In the United States we have a “drug czar,” a “terrorism czar,” a (newly appointed) “pay czar”, a “cybersecurity czar”, a “war czar”, an “energy czar,” a "copyright czar," a “food safety czar,” and we even have a “hurricane Katrina recovery czar.” This wouldn’t be alarming if this was the Roman Empire (the term was originally derived from word Caesar and meant emperor) or 13th century Russia, but it’s not, it’s 21st century America a country that prides itself in not being ruled by an emperor. So why in holy hell do we use this archaic term for our government officials?  I found out, and it's as stupid as you think.

I did some checking and it turns out this country’s first czar (or tsar if you are north of the Mason Dixon line) was Nicolas Biddle in 1932 who was the “bank czar” appointed by Franklin Roosevelt. Since then almost every president has appointed some czar of some sort. Czar is not the official title of the presidential appointee, rather it is short hand for their often overly long actual title that the media created, but just the idea of America having czars boggles my mind (admittedly, it don’t take much, but still). McCarthy would be turning over in his grave if he knew our government was full of czars.

When I hear the term czar I think of Russian monarchs with ostentatious facial hair and funny hats (ushankas, I think they are called) not American bureaucrats. I know Obama has plenty of other issues to tackle; the economy, healthcare, war(s), Fox News, pernicious flies, and hiding his cigarette smoking from the press, but he should take the time to sign an executive order asking the media to stop using the term czar.

Let’s use a more American-ish term for our officials, like “honcho” or “bossman” (or bosswoman) or “executive.” I’d even be okay with “person in charge of important stuff,” it’s bit cumbersome to say, but it’s better than czar. I know this is a small issue and somewhat semantically anal retentive, but this is America goddammit, not Russia. Is it just me? Am I being too sensitive?