‘…why do we keep appointing “Czars”?’ I know this is a rhetorical question, I just want to point out that I think the term ‘czar’ originated when President Nixon named William Simon “Energy Czar” during the energy crunch of the 1970’s … just about the same time that we started appending ‘gate’ to any scandals (as in Watergate)!
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Wednesday, May 16, 2024 @ 10:14 am
I’m wondering why he took the job. It seems to carry no power (unless he can back down Gates, Rice, Cheney and a bunch of 4-star generals), just responsibility.
Comment by Barry — Wednesday, May 16, 2024 @ 12:09 pm
I’ve wondered about the czar thing as well (and I’ve found it funny that it’s not “drug tsar”). I don’t remember the czar being considered any more aggressive than other royalty (aside from Peter the Great).
Of course “I’m going to appoint a drug king to handle this” just doesn’t send the same message. Maybe a President with German heritage can propose a “war kaiser,” a Hispanic President can suggest an “energy rey” and a less-cultured President can just say a “drug emperor.” Even those don’t have quite the ring.
Comment by Max Lybbert — Wednesday, May 16, 2024 @ 6:34 pm
Indeed.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Wednesday, May 16, 2024 @ 7:14 pm
Steven,
I thought we had a Commander in Chief or something or other. Why do we need one more person who has no authority or cannot make decisions? Don’t we have a Secretary of Defense? A President? Can this get any more surreal?
Plus, why the affinity with Tsarist Russia? The Romanovs did not end up that well off, if I remember correctly.
‘…why do we keep appointing “Czars”?’ I know this is a rhetorical question, I just want to point out that I think the term ‘czar’ originated when President Nixon named William Simon “Energy Czar” during the energy crunch of the 1970’s … just about the same time that we started appending ‘gate’ to any scandals (as in Watergate)!
Comment by Peter Bakke — Wednesday, May 16, 2024 @ 10:13 am
Czargate!
Indeed, yes, it is a time-worn tradition.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Wednesday, May 16, 2024 @ 10:14 am
I’m wondering why he took the job. It seems to carry no power (unless he can back down Gates, Rice, Cheney and a bunch of 4-star generals), just responsibility.
Comment by Barry — Wednesday, May 16, 2024 @ 12:09 pm
I’ve wondered about the czar thing as well (and I’ve found it funny that it’s not “drug tsar”). I don’t remember the czar being considered any more aggressive than other royalty (aside from Peter the Great).
Of course “I’m going to appoint a drug king to handle this” just doesn’t send the same message. Maybe a President with German heritage can propose a “war kaiser,” a Hispanic President can suggest an “energy rey” and a less-cultured President can just say a “drug emperor.” Even those don’t have quite the ring.
Comment by Max Lybbert — Wednesday, May 16, 2024 @ 6:34 pm
Indeed.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Wednesday, May 16, 2024 @ 7:14 pm
Steven,
I thought we had a Commander in Chief or something or other. Why do we need one more person who has no authority or cannot make decisions? Don’t we have a Secretary of Defense? A President? Can this get any more surreal?
Plus, why the affinity with Tsarist Russia? The Romanovs did not end up that well off, if I remember correctly.
Comment by Alan Cross — Wednesday, May 16, 2024 @ 11:10 pm
Alan,
I’m with you: I don’t get it either.
S
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Thursday, May 17, 2024 @ 6:35 am