is alarmed by Obama’s rising czars, I sit up straight in my chair and become uncommonly alert. Seems Feingold sent a letter to the White House asking some hard questions. Here are the main sections [emphases mine]:
As you know, there has been much discussion about your decisions to create and assign apparently significant policy-making responsibilities to White House and other executive positions; many of the persons filling these positions have come to be referred to in the media and even within your administration as policy “czars.” I heard firsthand about this issue on several occasions from my constituents in recent town hall meetings in Wisconsin.
The Constitution gives the Senate the duty to oversee the appointment of Executive officers through the Appointments Clause in Article II, section 2. The Appointments Clause states that the President “shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise proved for, and which shall be established by law.” This clause is an important part of the constitutional scheme of separation of powers, empowering the Senate to weigh in on the appropriateness of significant appointments and assisting in its oversight of the Executive Branch.
As a member of the Senate with the duty to oversee executive appointments and as the Chairman of the Senate Constitution Subcommittee, I respectfully urge you to disclose as much information as you can about these policy advisors and “czars.” Specifically, I ask that you identify these individuals’ roles and responsibilities, and provide the judgment(s) of your legal advisors as to whether and how these positions are consistent with the Appointments Clause. I hope that this information will help address some of the concerns that have been raised about new positions in the White House and elsewhere in the Executive Branch, and will inform any hearing that the Subcommittee holds on this topic.
Thank you for considering my views on this important matter. I very much appreciate your commitment to transparency and open government and look forward to your prompt response.
Finally, kudos to Feingold for also noting that the good folks in Wisconsin have raised the issue in town hall meetings. Nice to know someone in Congress is listening to the people!
So, let’s see who wins the Czar Wars. Stay tuned.
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
I know… the new commercial says that Bush II also had a lot of czars. And to think Obama won the election because of a three word slogan along with the notion that McCain was like Bush and that Obama wasn’t like Bush. The irony is hilarious now that the talking point seems to be the opposite of that… yes, Obama is actually like Bush II. As if that suddenly was a good thing.
exactly!!
So Bush appointing a group of unaccountable zealots working for their own cause obligates those of us who didn’t like what he did to suddenly find it OK for That One to also appoint a galaxy of them. I’m waiting with baited breath for both the obamabots and bushbots to respond to this comment with the usual hyperbole.
You know, the problem really isn’t with the appointments,per se, but with the person doing the appointing. Bush/That One–two m o r o n s who only happen to be on opposite sides.
And the problem is self-evident.
When will NQ go back to the centrist POV? While I dislike That One with a passion, that dislike is indeed rivaled by my dislike for McFlightsuit. One group of morons saddled us with a tinhorn; the other group saddled us with a dandy. Some f-ing choice.
Well, I think NQ just calls ‘em as it sees ‘em most of the time. But if you have to put us in a box, it is left of center but not way left, IMO. I think we look for things that don’t seem quite right, no matter who the actors are.
Now, Russ Feingold is a lot left of center, but I give him credit for having some cajones and expecting answers to the very good questions he has posed to the White House.
I never put you in, nor nor did I ask you to put yourself in, a box, now did I? My question is still unanswered and was rhetorical.
I didn’t mean YOU personally–the generic “you.” Yet you did ask that we go back to a Centrist POV.
I did, and you’re correct. My apologies, Pat.
But I still want the centrist POV, selfish thing I am.
And I really must make this comment: this website has allowed more than a fair share of obamabots and bushbots to post here. It is becoming difficult, if not impossible, to get a post in edgewise. Between the slack-jaws who love the Bush/Cheney dogma and post here incessantly and the mas puta dingalings from the left who fawn over every stuttered and stammered bit of hogwash from That One and beat everyone over the head with it, it is a wonder the regulars have an opportunity to get their point across. Please, NQ, cater to someone besides the crap artists of the world. We need this avenue to speak our piece and yours is the only site that allows such,
I guess we are a big tent. I kind of like that different kinds of folks come by. Makes for some interesting commentary.
And, Ferd, you are one of our favorites!!!
I appreciate your POV, Pat, and your compliment to me. The feeling is mutual and I do take all this very seriously. This country desperately needs an avenue for the center to vent. Every other group has their own and, in addition, comes here, too. We have no other place to go–we only have NQ.
I will see that the troops get your message, Ferd. It’s important to consider.
Thank you, Pat, so much. Just considering it and listening is enough for me.
Ferd, now that I’m off work, I have been considering your post again.
I think even Larry is surprised at how vociferously knee-jerk the reaction is to him discussing any favorable response to an Obama decision.
We (at least I) came here as a Hillary supporter who considered Obama woefully inadequate and was subsequently shocked at the corruption shown by the Democratic party in installing him as their nominee. I consider him a salesman, a con man who is hopelessly out of his depth.
But that doesn’t mean that if he happens to do something that I agree with, that I won’t say so. I will equally speak up if he performs badly.
There is a serious shortage of open-mindedness now. Just because I don’t like Obama doesn’t mean I like the Republican crazies. I find them pretty repugnant. I don’t want to think that my dislike of Obama has thrown me in with that bunch.
I guess it’s lonely being in the center. Hi Ferd!
yes to that love Ferds comments
Agree absolutely Ferd!
I’m staying independent now, no matter how people want to push me one way or the other. I love this:
I’d like to see who is advising the President legally now.
Thank you Ellen. You and I on occasion disagree but it is always in the spirit of true discussion. I read your posts and learn from them. Thank you for sharing them.
Ferd.
You are always straightforward and honest Ferd. I appreciate you, although we are often like the country mouse and the city mouse.
I also learn from you. Stay strong.
Pardon me, but the last one was not called McFlightsuit, it was President Codpiece.
LMAO.
My bad–he was Jethro McTull, except he lacked talent, looks, and brains.
They confirmed this guy?
Sunstein: Obama, not courts, should interpret law
‘Beliefs and commitments’ of nation’s leader should supersede judges:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=110103
So B0’s not the only one who thinks he should be a virtual dictator. Yipee!
BO was able to sway alot of people on his “I’m not George W”–now he’s adopted many of Bush’s same tactics–wow how’s that for changing Washington, for putting a stop to politics as usual and for the end to cronyism and corruption. Oh well, I guess hypocrisy doesn’t bother those who still belive in this fraud–wow and just when we thought it couldn’t get worse than Cheney, Bush and Rumsfeld. Of course poor Bush couldn’t use the race card to shut down free speech, that little evil trick is all BO and his gang.
It’s clear that Obama likes to keep his administration on a short leash. No independent operators.
That said, the apparent need for “czars” who cut across departmental and agency lines to further a policy objective may be prima facie evidence that the federal government is poorly organized. The czars are organized by function, while the rest of the government is organized…how? When too many departments/agencies are involved in carrying out a function (or think they SHOULD be involved), there may be a systemic problem.
Agreed Stan Davis. The whole administration seems to have a system failure.
Czars are only going to make things more complicated yet.
I really like this drawing, Pat. First of all, the Czars are set up like pins in a bowling alley, and the right strike could send them all tumbling. For example, Russ Feingold’s remarks are headed down the alley towards the Czars–let’s see if it’s a strike or a gutterball. My guess is that Feingold will be ignored. Glen Beck is also playing . . .
Also, the figures remind me of Russian nesting dolls–open one up, you’ll find another, then another, etc. These things can multiply very quickly, as we have seen. Very nice!
Wow–Yes, now that you mention it oowawa, they ARE set up like bowling pins. Love the analysis, as always.
I saw the Russian doll thing but not the bowling pins. Like your interpretation though, oowawa.
Fantastic, as usual Pat.
Ferd, why are you upset? You know we can’t go around censoring people on these boards, that is not our style. Though I wish we could make some republican nuts disappear, sometimes. The Obots don’t bother me.
oowawa ;great insight to a wonderful post and artwork.
The senator from Wisconsin can write a smooth letter, no? As in an opening move in chess, if BO ignores the move, he will find this letter being thrown in his face, for lack of transparency.
If he takes the bait and complies, he will release more BO-isms which will show his inconsistent judgment and lack of experience.
So yeah, I would say the Senator has asserted his chair and although he may not get a response, I am sure that they, the tzar’s, get to testify on the Hill.
What’s that you say? Executive privilege will be used to squash testimony? Where have I seen that move before?
What a wonderful cartoon!! And a subject matter that seems to escape the attention of those who are supposed to be watching what is going on. At least someone cares about who is running the government and it is not Obama, Reid, or Pelosi. It is all of these non-elected, un-scrutinized Czars. Maybe the one thing that is transparent in the government is the titles they have chosen for the people who supposedly answer to Obama.
Then I think, when does Obama have time to supervisor these people to see if what they say they are doing is what they actually are doing? That is assuming that they actually have time to meet with our TV star President. The only thing good about a TV star President is that at least we know where he is, and it is not being in the White House running the country. He is busy campaigning for what he believes is a good cause, Health Care Reform. But, unfortunately he does not want to hear what kinds of reforms the people want and do not want and what they are willing to pay for and what they do not want this country to go into more debt over. And as any good pitchman, he slants his product in the direction he wants.
I want Obama to be running the country and not just appointing Czars and being a pitch man for his brand of Health care reform. Or is that what we elected him to do by electing an inexperienced person who only knew how to follow other peoples lead, and do other peoples bidding, and reading pre-written and approved speeches?
Rich
That’s all Obama does: read.
He doesn’t lead.
And I think this whole Czar thing should be outlawed.
Period.
I noticed on the wiki link that they are actually called “directors”, and I think, “Well what exactly are you directing, and how much are you being PAID, and who decides that pay?”
It certainly isn’t Congress.
NO MORE CZARS! I don’t care which President appoints them,
It’s sneaky, underhanded, and bordering on unconstitutional.
It is a shame you didn’t see this with the very first Czar under Nixon. This has been going on for some time and is not limited to the idiots in the obamacratic party. The reptiles did it, too. Just so you know. Lose the selective indignation, and I’ll agree with you.
Selective indignation?
Do you even READ other people’s posts or do you always respond with such hate? You spewed this same crap on the person who wrote this post. What is your problem?
I said all Czars, no matter what party. READ MY POST.
And by the way, I am not a reptile, I’m a human being. So much for being in the “middle” as you claimed above.
Read the link that Pat left(as I pointed out in my comment above) You’ll see that this “Czar” crap started with FDR.
Are you drunk?
Ferd you like Cab’s or a good Chard? My sanehalf says a 2001 Cab we have might taste like vinager by now, think I will find out…I’m feeling lucky.
Jokers to left, clowns to the right…
Teak:
Thanks for the humor. LOL
Good points Tammy. I think you will see some changes in the label if Feingold heats things up at all. The devil is in what powers they have and what it is they do.
A czar by any other name sort of thing…
Perhaps the Czars are Rahm Emmanuel’s “Cabinet”
Nah, they’re just channelling Nixon. He was the dimwit who came up with the “Drug Czar” and it has been downhill ever since.
Watch what you ask for–it may outlive you.
Actually, the drug Czar started with Reagan.
And the whole “czar” thing started under FDR.
Look at Pat’s link….
Interesting stuff.
I love the art work Pat.
Those little guys are too cute to be dangerous!
Regarding the czars, I have zero interest in who is whispering in Obama’s ear.
My issue is their access to huge sums of tax-payer dollars, with no accountability to Congress…just as well, though, because the dems are not really interested anyway!
When George Bush was amassing more and more power to the executive branch, the precedent was set. The idea that the Dems wouldn’t take advantage of that power grab was ridiculous. And so they have. In fact, I think they’re trying to outdo GW in power and arrogance [a huge challenge].
Pat, I thought your graphic was great. Loved the line: Beck is busily czar-gazing.
How funny!
Of course, what’s not funny is the very thing that Feingold is questioning: who are these people, what are they doing and/or policies are they setting, and how does this square with Constitutional law. Feingold is hardly trying to smear the Administration but is absolutely representing his local constituents and the public at large.
Yet, Gibbs was unaware of Feingold’s letter and when read a portion of it during the day’s press conference, said he was not willing to play political games.
In my estimation this is way more serious than a political game. And Gibbs is one of the worst press secretaries I can remember.
And vetting some of these candidates may not be the answer. I agree with Harp’s post. I have no idea how this Cass Sunstein was confirmed and presumably “vetted.” What I’ve read on him? He makes Feingold look like a conservative [btw, Feingold is left of me as well, but he's always seemed like a stand up guy, even though I don't agree with him on many issues]. What I don’t like are these backdoor advisors/czars with no idea of who they are or what they’re doing. And why “do” we need all these extra people and salaries when there’s a standing Cabinet?
Anyway, excellent piece Pat.
It is a great piece, Pat. Great cartoon, too.
And let me say: Go, Feingold, Go.
ditto
Bush had czars. So Obama can have czars too. Sounds pretty much like the
same argument I tried to give the principal in 3rd grade. What matters is context.
What matters is political orientation. The Republicans are not interested in controlling whole industries. Remember the first TARP vote failed. And when it came to the loans for the auto industry, the president couldn’t get enough people in his own party to approve the money. He approved it and gagged when he did.
Here you have a president who wants to control the whole health industry. Buried deep in the proposed bills is an independent panel who will make decisions. The legislation is simply a hollow construct. The White House is basically telling Congress, “Pass it and we’ll fill in the details later.” It’s the same thing they’re proposing with the Consumer Financial Protection Agency, a new super-agency that would decide on what financial products should be in the marketplace.
So, add it up: the health care industry, the financial services industry, the energy industry (through cap and tax), not to mention the auto industry.
Against that backdrop, you have a number of “czars,” some with bizarre extremist views and some with anti-capitalistic attitudes who are beyond the reach of a Congressional subpoena. The president’s cabinet is a front for public and congressional consumption. You have to ask, who’s controlling the agenda. The first person to do so was Sen. Byrd. And that was back in February.
We had good reason to be concerned about a lot of the Bush administration’s policies and appointees. However I’m equally if not more concerned with the drive for economic central planning and control that will bury our economy.
Pat — your czar cartoon made me laugh. The czars appear jovial and harmless, but…pre-Lenin/Stalin Russian in their red uniforms! I did think of the nest of women peasant figures that a relative brought me as a gift from her trip there.
I consider myself center-left, but everything Russ Feingold says politically, not anything about supporting Obama, I take seriously and agree with. (As I recall, Senator Byrd disagreed with Obama’s selection of these czars and thought the absence of Senate approval went against the Constitution.)
Awesome toon Pat.
An absolute favorite. Love the dramatic colors and the bowling pin formation - everything. I’m rooting for Feingold. I hope he starts speaking out on a lot more.
Well, I just see a lot of people getting paid a lot of money on our dimes and I’m not seeing any real success in imporoving the mess our country is in politically. It’s always the practical question for me. What are we getting for our money? If nothing much, can we have some back?
So, yes I would like to see some questioning about the reasons there are so many, their assigned responsibilities, etc. And I would like more transparency about who they are exactly and how close they are to the “leader of the free world,” which I’m afraid will be just that: free for the taking.
Well, I just see a lot of people getting paid a lot of money on our dimes and I’m not seeing any real success in improving the mess our country is in politically. It’s always the practical question for me. What are we getting for our money? If nothing much, can we have some back?
So, yes I would like to see some questioning about the reasons there are so many, their assigned responsibilities, etc. And I would like more transparency about who they are exactly and how close they are to the “leader of the free world,” which I’m afraid will be just that: free for the taking.
Senator Byrd questioned Obama’s use of policy czars in a 2-25-09 letter to him and it was ignored. Link is here:
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/02/25/25greenwire-byrd-questions-obamas-use-of-policy-czars-9865.html
could someone please find out if Eric Holder is related to Willie (William) Roger Holder a Black Panter hijacker? I can’t find Eric Holder’s sibling, but one was born in the Bronx the other in Oakland. That doesn’t mean they aren’t related. If they are it would be a huge deal, even if they are only cousins.
His younger brother is named William Yearwood Holder. It’s reported that he worked at the Port Authority.
Found the full name on an oral history site, and the occupation in an article about Holder’s high school.
Obama doing 5 interviews on Sunday. He must be looking for a “full Lewinsky” from the media.
Does this guy EVER shut up?
I love that it’s killing his poll ratings, but I’d like to be able to turn on my TV just ONCE and not see his face.
I mean, REALLY.
Don’t turn on your TV on Sunday! He’s on all the time!
if everyone in America boycotted all those channels or just left the tv off .
wow what an impression that would make.
broadcasting to empty space lol
It is ironic that the one skill for which he’s repeatedly exalted, his preaching, is not working on the healthcare issue. We should check the Saturday rating on the approval of healthcare then see what Barry does for his own rating by Monday or Tuesday.
Amen Tammy. Has Obama taken his cue from Castro and Chavez both of whom spend hours yammering on to the peoples of their countries?
I think this administration has forgotten some things:
1. This ain’t Cuba or Venezuela.
2. Americans have pretty good bullsh*t detectors.
3. If you talk enough you may talk yourself out of a job.
4. In this culture overexposure and believing your own press tends to shorten your career.
Of course us old folks/snark, that should be put to death forthwith, know these things. The older I get the smarter I realize my elders were. Take notes.
I don’t care when the czars popped up–they all have to go. We have a Constitution and three branches of government to take care of the people’s business. Keeping up with an imperial squatter in the WH and slimedogs on the Hill is enough work for any country.
Wow, great cartoon!! They DO look like those Russian stack dolls. :o)
You know…why do we have to pay Czars? If all they are doing is offering advice to the POTUS, can’t they just do it when he calls up and asks their opinion? I would think that anyone in American would be willing to offer opinions to the POTUS free of charge. I don’t think it needs to be a full time job, or a paid job. If these people are all experts in their fields, then Obama should be able to pick up the phone and ask them a question.
Sounds to me like a way to get a bunch of friends on the payroll, AND bypass Congress.
These shouldn’t be full times jobs, that gives them too much power, too much time to write the bills, which they SHOULDN’T be doing.
We were in a small restaurant last Wednesday. Two short, white-haired ladies passed our table and glanced toward the T.V.
One said “there he is again, I can’t even watch T.V. anymore”!
I nearly burst out laughing, and immediately pegged them as astro-turf!
Pat, you have done it again - GREAT toon and post!
Thanks all for the positive comments on my toon. It was a challenge to create, but also kind of fun.
You’re welcome Pat. Your talent is amazing.
Great Picture!!
Czar war is different thing. Many people are talking it’s huge and etc. But i don’t believe that look similar that person who are appointed that position. It’s different matter. Main thing is those are same but Chage only thier faces.