Inauguration and Liberty

The Washington Post's Colbert I. King re-published a 2001 column yesterday. One that did nothing but tug on America's "apple-pie" heartstrings. It was a reprint of a column that offered, at its original best, a possible entry point into important issue: the future of liberty in a land now ruled by fear.

Too bad he fell short then.
Too bad he falls short now.


Comment on "Another Parade, Another Time":

Mr. King,

Normally a fan - I must critique your regurgitation of old column.

Yes, the sentiment is as poignant now as it was in 2001. Yes, you did have something to say. But that was then, this is... (well you know) NOW!

If you insist on republishing old columns - can you not at least make an effort to bring something new to the page as well?

How about a discussion of how 2009's security plan for "Inauguration Day" says a lot about America's lived reality. You know, the one driven by the sinking realization that only stressed Empires ever need to take such precautions to protect their head of state, their nation's voice, so to speak. Or, the fact that so great is the the need for security on Jan. 20th that a para-military regimen is required to safeguard the world's most widely recognized example of a non-violent transition of political power?

'Sad', that is the word you should have added to your column. 'Sad', is the word that describes how the armed logistics behind the most hallowed affirmation of US democratic values and FREEDOM gives lie to the promise of LIBERTY.

Surely, the preservation of a nation that increasingly resembles a Police-State out of necessity to keep its leaders alive should be cause for concern. No?

As an old Afghan farmer once remarked - "I'll know Liberty when I see no more guns needed to ensure my country continues in peace."

Amen!