By big R I mean Republican, and I said "mostly".

Here we have John Conyers saying "reading bills is hard".  Well yes John but thats why you get paid the big bucks. 

Sadly, most congresspeople do not read the bills they vote for (ie Patriot Act), they just take others words for it.

Anyhow, they have had MONTHS to read and digest the bill proposals now, and anyone who can't do that is incompetant regardless of party affiliation.

I read your long post.  I saw very little "common sense" and "logic".  Mostly I saw opinions and fear. I could address it point by point but it is hard to find coherent points to address.   You decided to paraphrase Obama saying "the war on terror is over"  but he has never ever said anything close to that.  You presented the president as wanting increased troop levels in Afghanistan as some sort of contradiction, however he has been saying that the war in Afghanistan needed more troops since the Democratic primaries.

Oh scary Czars! Czars are bad! Surely Nixon, Reagan, Bush 1, Bush 2 did not use Czars.

No I understand the point.  Incompetance is there on every level of society.  Some are incompetant some aren't.  It does not mean we should abolish government programs or not try to establish new ones for fear of incompetance.

There are many many lawmakers  who are great, who are very competant, who are very intelligent.   It is up to us to weed out the bad ones through votes and political action.

This is typical, but I was expecting more than this.  Becoming defensive by going offensive.  You try to belittle a point to make yours seem valid.  That doesn't fly.

You may want to do a little research.  Obama rode his candidacy on the back of ending the war.

No, what I want from you is some reason that Czars are bad.  Please explain to me why.

As to point number 2, you might want to do a little research, Obama rode his candidacy on the back of ending the war in IRAQ.  He has always always always spoke for a returned focus to the war on Afghanistan.  I followed the election very closely and at every opportunity he said there needs to be a withdrawl from Iraq and a focus on Afghanistan.

By the way, here is a link to the FIRST debate with McCain during the election with Obama saying "we need more troops in Afghanistan". 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2jYsLwcEIY

Care to take back your comment about me needing to do a little research?

Another aside on the polls.  The 42% poll was conducted by Zogby, a person who gives his polls a notorious Republican slant. For reference, he had McCain leading Obama on election day 48-47%.  He was only off by.. Oh.. About 10%.

Cabinet members, Supreme court judges, every single non-elected government employee from secretaries to janitors to the non-elected military members are all inherently bad?

Sorry, you will have to do better than that.  Unless you think we should elect every member of the cabinet, every general in the army, every Senator assistant, and not just Czars.   Did you complain when Bush created new cabinet positions?  Did you complain when Bush made hundreds and hundreds of non-elected political appointments?  Or has your ire been reserved for Obama?

All depends where you get your figures from..

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,531363,00.html

Reagan had 2.
Bush 41 had 1.
Clinton had 9.
Bush 43 had 12.

but for the sake of arguement.. How many of Bush’s appointees were members of radical revolutionary groups?

Self avowed communist's?

How many of them had published books on eugenics?

How many of them have expressed an interest in denying medical care to people based on age?

These people were able to be appointed because unlike Bush's czars which were all vetted by Congress and subjected to Senate confirmation, Obama's were not.

I can't WAIT to see what excuse this admin uses to throw Van Jones under the bus.

I guess it does depend where you get your figures from.  I looked up Czars on wikipedia and checked some of the sources for Bush's Czars appointments, the ones I checked were legitimate.

Your source is Fox news, in an interview with Greta Van Sustren quoting UNCITED statistics on the fly, with no mention where she gets the numbers.  I could only find 1 Reagan Czar btw.  

It is really strange that you accept without question her unsupported numbers because it fits your worldview.

Quite a few.  They are called Neo-Conservatives.

No evil commie pinkos that I know of were appointed by Bush. 

As I am unfamiliar with the book on eugenics claim or the denying medical care by age claim, can you provide me with some context?

From what I have read about Van Jones, I am not a fan.  Mostly because of the 9/11 truther thing.  I could care less if he does not survive much longer as a political appointee.

First off, military personnel are not traditional government officials.  And isn't it obvious that even elected government officials can be bad as well?  But compound that with those bad government officials appointing people into places of power is simply foolish.  To not acknowledge this is a problem is a rather naive point of view.

See there.  You did it again.  Going on the defensive by being offensive is not justification of a point.

Done with this for a while.

Pick up becks book... Arguing with idiots.