Another lie from the ‘Flopping Aces’

September 25, 2009 in Political Animals | 7 comments

There simply aren’t enough liars on staff at the group wingnut blog Flopping Aces, so they have to recruit more liars from the ranks of their readers. They’ve found a usefully idiotic liar in the person of one Leo Shishmanian, who has jumped upon the “CZARS BAD!” bandwagon so beloved of the wingnuts.

All of these czars have been appointed without congressional confirmation or direct involvement in the process.

Ummmm… nope:

The Senate’s list of confirmed civilian “Executive Nominations” includes the following administration officials listed by [Fox News] as “Obama’s czars”:

  • R. Gil Kerlikowske, confirmed as the Director of National Drug Control Policy on May 7; listed by Fox as the “drug” czar;
  • Dennis Blair, confirmed as the Director of National Intelligence on January 28; listed as the “intelligence” czar.
  • Cass Sunstein, confirmed as the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget on September 10; listed by Fox as the “regulatory” czar.
  • John Holdren, confirmed as the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy on March 19; listed by Fox as the “science” czar.
  • Herbert Allison, confirmed as the Department of the Treasury’s Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability on June 19; listed by Fox as the “TARP” czar.
  • Ashton Carter, confirmed as the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics on April 23; listed by Fox

    • as the “weapons” czar.
  • Aneesh Chopra, confirmed as an associate director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy on May 21 and also named Chief Technology Officer of the United States by President Obama; listed by Fox as the “technology” czar.
  • David J. Hayes, confirmed as Deputy Secretary of the Interior on May 20 and appointed by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar as “lead official for Interior and the Obama Administration in coordinating the federal response to California water supply” on June 28; listed by Fox as “California water” czar.

Shishmanian claims to be a trial attorney. I do hope he is more truthful in the courtroom than he is in his political writings.

  1. Leo on September 25, 2009 at 8:48 am

    Meat, you are correct, some of them have been approved.  Manning up to admit I didn’t check all 3 dozen or so before publishing.  I’m making the correction…next time, let me know if you spot an error before slandering me a and I’ll be happy to look into it…

  2. meatbrain on September 25, 2009 at 8:54 am

    What “slander”? I pointed out the obvious fact that you were repeating a known lie. Explain, please, how making a factual statement about you magically becomes “slander”.

  3. Leo on September 25, 2009 at 8:57 am

    I did not intend to deceive anyone, Meat.  Here’s my correction:  * [Author’s note:  Since original publication, I have learned that some of these “czars” have, indeed, been approved by the Senate. As mentioned above, it can be difficult to determine who is a czar and who isn’t. In my haste to publish, I admit I did not have time to research the complete history of every single czar appointment and that is my oversight error.  Many, however, have merely been appointed by the president without confirmation.]

  4. Leo on September 25, 2009 at 9:57 am

    Meat, not everyone who makes a mistake is a “liar”.  I did not intend to deceive anyone; therefore your statement is not “factual”.  Here’s my correction posted in the body of my opinion:

    • [Author’s note:  Since original publication, I have learned that some of these “czars” have, indeed, been approved by the Senate. As mentioned above, it can be difficult to determine who is a czar and who isn’t. In my haste to publish, I admit I did not have time to research the complete history of every single czar appointment and that is my oversight error.  Many, however, have merely been appointed by the president without confirmation. Regardless, neither congressional complicity nor approval is a substitute for constitutionality.]

    Like I said, next time, if you spot something you believe is inaccurate, shoot me an email before throwing around terms like “liar”.

  5. Leo on September 25, 2009 at 10:06 am

    sorry for the double post…I made a change and didn’t see that the first one was pending…

  6. meatbrain on September 25, 2009 at 12:59 pm

    As I’ve often pointed out, wingnuts are your best Internet entertainment value. Leo Shishmanian provides a textbook example of this maxim.

    Since original publication, I have learned that some of these “czars” have, indeed, been approved by the Senate.

    In reality, Leo never once bothered to find out who had been confirmed by the Senate. He chose instead to toe the wingnut party line. The thought of questioning Revealed Truth never even occurred to him.

    As mentioned above, it can be difficult to determine who is a czar and who isn’t.

    Yes, it is —  especially when Leo doesn’t bother to define what a “czar” is, or why we should care. US Presidents have been appointing advisors for decades… but it wasn’t a problem until a black democratic President did so.

    In my haste to publish, I admit I did not have time to research the complete history of every single czar appointment and that is my oversight error.

    Yes, when the publisher is on your ass to churn out another load of wingnut horsecrap, who wants to take the time to do the thirty seconds’ worth of Googling it would take to find the facts?

    Many, however, have merely been appointed by the president without confirmation. Regardless, neither congressional complicity nor approval is a substitute for constitutionality.

    Ummm… Leo Shishmanian doesn’t have the foggiest notion what a “czar” is —  the term is a meaningless one, applied by wingnuts for propaganda purposes. Leo Shishmanian and can’t be bothered to find out the facts of the dozens of people whom he decided to lie about. We’re supposed to accept without question that he’s an expert on “constitutionality”?

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA…

    :: wipes tears from eyes ::

    Meat, not everyone who makes a mistake is a “liar”.

    Leo Shishmanian happily spread yet another wingnut lie. He’d like nothing better than to dodge the moral responsibility for doing so.

    He is not entitled to that privilege. Just because he got the lie from someone else does not mean that he is not, himself, a liar.

  7. Jeff on September 30, 2009 at 1:22 am

    There’s a fine line between propaganda and scholarship. Actually, it’s not so fine; it’s a gaping maw. Propaganda involves gathering (or making up) evidence to support your preconceived notions. With scholarship, the conclusions emerge from the assembled evidence. Sadly, most popular conservative writers and pundits use propaganda.

    Why do they lie? Because the facts do not support their beliefs.