See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On August 3rd, 2009 at 7:31 am, DagneyT said:

   Finally this is being addressed! It’s about time. This czar thing should get the constitutional test! This is blatant attempt to avoid congressional oversight.

2. #2
   On August 3rd, 2009 at 8:33 am, et said:

   This should be a no brainer for all members of congress to support regardless of party affiliation. But somehow I think that the dems will rally round their own.

3. #3
   On August 3rd, 2009 at 8:50 am, Ron said:

   If George W. Bush had appointed even one czar, for any reason, he’d have been up for impeachment. I wish Rep. Kingston well, but his bill will die in committee, if it ever gets that far. You talk about an imperial presidency, Obama has shown us all what one really looks like. And Michelle, bought your book over the weekend and have started reading it — its great, and THANK YOU for all the documentation and footnotes, etc. That video of Bill Maher was priceless. Not one rebuttal, just ad hominem attacks.

4. #4
   On August 3rd, 2009 at 9:05 am, JConrad999 said:

   It’s sad that our tax dollars have to be used like this in the first place. This issue shouldn’t have even become an issue.

   But this is what happens when voters elect corruption. This is what happens when people vote for someone who has charisma, and only charisma. This is what happens when people don’t pay attention to politics.

   I blame the voters.

5. #5
   On August 3rd, 2009 at 9:14 am, happyscrapper said:

   On August 3rd, 2009 at 8:50 am, Ron said:
   If George W. Bush had appointed even one czar, for any reason, he’d have been up for impeachment

   If I’m not mistaken, I believe all Presidents have had a czar or two, including Bush. Just not 40+. Isn’t it interesting that Obama tried to get a lot of corrupt people appointed to his cabinet in the legal way, by vetting and approval of Congress. Then he saw that his corrupt cronies were not going to pass the smell test (except for a few of them!), so he just switched over to appointing a bunch as czars. Problem solved. What a sleezy piece of work we have “leading” our precious country.

6. #6
   On August 3rd, 2009 at 10:29 am, Savage24 said:

   The democrats control all of the government today and any Republican that thinks he/she can get anything passed is smoking the wrong tobacco.
   As honorable as this bill sounds, Nancy and Harry won’t even let it into committee.

7. #7
   On August 3rd, 2009 at 11:58 am, pueblo1032 said:

   Great idea from KINGSTON… However it has a SNOWBALLS CHANCE IN HELL of seeing the light of day… Keep trying though, it’s the only way to EXPOSE the SHAM that in now WASHINGTON DC…

8. #8
   On August 3rd, 2009 at 12:06 pm, Right By-The-Sea said:

   God bless people like Kingston. Whether or not this legislation currently has a chance is questionable, but it’s shedding light on Zero’s corrupt efforts to circumvent the Cabinet/Senate/Legislative processes.

9. #9
   On August 3rd, 2009 at 1:34 pm, Flyoverman said:

   Sweet! This will make them squirm. I can tell you Senator Byrd will support it.

   To his credit he was the first and most vocal opponent of the Czars.

10. #10
    On August 3rd, 2009 at 4:54 pm, mattm said:

    This is what we need, but withe the dems i charge I don’t see it getting very far.

11. #11
    On August 3rd, 2009 at 6:48 pm, zorro said:

    Every member of Congress worth his/her oath of office should support the bill.

    Unfortunately that would be about 20 votes. But I will bring this up at the next town-hall meeting with our democrat slugs (if they ever schedule one up here).