Republican government with fingers in too many pies

Opinion: It's easy for those of us on the Presidential campaign trail to lose sight of the bigger picture

Opinion: It's easy for those of us on the Presidential campaign trail to lose sight of the bigger picture. When I was asked what I thought of the huge boob exposed in primetime, I thought it was a reference to the Reverend Al Sharpton not knowing what the Federal Reserve was in that candidates' debate, by Mark Steyn.

But it turns out instead to be something to do with Janet Jackson baring one of her points of interest at the Super Bowl. This is a political column, and in the normal course of events some fifth-rate celebrity's breast awkwardly sticking out from her hideous costume with the nipple poking up through some sort of miniature hub cap would not normally fall within my remit.

Except that it does. Because the Federal Government is launching a "thorough" investigation into Janet Jackson's right breast. "I think the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] is being pretty silly about investigating this," said Howard Dean, the has-been Vermonter. "I'm probably affected in some ways by the fact that I'm a doctor, so it's not exactly an unusual phenomenon for me." Here's a sentence I never thought I'd type: I'm with Howard Dean on this one. I hasten to add that, alas, breasts are a more unusual phenomenon for me, but I'm generally all in favour of them: I enjoy them when they turn up on BBC costume dramas and when you're driving through France enjoying the topography and they pop up on billboards so you can enjoy the topoffgraphy. Unlike Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction, the existence of Janet Jackson's breast is not in doubt. We know where it is, there have been verified sightings; we're not relying on faulty intelligence and grainy satellite imagery, though your intelligence would have to be pretty faulty to sit through the show. So I agree with Howlin' Howard. No doubt he has personal reasons for not wanting the Feds to police these kinds of incidents: But, whatever the reason, it's heartening to find a Democratic candidate man enough to identify even one aspect of government as unnecessary.

What happened after that Super Bowl show? Within hours, Janet Jackson had lost a lucrative TV contract, NBC had excised a Dr Dean-like breast examination from "ER", the National Football League announced their Pro Bowl show was dropping some similarly "edgy" half-time entertainment and replacing it with hula dancers and conch blowers, the Grammy Awards telecast decided to go into a play-it-safe time-delay so delayed you'll be able to tune in and see the Grammy for Best LP go to Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass. That's a lot of fall-out. If the Golden Globes hadn't had the good fortune to have already been broadcast, they would undoubtedly have been panicked into changing their name. And, just to cap it off, a lady in Knoxville, outraged at Justin taking Janet's top off, is suing the pants off Justin, Janet, CBS, MTV and Viacom.

READ MORE

By contrast, what will be accomplished by a government investigation? Eventually, the FCC will issue a ruling and, if we're lucky, it won't be quite as ridiculous as their pronouncement on Bono's live use of the F-word last year, which the FCC deemed permissible because he was using it adjectivally.

Let us now turn from the breast shot heard of around the world to the President's 2½ trillion dollar budget. Do you know what a trillion is? Don't bother. If you've got a calculator, you won't be able to get enough zeroes on the screen.

But here's one way to look at it: President Bush plans to blow more of the American people's money in the coming year than the first 25 presidents of the United States spent combined, even after adjusting for inflation. In other words, the budget, like Janet, is bustin' its bodice.

A couple of weeks ago the president signed an $820-billion appropriations bill that, among other boondoggles, puts the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland on the public dime. If every rock star donated just 1 per cent of what he's spent on drugs since 1966, you could have the most lavish Hall of Fame in the world. But he won't, so Mr and Mrs Squaresville have to pay up instead.

If rock'n'roll requires Federal funding, we might as well give up. A government with its fingers in every pie is unlikely to have enough left over for the handful of pies it should have its fingers in. It was summed up by Americans' only glimpse of the President on the morning of 9/11: the Commander-in-Chief being informed of the first attack on the American mainland in nearly 200 years while he was speaking to grade-schoolers in Florida. That image encapsulates everything that's wrong with both parties' approach to government.

As we learned in the days after, because of incompatible computers, the FBI was unable to e-mail pictures of the 9/11 killers to local offices. Yet there's money available for rock'n'roll nostalgia, and an "indoor rain forest" in Iowa. The President should not be the National School Superintendent, the Pharmacist-in-Chief, the Curator of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, or the Inspector-General of Janet Jackson's Breasts. And, if neither politicians nor the electorate understands that at a time of war, then true republican government is doomed.