We need a czar czar
April 20th 2009 04:55
I see that President Obama has named two more "czars". I have no idea how many czars he has named now, but there are a lot of them. Is a secret memo going around Capitol Hill stating that the government just doesn't quite have enough bureaucrats already? Does Obama think that we just need a few more fiefdoms that will coalesce power and siphon tax dollars from the gullible and feckless public? I don't get it.
Overseeing so many czars, though, is a full-time job that will require a unique set of skills. How can Obama stay on top of it? He can name a "czar" czar! The panoply of czars would report weekly to the "czar" czar and then the "czar" czar would provide updates to Obama. That makes sense, right? We all know how effective and efficient government is. What is one more layer of fabricated management in an exponentially expanding government?
Overseeing so many czars, though, is a full-time job that will require a unique set of skills. How can Obama stay on top of it? He can name a "czar" czar! The panoply of czars would report weekly to the "czar" czar and then the "czar" czar would provide updates to Obama. That makes sense, right? We all know how effective and efficient government is. What is one more layer of fabricated management in an exponentially expanding government?
| 59 |
| Vote |









Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
Comment by Lester Caudill
Round Politics
Comment by PopulistConservative
Angry Electorate
Comment by PopulistConservative
Angry Electorate