Do we need another czar?
Ask Senator John McCain. In a year he could be president and appointing â€œczars.â€
Scary thought. His McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance law squelched too many freedoms for me to rush into rah-rah mode.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, agrees with me, telling CNNâ€™s Anderson Cooper: â€œMcCain- Feingold has really left a bad taste in many peopleâ€™s mouths, not just conservatives . . .â€
But when Cooper asked Perkins what steps McCain could take to win support from conservatives, Perkins said McCain could â€œannounce a family czar in the White House to focus on strengthening Americaâ€™s families.â€
You know, Iâ€™ve never liked that term, czar. Russian czars were dictators, the name taken from Caesar, the Roman emperor. We Americans are just generally down on all-powerful tyrants. So, why name our government officials â€œczarsâ€?
Of course, Perkinsâ€™s idea isnâ€™t for this Family Czar to tyrannize the countryside. He simply wants to bolster families.
But, ask yourself, which is more likely to come from some powerful new office in Washington: tyranny or stronger families?
And if you bet McCain would pick a swell person to be Family Czar, how would you like Hillary Clintonâ€™s pick? Or Barack Obamaâ€™s? If youâ€™re a Democrat, flip the examples around.
I wouldnâ€™t want my own mother to pick someone for such a position. And sheâ€™s super swell.
Letâ€™s make this our slogan: No new czars.
This is Common Sense. Iâ€™m Paul Jacob.