Obam announces plan to streamline government

[miles]

He'll close down three agencies and build one monolithic mega agency.

The Department of Hope, Change, and Shrinkage.

 

[phrodeau]

He wants to bypass the Constitution as much as possible.

Link?

 

[Liar]

Link?

Derp needs no stinkin' citation.

 

[garbage can]

In a largely symbolic move, I'd like to see the president eliminate every cabinet position except Defense, State and Treasury.

How about the Czars??............

 

[TexasWife25]

How about the Czars??............

The Czars have been around a long time
Im sure they will be there long after this presidency ends

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Know your history.



There can be only one. Three leads to civil war...

 

[unregistered]

 

[jeninflorida]

The Czars have been around a long time
Im sure they will be there long after this presidency ends

Obama has added more Czars than any other president....hell I would be happy if we went back to the number of Czars that Clinton had

 

[jeninflorida]

He'll close down three agencies and build one monolithic mega agency.

True, and then add another 10,000 government workers. The left wing nuts need to ask themselves this question, how many federal workers did Obama add? How many did Bush add (and I think we can fire all these workers)?

Do we really need all these workers?

What is Obama's goal for America? I'm thinking he wants to make America the next Greece?

 

[unregistered]

 

[TexasWife25]

Obama has added more Czars than any other president....hell I would be happy if we went back to the number of Czars that Clinton had

I have decided that you watch too much fox news
and read too little.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/czar-search/
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/...ents-rely-czar-power-does-obama-have-too-much

Its fairly hard to determine exactly how many "czars" there actually are, because czar is an arbitrary term bestowed by the media. So you could call just about any high level government official a "czar"

When looking for "Obama Czars" I went in search of , not how many the government has, as I have pointed out before, the government has had czars long before our president was "secretly born in Kenya". But how many were appointed by the president himself.

The consensus is, 8
POTUS hired 8 czars, all on his own.


If you think 8 is too many or way overboard, then that's a different argument. But throwing out flashy one liners without any actual facts behind them, gets old fast.

 

[Comshaw]

I have decided that you watch too much fox news
and read too little.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/czar-search/
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/...ents-rely-czar-power-does-obama-have-too-much

Its fairly hard to determine exactly how many "czars" there actually are, because czar is an arbitrary term bestowed by the media. So you could call just about any high level government official a "czar"

When looking for "Obama Czars" I went in search of , not how many the government has, as I have pointed out before, the government has had czars long before our president was "secretly born in Kenya". But how many were appointed by the president himself.

The consensus is, 8
POTUS hired 8 czars, all on his own.


If you think 8 is too many or way overboard, then that's a different argument. But throwing out flashy one liners without any actual facts behind them, gets old fast.

*applause*



Comshaw

 

[Sean Renaud]

True, and then add another 10,000 jobs. The left wing nuts need to ask themselves this question, how many federal jobs did Obama add? How many did Bush add (and I think we can eliminate all these jobs)?

Do we really need all these jobs?

What is Obama's goal for America? I'm thinking he wants to make America employed.?

Gotcha covered Jen.

 

[Liar]

If you think 8 is too many or way overboard, then that's a different argument. But throwing out flashy one liners without any actual facts behind them, gets old fast.

To be fair, it wasn't even a flashy one. It was pretty damn beige and about as witty as a Marmaduke strip.

 

[jeninflorida]

Well, you can think what ever you want. Also, your first link is from 2009.

I can never support someone like Obama, as they come from the spending side of the world. People like the Obama have no idea how to create wealth, they only know how to take wealth away from others.

I have decided that you watch too much fox news
and read too little.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/czar-search/
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/...ents-rely-czar-power-does-obama-have-too-much

Its fairly hard to determine exactly how many "czars" there actually are, because czar is an arbitrary term bestowed by the media. So you could call just about any high level government official a "czar"

When looking for "Obama Czars" I went in search of , not how many the government has, as I have pointed out before, the government has had czars long before our president was "secretly born in Kenya". But how many were appointed by the president himself.

The consensus is, 8
POTUS hired 8 czars, all on his own.


If you think 8 is too many or way overboard, then that's a different argument. But throwing out flashy one liners without any actual facts behind them, gets old fast.

 

[jeninflorida]

Gotcha covered Jen.

Clearly you think 8 isn't enough, gotcha covered
(if 8 is the correct number)

Clearly I think we can fire a min of 10 Czars

 

[Sean Renaud]

But you don't think Jen and that is the problem. You cannot have a spending problem when your taxes are lower than they could be. That's a simple fact of reality. It's called a priority problem when you spend more than you're willing to pay.

We are currently having a problem with employment. The worst possible thing we could do is fire anybody and you're talking about laying off thousands of people. That's literally the worst plan you could possibly have.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I have decided that you watch too much fox news
and read too little.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/czar-search/
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/...ents-rely-czar-power-does-obama-have-too-much

Its fairly hard to determine exactly how many "czars" there actually are, because czar is an arbitrary term bestowed by the media. So you could call just about any high level government official a "czar"

When looking for "Obama Czars" I went in search of , not how many the government has, as I have pointed out before, the government has had czars long before our president was "secretly born in Kenya". But how many were appointed by the president himself.

The consensus is, 8
POTUS hired 8 czars, all on his own.


If you think 8 is too many or way overboard, then that's a different argument. But throwing out flashy one liners without any actual facts behind them, gets old fast.

Doesn't anyone understand that appointment of a "czar" does not give the federal government any powers or functions that it did not have before? It's simply a matter of internal organization, giving one presidential appointee ad hoc authority over several agencies relevant to a mission.

 

[TexasWife25]

Doesn't anyone understand that appointment of a "czar" does not give the federal government any powers or functions that it did not have before? It's simply a matter of internal organization, giving one presidential appointee ad hoc authority over several agencies relevant to a mission.

I think her issue was... well I think her issue was she likes to toss out the ticker headlines on fox news...

but I think the original issue with czars was that they are unnecessary, as each department already has a head.

And I do think not all the czars are necessary, they are hired to streamline communications between several agencies for specific purposes, some of those purposes are not necessary anymore.

However its always nice to hear someone talking about laying off thousands of people to "save money" rather then making corporations pay a reasonable tax.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I think her issue was... well I think her issue was she likes to toss out the ticker headlines on fox news...

but I think the original issue with czars was that they are unnecessary, as each department already has a head.

And I do think not all the czars are necessary, they are hired to streamline communications between several agencies for specific purposes, some of those purposes are not necessary anymore.

However its always nice to hear someone talking about laying off thousands of people to "save money" rather then making corporations pay a reasonable tax.

Well, it spikes the guns of GOP points about the Dems being the party of bloated government, etc. Obama's acting like an efficiency-expert CEO making painfully necessary cuts. If it helps him win, he'll be in a stronger position WRT taxes.

 

[jeninflorida]

Doesn't anyone understand that appointment of a "czar" does not give the federal government any powers or functions that it did not have before? It's simply a matter of internal organization, giving one presidential appointee ad hoc authority over several agencies relevant to a mission.

Doesn't anyone understand when you add more government employees that someone has to pay for the salary & overhead?

 

[jeninflorida]

I think her issue was... well I think her issue was she likes to toss out the ticker headlines on fox news...

but I think the original issue with czars was that they are unnecessary, as each department already has a head.

And I do think not all the czars are necessary, they are hired to streamline communications between several agencies for specific purposes, some of those purposes are not necessary anymore.

However its always nice to hear someone talking about laying off thousands of people to "save money" rather then making corporations pay a reasonable tax.

What is a "reasonable rate"?

 

[richard_daily]

How about the Czars??............

You mean the ones instituted under reagan?

What about them?

 

[TexasWife25]

Well, it spikes the guns of GOP points about the Dems being the party of bloated government, etc. Obama's acting like an efficiency-expert CEO making painfully necessary cuts. If it helps him win, he'll be in a stronger position WRT taxes.

I honestly don't think he needs much help in winning.
The GOP should have rounded up a better batch of candidates to choose from.
They cant honestly think Romney can win. In order to beat Obama, any candidate has to have
full base support, and be able to catch independents. Romney doesn't have base support, the Evangelical sect doesn't think hes a christian. They held an anti-Romney meeting!

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/8/evangelicals-weighing-romney-options/print/

They are his base, and if you don't have the religious leaders, then religious followers will never back you.

Last election we had huge voter turn out.
I predict this election(unless either party does something crazy)
that a lot of people will simply stay home and not vote.

 

[TexasWife25]

What is a "reasonable rate"?

I agree we need to lower the corporate tax rate
However the rate is so high, because the don't actually pay it

I could make it 50%, what does it matter if at the end of the year you pay $0

"But by taking advantage of myriad breaks and loopholes that other countries generally do not offer, United States corporations pay only slightly more on average than their counterparts in other industrial countries. And some American corporations use aggressive strategies to pay less — often far less — than their competitors abroad and at home. A Government Accountability Office study released in 2008 found that 55 percent of United States companies paid no federal income taxes during at least one year in a seven-year period it studied. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/business/economy/03rates.html