| http://www.strike-the-root.com/columns/Bottoms/bottoms18.html Is America Really "Engaged" in Big Government? by John Bottoms It seems that Americans just aren't very enthusiastic about their government's efforts to protect the homeland. So commiserated hundreds of government and big business Pooh-Bahs at the recent "Homeland Security 2005" seminar, agreeing that they have "failed to engage the American people." What, Americans aren't "engaged" by the hours they spend standing on security lines at airports? They don't give thanks to the Homeland Security office as they're poked, prodded, felt up or strip-searched by bored, incompetent, lecherous federalized airport guards who don't notice when loaded guns pass under their X-ray vision? They aren't thrilled by the threat of being placed on a federal "no fly list" for having the wrong political opinions? They're not enthusiastic that their email, phone calls and web-browsing habits are being scrutinized by their government? They question why hundreds of people are being detained without criminal charges? They wonder how it enhances their security to place into solitary confinement a resident alien who volunteered to help the FBI catch the terrorists? They doubt the ability, integrity and intellect of a president who accuses them of aiding terrorists if they don't approve of his policies? What's not to like? But Americans individually seem pretty "engaged" in the business of security. The 20,000 airline pilots who are demanding FAA permission to carry firearms to protect themselves, their customers and their employers' multi-million dollar investment from terrorists and the US Air Force (which promises to shoot down hijacked planes) are engaged. Americans who are buying record numbers of personal defense weapons are definitely engaged. Jewish-American tourists avoiding visits to the Middle East and France this year also seem quite engaged. The airplane passengers and flight crew who subdued shoe-bomber wannabe Richard Reid were about as engaged as you can be. I guess those seminar attendees only want us engaged in government's efforts to provide security. In a rare and shocking display of honesty, several participants (anonymously) said "they felt that without another terrorist incident, keeping public attention on the gaps in security and support for the expenditures was growing more difficult." Well, guys, thanks for admitting that terrorist attacks are just a means to achieve your real goal of funding your growing federal fiefdoms. I'll remember that during the next terror strike, and afterward when you demand yet more tax money while threatening my remaining freedom. Lest Americans really become more engaged in homeland security, symposium attendee Richard Falkenrath, who is responsible for directing the "national strategy for homeland security" said that it was "largely impractical" to give the public information on security threats. We get it: our rulers don't want citizens engaged in homeland security; they just want servile inmates who meekly pay their taxes, follow orders, and accept that government knows best. But Homeland Security czar Tom Ridge has the solution. Since he and his federal colleagues have done such a bang-up job so far, just give them more power. "We need to take a look at restructuring government, probably perhaps restructuring the office itself," the linguistically indecisive Ridge said. Just as you know a politician's lying when his lips are moving, you can be sure that "restructuring government" means expanding it. Americans have shown at every opportunity that they are ready and able to become more engaged in the security of their homeland. Should the government on the Potomac ever decide to take them up on the offer, all they need do is ask. So far, it seems all those people know is how to crack the whip. May 8, 2002 |
