Enough of the Czars

It's enough already, don't you think? The Obama Administration is setting all manner of record with the appointment of czars to cover every imaginable aspect of government. The kerfuffle over Van Jones is a teachable moment (the fact is that he wasn't vetted and didn't have Senate confirmation for a key advisory position within the Obama Administration), but I'm sure that everyone will miss the point, so let me spell it out.

More scrutiny must be placed on how the czars are vetted. Some get confirmation, while many others aren't. The Republicans and their partisans have taken to calling this a "shadow government."

Shadow government? I don't think it means what they think it means.

Shadow government has a specific meaning - namely that it is the opposition government and usually occurs in parliamentary systems. It could also apply to a skeleton government to operate if the organs of governance are wiped out (terrorists, nuclear/wmd attacks, incapacitated, etc.).

What Obama and Democrats are doing with czars isn't a shadow government. It's unfettered governance without oversight from Congress, and Congress abdicated its responsibilities, meaning that it lost power to the Executive Branch. It's a vastly expanded use of czars and advisers that started decades earlier, but took on new significance with President Bush, particularly following 9/11 and then the credit market collapse.

In Obama's case, he's filling those slots to the apparent exclusion of policy positions within already established government entities like the Department of Treasury, where key positions remain unfilled. That's a questionable tactic for this Administration, but no one seems interested, least of all the media, when this should be a major story.

No one should have a problem with the president seeking advice and consent from trusted advisers, but those advisers should be thoroughly vetted by the Senate. Obama's vetting process is thorough screwed up and confirmations are only likely to further expose those deficiencies. That too is something that the Congress must address.

I don't think it's ignorance in terms of calling this a shadow government either. I think it's the lack of a term for what Obama is doing to avoid scrutiny of his advisers background by using the czar route instead of Congressional vetting via confirmation. "Shadow government" has "shadowy" and "evil" connotations, which is just how the Republican want it, but the Democrats have to address this now too - they have to justify how and why Obama is going that route, instead of confirmations.

A potential justification - and not one I agree with - is that the kinds of problems facing the country are more interrelated than ever before. Take the car czar position for example. A Dept. of Treasury official on automakers may have the economics expertise, but not experience in the auto market, while the Transportation Dept official doesn't have the economics background. I'd disagree, given that there are experts who are cross disciplinary and should be advising within the existing structures, and even if there aren't, the advisers should be confirmed.

Heck, Congress should be asking those questions, even if it's a Democrat in charge, because when a Republican finally takes the WH at some point in the future, they're going to cite Obama's precedence, and move ahead with still more unelected and unvetted positions.

And the Democrats wont do it, even if it means the loss of power by Congress as an institution, because it would expose the mess within the Obama Administration and how they choose their advisers.

If I were a Republican in Congress (or even any Democrat), I'd be urging a law that requires all "czars" be confirmed - to prevent any end-run around confirmation process, and to make sure that existing positions are filled that are for the same subject area.

In other words, if there's a confirmation-eligible position in the Treasury, you can't go ahead and leave that position unfilled while you create a czar that does the same thing - with a position that is not confirmed via Senate.

It's so common-sense, it wont get done.

UPDATE:
Michelle Malkin emails to note that the NY Times did run a story about unfilled positions last month. I should have realized that as well, seeing how I wrote a posting on the same and that the czars were a poor attempt at an end run around the confirmation process.

UPDATE:
I note that Freedom's Lighthouse posts video showing Rep. Mike Pence (R) calling for a suspension of all czars and background checks on all those who were already appointed.

Van Jones Quits Amid Controversy

Good riddance to bad rubbish. I have little doubt that Van Jones' 9/11 troofer angle contributed heavily to his quitting from the post, but it was his crank science links and radical left positions that were truly troublesome, even as they fit in with the Administration's overall outlook perfectly.<

Mr. Jones issued an apology on Thursday. When asked the next day whether Mr. Obama still had confidence in him, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said only that Mr. Jones "continues to work in the administration."

The matter surfaced after news reports of a derogatory comment Mr. Jones made in the past about Republicans, and separately, of Mr. Jones's name appearing on a petition connected to the events surrounding 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon.

That 2004 petition had asked for congressional hearings and other investigations into whether high-level government officers had allowed the attacks to occur.

The reports of his resignation generally focus on the 9/11 troofer petition, and that he once made derogatory comments about Republicans, but ignore his links to the Communist Party and crank science links. It also ignores the fact that he was a supporter of cop killer Mumia Abu Jamal, who organized marches to demand his release.

The Rhetorican also tracks Jones' resignation.

It is entertaining to see Jones bail (or be pushed) on a holiday weekend to minimize news coverage and get outside the news cycle. At least the Administration did that part right.

UPDATE:
Don Surber notes that Powerline Blog found statements Jones made just days after 9/11 blaming the US for the terror attacks. I don't think they are proof of trooferism, but are typical of the leftist thought that blames the US for all evil in the world.

The Troof Behind the Van Jones Story

President Barack Obama selected a guy named Van Jones to head up his green policies. He's your typical lefty, but then came word that he may have associated with the 9/11 troofer movement - he's a conspiracy monger who was pushing that the government was behind the 9/11 terror attacks.

Jones was forced to respond yesterday, and he issued a too cute by half denunciation of the statement. He says that he didn't review the statement he was signing closely enough.

Now, there is additional evidence that he was involved in planning a march in San Francisco. That site claims that Jones was an organizing member of a march to demand the truth as to what happened on 9/11. It was populated with all your typical leftist groups, and anti-war groups that had sprung up to protest the war in Afghanistan (from where al Qaeda sprung and plotted the terror attacks). Jones also worked on an underground anti-war publication.

Also, Ben Smith contacted other people named in the 9/11 Troofer statement, and while they said that they signed something that was more narrow than what finally appeared on the Troofer site, it generally matched their preferences for a government-involved conspiracy.

He does not know how his name came to be on the petition. Okay then. It's nice that he's denying that he is now not a troofer, and that he was never a troofer, but how'd that name get on there in the first place.

The problem isn't that he's a troofer, which I find absolutely repugnant, but that he's not into details - like reading comprehension. It's a damning indictment of his inability to pay close attention to detail - a key character trait for someone who is supposed to be helping switch the economy over to something that is more environmentally sustainable (taking his assumed position in government on the most favorable terms).


This also goes to his ability to read for comprehension and understanding what he's doing. If you assume that he didn't know what he was signing, then it's a damning argument against his character and judgment. If you assume that he knew what he was signing and that he signed it anyways, that too is a damning indictment of his character and judgment.

We have tax cheats confirmed by Congress to head the Treasury. We have all manner of corruptocrat in Congress and the Administration. This guy's a weasel. He might even be a closet troofer. Why shouldn't he be in this Administration? He fits in perfectly with this Administration and the Democrats in general. After all, multiple polls have found that a significant portion believe in a 9/11 conspiracy. So, Jones' position isn't that far out of mainstream Democrat party thought. His philosophy fits in perfectly with the Administration, and Obama has filled other slots with tax cheats. Trooferism isn't going to dissuade the President here.

Still, if President Obama is going to send Jones packing, he's going to do it today - on a Friday before a long weekend. What better way to send Van Jones under the bus?

UPDATE:
Jammie notes that Jones is a Mumia supporter. Why am I not surprised?

UPDATE:
Howard Zinn was one of the people contacted to see whether they had signed on to the troofer petition, and he said that the 9/11truth.org people lied to him and that the statements provided to him didn't go nearly as far as what the organization ended up releasing. Okay. If that's the case, why then is Zinn still associating with this organization if they misled him and distorted his position? Birds of a feather and all that.

It's an interesting sidebar to the matter at hand, that Van Jones, who also happens to be a self-declared Communist, has no place in the Administration because of his crank science connections and I have to believe that the Secret Service and FBI both made a stink about his support for cop killer Mumia Abu Jamal.

Jones is a serial conspiracy theorist - jumping from one to the next.