Czar

[Chris]

Could some body please tell me why when B. H. Obama chooses a cabinet member he calls them a czar. I'm kinda scared. If congress votes down a bail-out, can our representatives be over-ridden by the treasury czar? What the #=!! is going on here? My long guns have been buried since the Clinton regime. I'm thinking it might be time to dig em up and clean off the cosmoline. What happened to my country? America is in distress, I'm flying my flag upside down from this point onward. What happened to the Constitution? Has there been a take-over? Does any body care?

[Dirtyshirt]

A, "Constitutional Republic, if you can keep it" seems to be lost in a few rapid and substantial chunks rather then by small increments.

I believe the first major loss was 1911-13. During that time were the 16th&17th amendments laying the groundwork for the Federal Reserve, direct income taxes (IRS), and the transformation of an appointed Senate to the current elected Senate.

Prior to that time State Senators were appointed by State legislatures. Thereby keeping the Senator local and accountable to the people of that State.

Another was the, "New Deal" during the '30's that shifted the original core principals of the government to new broadend social spending powers.

The US promotion, formation, and participation in the United Nations introduces a general loss of autonomy.

Then the one that I'm actually witnessing during my lifetime has been an era of eight years of the most ever executive powers that have been overturned by the Supreme Court. The executive branch along with the legislative branch continue to fail in almost every area of their responsibilitys while ignoring the will of the people.

We will learn soon that the Government will have blatantly failed us in it's primary purpose of protecting us.

The Federal Reserve board and the US Department of Treasury have been given the most supreme powers of the land.

IMO, we have lost our country already and are now Serfs.

I'm interesed in other comments.;)

[Dirtyshirt]

I wish I were able to sit down and sincerely discuss American fundamental issues with a member of our law making government.

Am I the only one that believes, "we the people" have lost our government and possibly our American way of life forever?

[Dirtyshirt]

.....Lighten up, man. The sky isn't falling.......
I know these quotes were for a different response but I think, "the sky is falling" Donny.

Pragmatically is this a representative government any longer?
Is it a government, "by the people, for the people"?
Is it a Constitutional republic?

How about, "equal justice under the law"?

[Dirtyshirt]

Donny, ponder my questions for a while, I'm moving ahead in case I can catch someone elses interest in this discussion also.

http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2008/11/bloomberg-news-sues-fed-under-freedom.html
Bloomberg news wants to know.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/fox-business-sues-treasury-failure-respond-freedom-information-act-requests/
Fox news wants to know.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/

WHAAAT??? federalreserve. gov???

I want to know. Are we in the middle of a coup and don't know it?

Is the use of, "czar" as innocent as Donny implies?

[Chris]

Probably for the same reason "Dubya" calls Karl rove "genius".

Here are a few other "nicknames" used by GWB:

* Poppy, 41, Old Man - George H. W. Bush
* Bushie - Laura Bush (this is a mutual nickname)
* Dino (short for Dinosaur) - Jean Chrétien, Prime Minister of Canada
* Steve - Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada
* Pootie-Poot - Vladimir Putin, current Prime Minister and former President of Russia
* Bandar Bush - Bandar bin Sultan, ambassador to the United States from Saudi Arabia
* Landslide - Tony Blair, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
* Man of Steel - John Howard, Prime Minister of Australia
* Quasimodo, Big Time, Darth Vader - Dick Cheney, Vice President of the United States of America
* Izzy, Altoid Boy* - Special Assistant Israel Hernandez (*for his role as provider of breath mints to the President on the campaign trail)
* Besides "Boy Genius": also Turd Blossom - Senior Advisor Karl Rove
* Condi- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
* The World's Greatest Hero - Secretary of State Colin Powell
* Big O (current), Pablo (former) - Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill
* Fredo, Speedy - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales
* Danny Boy, Dan the Man - Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Bartlett
* Ari-Bob - White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer
* High Prophet, Hurricane Karen - Karen Hughes, Special Advisor; Director of Communications under Texas Governor George W. Bush
* The Blade, My Man Mitch - Office of Management and Budget Director Mitch Daniels
* Big Country - Director of FEMA Joe Allbaugh
* Brownie - Director of FEMA Michael D. Brown
* Tree Man - Unnamed forest service official
* La Margarita - Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings
* Brother George - CIA Director George Tenet
* Tangent Man - Chief of Staff Andrew Card
* Sweet Jan - Justice Department liaison to White House Liaison Jan E. Williams Acosta
* Tiny - Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage
* Light Bulb - National Energy Policy Development Group Executive Director Andrew D. Lundquist

Lighten up, man. The sky isn't falling. I call my ex-wife "chicken" or "butt nugget" or "Q-bin" or "Wendy the cube"... or several other nicknames that have evolved over the years. Politicians can have a personality too, ya know?Everything is half-ass with you, Donny. I don't give a flying... about nicknames. I guess as long as you aren't standing in a bread line then everything must be OK. "Don't tax me, tax thee behind the tree". As long as it's not your ox being gored it's OK for someone elses, right? You don't have guns so if guns are outlawed it's no big deal. You don't smoke so anti- smoking laws are OK. You are a typical " I, me, mine" kinda guy. It's only funny if you think it's funny. Wake up boy, the sky has already fallen but I guess master government will take care of you. You generation X children are some sorry @$$ individuals. You've been indoctrinated and don't even know it. Czar is not a term we should become used to hearing, it's not a nick-name, it's a way of thinking. WAKE UP!

[Chris]

It's a nickname just as much as the nicknames Bush used. And the sky is falling in part because our current President didn't handle business. He had 8 years to keep us from reaching the place we've reached, and he didn't do his job.

Electing this next administration is not what's going to screw up your life for the next 4 years (or more)... electing the current administration (twice) did that for us.
It started long before that. Generations are guilty of letting the people lose their power. The New Deal was a raw deal, and it keeps going on and on. If the government hadn't bailed Chrysler out in the seventies they wouldn't be here today to look for another. I know that is not your fault, it all of ours. We must be vigilant. How about an armed redress of grievences. Whoo-ya!

[Dirtyshirt]

Even if it DID start long before Bush, it was his job to try fixing it. He had 8 years, and didn't accomplish his mission.

I don't believe Chris is defending Bush.

You wrote, "DID" as if you're disputing fact.

Are we understanding you correctly that Amrican foriegn policy the past 100 years was something the founders would approve of?
They certainly knew it would require substantial taxation to participate in that type of policy.

How about the central bank (Federal Reserve) and the debt economy?

You have no problem with the, New (raw) Deal? How we handled the cold war? Political corruption?

We can include the past 8 years or the next six months, but first we have to determine if you're familiar with the purpose of our government.

This topic is very bi-partisan.

[Chris]

No, Dirtyshirt, this topic has morphed into something other than what I think the topic started intended. His partisan politics were quite evident with his first post. Had he began the topic asking the questions you asked, I wouldn't be participating in this thread. Instead he is making insinuations about the incoming administration. I'm tired of that crap. I have a feeling Barack Obama will most likely end up being one of the best Presidents of our time, regardless of fear mongers or hate mongers from the right.But why czar? Have you ever heard of Russia? Well, this isn't Russia.

[Chris]

I just realized that that very cool hornet that stings with truth is on me. Thanks to whoever did that, I would have never figured that out. Muchas gracias!

[Dirtyshirt]

Why not? What does it matter what nickname he uses? I used to call my ex-wife a butt nugget. Who knows where people get the nicknames they pick...

I don't believe, "czar" as it's being applied is a, "nickname".
Webster's says it's the 1. title of any of the former emperors of Russia.
2. A person with wide ranging power.

Both interpetations are contrary to the government of the people.

I have a feeling Barack Obama will most likely end up being one of the best Presidents of our time, regardless of fear mongers or hate mongers from the right.
It's possible he will be the President who will have the greatest burdens placed upon him.

And there's nothing left to work with and it's time to pay the piper.

[Chris]

Doing a simple google search for the word "czar", I found headlines using terms such as "Drug Czar", "Energy czar", "Car Czar", "Cyber Security Czar"...

I highly doubt any of those headlines refers to emperors of Russia, but rather experts in various fields. There is no reason for concern over the use of that word. I think it's kinda silly to even be having this discussion.



And if he turns things around, he'll be an American hero.
Happy birthday, Donny. OK, you say nickname, I say mindset.

[Dirtyshirt]

2. A person with wide ranging power.

....... I think it's kinda silly to even be having this discussion. ......

No offense, but this type of discussion requires more then you are able to provide.

I, (and I believe Chris also) was trolling for a Brian Crain or a possible lurker type of exchange.

Perhaps once a substantive exchange culminates, it won't appear to be so, "silly" to you.;)

[Dirtyshirt]

This thread was started based on the use of the word "czar". You and Chris have expanded that to fit around a pre-conceived view of Barack Obama. While you might be proven to have valid concerns about our next President, believe me, it's silly for grown men to try to pretend the use of that word is significant.

"Czar" has been used in our govenment for quite a few years now.
You're correct that this thread has expanded.

May I invite you to set aside Obama now and answer these questions.

Are we understanding you correctly that Amrican foriegn policy the past 100 years was something the founders would approve of?
They certainly knew it would require substantial taxation to participate in that type of policy.

How about the central bank (Federal Reserve) and the debt economy?

You have no problem with the, New (raw) Deal? How we handled the cold war? Political corruption?

Perhaps then you will discover the true intent of this thread and the implication of the word, "czar" and the observation Chris has brought forward.

"We can include the past 8 years or the next six months, but first we have to determine if you're familiar with the purpose of our government."
I directed that statement at you Donny.

Keep in mind Donny that it's not, "silly" just because you're unable to keep up.

[Dirtyshirt]

What you're missing is that it's not that I can't keep up, it's that I don't feel like getting involved in the discussion you're trying to start with me. I've spent numerous hours around people holding similar conversations... people who are just as clueless as the two of you. ;) No offense, but it simply bores the crap out of me to listen to people acting like they know what they're talking about, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth, especially about such a discussion as the one you'd like to have. Again, no offense. Seriously. I just honestly don't think you or Chris really know that much about this.
Ah yes, the typical Donny Pauling bail as soon as substance is asked for.

[Dirtyshirt]

Another thing... let's say our government is going to hell in a handbasket, whistling Dixie along the way... what is going to be accomplished by complaining about it here? Are you and Chris going to start a revolution, hoping I, and the other 5 people who read this board, will join if we read enough of what you write?

I just think it's a pointless discussion to be having on this particular board.
You're excused Donny.

[Chris]

Another thing... let's say our government is going to hell in a handbasket, whistling Dixie along the way... what is going to be accomplished by complaining about it here? Are you and Chris going to start a revolution, hoping I, and the other 5 people who read this board, will join if we read enough of what you write?

I just think it's a pointless discussion to be having on this particular board.We'll have some revolution, if you bring your pellet gun we may do alright. You can be a czar, Dirty can be one, and I'll be one too. We'll ride them goats right up the steps of the capitol building with our pea shooters and show them so-and-sos a thang or two. Or maybe we'll ride this dead horse.

[John Hunt]

...We'll ride them goats right up the steps of the capitol building with our pea shooters.....


I have a Jennings J-22 that would be ideal for this occasion.

[Chris]

I have a Jennings J-22 that would be ideal for this occasion.YES!! Them's your goats too I do believe.

[Dirtyshirt]

I don't think I can trust Donny with my goats.

[Dirtyshirt]

It's just that Donny Pauling doesn't believe that ANY of us on this board are able to offer substance in that particular discussion.

ANY of us includes... well, any of us. Have you ever heard young children talking seriously about a subject they don't fully comprehend, and try hard to keep yourself from laughing at the things they say? Well, I don't want to be involved in a similar conversation composed of the adults on this board. Not one of us has more political experience than a bit of reading and a whole lot of "shop talk".
Oh really?.....I've mentioned several times throughout this thread that you aren't capable of participating. And now we have your admission.
It's been discovered that you Donny purposely avoid substance for fear you will expose yourself as lacking depth. Over the years you've become somewhat skilled as an additional defense at turning the tables by accusing others of being exactly what you know you are, or lacking the knowledge you know you don't have.

Now don't take that personal... it's just that if you're not capable, or not able, then you would hardly be one to judge those that are.
In this case it would be, you don't know, what you don't know.

I find it very curious that you being someone who wants to be so involved in this discussion that you try so hard to derail it and offer so little. There is no harm in this once people get to know you better and they learn to avoid following you and lowering the substance of a topic down to your level.

Now I'll look you straight in the eye and be completely honest with you. My discussions as far as this topic goes are less about you then they are about me.
My comments and questions are designed for substantive engagement. This is how I gather knowledge and additional perspective. That a person who chooses to engage with me learn as well is optimal.
You deliberately avoid this type of conversation in this section and that you never realize any benefit has been by your own design.

I know this might be just another game you're playing and if you want to, play, start a thread about polishing brass on a sinking ship.

For this thread I'll wait for substance.

[Dirtyshirt]

We won't attend any rallies. We won't start demonstrations. We won't sit in trees. We won't start a boycott.
Oh you are SO wrong.

We will have less and less discussions in the future Donny.

[Dirtyshirt]

You plan to sit in a tree, start a boycott, attend a rally, or start a demonstration? Let me know when. I'll bring a camera for documentation.
I don't know why you'd find it so hard to believe. I've always been political. I've entertained the idea of running for local office. Lately I've had numerous communications with my elected representatives.
I spent several hours attending and writing pages on record against the free-range grazing issue here in Tehama County.
I like to think my involvement was very important to it's defeat.
I'm comtemplating attending a future demonstration with fedupusa in Washinton DC.
Sorry if it hurts your feelings. It's just that this type of discussion reminds me of the days I spent at the sawmill back in the mid 90s. Lots of talk. No action. No real, deep knowledge. Just men talking to pass time and try to impress each other with their lack of knowledge.

That's not meant as an insult. I just thought that at some point we outgrow it and learn that it's okay to admit we're clueless about certain things. Know what I mean?
It doesn't hurt my feelings, it's more of an annoyance that you make mindless assumptions.
As I've tried so hard to explain, "deep knowledge" comes with sincere exchange and you've never given it a chance.
You can start by answering the questions I asked previously.

[Dirtyshirt]

Run for local office, and I'll campaign door to door for you. That is a promise. But you have to promise you'll share your experiences with us.
No, I'm involved with a BoyScout troop now and it takes a lot of time and more coming up.

I'd rather be a citizen advocate for local government responsibility on issues like the free-range grazing.

However, there are a few issues I'll be working on that I'd like to share here.
I'm thinking of a future campaign to remove the city from the movie theater business.

I've been thinking of a grass-root proposal regarding Sacramento River water based on the arguement of denying this area financial and physical growth while supporting SoCal's economy at our expense.
As in, don't move our water to them, have them, move to our water.

Then there is the FedUpusa org that has my current attention.

......but I don't have much desire to obtain a deep knowledge of something so subjective. A person's position on politics is mostly influenced by their life situation and the people they surround themselves with. I like things that can be described as 1+1=2 (with the exception of movies, which don't have to be so cut and dried for me to enjoy them).

I can anticipate a question, so let me answer it in advance: the more I study Christianity, the more I see the basics of the faith are pretty black and white. That's the only reason it holds my interest as much as it does.The problem is that many consider the Constitution to be subjective, when in fact it's less subjective then the Bible. Personal responsibility, right and wrong, is usually very, "black and white". Gray is usually a manipulation of truth.

Default to basics while rejecting statis-quo, for those that have worked so hard to make it all, "subjective" are proving themselves to be an enemy.

Stick with the facts and write a note to our Govenor reminding him that we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.
That takes less effort then going door to door for me.

[Chris]

I wonder if any of us large-ego types on this board ever look at ourselves in the mirror and say, "You know, I'm really full of a lot of sh-t and don't really know half the things I want people to think I know..."Hey man!, I resemble that remark.

[Chris]

Here ya go, DS and Chris:

http://www.slate.com/id/2207055/?y=1
I got off this dead horse a few posts back. But thanks anyway, that was fun to read. And I don't take it personally. Politics is hobby, faith is life. When we prioritize the proper way, we get less worked up about man's government, and less hung up on ourselves.