Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » World Watch » Titles

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Titles
cb
Member
Member # 6179

 - posted      Profile for cb   Email cb       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Article 1, Section 8 reads: "No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States"

Shouldn't this preclude offering the title of Czar for any appointed post?

Posts: 347 | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 945

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think they're using definition #4:

quote:
czar
  /zɑr, tsɑr/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [zahr, tsahr] Show IPA
Use czar in a Sentence
–noun
1. an emperor or king.
2. (often initial capital letter) the former emperor of Russia.
3. an autocratic ruler or leader.
4. any person exercising great authority or power in a particular field: a czar of industry.

But perhaps we should say "ignoble czar" just to make sure.
Posts: 6847 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cb
Member
Member # 6179

 - posted      Profile for cb   Email cb       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That definition is #4 for a reason. No body hears the word Czar without making the connection to a Russian emperor or king. I know this is trivial compared to all the world changing events that are taking place daily, but it's always been a pet peeve of mine that the title Czar should have any place in our government. But thanks for the clarification.
Posts: 347 | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Journalists used to call Babe Ruth the King of Swat.

FOX News reported July 13th,
quote:
President Obama might have slipped Monday, when he introduced Gil Kerlikowske as his "drug czar" while speaking to an urban policy group in Washington.

Kerlikowske's real title is director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. The administration generally rejects the term "czar" as a media-generated buzzword.


Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cb
Member
Member # 6179

 - posted      Profile for cb   Email cb       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Babe Ruth's title wasn't administered to him by the federal government, though politicians did bow his way when he ruled baseball. [Wink]

quote:
The administration generally rejects the term "czar" as a media-generated buzzword.
Interesting how now, after appointing his 34th Czar, now he says something like this.

In the 6 months he's held office Obama's appointed almost 10 times as many czars as any other president.

President Reagan appointed one (Hello!!! What were you thinking big guy), as did President George H.W. Bush. President Clinton appointed three and President George W. Bush appointed four.

Why so many czar appointments by the Obama Administration? Is it perhaps to circumvent the Constitution and create an imperial Presidency. These Czars do not have to be approved by the Senate, nor do they have to answer questions posed by congress. They reportedly have open door access to the president.

The press is finally commenting and teasing about this (they do like to tease that boy [Roll Eyes] ) since it would be pretty difficult to ignore it with the alternate media jumping all over it. So now the Obama line is "czars are a media generated buzz word". HA! [LOL]

[ July 14, 2009, 11:34 PM: Message edited by: cb ]

Posts: 347 | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
FOX News said, "The administration generally rejects the term "czar" as a media-generated buzzword." That expressed their opinion that the MSM often used the term "czar" but the administration rarely did. Now FOX News is often wrong, but seldom in a way which will benefit Obama. So I should guess Obama slipped and said "drug czar" because that is a lot shorter than "Director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy," so that is how his staff describe the position when speaking to him. But I have heard no tapes of conversations in the Oval Office, so I have no proof what you say is wrong.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cb
Member
Member # 6179

 - posted      Profile for cb   Email cb       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
AHH! I did my research and you are right, Obama himself doesn't use the title, he dislikes the autocratic sound of it. So I concede that he hasn't been handing out the title. It is the media that is keeping the title alive. We can still argue the need for all the appointments, but I remove my accusation against Obama about the propogation the title of Czar.

[ July 15, 2009, 10:28 AM: Message edited by: cb ]

Posts: 347 | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The number of "czars" does seem excessive, by whatever name they are called. Other things being equal, I should prefer a President who has been a governor, as he may have made his initial mistakes in appointing the wrong people and making government too complicated within his unfortunate state. But in 2008 both McCain and Obama had been Senators, meaning they had been more occupied with making law than governing, which is experience also important for a President. So I shall be resigned if Obama makes an administrative mess of things, although certainly not pleased. Anyway, you had a good idea in looking that up, as I had not known Obama personally disliked that use of "czar."

[ July 15, 2009, 12:33 PM: Message edited by: hobsen ]

Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Why so many czar appointments by the Obama Administration?
Presumably because the alternative is the British quango. Seriously.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
> scifibum

> czar
> –noun
> 1. an emperor or king.

Sure it could be number 4, but I rather believe it's number 1. These are the emperors.

So who appoints an emperor and what does that then make Obama?

God?

Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well duh, hasn't the right pretty well established Obama's status as deity at this point?
Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So the news media call some Obama appointees "czars," and czar is a word which can sometimes mean an emperor or king, so that makes Obama into God? If that is true, Cherrypoptart, the power of the press has indeed risen to unprecedented levels these days.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We have to remember that gods are basically created through the belief of their followers. If that's the case, Obama is well on his way to becoming the god of hope and change. People believe what they want to believe regardless of the facts hitting them upside the head.

We can also see all kinds of explanations being offered for everything that happens, and they all try to give the god emperor of America, Obama, every benefit of the doubt.

No matter what happens, it's spun in his favor. It kind of reminds me of the Bible, the way the media try to spin everything.

Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What you say about Obama may be true, Cherry, but you may have a bone to pick with Ron Lambert and others over that assertion gods are created only through the belief of their followers. But I suppose that would belong on a different thread.

[ July 20, 2009, 11:02 AM: Message edited by: hobsen ]

Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
If that is true, Cherrypoptart, the power of the press has indeed risen to unprecedented levels these days.
No, it's not the power of the press. It's the level of the fearmongering of the Right. [Smile]
Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1