- WND - http://www.wnd.com -
If I didn't hear it with my own ears, I wouldn't have believed it.
Posted By Joseph Farah On 10/06/1998 @ 1:00 am In Commentary | Comments Disabled
Last week Vice President Al Gore (I know, I know. You thought Clinton was the president of vice.) announced that 229 million of your tax dollars would be redistributed to police departments around the country to upgrade their technology and improve efficiency.
Now, before I get to the point, it needs to be stated that the federal government has no business taking money from some guy in Boise, Idaho, and spending it on local police programs in Sacramento, Calif. But that’s exactly what is going on here. Nobody questions this stuff in America anymore. We just assume that those guys in Washington know best how to spend our money. Or maybe we just fear what will happen if we demand that they adhere to the tenets of the Constitution.
But I digress. Here’s the real point. Al Gore took this action — an obvious attempt to campaign for the presidency with taxpayer money — in the name of fighting crime. Fighting crime? The best thing Al Gore could do to fight crime would be to turn himself in to the FBI and confess that he is the second-highest-ranking lawbreaker in the country.
Listen to this guy: “If we are going to reduce crime once and for all, we must work to give law enforcement the 21st-century tools and technology they need to fight crime more effectively.”
First of all, Al, we’re never going to reduce crime “once and for all” until the Good Lord returns. And you ain’t Him, pal. Secondly, I suspect — knowing the nature of this administration — what you’re talking about are not really tools to catch crooks, but the tools to keep tabs on perfectly law-abiding citizens.
Gore adds: “Technology makes it harder for criminals to get away with their crimes and allows officers to do their jobs quicker and more effectively so they can spend more time on the streets.”
Now, I’ll admit that Al Gore is something of an expert at getting away with crimes. Remember? He’s the guy who defended himself against allegations of raising political money at taxpayer expense by suggesting there was “no controlling legal authority.”
Since he also bills himself as “the technology czar” of this criminal administration, I will assume the kind of systems and hardware to which he refers is not currently in place at the White House. My friends, that is where we need the surveillance cameras and the hidden recording devices — not out in Middle America.
Where does Al Gore get off playing Santa Claus with taxpayer money? Like his boss, the vice perpetrator has never worked an honest day in his life.
Always beware when you hear: “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help you.” What this program really amounts to is something much uglier than fighting crime. It’s about bribery. It’s about extending federal control. It’s about co-opting local officials into federal subservience. It’s about, in effect, Washington deputizing your local sheriff or police chief to do Uncle Sam’s bidding.
Oh, I know. You can’t do that with $229 million. But this is just the tip of the iceberg as WorldNetDaily has shown with its occasional series of “Armed and Dangerous” reports. The federal law enforcement army is growing rapidly. There are now more than 80,000 federal agents under arms — not counting the military. That 80,000 federal cops represents, in real terms, the standing army the Founding Fathers feared might some day be organized in America.
It has happened quietly. It has happened without fanfare. It has happened without press releases and press conferences. Yet, it has happened.
It happens because Americans have come to trust government far too much.
They believe claptrap about technology helping to fight crime. Do you know what the best deterrent to crime is? A well-armed and vigilant citizenry — the worst nightmare of Al Gore and his tyrannical friends in Washington. Instead Al Gore and his co-conspirators think the answer to crime is watching you, listening to you, keeping tabs on you in every conceivable way.
They don’t trust you. Why should you trust them?
Article printed from WND: http://www.wnd.com
URL to article: http://www.wnd.com/1998/10/1221/
© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.