The "czars" aren't Czars, you know. That's a ridiculous idea. What the press calls "czars" are only "special advisers" to the president. He'll task them with, say, figuring out how to modernize the government's computer systems. The president will then apply what it can with the executive powers, and the Congress will have to pitch in with laws and appropriations. "Czars" were basically a name put on various people, like Bill Bennett -- the Drug "czar" and the Education "czar" under Reagan -- kind of newsroom sarcasm, because in fact, the "czars" have no power except what the president has. They investigate situations for the president. They go and find out exactly why such-and-such isn't working, and then advise the president what should be done. No president knows everything. He needs eyes and ears, and occasionally, mouths. Somebody needs to talk to Larry King, after all. Who better than a czar? Then they write a report that tries to sell, say, a Department of Computing, or more changes from the FCC. They can't DO anything. They can't decide to shoot the Secretary of Commerce because he doesn't agree. The Russian absolute monarchs were Czars. They had almost total power. The system of "czars" we've built up -- much more of them in conservative times than liberal, by the way -- is pretty innocuous.