Obama and the Cyber Czar

Obama is adding to his army of czars and creating a new office.

He's such a busy guy!

From the Wall Street Journal:

President Barack Obama will announce on Friday the creation of a "cyber czar" position, stepping up his administration's efforts to better protect the nation's computer networks.

The White House appointment will be followed in coming days by the formal creation of a new military cyber command that will coordinate the defense of Pentagon computer networks and improve U.S. offensive capabilities in cyberwarfare.

The cybersecurity chief will report to both the National Security Council and the National Economic Council, a compromise resulting from a fierce White House turf battle over the responsibilities and powers of the new office.

Mr. Obama won't announce on Friday the person who will fill the new job. That isn't expected for at least a few more days.

...The moves come amid growing evidence that sophisticated overseas hackers are waging a widening assault on important U.S. networks. The Defense Department detected 360 million attempts to penetrate its networks last year, up from six million in 2006. The Pentagon alone has spent $100 million in the past six months repairing damage from cyberattacks.

U.S. officials acknowledge that the hackers, believed to be mainly from Russia and China, are having some success. The Wall Street Journal reported this spring that cyberspies breached both the nation's electricity grid and the Pentagon's biggest weapons program, the $300 billion Joint Strike Fighters.

"I'd like to say that our networks are secure, but that would not be correct," Army Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander, who runs the National Security Agency, told lawmakers this month. "We have vulnerabilities."

I'm not suggesting that protecting our nation's computer networks isn't important, but is a cyber czar necessary?

Robert Byrd considers Obama's addiction to czars to be dangerous.

Robert Byrd, the longest serving senator in history, criticized President Obama's appointment of numerous White House advisors, also called "czars," saying the presence of the czars gives the president too much power.

These czars report directly to Mr. Obama and have the power to shape national policy on their subject area. So far, Mr. Obama has recruited czars on health reform, urban affairs policy, and energy and climate change. Unlike Cabinet secretaries, they do not have to be approved by Congress.

In a letter to Obama on Wednesday, Byrd, a Democrat, said that the czar system "can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances," Politico reported. Byrd added that oversight of federal agencies is the responsibility of officials approved by the Senate.

"As presidential assistants and advisers, these White House staffers are not accountable for their actions to the Congress, to cabinet officials, or to virtually anyone but the president," Byrd wrote. "They rarely testify before congressional committees, and often shield the information and decision-making process behind the assertion of executive privilege. In too many instances, White House staff have been allowed to inhibit openness and transparency, and reduce accountability."

Byrd has been a longtime critic of policies that concentrate power in the executive branch.

So we hear that Obama is announcing a "cyber czar" position.

Many supporters say, "Isn't that great? Obama is taking action."

I don't see anything great about Obama's czar strategy.

Czars are one of Obama's favorite loopholes. He names czars to avoid accountability and circumvent Congress.

But even fellow Dem, Byrd, warns of Obama's czar force.

It bothers me that President Bush was mercilessly bashed for grabbing power and expanding the power of the presidency, yet Obama is openly threatening our Constitutional system of checks and balances with little opposition.

When he was in Hollywood on DNC fundraising business, Obama bragged to donors, "I would put these first four months up against any prior administration since FDR."

He said, "[I'm] not satisfied. I'm confident in the future, but I'm not yet content."

That's right. Obama is not content. He wants even MORE power, and he's getting MORE almost every day.

As Byrd warns, what Obama is doing is destructive. He's chipping away at the very foundations of our government, our freedom, our country.

I don't know why Americans are allowing him to get away with this unprecedented power grab.

Obama has taken the Imperial Presidency to staggering heights.

Obama has gone beyond acting like he's the king. He's more powerful than a dictator. I believe Obama thinks he is a god, not bound by any earthly constraints, like the Constitution of the United States.