Here a Czar...there a Czar...

by DM007 Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:24 pm

......Everywhere a Czar.

Anyone have a clue what the Czar count is up to now? I heard 32 (shouldn't someone call Guinness Book?). We should know. Afterall, they are on our payroll (and handsomely compensated). None of them are elected, or accountable to anyone, except the President. I could go on, but my blood pressure will suffer......

by **Old Timer** Sat Jul 11, 2009 10:23 pm

DM007 wrote:......Everywhere a Czar.

Anyone have a clue what the Czar count is up to now? I heard 32 (shouldn't someone call Guinness Book?). We should know. Afterall, they are on our payroll (and handsomely compensated). None of them are elected, or accountable to anyone, except the President. I could go on, but my blood pressure will suffer......

Could it be that he is putting together his own private little regime??? Nah, he wouldn't do that would he. Why that would be people that ran the country and were answerable only to him. What would that make him? King of the czars, emperor of the czars? Isn't that what a dictator does. Or a religious leader such as in the Islamic nations? But hasn't he assured everyone that he would never do that?

BETTER THINK ABOUT WHERE IT IS HEADING FOLKS, AND DON'T SAY YOU WERN'T WARNED A LONG TIME AGO, LIKE BACK IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR.

by **CarolinaHound** Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:09 am

DM007 wrote:......Everywhere a Czar.

Anyone have a clue what the Czar count is up to now? I heard 32 (shouldn't someone call Guinness Book?). We should know. Afterall, they are on our payroll (and handsomely compensated). None of them are elected, or accountable to anyone, except the President. I could go on, but my blood pressure will suffer......

Keep people busy with what your right hand men are doing and they don't have time to pay attention to what your left hand men are doing.

by Theophilus Sun Jul 12, 2009 3:50 am

CarolinaHound wrote:
DM007 wrote:......Everywhere a Czar.

Anyone have a clue what the Czar count is up to now? I heard 32 (shouldn't someone call Guinness Book?). We should know. Afterall, they are on our payroll (and handsomely compensated). None of them are elected, or accountable to anyone, except the President. I could go on, but my blood pressure will suffer......

Keep people busy with what your right hand men are doing and they don't have time to pay attention to what your left hand men are doing.

I guess the PETA czar is next. affraid

by **Old Timer** Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:27 am

Theophilus wrote:
CarolinaHound wrote:
DM007 wrote:......Everywhere a Czar.

Anyone have a clue what the Czar count is up to now? I heard 32 (shouldn't someone call Guinness Book?). We should know. Afterall, they are on our payroll (and handsomely compensated). None of them are elected, or accountable to anyone, except the President. I could go on, but my blood pressure will suffer......

Keep people busy with what your right hand men are doing and they don't have time to pay attention to what your left hand men are doing.

I guess the PETA czar is next.

And just wait until the religious czar sshows up.

by **CarolinaHound** Sun Jul 12, 2009 12:10 pm

The bootie czar is next!

by DM007 Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:29 pm

Old Timer wrote:
Theophilus wrote:
CarolinaHound wrote:
DM007 wrote:......Everywhere a Czar.

Anyone have a clue what the Czar count is up to now? I heard 32 (shouldn't someone call Guinness Book?). We should know. Afterall, they are on our payroll (and handsomely compensated). None of them are elected, or accountable to anyone, except the President. I could go on, but my blood pressure will suffer......

Keep people busy with what your right hand men are doing and they don't have time to pay attention to what your left hand men are doing.

I guess the PETA czar is next.

And just wait until the religious czar sshows up.

Too late. He' got a "Spiritual-something-or-other" czar (it's not Wright, though).

I've searched around, and can't seem to find ANY real consensus on the actual count, or the definitive titles/descriptions/authorities of each. We only hear about the few high-profile czars on the news (car, health care, drug, security, banking). 32 is still the latest count I can reasonably determine.

Why title them "czar"? Why not adviser, coordinator, organizer, committee leader, etc?

"czar", according to Webster:
1: emperor ; specifically : the ruler of Russia until the 1917 revolution.
2: one having great power or authority .

According to dictionary.com:
1. an emperor or king.
2. (often initial capital letter) the former emperor of Russia.
3. an autocratic ruler or leader.
4. any person exercising great authority or power in a particular field: a czar of industry.

Titles are EVERYTHING in D.C. Why czar? I can't find any definition, anywhere, of czar that's less than what's above. There is no casual or colloquial definition. There is no "gray area" with this word. It is absolute. The US Constitution I've read and studied (apparently, there may be others), was designed and penned to SPECIFICALLY FORBID any such singular position of authority, anywhere within our governmental structure.

by **Old Timer** Mon Jul 13, 2009 1:18 pm

DM007 wrote:
Old Timer wrote:
Theophilus wrote:
CarolinaHound wrote:
DM007 wrote:......Everywhere a Czar.

Anyone have a clue what the Czar count is up to now? I heard 32 (shouldn't someone call Guinness Book?). We should know. Afterall, they are on our payroll (and handsomely compensated). None of them are elected, or accountable to anyone, except the President. I could go on, but my blood pressure will suffer......

Keep people busy with what your right hand men are doing and they don't have time to pay attention to what your left hand men are doing.

I guess the PETA czar is next.

And just wait until the religious czar sshows up.

Too late. He' got a "Spiritual-something-or-other" czar (it's not Wright, though).

I've searched around, and can't seem to find ANY real consensus on the actual count, or the definitive titles/descriptions/authorities of each. We only hear about the few high-profile czars on the news (car, health care, drug, security, banking). 32 is still the latest count I can reasonably determine.

Why title them "czar"? Why not adviser, coordinator, organizer, committee leader, etc?

"czar", according to Webster:
1: emperor ; specifically : the ruler of Russia until the 1917 revolution.
2: one having great power or authority .

According to dictionary.com:
1. an emperor or king.
2. (often initial capital letter) the former emperor of Russia.
3. an autocratic ruler or leader.
4. any person exercising great authority or power in a particular field: a czar of industry.

Titles are EVERYTHING in D.C. Why czar? I can't find any definition, anywhere, of czar that's less than what's above. There is no casual or colloquial definition. There is no "gray area" with this word. It is absolute. The US Constitution I've read and studied (apparently, there may be others), was designed and penned to SPECIFICALLY FORBID any such singular position of authority, anywhere within our governmental structure.

Why should obama care. He put hillary in against the law as her term was not yet finished and no one dares to say anything against their mesiah. He knows it is not right to do what he is doing but then hasn't he broke every promise and or backed down from it. Isn't he putting this country into a spiral of debt that we will never get out of. Doesn't he want his own private army. He is building his own private regime that will will be answerable to him only. Once there are enough, how long before he begins the move into religious leadership. And who will be able to stop him by that time. I have seen the future and it is not very pretty.

And one last thing. I as an American citizen pledge my allegence to the flag and to the republic for which it stands. Not to any person or their office. And if obama don't like it he can kiss my ass.

It seems that Hillary taking the office she did waas against our constitution and the democrats knew about it. Hee is the actual wording from the constitution istself.

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

by Sponsored content

Here a Czar...there a Czar...

Here a Czar...there a Czar...

Re: Here a Czar...there a Czar...

Re: Here a Czar...there a Czar...

Re: Here a Czar...there a Czar...

Re: Here a Czar...there a Czar...

Re: Here a Czar...there a Czar...

Re: Here a Czar...there a Czar...

Re: Here a Czar...there a Czar...

Re: Here a Czar...there a Czar...