Sunday, June 10, 2012

American Heroes

“Now let your American heroes know how grateful you are for their service as they protect our freedom!” – Heard at any sporting event in the US

The voice from the loud-speaker prompts the crowd at a sporting event as half a dozen drab-dressed soldiers walk onto center stage.  The crowd rises to its feet and cheers as the uniformed soldiers wave.

Which of our freedoms do US soldiers protect? 

Do they protect our freedom to have our crotches groped at airports, train stations, and bus stops by government agents?

Do they protect our freedom to be strip-searched by our jailers after routine traffic stops?[1]

Do they protect our freedom to be monitored as decided by secret tribunals? [2] [3]

Do they protect our freedom to be stopped at random checkpoints to be commanded to show our “papers please” or to submit to a pat-down or luggage search?[4]

Do they protect our freedom to pay for unmanned drones to kill US citizens overseas and now to watch us at home?[5] [6] [7]

Do they protect our freedom to have our cell phones monitored?[8]

Attack the Messenger

“I feel uncomfortable about the word hero because it seems to me that it is so rhetorically proximate to justifications for more war.” – MSNBC host Chris Hayes generated a storm of criticism for daring to doubt the heroism of soldiers fighting in the US government’s perpetual war on terrorism.[9]

“But in fact the forces aren’t ‘serving their country’ or ‘keeping us free.’ They are doing the bidding of hack politicians, well-connected economic interests, and court intellectuals who are striving to satisfy personal ambition, attain wealth, or create historical legacies.” - Libertarian writer James Bovard[10]

During Memorial Day weekend, MSNBC host Chris Hayes was castigated by many for jeopardizing their illusion that US troops “defending the Homeland” (called the Fatherland in another time and place whose heroes were honored with the Iron Cross) were not performing a heroic task.[11]

And if the charges against Bradley Manning are true, Manning did even more than just suggest US troops are not on a heroic mission: Manning showed that US government actions overseas are terrorism—which is supposed to be what the other guys do.  

Manning, currently in a US military prison, is accused of leaking information to WikiLeaks that the US government would prefer to keep secret from the American public:

  • video of US troops and contractors killing innocent civilians and two journalists in Baghdad in 2007 with an attitude similar to teenage boys playing video games[12]
  • video of the Granai airstrike in Afghanistan on May 4, 2009 which killed over one hundred civilians, mainly women and children[13]
  • numerous US diplomatic cables on torture, diplomatic relations, drone attacks in Yemen, and other matters embarrassing to the US government.

How did American public respond to these revelations?

They didn’t—it didn’t immediately affect them.

How did the US government respond?

As evidenced by Manning’s imprisonment and the charges against him: with persecution and prosecution for aiding the enemy.[14]  The US government didn’t prosecute those who killed civilians, nor did it acknowledge its mistakes.  Instead, it attacked not only the whistleblower, but also WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, who had the courage to publish the information.[15]

Blowback

"We have gone a long way down the road of creating a situation where we are creating more enemies than we are removing from the battlefield. We are already there with regards to Pakistan and Afghanistan…. If you strike them indiscriminately you are running the risk of creating a terrific amount of popular anger. They have tribes and clans and large families. Now all of a sudden you have a big problem … I am very concerned about the creation of a larger terrorist safe haven in Yemen." - Robert Grenier, former CIA chief of counter-terrorism

The real danger will come from the response of those terrorized by US military actions.  Chalmers Johnson called it “blowback,” a euphemism for people in foreign countries who fight back against the oppressive foreign policies of the US.

The Obama administration has increasingly used unmanned drones to kill suspected terrorists overseas.  The drone strike campaign diverts the attention of the public and lulls Americans to sleep because the drones are remotely piloted and there are fewer US troops in the battle zone.  Dennis C. Blair, former director of national intelligence, calls the drone strikes “dangerously seductive”:

“It is the politically advantageous thing to do — low cost, no U.S. casualties, gives the appearance of toughness.  It plays well domestically, and it is unpopular only in other countries. Any damage it does to the national interest only shows up over the long term.”[16]

Former CIA chief of counter-terrorism, Robert Grenier, criticizes the US government use of drones in the Middle East.  The indiscriminate strikes kill so many civilians and so outrage the population that Grenier expects a blowback response:

“We have been seduced by them and the unintended consequences of our actions are going to outweigh the intended consequences."[17]

A Nation of Suspects

In 2010, the Obama administration wrote a secret memo to rationalize the legality of killing US citizens overseas.  Again the public outcry was minimal, limited to Ron Paul and a few others who were marginalized by the media.  Most Americans ignored the US government murder of Anwar al-Awlaki, a US citizen, without due process. 

Now drones are not just used overseas.  While we were sleeping, the federal government brought drones home to spy on us.  Michael Donley, Secretary of the Air Force, released a memorandum on 23 April 2012 authorizing the use of drones to spy on US citizens in the US.[18] [19] America is now a nation of suspects.  Our American “heroes” spy on us.

Section 9.5 of the memo authorizes the military to release photos taken by the spy drones to others in the government if “the recipient is reasonably perceived to have a specific, lawful governmental function requiring it.”

But don’t worry: the military will be careful when it violates our constitutional rights in the name of national security.  According to page 2 of the memo:

“Intelligence oversight (IO) involves a balancing of two fundamental interests: obtaining the intelligence information required to protect national security and protecting individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution and the laws of the United States (US).”

Section 7 of the memo talks about protections against intelligence agents who break the rules while operating in the US.  This is merely lip service as we remember how the government persecuted Bradley Manning for exposing the killing of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Despite all of the words in section 7 of the memo, the truth is: the government doesn’t really care if it breaks the rules; it just doesn’t want the public to know about it.

What will happen when the troops using spy drones in the US abuse their power?  Will another Bradley Manning step forward to be imprisoned for defending the rights of US citizens?

Heroes and Pawns

Supporters of the war make good use of the dead, who can’t speak for themselves, but they have no use for Bradley Manning, who allegedly told the world what the US government did to civilians overseas.  Unfortunately, US citizens’ response to proof of US forces killing civilians has been underwhelming.  And a collective yawn has greeted the PATRIOT Act, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) allowing indefinite detention of US citizens without trial, the TSA treating travelers like farm animals, and now the use of spy drones in the US.

Who are the heroes?  Those men and women who, however well-meaning, invade and occupy foreign countries because the government hoodwinks them into believing they’re protecting their country’s freedom?  Or are the real heroes those who point out the evils done by their own government and now sit in jail because of it?

“Memorial Day should be a time to remember the government’s crimes against the people. Politicians have perennially sent young Americans to die for false causes or on wild-goose chases.” – James Bovard

[1] Supreme Court of the United States, Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington et al., October Term 2011, (Accessed at http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-945.pdf on June 3, 2012).

[5] “Drone Use Takes Off on the Home Front,” April 20, 2012, By ANDY PASZTOR and JOHN EMSHWILLER, Wall Street Journal, (Accessed at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304331204577354331959335276.html# on Apr 21, 2012).

Local organizations are applying to use drones:

“The more than 50 institutions that received approvals to operate remotely piloted aircraft…include not only agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security but also smaller ones such as the police departments in North Little Rock, Ark., and Ogden, Utah, as well the University of North Dakota and Nicholls State University in Louisiana.

“The information, released by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, came to light as the Federal Aviation Administration gears up to advance the widespread use of the drones. By the fall of 2015, Congress wants the agency to integrate remotely piloted aircraft throughout U.S. airspace.”

[6] “Gov.: Drones over Va. 'great'; cites battlefield success,” 5/29/2012, WTOP, by Paul D. Shinkman, (Accessed at http://www.wtop.com/120/2882193/Governor-Drones-over-Va-great-right-thing-to-do on May 31, 2012).

[7] “The Age Of Drones: Military May Be Using Drones In US To Help Police,” by Charles Feldman, CBS LA, June 4, 2012, (Accessed at http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/06/04/the-age-of-drones-military-may-be-using-drones-in-us-to-help-police/ on June 5, 2012).

“The revised Air Force report is a continuation of a policy already a few years old, but is causing more alarm now as drones appear poised to soon become a ubiquitous presence in U.S. skies thanks to a federal policy to promote their use, first by law enforcement agencies, and then by commercial concerns.”

[8] “Police Are Using Phone Tracking as a Routine Tool,” By ERIC LICHTBLAU, Mar 31, 2012, NY Times, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/us/police-tracking-of-cellphones-raises-privacy-fears.html?_r=2&ei=5065&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=all on Apr 1, 2012).

[11] “Blogs rip MSNBC's Chris Hayes on 'heroes',” By MACKENZIE WEINGER, 5/28/12, Politico.com, (Accessed at http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76799.html on June 3, 2012).

[18] “AIR FORCE INSTRUCTION 14-104,” 23 APRIL 2012, Intelligence, OVERSIGHT OF INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES, (Accessed at http://www.fas.org/irp/doddir/usaf/afi14-104.pdf on June 9, 2012).

Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

The “War on Women”

“There is actually a war on women.  Abortion is one issue, but contraception and family planning and birth control are opposed by this crowd too.” – Nancy Pelosi speaking about Rs in Congress at the 2011 Women Money Power Summit[1]

The federal government struck a blow for “embattled” women by requiring contraception coverage to be included in their healthcare at no additional cost.  Sections of the Patient Protection and Affordable Healthcare Act (aka Obamacare) become effective over several years.  Contraception coverage becomes effective August 1, 2012 and mandates that non-profit religious employers supply contraception coverage to employees.  On January 20, 2012, Department of HHS Secretary Katherine Sebelius issued a ruling :

“Today the department is announcing that the final rule on preventive health services will ensure that women with health insurance coverage will have access to the full range of the Institute of Medicine’s recommended preventive services, including all FDA-approved forms of contraception…Nonprofit employers who, based on religious beliefs, do not currently provide contraceptive coverage in their insurance plan, will be provided an additional year, until August 1, 2013, to comply with the new law.”[2]

Sebelius’ bureaucratic ruling cost the government nothing since employers must foot the bill for contraception coverage for their employees.  Unfortunately, whenever government interferes in the market, prices go higher for everyone, and the cost is always more than the politicians predict.[3][4]

A Battle Between Faiths

“The HHS rule requires that sterilization and contraception – including controversial abortifacients – be included among ‘preventive services’ coverage in almost every healthcare plan available to Americans.”  – US Conference of Catholic Bishops Jan 20, 2012 News Release[5]

“Don’t impose your teaching upon us and make us do as a church what we find unconscionable to do!” – Cardinal Dolan Mar 3, 2012

The Catholic Church balked.  Its religious leaders believe abortifacients, such as the “morning after pill,” are equivalent to abortion.  Catholic leaders do not want Catholic employers to be forced to pay for things with which they disagree.  Soon-to-be Cardinal Timothy Dolan explained:

“In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences.”[6]

In response, the Obama administration pretended to compromise with Catholics: if non-profit employers had religious objections, the insurance company would be forced to pay for contraception coverage instead.[7]  This wouldn’t apply if the employer was self-insured, and ignores the economic fact that the employer ultimately pays for the contraception coverage when the insurer passes its costs on to the employer.[8]

On February 16, 2012, the Congressional Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing on the contraceptives mandate and whether it violates religious liberties.[9]  Democratic members wanted Sandra Fluke as a witness, but Darrell Issa (R), chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, wouldn’t let her testify.  Issa pretends to be restraining the growth of government spending now that Obama is President, but Issa didn’t have a problem voting for the Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act in 2003 when Bush was President.

Within a week, Congressman Elijah Cummings (D), and Nancy Pelosi (D), leader of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee, had a hearing and let Fluke “testify” about her faith in the state and Big Brother:

“Leader Pelosi, Members of Congress, good morning, and thank you for calling this hearing on women’s health and allowing me to testify on behalf of the women who will benefit from the Affordable Care Act contraceptive coverage regulation…And so, I am here to share their voices and I thank you for allowing them to be heard.”[10][11]

Sluts and Teabaggers

“What does it say about the college co-ed Susan Fluke [sic] who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex. What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right?” – Rush Limbaugh on his Mar 6, 2012 radio show

“President Obama is going to be visiting Joplin, Missouri on Sunday but you know what they’re talking about, like this right-wing slut, what’s her name?” Laura Ingraham? Yeah, she’s a talk slut.” – Ed Schultz on his May 25, 2011 radio show

Gergen: "They still haven't found their voice, Anderson. This happens to a minority party after it's lost a couple of bad elections, but they're searching for their voice."

Cooper: "It's hard to talk when you're teabagging." - Discussion about the Republican Party on May 15, 2009 on the Anderson Cooper show on CNN

On his radio program, Rush Limbaugh called Sandra Fluke a ‘slut’ for asking for free contraceptive coverage.  Limbaugh’s outburst came two weeks after Fluke spoke before the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee.  Immediately outrage was expressed in the media that Limbaugh had dared to utter such words and many called on advertisers to boycott Limbaugh’s radio program.

If you’re one of those outraged:

Even President Obama got into the performance. Comparing Fluke to his teenage and pre-teen daughters, Obama played along with the image of Fluke as a young girl and not a 30-year old woman.  President Obama phoned Fluke and commended her for not being discouraged by name-calling:

"I wanted Sandra to know that I thought her parents should be proud of her and that we want to send a message to all our young people that being part of a democracy involves argument and disagreements and debate.  We want you to be engaged, and there is a way to do it that doesn't involve you being demeaned and insulted."[14]

But the President has missed earlier opportunities to comment on “demeaning and insulting” commentary in the media against his political opponents, especially when it occurs at his own events.  Ironically, in 2009, Wanda Sykes made outrageous comments about Rush Limbaugh and the President was not outraged—he was entertained.  He laughed about it (video).

SYKES: “Rush Limbaugh! I hope the country fails? I hope his kidneys fail, how about that?”

(LAUGHTER)

SYKES: “Needs a little waterboarding, that's what he needs.” - Wanda Sykes speaking about Rush Limbaugh at National Press Club “roast” of President Obama on May 9, 2009 (video)

Why did Obama miss the earlier opportunities?  Because it’s all just politics.  Insults are ok if they’re directed at political opponents. 

At an Obama rally in Michigan on Sep 5, 2011, Teamster Union Leader James Hoffa Jr. spoke about the Tea Party:

“Let’s take these son of a bitches out and give America back to an America where we belong.”[15]

Did Obama defend the Tea Party as “being demeaned and insulted” by Hoffa’s comments?  Apparently not.  When asked, the White House declined to comment.[16]

Like Hoffa’s comments, Fluke’s testimony was just politics.  Fluke is a loyal soldier in the public relations battle for Obamacare and more federal government control of the healthcare industry.  The President joined the debate under the guise of supporting her in the fight against the “Republican war on women.”[17]  But when President Obama pretends to “send a message to all our young people that being part of a democracy involves argument and disagreements and debate,” it’s all just politics.

Lost in the controversy was the federal government mandate that the Catholic Church, as an employer, must pay for contraception for its employees—something that is an affront to the core values of the Church.  If you were one of those outraged when a political pawn was called names, where is the same outrage when the government forces a private entity to do a thing that is antithetical to its core beliefs?

Catholic religious leaders and leaders of other faiths maintained that the contraceptive coverage provision of Obamacare forces them to violate their religious beliefs.[18]  They all should have realized that they are free to believe what they want only as long as the state approves.  The state is the ultimate arbiter of religious faith, as Katherine Sebelius said in her ruling:

“I believe this proposal strikes the appropriate balance between respecting religious freedom and increasing access to important preventive services.”[19]

Like the Jews of ancient Israel under Rome, US citizens are free to believe what they want, as long as they continue to make the appropriate religious sacrifices to their modern day emperor—Big Brother.

Which Are You?

“Just recently in the last several, couple debates, it’s come out the biggest story in Washington, it isn’t the wars that are going on and the killing and the bankruptcy. It’s, who pays for birth control pills. I would think, why wouldn’t the logical answer be – you know logic in Washington doesn’t sell all that well – why shouldn’t the logic be, whoever wants the birth control pills, why don’t they go buy them?” – Ron Paul speaking in Lawrence, KS March 9, 2012[20]

“Well I don’t want the government in the insurance business. This whole idea that the government can tell insurance company what they should give…  When you’re talking about mandating birth control pills in an insurance program—that’s no longer insurance.  It’s a mandate, it’s an entitlement.” – Ron Paul interviewed on Mar 2, 2012[21]

Our rulers and the media talk about contraception while the national debt exceeds $15.5 trillion. 

Our rulers and the media talk about the “war on women” while the US military wages war overseas.  The US government maintains hundreds of bases overseas, occupies Afghanistan and Iraq after horrific killing on both sides (e.g. graphic photos), and attacks Pakistan and Yemen with drones.

Sluts or teabaggers.  Democrats or Republicans. What’s the difference? 

Both want Big Brother to take care of them.  Both trade liberty for security.

Which one are you?

______________________________________

[1] “Pelosi: There is a war on women,” by Jessica Yellin and Kevin Bohn, CNN, Apr 7, 2011, (Accessed at http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/07/pelosi-there-is-a-war-on-women/ on Mar 7, 2012).

[2] “A statement by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius,” Jan 20, 2012, US Dept of HHS, (Accessed at http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2012pres/01/20120120a.html on Mar 16, 2012).

[3] Peter Schiff explains the economics of free contraception in this video.

See this for a history of federal government estimates of healthcare program costs.[3a]

[3a] “U.S. health plans have history of cost overruns,” The Washington Times, Nov 18, 2009, (Accessed at http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/18/health-programs-have-history-of-cost-overruns/print/ on Mar 25, 2012).

[4] In a 2009 speech to a joint session of Congress, Obama promised his proposed healthcare plan would cost “around $900 billion over 10 years.”[4a]  The CBO projected $940 billion over 10 years for the Patient Protection and Affordable Healthcare Act of 2010 when it was passed into law.  By March 13, 2012 the CBO increased its estimate to $1.76 trillion.[4b]  Anyone surprised?

[4a] “REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT TO A JOINT SESSION OF CONGRESS ON HEALTH CARE,” Sep 9, 2009, U.S. Capitol,
Washington, D.C., (Accessed at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-to-a-Joint-Session-of-Congress-on-Health-Careon Mar 14, 2012).

[4b] “Updated Estimates for the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act,” Congressional Budget Office, (Accessed at http://cbo.gov/publication/43076 on Mar 14, 2012).

But it’s not as bad as it seems: the CBO also estimates that the federal government will take in $509 billion in increased taxes and penalties on US citizens.  Doesn’t that make the increase in socialized medicine more fiscally responsible?

[5] “U.S. Bishops Vow to Fight HHS Edict,” US Conference of Catholic Bishops, Jan 20, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.usccb.org/news/2012/12-012.cfm on Mar 13, 2012).

[6] Ibid.

[7] “Obama tweaks birth control rule,” By Richard Wolf, USA TODAY, Feb 10, 2012, (Accessed at http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2012/02/source-obama-to-change-birth-control-rule/1#.T266vtny9CI on Mar 24, 2012).

[8] “ Catholic Bishops Fight Contraception Rule at House Hearing,” By Louise Radnofsky, Feb 16, 2012, WSJ, (Accessed at http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/02/16/catholic-bishops-fight-contraception-rule-at-house-hearing/?KEYWORDS=health on Mar 25, 2012).

“The bishops say that the White House’s proposal for insurance companies to directly pay for and provide contraception to the employees of Catholic universities and hospitals and other religiously affiliated institutions couldn’t work because ‘the cost of providing those service are born some place.’”

[9] “Meet Sandra Fluke: The woman you didn’t hear at Congress’ contraceptives hearing,” by Sarah Kliff, Feb 16, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/meet-sandra-fluke-the-woman-you-didnt-hear-at-congress-contraceptives-hearing/2012/02/16/gIQAJh57HR_blog.html on Mar 25, 2012).

[10] Fluke’s testimony was not what is usually understood when someone testifies before Congress: the declaration of a witness under oath; her testimony can be better understood by an alternative definition: a public declaration regarding a religious experience.  Fluke testified to her view of a god-like state fixing all of society’s ills.

[11] “Law Students for Reproductive Justice,” Sandra Fluke’s statement, (Accessed at http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/statement-Congress-letterhead-2nd%20hearing.pdf on Mar 25, 2012).

[12] “Anderson Cooper: ‘It's Hard to Talk When You're Teabagging’ (VIDEO),” by Alex Leo, May 25, 2011, Huffington Post, (Accessed at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/15/anderson-cooper-its-hard_n_187318.html on Mar 8, 2012).

[13] “’Tea Bagging’ Rallies Ruthlessly Mocked On Maddow Show,” by Jason Linkins, May 25, 2011, Huffington Post, (Accessed at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/09/rachel-maddow-ana-marie-c_n_185445.html on Mar 8, 2012).

[14] “Barack Obama Comments On Rush Limbaugh, The 'War On Women' ,” by Laura Bassett, Mar 6, 2012, Huffington Post, (Accessed at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/06/barack-obama-rush-limbaugh-war-on-women_n_1324517.html on Mar 8, 2012).

[15] “Hoffa On Tea Party: ‘Let’s Take These Sons Of Bitches Out!’,” By Mary Bruce, Sep 5, 2012, ABC News, (Accessed at http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/hoffa-on-tea-party-lets-take-these-sons-of-bitches-out/ on Mar 25, 2012).

[16] “White House Declines To Comment On Union Leader’s Anti-Tea Party Rhetoric At Labor Day Rally,” by Mary Bruce and Jake Tapper, Sep 5, 2012, ABC News, (Accessed at http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/white-house-declines-to-comment-on-union-leaders-anti-tea-party-rhetoric-at-labor-day-rally-2/ on Mar 25, 2012).

[17] “Asked About “Distasteful” Language from Liberal Commentators, President Obama Says He Aims to Lead by Example,” by Jake Tapper, Mar 6, 2012, (Accessed at http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/asked-about-distasteful-language-from-liberal-commentators-president-obama-says-he-aims-to-lead-by-example/ on Mar 8, 2012).

“If President Obama truly lead by example, he would make phone calls to other embattled women.  By selecting Fluke, who supports his program, he shows he is merely playing partisan politics.”

[18] “HHS delays, but does not change, rule on contraceptive coverage,” Catholic News Herald, Feb 28, 2012, (Accessed at http://news.charlottediocese.net/n/component/content/article/1337-business-leaders-decry-hhs-contraception-mandate?start=9 on Mar 28, 2012).

[19] “A statement by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius,” Jan 20, 2012, US Dept of HHS, (Accessed at http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2012pres/01/20120120a.html on Mar 16, 2012).

In a press conference responding to questions about the loss of freedom associated with a mandate that forces Catholics to violate their religious beliefs, note how conveniently the politics of fear helps the Press Secretary when a question about Iran and al Qaeda serves as a convenient distraction from the loss of liberty at home.  Note that this occurs both times questions about the contraception mandate come up.[19a]

[19a] “White House Press Secretary on HHS contraception mandate,” by Grant Gallicho, Commonweal Magazine, Jan 31, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/blog/?p=17042 on Mar 13, 2012).

Press Secretary Carney:

“The decision was made, as we have said in the past and Secretary Sebelius has said, after very careful consideration, and the administration believes that this proposal strikes the appropriate balance between respecting religious beliefs and increasing access to important preventive services. We will continue to work closely with religious groups during this transitional period to discuss their concerns.”

[20] “RON PAUL IN LAWRENCE, KS FRIDAY, MARCH 9,” by Anthony Terrell, Mar 9, 2012, NBC News (Accessed at http://www.facebook.com/notes/anthony-terrell/ron-paul-in-lawrence-ks-friday-march-9/264075443672500 on Mar16, 2012).

[21] “Ron Paul Tells Piers Morgan The Contraception Mandate is ‘Silly’,” by Michael Hayes, Mar 2, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.mediaite.com/uncategorized/ron-paul-tells-piers-morgan-the-contraception-mandate-is-silly/ on Mar 25, 2012).

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

The Father of Lies in America

"This is a spiritual war. And the Father of Lies has his sights on what you would think the Father of Lies would have his sights on: a good, decent, powerful, influential country - the United States of America. If you were Satan, who would you attack in this day and age?" - Rick Santorum speaking at Ave Maria University in Florida, Aug 29, 2008[1]

Because Rick Santorum is rising in the polls in his run for President, he recently made headlines for something he said four years ago at Ave Maria University when he spoke of Satan, the Father of Lies, attacking America.  Santorum might have been describing his own political candidacy. 

Santorum and other conservative politicians have mastered the rhetoric that attracts conservatives and Tea Partiers.  They fill their pre-election talks with obligatory references to being pro-life and pro-traditional marriage, protecting the unborn, being anti-tax, and advocating major cuts in federal spending.  It’s easy to dupe the gullible electorate with fine words about Christianity, morality, and family values, and lies.

Pro-Life?

“On occasion scientists working on the nuclear program in Iran turn up dead.  I think that’s a wonderful thing, candidly.” – “Pro-life” Rick Santorum campaigning in S. Carolina (video), Oct 27, 2011

If evil is the absence of good—there’s a void in America as US citizens cheer their potential rulers, who spout off about murdering Iranian scientists or embargoing Iran. 

Embargoes are another lie.  Politicians make them seem like business transactions.  But embargoes are acts of war that kill people: the US embargo of Iraq killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis before the US invaded Iraq (video).

The war in Iraq was fought over a lie: as a US senator, Rick Santorum supported George Bush’s invasion of Iraq in search of WMD when Iraq had no WMD.  Even after the Bush White House admitted no WMD had been found, Santorum held a 2006 news conference and lied:

“’We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons,’ Santorum said.”[2][3]

Yes, Santorum knows about lies.

Now Santorum advocates attacking Iran to prevent them from getting nuclear weapons, the same lie the US told to justify invading Iraq.  “Pro-life” Rick Santorum wants to be President so he can lead the US into a war against Iran (video).

Santorum and his fellow pretend-limited government conservative R-candidates, Romney and Gingrich, are walking contradictions:

  • They profess a reverence for life as long as it is unborn.
  • They bemoan the growth of the federal government while pushing for the growth of government by their advocacy of a militaristic, security state.  They supported the execution of a US citizen without due process by the Obama administration.
  • They tell us how damaging Obama’s domestic policies are, but they support the same policies when practiced by rulers with an R after their names.

“What Makes This Country Great”

"I'm an Italian guy from a steel town who grew up understanding what makes this country great.” – From Rick Santorum website

A good lie mixes some truth in with it.  Santorum’s campaign website mentions he grew up in a steel town, so you’ll think he is still a member of the working class.  Other than four years working as a lawyer, Santorum has worked in politics since he was 23.  After he was elected to Congress at 32, Santorum has held office or been a D.C. lobbyist ever since and lives just outside of Washington, D.C.

“What makes this country great” for Santorum is political power.  As a candidate for the Republican nomination for President, Santorum says he opposes the big government policies of Obama.  Santorum wants you to forget that he:

  • talks about limited government, but supports the NDAA and the PATRIOT Act (video and PATRIOT Act votes in 2005 and 2006);
  • pretends to be  a limited government conservative, yet Santorum admits he’ll vote for bigger government as he explained how he’ll “take one for the team” during the Mesa AZ Republican debate when he described voting for bigger government to support Republican President Bush on No Child Left Behind (video);
  • professes to be a fiscal conservative despite voting five times to increase the National Debt limit: HR 2015 in 1997, S 2578 in 2002, HJ RES 51 in 2003, S 2986 in 2004, and HJ RES 47 in 2006 (video about Santorum’s big spending ways in Congress);
  • protests Obamacare despite having helped create a new unfunded entitlement, Medicare Part D, as Republican Senate conference chairman;
  • joined with senators Barbara Boxer and Frank Lautenberg to pass new federal gun control regulations;
  • helped keep forced dues flowing to the labor unions by voting to kill the National Right to Work bill (video);
  • pretends to oppose abortion despite bragging (4:30 in this video) about voting for funding birth control—which means he sent US taxpayer’s money to Planned Parenthood for abortions (video).[4]

As Michael Tanner of the Cato Institute says of Santorum:

“…Santorum might be viewed as the mirror image of Ron Paul. If Ron Paul’s campaign has been based on the concept of simply having government leave us alone, Santorum rejects that entire concept. True liberty, he writes, is not ‘the freedom to be left alone,’ but ‘the freedom to attend to one’s duties to God, to family, and to neighbors.’ And he seems fully prepared to use the power of government to support his interpretation of those duties.”[5]

The Spiritual War in America

When nearly half of Americans polled want a preemptive attack on Iran now, and when government murder of US citizens without trial is cheered by the mob, the Father of Lies is winning.[6]

When Rick Santorum talks about government murder of Americans as good and murder of Iranian scientists as a “wonderful thing” and he gets your vote, the Father of Lies has won.

image

_____________________________

[1] “Faith in Public Life: A Personal Journey,” speech by Rick Santorum, Aug 29, 2008, Ave Maria University, (Accessed at http://www.avemaria.edu/Portals/0/Podcasts/2324.wma on Feb 24, 2012).

[2] “Lawmakers Cite Weapons Found in Iraq,” by Dafna Linzer, The Washington Post,  Jun 22, 2006, (Accessed at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/21/AR2006062101837.html on Feb 29, 2012).

[3] “Report: Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq,” Jun 22, 2006, Fox News, (Accessed at http://web.archive.org/web/20080424081106/http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html on Feb 29, 2012).

[4] “Santorum's Contradictions: A Record of Forcing Catholics to Pay for Contraception,” by Thomas R. Eddlem, The New American, 20 Feb 2012, (Accessed at http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/10930-santorums-contradictions-a-record-of-forcing-catholics-to-pay-for-contraception on Feb 24, 2012).

[5] “Santorum’s Big-Government Conservatism,” By Michael Tanner, National Review Online, Jan 4, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/287068/santorum-s-big-government-conservatism-michael-tanner on Feb 28, 2012).

[6] “Newsmax Poll: Nearly Half of Americans Say Attack Iran Now,” Feb 27, 2012, By Jim Meyers,Newsmax.com, (Accessed at  http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/iran-attack-nuclear-israel/2012/02/27/id/430675?s=al&promo_code=E478-1 on Feb 28, 2012).

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, February 5, 2012

Your Federal Government At Work

It’s primary season for the upcoming Presidential election in the US.  As “limited government conservative” Presidential candidates for the Republican party explain their unique qualifications for President, consider these recent examples of our overreaching federal government:

  • To “protect us from drugs,” the federal government frequently conducts drug raids.  In a city-wide drug raid in Fitchburg, MA, the FBI took a chainsaw to Judy Sanchez’ door while she was in her apartment with her three-year-old daughter and pet dog.  Sanchez was lucky, neither her dog nor anyone in her family was shot.[1]  It wasn’t the first time government agents raided the wrong home in the drug war, and it won’t be the last.  Many other innocent citizens have been killed by the feds while they “protect us” from drugs.
  • To “keep us safe from terrorism,” we must now sacrifice our liberties and endure the indignity of body searches and porno-scans.  When our protectors at La Guardia Airport in NY spotted two suspected pipe bombs in a passenger’s luggage, TSA agents seized the passenger’s property and simply left the suspected pipe bombs in a public area.  For six hours hundreds of passengers passed by the confiscated suspected bombs and police were not notified.[2]  It turned out to be much ado about nothing, as the suspected pipe bombs were merely gold and silver pipes for use as homeopathic medicine.
  • In addition to sacrificing our liberties as the feds “keep us safe from terrorism,” it also seems we must sacrifice our property as well.  Almost every day there’s a story of another TSA agent being prosecuted for stealing from travelers they’re “protecting.”[3]
  • To “protect us from guns,” the federal government let guns be sold to people who were buying for Mexican drug cartels.  Code-named Fast and Furious, the federal government program strong-armed Arizona gun dealers into violating gun laws and now both political parties dispute who was running the program.[4]
  • To “keep making homes affordable,” government-sponsored enterprises: Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, after a taxpayer-funded bailout in 2008, are now owned by taxpayers.  Freddie Mac sets the rules for refinancing home loans and made rules making it difficult for homeowners to refinance their mortgages to get lower interest loans and stay in their homes.  Freddie Mac recently invested in mortgage-backed securities that are profitable when homeowners are trapped in high interest loans.[5]  Meanwhile, sister organization Fannie Mae has been under investigation for nearly a decade for fraudulent foreclosures.  According to whistleblower Nye Lavalle:

    • “Fannie Mae, its directors, servicers and lawyers appeared to have an institutional policy of turning a willful blind eye to evidence of mortgage origination and servicing fraud.  When confronted directly with this evidence, Fannie not only failed to correct and remedy the abuses, it assisted in continuing the frauds via institutional practices that concealed fraudulent foreclosures.”[6]

  • To “serve the American people,” the federal government employs about two million people, not including those in the military or the Postal Service.  For those of you out of work or having a tough time making ends meet, your federal employees feel your pain—the House just approved an extension of a two year pay freeze for federal employees.[7]  Unlike you, the majority of federal employees still get pay increases during a “pay freeze” and get compensated on average, 16% more than private sector employees.[8]

The Tea Party has become a political force by making noises about limited government since Obama was elected President.  But of the R-candidates for President who supposedly embrace the limited government philosophy, only Ron Paul believes in limiting the limited federal government.  Mitt-Romneycare-Romney doesn’t.  Newt-Moonbase-Gingrich doesn’t.  Rick-Votes-for-National-debt-increases-5-times-as-Senator-Santorum doesn’t.

Only Ron Paul:

If you are a voter and truly want a limited federal government, what lies do you tell yourself when you support your “limited government” candidate instead of Ron Paul for President?

__________________________________

[1] “FBI Uses Chainsaw In Raid On Wrong Fitchburg Apartment,” By Jim Armstrong, WBZ-TV, Jan 31, 2012, (Accessed at http://boston.cbslocal.com/2012/01/31/fbi-uses-chainsaw-in-raid-on-wrong-fitchburg-apartment/ on Feb 2, 2012).

[2] “'Bomb’ botch at LaGuardia,” By PHILIP MESSING and TIM PERONE,  Jan 31, 2012, NY Post, (Accessed at http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/queens/bomb_botch_at_lag_cNNAisTre0rBixGKlehknI on Feb 2, 2012).

[3] “NYC agent arrested in latest TSA theft allegation,” AP, February 02, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/02/02/police-tsa-agent-at-jfk-stole-5k-from-passenger/ on Feb 4, 2012).

[4] “Report by House Democrats Absolves Administration in Gun Trafficking Case,” By CHARLIE SAVAGE, Jan 31, 2012, NY Times, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/31/us/politics/operation-fast-and-furious-report-by-democrats-clears-obama-administration.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha24 on Feb 2, 2012).

[5] “Report Prompts Calls To End Freddie Mac's Conflict Of Interest,” by Chris Arnold and Marilyn Geewax, Jan 30, 2012, NPR, (Accessed at http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/01/31/146110055/report-prompts-calls-to-end-freddie-macs-conflict-of-interest on Feb 4, 2012).

[6] “A Mortgage Tornado Warning, Unheeded,” By GRETCHEN MORGENSON, NY Times, Feb 4, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/business/mortgage-tornado-warning-unheeded.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha25&pagewanted=all on Feb 5, 2012).

[7] “House approves measure to freeze federal salaries,” By Ed O'Keefe, Feb 1, 2012, Washington Post, (Accessed at http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/federal-pay-freeze-bill-comes-up-for-a-vote/2012/02/01/gIQAJwg9iQ_story.html?wpisrc=nl_fedinsider on Feb 4, 2012).

[8] “Comparing the Compensation of Federal and Private-Sector Employees,” Congressional Budget Office, Jan 2012, (Accessed at  http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/126xx/doc12696/01-30-FedPay.pdf on Feb 4, 2012).

From page 23 of the report:

“For workers at all education levels, the cost of total compensation averaged about $52 per hour worked for federal employees, compared with about $45 per hour
worked for employees in the private sector with certain
similar observable characteristics. Thus, total compensation was about 16 percent higher, on average, for federal workers than for similar private-sector workers, indicating that the government spent about 16 percent more on total compensation than it would have if average
compensation had been comparable with that in the
private sector, after accounting for differences in those
characteristics.”

Posted by at 1 comment:
Labels: , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)