Letter to the Editor: Czarmania
BY George A. Grant, Claremore
Thursday, December 20, 2012
12/20/12 at 3:02 AM
Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution states: "there shall be no Titles of Nobility." The Founding Fathers stated: "As long as titles are excluded, there can never be serious danger that the government will be other than with the people."
The president cannot appoint dukes, earls, lords or princes. But appointing czars? There is nothing in the Constitution about the appointment of czars. We have an: Afghanistan czar, AIDS czar, Auto Recovery czar, Auto Industry czar, Border czar, California Water czar, Energy czar, Climate czar, Central Region czar, Domestic Violence czar, Drug czar, Economic czar, Energy and Environmental czar, Faith-Based czar, Government Performance czar, Great Lake czar, Guantanamo Closure czar, Information czar, Intelligence czar, Mideast Peace czar, Pay czar, Regulatory czar, Service czar, Stimulus Accountability czar, Sudan czar, TARP czar, Technology czar, Terrorism czar, Urban Affairs czar, Weapons czar, Weapons of Mass Destruction czar, and a couple I probably missed.
These czars are not elected by the people, not ratified by the Senate, and not responsible for their actions. They operate independently at the whims of the president who appointed them. Through this newly found "nobility," the government can and will control every aspect of every individual's life and their duty to the ruling class.
They can decide what, when and how each "serf" has sinned against the socialist dictator.
"If we are directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we should soon want bread." - Thomas Jefferson, autobiography, 1821
Editor's note: The title "czar" is an informal one, it carries no royal authority. Many presidents have appointed "czars," including George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
Letters to the editor are encouraged. Send letters to email@example.com.