President Obama with one of his many "czars," Carol Browner.

For those who are keeping tally, the Obama empire now has 32 czars. That figure includes Mark Lloyd, the Diversity Czar at the FCC — that’s diversity in broadcasting. Lloyd who comes from the Center for American Progress (CAP), concluded that talk radio is far too conservative, 91 percent he says, and wants to see that changed via public policy.

Truth be told, America has more czars in eight short months than the Romanovs ran through in over 300 years of rule in Imperial Russia.

Some see czars as only a symbolic gesture; when the president has something he wants emphasized, he appoints a czar, sending a clear message that certain issues are to receive more prominence. Others see it as emblematic of a bureaucracy out of control; some as a dictatorial way to implement policy changes. And still others see the appointment and proliferation of czars as a symptom of the rise in concentration of power at the White House, regardless of who is in power.

The new czars that have garnered the most attention so far include the energy czar (Carol Browner) and science czar (John Holdren), the climate czar (Todd Stern) and the health czar (Nancy-Ann DeParle), and the regulatory czar (Cass Sunstein) and the economic czar (Paul Volcker.)  But did you know that there is a Great Lakes czar (Cameron Davis), a weapons czar (Ashton Carter), a Sudan czar (J. Scott Gration), a Mideast peace czar (George Mitchell), and a Mideast policy czar (Dennis Ross)? My personal favorite is the pay czar (Kenneth Feinberg) — who wouldn’t want that job? As special master for compensation he sets the compensation rates for the top 100 earners at companies who have received taxpayer money from TARP.  (Imagine the possibilities!)

This brings us back to the new diversity czar, Attorney Mark Lloyd. Lloyd sees a golden opportunity to reform the congressionally-created Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), as if it weren’t liberal enough already, “along democratic lines and funded on a substantial level.” It’s no secret that the CPB already receives millions and millions of dollars from the feds, courtesy of your pocket, so why not make them dance and sing the White House party line? It would be state-TV, Amerika style.

To do this Lloyd is willing to silence private communications companies — it’s really his goal — and make them pay homage to the CPB in the form of extortion. In his 2006 Prologue to a Farce: Communications and Democracy in America, Lloyd recommends that private broadcasters subsidize their own competition through fines, fees, and licensing requirements if their messages and programming do not conform politically to that of the federal government. So long freedom of speech!

According to Seton Motley of the Media Research Center, Lloyd laid out his blueprint for attack in a George Soros-funded report entitled “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio.” He would silence conservative and religious talk radio in the free market with federal strings:

• Restore local and national caps on the ownership of commercial radio stations.
• Ensure greater local accountability over radio licensing.
• Require commercial owners who fail to abide by enforceable public interest obligations to pay a fee to support public broadcasting.

There is a term used by the FCC, “localism,” that is broadly defined and enforced by personal subjectivity. So it is this localism that Lloyd is invoking in his plan, apparent in the language “local” and “public interest.” This is a spectacular end run around the 1st Amendment — who needs the Fairness Doctrine brought back, when the diversity czar can impose his own prescriptions and definitions on local broadcasters?

In fact, Lloyd says this very thing in his “Forget the Fairness Doctrine” report:

To be fair, even some progressives are confused about the Fairness Doctrine. A recent news story reported that the League of United Latin American Citizens, or LULAC for short, has asked Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to reintroduce the Fairness Doctrine—even as the same article reports on a speech to LULAC by ABC News correspondent John Quinones, who spoke of his work bringing to audiences a hard-earned perspective to the long-running immigration debate.

Quinones told the LULAC audience that he got his start because a San Antonio community organization threatened that if the stations didn't hire more Latinos, the group would go to the FCC and challenge their licenses. "Thank God for them," Quinones said. "I wouldn't be here."

Equal opportunity employment policies. Local engagement. License challenges. Nothing in there about the Fairness Doctrine...
The other part of our proposal that gets the dittoheads upset is our suggestion that the commercial radio station owners either play by the rules or pay. In other words, if they don’t want to be subject to local criticism of how they are meeting their license obligations, they should pay to support public broadcasters who will operate on behalf of the local community.

Three things are apparent here: 1) the licenses of stations who broadcast messages that don’t agree politically with the administration will be threatened; 2) those same stations will have to fork over extortion money to the state-media for daring to disagree; and 3) it will operate under somewhat of a snitch/complaint system.

It’s very telling that a regime has to fashion a visible hierarchy of many czars — the real plotters and planners who easily manipulate public opinion and Congress. The elevation of so many to positions of power and authority, out of touch with the American people and untouched by Senate confirmations or congressional control would lead many to believe that such a system amounts to an attempt to circumvent the checks and balances installed by our Founding Fathers.

But perhaps it’s just as well that it’s all out in the open for those who have eyes and ears to see and hear.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (13)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

danwhitehead1 said:

	Just incredible - - - This thing just gets more sickening all the time. I never did understand just how czars fit into a constitutional republic. These people have to be struck down and struck down good and hard. It's getting later all the time.
	report abuse vote down vote up

September 01, 2009
Votes: +6

danwhitehead1 said:

	P.S. Is it just my imagination, or does the picture of Obama and that woman look like two of those tragedy masks from the theatre?
	report abuse vote down vote up

September 01, 2009
Votes: +2

Still Free said:

	Tragedy masks--could be... Glad you too noticed their expressions. I thought the "czarina" looked a little looped (maybe on medication). As for the POTUS, are his eyes even open, and what's with the mouth? And what's this--he must be slipping -- no pointing finger? They are SO-O-O out of control ... but, alas, I fear they DO know what they are doing.
	report abuse vote down vote up

September 01, 2009
Votes: +3

Nate X said:

too late The genie is already out of the bottle. If you think that American's en masse will tolerate and allow the plans some of these czars have in mind for us, think again. The US government will not be able to monitor the massive amount of traffic that the web has daily unless they do so with brute force. That won't happen because a revolution of the French variety will happen. People are waking up to what assclowns we have in gov't. Try to eliminate or heavily curtail something like talk radio (or religious radio, Christians just won't stand for that) and you will have a revolt on your hands. Censor the internet in addition? A revolution.

report abuse vote down vote up

September 01, 2009
Votes: +3

Ken Creech said:

... If dictatorship is not evident one has to be either blind, stupid or both! I for one prefer to think that most AMERICANS are smart enough to see through the facade of democrats in the DC community organization. OH for November 2010 when the pasture will be full of retired senators and reps from congress!! AMERICANS are tired of stupidity in their HOUSE. Since when did crossing our borders illegally entitle any one to citizenship n the USA???. Or for checks from SS Or for free medical services or american colleges. SICK, uuggghhh

report abuse vote down vote up

September 02, 2009
Votes: +3

danwhitehead1 said:

	Thank you very, very much - - - - - - - Still Free, Nate X and Ken Creech.
	report abuse vote down vote up

September 02, 2009
Votes: +2

danwhitehead1 said:

So often - - - - - - I feel hopeless and that all is lost; but then I see the things folks post here at JBS and become encouraged once again. What worries me is I'm thinking that the scum who would rule, particularly the swine that are currently running our rogue, out-of-control fedgov, would not hesitate one moment to call in foreign UN troops should the righteous anger of the people ever boil over and they rise up and give the scum that would rule what all tyrants and bullies rightly deserve.

report abuse vote down vote up

September 02, 2009
Votes: +3

distraction said:

... Dear too late: 'The US government will not be able to monitor the massive amount of traffic that the web has daily unless they do so with brute force.' Is't there already legislation brewing to allow the President to control (or shut down) the Internet--"in times of crisis"? This is truly becoming frightening. The next thing I expect to see is reinstatement of the Sedition Act. Not only can this happen in America, it already has.

report abuse vote down vote up

September 02, 2009
Votes: +2

Thomas F. Heringer said:

Rev. I think they need to start applying the fairness doctrine to the White House. There are far too many Liberals in one place. They need to have at least half of the White House appointees be Conservative Constitutionalists. The White House should have to pay a huge fee for failure to be fair in equal representation at the White House. They should also pay a license fee for all speeches by any member of the White House from the President on down, I would suggest a couple millions each or more out of the pockets of the individuals and not out of the pockets of us.

report abuse vote down vote up

September 02, 2009 | url
Votes: +4

danwhitehead1 said:

	Right on Thomas F. Heringer!!!!! You preach it!!! I'd gladly turn the pages for you.
	report abuse vote down vote up

September 02, 2009
Votes: +2

Still Free said:

Lovely thoughts, Mr. Heringer, but I'm afraid they are purely a fantasy. How I wish your ideas would take place, but I just don't ever see that happening--unless we get a true Patriot in the White House. And I hate to sound negative, but if the "Amnesty Bill" gets "passed" how will we ever get any of our guys in? Along with being as informed as is possible, and being a Bircher, I have resorted to prayer because at this point we need divine intervention in the form of a miracle. My neighbor had begun going to church EVERY day because, in her words, "everything is so messed up." But I love your idea, Mr. Heringer, and thank you for it.

report abuse vote down vote up

September 02, 2009
Votes: +2

jchontos said:

	Former chapter leader, but renewing member I see articles in the paper today about Green Czar Van Jones, but nowhere in the article does it mention that he is an avowed communist. We are fighting an entrenched media and unless we start spreading the word faster and better than press and TV, we will be relegated to be a noisy minority, and ready for re-education camps or worse.
	report abuse vote down vote up

September 05, 2009
Votes: +0

Concerned Citizen said:

	Here's a thought! Where's all the money generated by the Moyers, Burns and Sesame Street franchises over the years went. I bet that it would tickle our elmo to find out...
	report abuse vote down vote up

September 14, 2009
Votes: +0