Why is it every time that the president assigns a special urgent and unique project–the assignment is never to a director, administrator, not even to a chief of staff, always to a ruler, or more specifically, to a czar. The very notion of calling someone a “czar” speaks to a strange type of insecurity, both historically and dramaturgically. It may denote majestic expertise, autocratic control, and Olympian judgement. While aggrandizing, I wonder sometimes what any of us think about appointing a czar in the private sector. Would you for example, appoint a czar of human resource management? A czar of fundraising in your church? Would you turn your kids over to tennis camp run by a tennis czar? The next time we appoint someone, maybe they should be called duke or duchess–it is less Olympian.