Your email address:

Send To (enter comma-sperated email addresses):

Note to Recipient:




Entry:
Piercing The Bubble The Fox News headline says it all so perfectly: [1]Man Gets Within 10 Feet of Cheney. Presumably this put Cheney at risk of ending his nearly three years in complete isolation from actual human contact, most of it spent in an undisclosed secure location. The scary thing is, he's the guy who's supposed to be more in touch than Bush. Fortunately alert secret service agents were able to wrestle the man to the ground. He was then arrested and charged with some truly absurd violations: assaulting federal officers (presumably when he responded to being pushed by any action other than going completely limp), and the Kafkaesque ' impeding the operation of the Secret Service.' Well, the secret service are supposed to protect the vice-president. They arrested this guy because they thought he posed a threat. Sounds to me like they were operating just fine. More to the point is the question of whether anyone will think to suggest that the secret service should be arrested for impeding the operation of the first amendment. Certainly the secret service has a legitimate security responsibility, and they are expected to keep people like Dick Cheney safe from physical assault. On the other hand, it seems like a gross abuse of governmental power for Cheney and Bush to use the Secret Service to prevent them from being confronted peacefully by people who disagree with their policies. If the president and vice-president are kept locked away from any hint of dissent or displeasure can democracy be said to be in action? The concept of a leader isolating themselves from all but adoring crowds is much more typically associated with totalitarian regimes than with democracy. Is it unpleasant to be confronted by a horde of screaming, angry people denouncing your actions? I would hope so. But that is part of the price that a leader should pay if they are acting at odds with the wishes of those they are supposed to be governing on behalf of. After all, here in a Democracy the president is supposed to be acting on our behalf. References: 1. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,130782,00.html