Friday, March 18, 2005

Safe at home

The new Homeland Security Secretary acknowledged that you can't protect all of the people, all of the time, so the government is going to put its resources into preventing the most serious attacks. It's a sensible approach and one that the Bush administration should have adopted publicly almost immediately after Sept. 11, instead of trotting out John Ashcroft and Tom Ridge every other week to send Americans to the hardware store in search of duct tape.

Republicans have long nurtured a reputation for law and order, and critics--myself included--believe they exploited the 9/11 attacks and intruded on civil liberties out of proportion to the real risk of a terrorist attack. A key principle of conservatism--and conservatism and Republicanism are not always mutually inclusive--is that life is inherently risky, tragic even, and that there is a limit to what government can do to mitigate that risk. It's a sensible philosophy.


Anonymous Amos the Poker Cat said...

William F. Buckley's definition of conservative is:

It stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.

8:29 PM

Blogger Jonathan Potts said...

Keep in mind it wasn't a blanket endorsement. I'm already an outcast in the liberal blogosphere for daring to suggest that Democrats might want to start winning elections.

10:30 PM

Blogger djhlights said...

Considering this was the approach of Richard Clarke and we all know how his advice was taken, I'll believe it when I see something actually being done.

To start, getting the funding that has been slashed in the budget for first responders actually diverted to places that need it. Having it divided as pure pork for districts that are as likely to be attacked as my theater is likely to be attacked in a way similar to the Moscow Theater standoff a few years back is pure stupidity. That would be one large step that can be done right away.

Like I said though, I'll believe it when I see it. I just doubt the Congress will go along with it. I sure as hell hope to see it though!

10:22 AM

Blogger djhlights said...

Regarding this line of realism in fighting terrorism, Jonathan did you happen to read Richard Clarke's article in the Atlantic back in January regarding possible lines of terrorist attacks over the next ten years. It's subscription only online, but the library more than like has it.

10:28 AM

Blogger Jonathan Potts said...

I have it at home, but I haven't read it. Maybe I'll dig out since we are on the subject.

4:46 PM

Blogger Shawn said...

Unfortunately, Richard Clarke's suggestions will most likely be brushed aside by many on the Right. They claim he's simply a frustrated, bitter bureaucrat who's angry at being pushed aside by President Bush. Never mind that he also served under Presidents Reagan and Bush I. Even our national security is becoming politicized.

3:14 PM


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home