I find your observation about government inability to decipher might be interpreted more as a political constraint rather than a technical limit. That said, I would expect conservative thinkers to reject a government decryption snoop on everything we do.
I've been interested in cryptography for quite a while, and I've watched a lot of the discussions that have surrounded it, especially as it concerns government agencies. The government really doesn't like crypto at all. I don't know if you're aware, but but cryptography used to be heavily controlled as an export product. (still is to some degree - figures, the government doesn't think foreigners can do math). Phil Zimmerman, the guy who wrote PGP was under threat of federal charges for quite some time because he open-sourced the code to the program. The uncertainty and roadblocks generated by FedGov were a major reason the internet didn't develop stronger privacy protections in the days before the net was noticed by the vast majority of the public. The main conclusion I took from this was that they believe in privacy that goes one way, and that is their way. Extracting information from FedGov is like pulling teeth (See Fast & Furious), but they want to be able to read anything you send on the net. You might be surprised at how much of the internet passes through points that FedGov has direct access to. Anyone who thinks they aren't snooping hasn't been paying attention.
I admire your well thought-out post, you hit the target.
Gee thanks! Doesn't happen often. Trust me. :-)
Something like what MS is supposedly doing with Windows 8 -- where the signing cert is in hardware, and everything from bios-boot forward will (supposedly) be verified as trustable. Unless of course there's a little problem with the MS Root certificate itself being untrustable...
Horses Out. Check.
Barndoor Closed. Check.
Security from the geniuses who thought VB Script in Email was a great idea. Check.