Several weeks ago, I heard a report on NPR which stated, in no uncertain terms, and (a) audits determined that security had not improved since 9/11, and (b) that private firms had done no better (nor worse) than the government employees.

I wish I could say I was totally shocked by (a), but I've long thought that perhaps banning fingernail clippers and searching old ladies didn't significantly increase security. On the other hand, the report stuck in my head because I was suprised by (b) -- I confessed I had fully expected the private security firms would outperform government employees.

But, hey, I'm honest -- I accepted the results as true and admitted my error to myself.

Fat chance! When I will learn to stop letting liberal-leaning news sources deceive me? After all these years, I'm apparently still much too trusting. Recently, concerning the same story, I found this account:

A congressional investigation found airport screeners employed by private companies do a better job detecting dangerous objects than government screeners, according to a House member who has seen the classified report.

The Government Accountability Office found statistically significant evidence that passenger screeners, who work at five airports under a pilot program, perform better than their federal counterparts at some 450 airports, Rep. John Mica, R-Fla. and chairman of the House aviation subcommittee, said on Tuesday.

"You get a statistically significant improvement if you go to federal supervision with private screening companies," Mica said.

Why? Why can't I be trusting? Why must I constantly assume these people are lying to me and check everything they tell me? Why must they be so congenitally dishonest?