Barack Obama, Czars And The Great Unknown
On Sunday, Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who has announced her resignation to run for governor in the Lone Star state, penned a piece in the Washington Post about what she called "Czarist Washington." Read closely, and you will discover an easily overlooked undercurrent to Hutchison's concern. She is worried less about the known actions or influence of those Obama advisers who have arbitrarily been called "czars" than about what we don't know about the actions or influence of these people. To wit:
They hold unknown levels of power over broad swaths of policy. . . . So what do these czars do? Do they advise the president? Or do they impose the administration's agenda on the heads of federal agencies and offices who have been vetted and confirmed by the Senate? Unfortunately -- and in direct contravention of the Framers' intentions -- virtually no one can say with certainty what these individuals do or what limits are placed on their authority. We don't know if they are influencing or implementing policy. We don't know if they possess philosophical views or political affiliations that are inappropriate or overreaching in the context of their work.
As a political theme, this concern with what is unknown about Obama's administration is an important one to watch, because for one reason or another, it is striking a nerve for many Americans. It does not seem to matter that Obama has not substantially changed the structure or operation of the executive branch, or, with a few exceptions, the sorts of positions he appoints. Instead, there is a pod-person-like fear at work here: Judge Obama not by what he does or says, say his critics, but by what we don't yet know about what he is doing.
The issue of czars, which has become a regular feature of the conservative press, has its roots in a list of 32 political appointees that was compiled by the group Taxpayers for Common Sense. It is difficult to divine the method TCS used to compile this list. It chooses 32 people, out of the more than 3,000 political appointees in the executive branch, of which more than 500 are confirmed by the Senate. The TCS list includes everyone from the top counterterrorism official at the White House John Brennan to someone named Cameron Davis, who is overseeing Great Lakes restoration at the Environmental Protection Agency. The list includes both Senate-confirmable positions, like Cass Sunstein, who is the director of the Office of Regulatory Affairs, and non-confirmable diplomats assigned to foreign hotspots like J. Scott Gration, who is working to find a solution in Sudan. It includes Paul Volker, a minor economic adviser to Obama, but leaves off Lawrence Summers, who wields enormous power within the White House shaping economic policy. There are literally thousands of other Obama appointees, with various amounts of power, who are not on the list.
Now in truth, there is little mystery about any of these people. The government is large, but for the most part it is not a black box. Many of these so-called czars, like Richard Holbrooke, a diplomatic adviser on Afghanistan and Pakistan, regularly speak with journalists, hold public events and meet with foreign heads of state. If Hutchison was staying in the Senate, and actually wanted to learn about the "limits" of their "authority," it would not be hard to figure out. Each of the 32 officials named in the Taxpayers for Common Sense document report to other officials, either inside the White House or in the various Cabinet Departments. A few meet regularly with the president. All work on matters for which the president is constitutionally permitted to act.
But Hutchinson's concern about potential--as yet unknown--Constitutional subterfuge is not really the point here. She is running for a major office, is seeking to brand herself as a national conservative leader, and her advisers know how to spot a major vein of political gold.
Which returns us to the more interesting question of why all this talk of czars has excited a certain slice of the population. One reason is the Russian sounding word, a variation on tzars, which has been used by Republican and Democratic leaders since Richard Nixon. A second issue is Obama's inability thus far to convince a certain segment of the population that he is who he says he is, and is doing what he says he is doing. This is what Hutchison is mining for, what Glenn Beck is spending his time on, and it was what many of the protesters at last Saturday's 9/12 march on Washington were talking about as I made my way through the crowd. It is a fear based in ideology, in the insecurity of the times and in the evolving nature of the political press.
It is also the message behind Rep. Joe Wilson's outburst last week. "You lie," was more than just a disagreement over policy, or even the interpretation of policy. It was an accusation that the President of the United States was not the man he says he is, even if it does not take long to explain the facts behind his utterances. What is happening, I suspect, is something more fundamental than just the coarsening of politics and the 24-hour-news cycle that President Obama discussed last night on 60 Minutes. It is also a symptom of the severing of information streams, the next step in the Balkanization of the news business. People are not only seeking out the opinions and political spin they want from the information sources, but the very facts they want. And if the facts are not readily available, a preoccupation with "the unknown" is a fitting substitute.
-
1
"A secondary issue is Obama's inability thus far to convince a certain segment of the population that he is who he says he is, and is doing what he says he is doing."
.
How many people in this country have to go around convincing "white" people they are not a nazi, communist, socialist, foreign born, muslin elitist or should be impeached? That is the segment you are referring to so I'm not sure why you can't just say that.
.
But of course lets not forget if this were Hillary in the WH then these same people would be hating her because she is a woman. And Hillary would have to convince everyone that Bill wasn't really running the show.
.
Secondary indeed. -
-
2.1
Gunny, do you think Mikey is being sarcastic here? It's difficult to believe he could be this obtuse.
-
-
3
It is also a symptom of the severing of information streams, the next step in the Balkanization of the news business.
Uh oh, another blogger ethics panel!
-
4
Well hell, can you blame 'em? After all, the guy's BLACK, don't ya know. You can never really know what's in their heads.
-
5
Too bad Obama didn't name them Apostles instead of Czars. I'd have given a paycheck just to watch the heads explode.
-
5.1
He didn't even name them czars. It's not like that's their formal title, just a common shorthand.
.
Obama must be an impressive politician. His enemies think he's both czarist *and* communist.
-
-
6
Michael Scherer:
.
Hmm...So the Washington Post has no responsibility whatsoever to prevent Kay Bailey Hutchison (not Hutchinson) from misleading their readers?
.
The fact that she's broadcasting a grossly misleading argument via the pages of the Post is not the point, you say?-
6.1
fixed that too.
ha about the point. It is not my role to tell the Post exactly how misleading an argument must be before it becomes unprintable. Tho Joe has weighed in there.
-
6.2
That's what all of you say, Micheal:
.
Who? Me? I didn't do it! It wasn't me! They're just entertainers.
.
It's been going on for about 40 years, and I think it's about time you stop dodging your responsibilities, Micheal.
.
This is 2009 Micheal and you in particular need to grow up. -
6.3
Well, if Joe Klein has weighed in, doubtless truth will reign throughout the land and ethics reform will become an instant reality. After all, we all know he has "the time and the legal background" to address this issue with credibility. In other news: David Broder calls for radical change and admits that centrism was always a mistake.
-
6.4
Thanks for the correction and response, Michael Scherer.
.
Let me consider your statements for a while... -
6.5
It is not my role to tell the Post exactly how misleading an argument must be before it becomes unprintable.
A newspaper that prints lies is not newsworthy or even worth discussing really.
I'm sure even bringing up such a distasteful thing would make for an uncomfortable situation at the next cocktail party. -
6.6
It is not my role to tell the Post exactly how misleading an argument must be before it becomes unprintable.
Why let an all too convenient strawman (albeit intellectually corrupt) go to waste.
-
Columbia wants to refund your money.
-
-
7
Shorter MS: KB Hutchinson rolls out updated Southern Strategy in run for governor of Texas.
-
7.1
Yep. The first thought to came to mind when I read this post was that she's running in 2012. One term it is, I suppose.
-
-
8
It would be interesting, MS, to see you point out the many unique situations this president has faced, both during the campaign and now.
.
Some questions I know you won't ask:
.
What is the nature of these situations?
.
Who promotes them?
.
What are the demographics of the promoters of these situations?
.
What is the motivation behind their promotion of these events?
.
What parallels exist in the past exist?
.
You lightly skirt the issue with your "pod-person" commentary, but in reality, Micheal, I don't think that it is very hard to draw the line from A to B here.
.
There are certain people in this country who are, in more ignorant circles, unknowable Micheal, and I think you know who they are. -
9
They hold unknown levels of power over broad swaths of policy. . . . So what do these czars do?
MS: Any idea whether Sen. Hutchison has ever heard of a man named Richard Cheney?
-
9.1
She's very familiar with Cheney. He's #1 on her "Do not go hunting with this guy" list.
-
-
10
Wow. It seems to me that most of us already have drawn that line from A to B Micheal. I'm about three steps behind 'em!
.
How come you can't? Is that hand shaking a bit too much to draw that line?
.
jeopardy.wav
jeopardy.wav
jeopardy.wav
.
FYI Micheal, "Balkanization" is a nice euphemism, but just look upthread from this comment to the others who have posted and next time, try using the correct terminology. -
11
The subtitle you're looking for, as the facts you mention make clear, isn't "The Great Unknown," it's "The Big Lie." That's all they have.
-
As a political theme, this concern with what is unknown about Obama's administration is an important one to watch, because for one reason or another, it is striking a nerve for many Americans.
-
It's striking a chord because the media is terrible at reporting the news. The Post publishes this instead of fact-checking it, and you say "it might be effective!" Reporting facts, informing readers, is simply not something you people do anymore. -
12
"Obama's inability thus far to convince a certain segment of the population that he is who he says he is, and is doing what he says he is doing".
.
You make it sound like we just simply do not trust Obama, Michael. Is that what you are saying?
.
Would you also be saying that the American pubic simply does not trust those in Washington, our elected officials to adequately and honestly handle our Nation's business?
.
Politico says this...
."Just as faith in the president has slipped since March, so, too, has trust in much of his agenda."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25189.html#ixzz0R65ULKJn
.
The public's trust is all that any politician has, President, Senator, Representative, "Czars", and clear down to the local dog catcher.
.
In general, the public trust has been squandered and abused over the years. Not simply by this Administration but every Administration back to Reagan in current times. But, this has always been an issue, and that is why we see from time to time politicians reacting and listening to the citizenry. They then pass legislation that is in the best interests of most all Americans, retaking the trust bestowed upon them. Again, Reagan was the last President to adequately do this.
.
However, I have been witnessing more and more distrust in Politicians, and even locally long term politicians who have been in office virtually for life, have been voted out of office.
.
I now see the same reactions and feelings going on in the National arena. Not just for Republicans, but from Democrats I know as well.
.
Anytime you run on "change we can believe in" and that change only causes more questioning of the purpose without clearly defined purposes, then soon the public's trust will shift from a positive reaction to a negative reaction.
.
Obama is a very good campaign politician, he gives a great campaign-like speech. He however lacks in those skills to bring out his message in clear and concise words which are understandable, and believeable by the average American. Perhaps the campaign style is what people are reacting negatively to from him. That and his incessant appearances in front of the camera giving his campaign speeches over and over again.
.
So really it is not so much that the "Czars" are not trusted, it is Obama himself. Also I believe there is much concern about his associations, both current and in the past. Rev Wright set the stage for distrust in Obama's future associations. People will question those who he associates himself with until he leaves office.
.
As long as Obama continues to be the candidate, he will continue to lose support.-
12.1
I have to say this, Rusty. Don't you blame some of the American pubic's mistrust on the fact that the last guy was called Bush?
-
12.2
Absolutely homer, and before him Clinton.
-
12.3
Rusty, I think you missed my subtle joke playing off the typo in your comment...
-
-
13
See, now if Obama were a white Mason as supposedly all the Founding Fathers and every true industrialist in this nation's history then we all could sleep in the warm bosom of their magnanimous Solomon-esque control.
He's black, so he doesn't have that backboard. OMG, is it possible he's Jewish? We're all gonna die.
-
14
The feigned ignorance garbage is getting old. 30 years of Time and other tradititional media outlets pretending that Birchers and white supremacists and "one world government" cranks might have some legitimate concerns not only didn't stop the flow of angry letters and charges of liberal "media bias", but it encouraged these irresponsible people and actually gave them the courage to think they are actually legitimate.
I mean why write up a long-winded and mealy mouthed analysis of Hutchison's bizarre op/ed when you could have simply said that Hutchison is in a contest where she has to out-crazy a secessionist-leaning, neo-confederate governor, so she cobbled together the feces-stained rambling of some other crazies and put her own disgraceful stamp on it (and the approving stamp of the increasingly deluded Washington Post editorial board)? -
15
Michael, you say: "A secondary issue is Obama's inability thus far to convince a certain segment of the population that he is who he says he is, and is doing what he says he is doing. "
I really hope you don't mean to suggest that it is incumbent on Obama to prove that he is doing what he says he is doing. Surely, it's on those that are protesting to demonstrate why they say he is NOT doing what he says he is doing? surely what he IS doing is something independently verifiable by, you know, looking at what he is DOING.
The "issue" with the czars is the reddest of red herrings; that op-ed stunningly dishonest. And I don't believe it is of interest that a "certain slice" of the population - as you call it - or the vocal superminority as I call it - has jumped on this issue; unless you mean from an anthropological point of view. What gets me is how you - as a reporter - can be so dispassionate about lies and idiocy influencing any portion of the population - shouldn't it make your blood boil that this is being encouraged and pushed by a currently sitting senator and someone who wants to be in charge of the massive state of Texas? why do you hate your country?
-
15.1
Wonderful summary!
.
God forbid he has to prove that he has to prove that he means what he says!
.
After all, any GOP shill like Micheal knows that all Black Americans have a Secret Agenda and given any opportunity to dogwhistle it, they will, and then they will run like hell from any responsibility for perpetuating it in this, the Year of Our Lord, 2009!
.
He just doesn't have the maturity or gumption to at least help others in his party knock this newest version of Southern Strategy off the rails - and their rabid supporters.
.
Look up thread at his response. Typical. They all say "oh how horrible it is" but when it comes time to clean up their own foul turds, he runs like hell. -
15.2
I couldn't believe his response to Gunny as if the mistake in the article was to mistake "secondary" and "second"!!
It is all just so f**king depressing.
-
-
16
Mike, your utter ignorance defies logic. You don't think Kay Bailey is trying to out crazy Mr. RIck "I want to secede" Perry. Why should Kay Bailey be concerned about czars when she should be focused on how to get Texas back on track...no she wants to rile up the crazies that despise her because she is pro-choice. Why do you think she voted against Sonia Sotomayor, the 3rd female justice out of 110 or so. You waste more words than Faux news..my only solace is that at least you are not wasting paper with your dribble.
-
16.1
Nice post. Please keep an eye out for a "1000 Words" thread. I think you'd be a welcome addition.
-
-
17
lol - "Balkanization"...try "Bachmannization"; flinging whatever crazy sh!t floats across your consciousness out into public in order to stir up fake controversy and unnecessary fear.
We don't know if they are influencing or implementing policy. We don't know if they possess philosophical views or political affiliations that are inappropriate or overreaching in the context of their work.
And what about your staffers,
Senator McCarth....Senator Hutchinson? What sort of influence do they have in your office? -
18
In reference to what the Post publishes, Media Matters has an interesting piece about a new PEW Research survey:
Republicans continue to be highly critical of the news media in nearly all respects. However, much of the growth in negative attitudes toward the news media over the last two years is driven by increasingly unfavorable evaluations by Democrats. On several measures, Democratic criticism of the news media has grown by double-digits since 2007. Today, most Democrats (59%) say that the reports of news organizations are often inaccurate; just 43% said this two years ago.
I think Jamison Foser sums it up best:
Who could have imagined that a decade-long assault on the Clintons and Al Gore, including all but handing an election to George W. Bush, unabashed cheerleading for Bush's rush to war in a country that didn't attack us, and a general refusal to call right-wing lies "lies" would eventually result in the media losing credibility among Democrats?
-
19
Avast, me hearties!
.
Can we be attemptin' t' be havin' a no-feedin' week, if ye please?
.
Leave rusty/texty/freeper/spongy an' their wee-willie'd mates 'lone t' be indulgin' in their pathetic circle jerk in th' dark, so t' speak?
.
I know it be great' entertainin' an' easy as pie t' be rippin their sh*t-spewin' th' shreds - I know I usual' enjoy th' sport - bu' I'd sure like t' have me a week free o' those impotent jerk-offs, fer a change!
.
PLEASE???-
19.1
I'm about burnt, anyway, Pirate Wench.
.
I'll scabbard me cutlass, but you owe a shot 'o rum! -
19.2
Oh, OK. But only because you just had a birthday and I have to cut the grass before work. But what if our little critters starve? Can we at least post "Points and laughs"? Please?
-
19.3
BTW, what's happening in 5 days, Pirate Wench? Am I missing something? Are the teabaggers gathering on the beach to service the Great White Whale? Is the Katrina inquiry finally getting underway?
-
19.4
I second. Here is to a troll free week. I pledge to ignore them.
-
19.5
53 -
.
This be th' last week in th' Swamp fer th' Pirate Wench. I be plannin' t' be sendin' 'er off into th' sunset followin' Saturday's observance o' 'er inception.
.
It'd be ri' nice t' spend me final days as whack-job-free as be possible, tha' be fer sure!
.
It truly be turned t' a swampland 'ere, an' I be ready t' sail off t' saner, more-attached-t'-reality ports o' call. I be lookin' 'round fer a new home port t' park meself in tha' no' be near so infested scurvy wingnut devils an' rabid rats o' ri' wing insanity.
.
Yarr. -
19.6
You folks are pathetic. You go on for paragraphs bemoaning the racists, the ignorant, the liars, when in reality you need not look any further than a mirror.
-
19.7
53 -
.
5 days t' ITLAPD (International Talk Like A Pirate Day! Me "birth" day!)!
.
http://www.talklikeapirate.com/piratehome.html
.
I be agitatin' fer th' Swamp t' be all-pirate, all day (IPLAPD - International POST Like A Pirate Day!)!
.
Sunrise t' sunset!
.
Ev'ryone fr'm "journalists", t' posters, t' bilge-sloopin' trolls!
.
Thar'll be pirates!
.
Yarr! -
19.8
OK sacredh -
.
Pointin' an' laugin' be 'llowed!
.
Yarr. -
19.9
sacredh - fergot me own "h"! LaugHin'!
.
yarr! -
19.10
'Twill be right dull here, Pirate Wench.
.
In honor of your departure, me cutlass is in me locker!
.
Happy sailing! -
19.11
…pirate, it's too bad if you choose to leave. I almost quit twice, but I won't let “those others” win. And we only live twice, right? Alas, there may not be many places to escape …unless those boards are so heavily moderated as to be choirs instead of debates. Can you take a (real) vacation and come back as a new identity guaranteed to annoy the RW'ers? Perhaps as a valley girl or Sarah Palin's evil twin? Oh, to write diabolically opposite views from hers, but in her same word salad….
-
19.12
deconstructiva -
.
I be contemplatin' startin' me own blog, whar anyone can be sayin' anythin' they wants, bu' only in pirate-speak - wha' be ye thinkin' o' tha' idea
?
.
yarr. -
19.13
…that's a great idea. The crazies may still invade, and it would take time to set things up and exterminate the trolls (not literally) …but think of KT, MS, and Amy secretly reading YOU at 3:00 am while their families are asleep. Go for it!
-
19.14
PW, please reconsider leaving the swamp. At first it took me awhile to decipher your posts, but now it's second nature. Leaving because of the trolls is a victory for them. A hearty "go F' yerself" missing from the threads would be like finding out that Santa Claus is really Rush Limbaugh breaking into our homes at Christmastime just to steal from our medicine cabinets.
.
Take an occassional break (it does wonders), but return when your batteries get recharged. This place just wouldn't be the same without you. -
19.15
awwww, pw. I just love it when they get riled up. I can hardly help myself.
.
I'll do me best, m'luv, just for you. But don't come down too hard if I backslide. y'hear?
. -
19.16
Nooooooooo, pw! Don't go! Come back! I'll be good, I promise. really.
-
19.17
I'll not feed trolls this week, I promise.
-
19.18
SZ: I'm probably wrong about this, but over the last few months I've had the sneaking suspicion that you debate with the trolls (rightists) for either your own or our amusement. There are a few conservatives on here that have honest disagreements with us and really are worth engaging, but some of the flat-out batsh!t lunatics are so over the top that I doubt a seconal drip would slow them down.
.
I apologize if I'm wrong and thank you if I'm right.
-
-
20
Shorter KB Hutchison: My conspiracy theory is so believable it can get someone who believes conspiracy theories removed from the administration!
-
21
Hutchison worries about the unknown unknowns. Three guesses who her campaign manager is....
-
22
Shorter MS: Although Hutchison is an idiot and a demagogue, her concerns are quite reasonable.
The media feels compelled to discover the "reasonable" kernel in every right-wing talking point. And the right wing has figured this out. The crazier they get, the more they pull the "centrist" position to the right.
-
23
And what's funny is that the WaPo comments section does a better job of taking down Hutchison than anything Scherer writes.
Czar is a Russian sounding word. You don't say??
-
24
Shorter MS: Dog bites man..Researchers discover water is wet....the color of an orange is orange...
-
25
Will_Bunch asks a question via Twitter -- So if a key part of the Tea Party protests is overthrowing "the czars," then I guess it would be fair to call them "Leninists"?
-
25.1
Call them any thing you want but late for dinner. They are immune to the slings and arrows for the left.
-
- michaelscherer @alangrayson TIME told your story (http://bit.ly/cdG9qb), tho not how you would have told it, here: http://bit.ly/YSRHh - 5 hours ago
- michaelscherer RT @PElliottAP: Obama makes surprise visit to White House briefing room. Tune in. - 8 hours ago
- michaelscherer RT @ryssiebee: 92 magazine covers, 10 years, 2 minutes. http://bit.ly/5d7oCo - 11 hours ago
Most Popular »
- NBC: There Was Never a Conan O'Brien
- Undercover Boss Is Phony and Manipulative. But Don't Hold That Against It.
- NH Poll: Dems Face A Thumpin'
- Gibbs Mocks Palin, Tea Party Convention
- Barack Obama: Then vs. Now
- Irony of the Day
- Paul Ryan Won't Run For Prez In 2012
- Today's Health Care Checkup - GOP Plans Under the Spotlight
- Do You Spend Less than $2,000 Annually on Internet, TV, Cell Phone Service, and Video Games?
- CO Gov Poll: Hickenlooper +4
- Asian Carp Battle: Foreign Fish Threaten Great Lakes
- Is the Bible Fact or Fiction? Archaeology's Discoveries
- Spain's Troubled Economy: Fears Over Euro Zone Outlook
- Kennewick Man, Archaeology Find: Who Discovered America?
- Al-Qaeda, Yemen, Wedding: Unlucky Name, Celebration
- Tea-Party Convention: Lessons on Palin and the Movement
- Venezuela: Chavez Protests at Ball Game Over Electricity
- Jim Frederick, Black Hearts in Iraq's Triangle of Death
- Marja: Operation Moshtarak Tests Obama's Afghan War Plan
- Why China Needs The U.S. -- And Vice Versa
Quotes of the Day »
RSS