Obama Not First President To Appoint Shadow Government

Since this seems to be a hot topic these days, I'd like to ask folks to think about the very first director of the Office of National Drug control Policy. Joe BidenJoe Biden, then a U.S. senator, coined the term "drug czar" as a description of the directorship of the ONDCP. Since then, our leaders have conspired to circumvent the Constitution of the United States of America by creating directorships in a number of other areas of government that are not suject to the usual checks and balances. Basically the aim has been to destroy the foundation upon which our nation was built by creating high-level leadership jobs that are large in scope and are not subject to constitutional protections that were included to prevent our federal government from becoming too powerful. Although the Constitution does provide for positions other than the Cabinet they are clearly meant to be lesser in stature than the Cabinet, as stated in our U.S. Constitution in Article 2 Section 2 in reference to the President's authority. I've added bold type for emphasis and italics for clarification of authority:

"[The President]...shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments."

I would think this was the section used to justify the "czar" positions so popular these days. The problem is our highest law clearly states that such appointeees should be "inferior officers". For anyone who is not aware, the term "czar" is a corruption of "caesar". The title "czar" was last used by the imperial rulers of Russia before Red October and the Marxist rebellion that resulted in a Socialist government that lasted until the 1980's. The point is that a czar or caesar is hardly the title of an inferior officer as specified by the Constitution. Such a moniker would be given to a ruler of a particular domain. Aside from that the Constitution gives neither the president nor the legislature the authority to create powerful positions in government. My opinion of this debacle is that a Cabinet member should be capable of running whatever area of government he or she has been assigned to head. The hiring of redundant personnel is not only wasteful of tax dollars but unnecessarily complicates the government's decision-making process.

At any rate, the first "czar" position was created by Ronald ReaganRonald Reagan and George BushGeorge Bush. Reagan's vision of the U.S. presidency was monarchical in nature, so it's not surprising that he was first to implement a high-level leadership position that in effect answered only to the President. The current trend of side-stepping our supreme law started years ago. Anyone who has read through my list of articles knows I am a vehement opponent of both political parties in America. The fact that Republicans were the first to scheme to skirt the Constitution is irrelevant. They are no more or less evil than Democrats. Neither party has represented our interests for years.

Since 1988 and the Anti Drug-Abuse Act, more "czars" have been appointed until now, with Obama's administration I've lost count of the number of extraneous idiots that have been foisted upon us. Does anyone remember the original structure of the government, when the President's advisors were the Cabinet appointees and the government seemed to run just fine, or at least no worse than it does today?

Perhaps the powers-that-be noticed an opportunity for more graft? After all, two dishonest people overseeing the same area of government have to able to steal more effectively than one. In fact, two should be more than twice as effective as one could be if the general rules of human productivity apply. Therefore we have a situation where our erstwhile leaders are stealing our money and freedom at a rate more than twice as quickly as one professional politician could alone. I guess I have to give them credit for excelling in the fleecing and oppression of the common citizens.

This is just another example of our government run amok. The founders of this nation displayed a canny understanding of a government's tendency to grow itself beyond healthy limits. This is not surprising given that they lived under the oppressive rule of King George and witnessed first-hand the results of a tyrannical authority that cared nothing for the lives of its citizens. What we seem to have forgotten is that they tried to warn us that the greatest danger to our future would come not from a foreign invader but from our own acquiescence to the abuses of our government.

Remember this: In a Republic with free elections, you may not get the government you want. However, you will always get the government you deserve.