Okay, the GOP seems to be in a tizzy over the number of czars in the Obama administration. Six Republicans have written a letter to the White House saying, "The creation of 'czars,' particularly within the Executive Office of the President, circumvents the constitutionally established process of 'advise and consent,' [and] greatly diminishes the ability of Congress to conduct oversight and hold officials accountable." The letter asks for information about their authority, qualifications and transparency. It also asked that the Obama administration stop from creating any new czar positions.

So the White House is on the offensive. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said that the GOP "silence was deafening" on the issue of czars during the Bush administration. Well ... maybe because when Bush appointed a czar, he didn't really consider him to be a czar in the "Czar Nicholas" sense.

This is the favorite tactic of the left. When in doubt, just say "Well Bush did it!"

Bush, did in fact have czars during his administration. In fact, the whole concept of czars goes back to Ronald Reagan with the Drug Czar. President Clinton had 3 czars during his administration. George W. Bush had 4 czars. But Barack Obama has how many ... 16 ... 18 czars .. and counting?

Oh how I would have liked to have been sitting on the Fox & Friends curvy couch this morning when they interviewed presidential mouthpiece Robert Gibbs. Here's a hint on how that interview would have gone.

When Gibbs made a reference to people who are " ... fortunate enough to have health insurance." I would have stepped right in:

Excuse me, Mr. Gibbs .. are you saying that some people have health insurance just because they're lucky? Is this really a matter of luck? Are you going to tell a head of household who has sacrificed to make sure that his family is properly insured that he was just lucky? That he was just fortunate? And are you also telling us that heads of household who don't provide their family with insurance aren't irresponsible, they were just not fortunate? Does the Obama Administration think that individual responsibility plays any role in the health care debate?

Hey .. you on the curvy couch. Stop wimping out.

It's from Robert Gibbs .. PrezBO's spokesman. The headline says that "PRESIDENT OBAMA DELIVERS NATIONAL ADDRESS TO AMERICA'S SCHOOCHILDREN." Anyone see a problem with that?

National security has resurfaced in the news lately for a lot of reasons.

Number one: Congress is on vacation.

Number two: Eric Holder decided that it would be a wise idea to investigate CIA interrogators for their role in terrorist interrogations.

Number three: the moonbats need something to sink their teeth into.

Number four: it has been a violent couple of months for the troops in Afghanistan. Number five: we are approaching the anniversary of September 11th.

Now if you will recall, the Obama administration declared that we are no longer fighting a war on terror. That phrase was removed from the White House lexicon along with "jihad" and others that may insinuate the hateful ideology of Islam. In fact, there is no more Islamic terrorism. The phrase now is "man-caused disasters." And the war against these Islamic goons is now our "overseas contingency operation."

Well somebody needs to inform White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. He must have been sick the day that this memo was released, because yesterday Robert Gibbs actually used the phrase "war on terror" during his daily press conference. Hard to fight a war when you can't call it like it is, isn't it?

Now Robert Gibbs also had a few things to say to Dick Cheney. Cheney has been very vocal about the administration's decision to investigate terrorist interrogators. Cheney said that this is a purely political act, "It's an outrageous political act that will do great damage, long-term, to our capacity to be able to have people take on difficult jobs, make difficult decisions, without having to worry about what the next administration is going to say." Robert Gibbs chalked up Cheney's criticism to nothing short of "typical" and "unfounded." He says, "I'm not entirely sure that Dick Cheney's predictions on foreign policy have borne a whole lot of fruit over the last eight years in a way that has been either positive or, to the best of my recollection, very correct."

Seems like these guys need to get out of a spitting match and start focusing on the real enemy.

Besides the healthcare debate, Washington is also figuring out how to handle large executive salaries at companies that received bailout money. Not only do we have our pay czar Kenneth Feinberg; but Obama's press secretary Robert Gibbs decided to chime into the debate. Baby Huey says, "I don't think the American people begrudge that people make big salaries, as long as they're not jeopardizing the good will of the public in doing so."

Oh, isn't that just so sweet! It's OK with the American people if private companies pay their executives big salaries ... but they need to make sure that they keep the good will of the public along the way. Fine .. so how do we determine whether or not a particular company still enjoys the public's good will? Does some political hack figure that out for us and let us know? Hardly. The public votes with their pocketbooks. If they feel good about the company, they become customers. If they don't, they don't. It is not for the government to decide.

Man do I get the hate mail when I bring up the subject of Barack Obama's birth certificate. Apparently White House press secretary Robert Gibbs is just as frustrated as I am about this 'birther' crowd. Yesterday he was asked what he thinks it will take to make the birthers go away.

He says, "I almost hate to indulge in such an august setting as the White House -- and I mean this in seriousness -- the White House briefing room, discussing the made-up fictional nonsense of whether the president was born in this country ... If I had some DNA, it wouldn't assuage those that don't believe he was born here. But I have news for them and for all of us: The president was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, the 50th state of the greatest country on the face of the earth. He's a citizen."

Can you believe that we are six months into this presidency and there are still people out there who wake up every morning and worry about the fact that they believe Barack Obama is not a US citizen.

I hope that you got the chance to see the exchange yesterday at White House press briefing. Robert Gibbs starts to get really flustered when a CBS reporter continues to hound him over the fact that Obama town hall events are completely staged. There are no "random" questions from the audience. Everything is pre-selected, every question is screened, etc. So this reporter calls him out on it, and then Helen Thomas gets involved. She says that she has never seen this level of control in the White House before. And if anyone should know, Helen Thomas would.

I just LOVE that woman!

After releasing the results of these "stress tests" ... the Obama administration says that it is still open to the idea of government dictating management changes at these companies receiving "substantial" government aid. Robert Gibbs says the government would consider changes at the CEO level and at the board of directors level in order to make sure "that the management was in place to remedy the situation and ensure long-term viability without continued government assistance."

Tax cheat Timothy Geithner also echoed this sentiment. He says, "We'll have to make judgments about whether the quality of leadership of those boards is strong enough so that again our interests are met best." Did you hear that? "Our" interests. Who exactly is he speaking for? The federal government .. the Obama administration .. the Treasury Department .. the taxpayers? Either way, I am still waiting for someone to show me where in the Constitution it says that the executive branch of our federal government can remove anyone from a private company.

Again .. I'll point out, though it won't register with most people, that there is a name for an economy where the means of production are privately owned but controlled by the government. That would be a fascist economy. Not that anyone really cares.

Barack Obama signed over your grandchildren's economic future yesterday. He signed this government growth bill into law. And as if that wasn't bad enough ...

Did you happen to hear what Obama's press secretary, Robert Gibbs, had to say about the stimulus? On Air Force One, on the way to Denver to have Obama sign the bill that just HAD to be passed by Congress over four days ago, Gibbs said, "I think the president is going to do what's necessary to grow this economy .. While there are no particular plans at this point for a second stimulus package .. I wouldn't foreclose it."

Well that didn't take long. Wasn't this stimulus package supposed to take care of it? Yet on the very day PrezBO signs it we hear talk of another one! Haven't we grown government enough for a while? How much will the next stimulus cost .. two trillion? We've already squeezed universal healthcare and the possibility of government Internet regulation into this current bill, what Democrat dreams and schemes can we come up with next?

Wall Street didn't seem to feel too confident about the stimulus bill either. The Dow Jones dropped almost 300 points, close to its lowest levels in more than a decade.