So let me get this straight: If folks in Louisiana and Mississippi had been given one weekend a year to buy disaster prevention items tax free, then the clean-up of Hurricane Katrina would have been a breeze.

I know, I know, I missed the real main point: If the people of Louisiana hadn't been so stupid as to elect Democrats to public office, then things would be much better now.

Actually, that logic does make sense. After all, if the people of the United States hadn't been so stupid as to elect a Republican president and Congress back in 2000, we wouldn't be pissing on ourselves in Iraq right now.

All sarcasm (if it qualifies as such) aside, the real lesson of the last five years is that limited government sucks. The vast majority of Americans are paying about the same amount in taxes, and we get vastly reduced service. It isn't just a lack of body armor for our military--after all, the Pentagon budget has been growing by leaps and bounds. And it isn't just the scandal that continues to evolve in Louisiana and Mississippi. In the end, limited government means a limited America.

Hey, if that's what you want, fine. But the Prez wants a robust and, well, manly America, and that just doesn't jibe with his decidedly limited view of government. After all, it's hard to consider yourself the supreme nation on Earth when third-world nations respond to a crisis within your own borders faster than your own government.

In order to take care of the people of this nation, we need a strong and, yes, big government. I don't expect to see much in the way of Social Security when I retire, not least because I've contributed a grand total of $9234 to the "trust fund" so far. But even if SS goes bust (and it won't, not completely), there are plenty of other things we take for granted that require big government. Civil aviation is dependent on the government, as are most mining and agricultural concerns and, well, anyone whose job has anything to do with the Internet. My wife's job as a journalist isn't directly tied to the government, except that she's expected to be a watchdog of that government, and without as much government there would be fewer journalists around.

In short, we need big government. I agree that big government is something of a sugar daddy--one that plays favorites to a shocking degree--but I don't see the problem with that. Despite all the things I carp about on a regular basis, I like living in the United States. By and large, I'm free to say what I want and do what I want. I can't think of another place I'd rather live.

The Prez and his pals who espouse a "limited" government are interested only in limiting the parts of government they don't like. The parts they like (or that enrich them) are just fine. And hey, isn't getting elected so you can score your portion of the spoils the American way? Duke Cunningham sure thought so. Of course, he now has eight years to reconsider his position.

The plain fact is that you can't be big and small at the same time. If you want to kick ass, you've got to wear big boots. Steel-toed, if possible. If we want America to be great, we've got to spend money like we mean it. Fund universal health care. Remove the ceiling on FICA (Social Security) contributions. Make FEMA not only a cabinet-level agency but one that plans rather than reacts. And, you know, make sure the grunts have their armor. That would be a good idea, too.

Jon Worley is in favor of limited stupidity, but he realizes that's a pipe dream as long as he keeps writing columns.