A rightwing relative of mine sent me one of those viral emails about Obama’s evil system of czars. After I wrote my response (and before I clicked on Reply-All), I made a copy and edited it a bit. Here’s a four-point rebuttal.
- There is not a single czar in the U.S. government. The word "czar" does not appear in anyone’s official title. The Republicans are trying to abolish something that doesn’t exist.
- The media like the word "czar" because it’s a short word. The word became very popular about ten years ago. Ten years from now, they might be calling someone a "duke" or a "boss" or a "hobbit." Also, see point #1.
- The media first used the word "czar" for a government official over 60 years ago (during FDR’s presidency). But "czar" wasn’t actually part of his title. Have I mentioned point #1?
- Some government officials are confirmed by the Senate, some aren’t. Again, see point #1.
The media have been calling people czars since the 1940s. FDR had a rubber czar (because rubber was needed for tires on jeeps and airplanes during WWII). Truman had a housing czar (to find housing for veterans returning home from WWII). Nixon had a price czar (to give him advice about controlling inflation).
According to Wikipedia (here), the first Bush had 3 czars, Clinton had 11, and the second Bush had 46. So far, Obama has 35. That doesn’t mean the number of czars has been increasing. It means that, in the last ten years, the media have fallen in love with the word. Ten years from now, maybe journalists will be talking about the Energy Duke or the Terrorism Boss or the Infrastructure Hobbit. And some idiotic Republican will be saying "There are too many hobbits in government! We need to pass a law against the unchecked power of hobbits!"
Senate confirmation seems to be a big issue for Beck and his angry minions. Here’s a few well-known czars for you:
Drug Czar (official title: Director of National Drug Control Policy, confirmed by Senate)
Intelligence Czar (official title: Director of National Intelligence, confirmed by Senate)
Science Czar (official title: Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, confirmed by Senate)
OK, I’ll admit that Obama asked George Mitchell to serve as Special Envoy to the Middle East without Senate confirmation. He has been called the Middle East Czar, although that isn’t his official title (see point #1). Mitchell was previously the Senate Majority Leader, way back about 15 years ago. Oh, yes, he was also the Special Envoy for Northern Ireland, where he negotiated the Good Friday agreement that brought peace to Northern Ireland (without a Senate confirmation). Good job, George! Sounds to me like he’s a good person to send to the Middle East.
Who else? GW Bush had an abstinence czar, a faith-based czar, a Hurricane Katrina recovery czar, and even a reading czar (I suspect his wife suggested that one). I don’t know if they were confirmed by the Senate or not, but I will say this one more time: their official titles weren’t czar. The word "czar" was given to them by the media (see point #1). Karl Rove (Turd Blossom) was called the "Domestic Policy Czar." Did the Senate vote on him? Bush had a White House chef and someone who mowed the grass. If some newspaper referred to them as "Food Czar" or "Lawncare Czar," would they need Senate confirmation?
Finally, for god’s sake! Think about it for a minute: Czars can’t be communists! You can’t say that Obama is a communist who’s also a fascist who’s appointing czars. The amount of sense in that idea is zero.
I know. It’s basically a non-issue about a stupid topic invented by brain-dead Republicans. And other Kossacks have probably written other diaries about it (but maybe not with a four-point rebuttal, which anyone can use with friends or co-workers). But I had to get this off my chest. Sometimes it’s good to rant.