(no subject)

[fabrisse]

The first question in this final Presidential Debate: Can we be as safe as we were?

The question is wrong.

We were never safe. We haven't been since Pearl Harbor. Even before that we had homegrown riots, bombers, and assassins. Safety isn't possible. Nor should it be.

Can we do things to stay safer? Yes. We're doing them. Not as well as we should, but the mechanisms are in place. The most important thing for us all to remember is that these provisions were in place before the PATRIOT Act.

Edited to add: The gay marriage question is producing some weird rhetoric.

Bush: We need to teach children to read, write, and subtract early.

Which may be true, but sounds really strange.

Comments

[undauntra.livejournal.com]

I'd rather be free than safe.

Also, addition is clearly vastly overrated. One can emulate it by simply subtracting negative numbers.

[fabrisse.livejournal.com]

And it explains Bush's spending policy.

Freedom is more important than safety. It always has been. I loathed the question at least partially because there was an implicit lie to the American people in the question itself as well as in the answers.

By the way, I hope BP 600 doesn't refer to blood pressure. *g*

[breeamal.livejournal.com]

For a long time there has been this idea that you can trade freedom for security, life it was currency or something.

I was trying to come up with something pithy, but fuck it.

I'm gay, one of the last minorities it's ok to dawg. They aren't giving me either so I guess I'd rather have freedom.

[fabrisse.livejournal.com]

Hey, nice to see you in my LJ.

Equal rights under the law and a good faith attempt at equality of opportunity are all that a government can really give us. Those are the freedoms that are supposed to be guaranteed by our Bill of Rights. Trading any of that away for spurious security is a huge mistake.

Sometimes pithy just isn't possible. I hope that soon, you will be guaranteed your equal rights.