Posted on 10/26/2001 1:30:53 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
Redundant incompetence
© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com
Most of us cannot envision a life without bureaucracy those inefficient, cumbersome, lethargic tax-supported entities that, were they businesses, would have folded long ago, their managers jailed on charges of fraud, theft and breathing valuable air.
We cannot envision a life without bureaucracy because over the years we have allowed our leaders to create so damned much of it. We have agencies for everything, and most of what our national leaders have created, our state and local leaders have duplicated.
So, we not only have bureaucracy, baby, we have redundant bureaucracy. Are we really stupid, or what?
With this in mind, it really bothers me that we're allowing our leaders to create even more bureaucracy now, as we face a new and very real terrorist threat. If anything, Americans need more decisions being made by less people or, at a minimum, accountable people at this time in our history than at any time in our past.
With more bureaucracy in the form of Gov. Tom Ridge's newly created Homeland Security agency, the people get neither accountability nor a reduction in the number of decision makers.
No one knows the futility of more bureaucracy better than a "recovering" bureaucrat.
On Monday former Deputy FBI Director Oliver "Buck" Revell told the Press Club of Dallas the U.S. could never have stopped the Sept. 11 attacks because "we were deaf, dumb and blind we were asleep at the switch."
Revell said terrorist dangers had been spelled out to Congress and various commissions many times during the Clinton administration. But because our nation was (and is) too top-heavy and too dependent on the chronic inefficiency of its own bureaucracy, boom! We became victims instead.
So much for the hundred billion or so dollars taxpayers coughed up last year to fund all of these agencies tasked with some degree of national security.
Oh and so much for holding anyone accountable for this incredible security failure. Instead of asking for more power to violate the civil rights of innocent people, why the hell isn't Attorney General John Ashcroft arresting people who failed to do their jobs to protect this country?
" Nothing's been done to put together a coherent homeland defense," Revell said. "There is no strategic planning, shared mission or coordination" among agencies dealing with global, organized crime and terrorist activities.
No foolin'.
Over 140 agencies under 14 Cabinet heads are responsible for some aspect of homeland defense. That is just too much bureaucracy. Nobody knows what everyone else is doing. And in the few instances where people have tried to find out, testosterone gets in the way and agencies actually withheld information from each other, just to protect their stupid turf and preserve their position at the federal (read taxpayer) funding trough.
With that kind of bureaucracy, Cabinet heads are wearing so freaking many hats there is no possible way they can effectively manage all the duties they are assigned.
So what was the "solution" of the Bush White House to address this terrorist "problem" of ours? What was Congress' answer? Well, let's just create a brand-new agency and staff it with a new Cabinet-level chief.
Yeah, that'll work.
"It doesn't matter how many homeland czars we have," Revell said, noting that if there is no "political will" or "public attention for more than 24 hours," this new bureaucracy is only going to perform as well as well, our old bureaucracies.
That's just swell. How in the world can a nation achieve the pinnacle of global success America has achieved and be so self-destructive at the same time?
All this bureaucracy is killing us, folks. We no longer have leaders to choose from on election day just corporate paper-shufflers, "personnel managers" and carpetbaggers who are much better at shirking a duty than taking one on. We are no longer electing representatives, senators and presidents just figureheads who manage and fund bureaucracies.
The United States government is now our largest employer, ladies and gentlemen. Add to those numbers the numbers of men and women who work for state and local governments. Enough said.
And you wonder how in the world "them damned terrorists" could have killed almost 7,000 people Sept. 11?
I don't. I don't wonder at all.
Related offer:
Think every vote counts? Think again. Get Jon E. Dougherty's report, "Election 2000: How the military vote was suppressed," in WorldNetDaily's online store.
For Education And Discussion Only. Not For Commercial Use.
Yes, Washington is awash in multiple federal agencies. You name it and every letter of the alphabet has probably been used at least once if not dozens of times. And just like we found out when our troops went into Grenada, none of them have the capability of talking to each other.
This position actually makes sense, much sense. It will coordinate the intelligence and resources of all those agencies the otherwise would not happen. For once added bureaucracy makes some sense.
We are all New Democrats, Now.
-------------------------------------
--- "un-confusing the lines of control" ---, hmmmmm, I didn't know they spoke bureaucrateze at Jack in the Box. - Maybe you did push a desk in the service.
The only position which makes sense to you is bent over. Tell me ONE THING that the federal government does well?.
---max
Ok. You might want to take another shot at it because, quite frankly, I don't think those two sentences made sense to anyone. I was really looking for some critical analysis of the aritcle and, specifically, of my comments at 4 and 5. How did we get to bending over tables and the like?
But never fear, I noted your sly dig on 'potency'. Having problems that way, are you? -- That, plus your frequent references to your imagined foes mothers, leads me to believe you are one sick puppy. Find help.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.