Fame for Killers and Their Causes

“Your August 3 cover rewards a terrorist with celebrity treatment.  It is ill-conceived, at best, and re-affirms a terrible message that destruction gains fame for killers and their 'causes.’ ” -  Boston Mayor Tom Menino

August 2013 Cover

The controversy over Rolling Stone magazine’s August issue cover started with officials in Boston, including Boston’s mayor Tom Menino.  Rolling Stone put accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s Twitter profile photo on its August cover.  Thousands of people expressed outrage using social media.

Depicting a Monster

"Rolling Stone's decision to glamorize the image of a man who brought terror to our city is disappointing. The marathon bombing shook our city and now thousands of people who were personally affected by this tragedy will have the unfortunate experience of coming across the face of a terrorist in a space usually reserved for rock stars and cultural icons.” - Boston City Councilor Rob Consalvo

“Tedeschi Food Shops supports the need to share the news with everyone, but cannot support actions that serve to glorify the evil actions of anyone. With that being said, we will not be carrying this issue of Rolling Stone. Music and terrorism don't mix!” – Tedeschi Food Shops, Inc. Facebook page July 17, 2013

"What Rolling Stone did was wrong. This guy is evil. This is the real Boston bomber. Not someone fluffed and buffed for the cover of Rolling Stone magazine." – Sergeant Sean Murphy, Police officer who released arrest photos of Tsarnaev

Critics perceive the cover photo on the magazine as glamorizing Tsarnaev and expressing support for his actions. Rhode Island-based chains: CVS pharmacy stores and Cumberland Farms convenience stores, and Massachusetts-based chains: Tedeschi convenience stores and Roche Bros. grocery stores all announced they would not sell the August issue.

Critics were concerned that the evil Tsarnaev is accused of doing wasn’t evident from his picture on the cover.  If Rolling Stone had portrayed him, as in old Westerns where the bad guys wore black hats, there would have been no controversy over the magazine’s cover story about the Boston Marathon bomber.  At the marathon, Bostonians gained intimate knowledge of the carnage bombs cause and also learned how deceptive appearances can be—at least in Tsarnaev’s case.

“A More Complete Understanding”

“Our hearts go out to the victims of the Boston Marathon bombing, and our thoughts are always with them and their families. The cover story we are publishing this week falls within the traditions of journalism and Rolling Stone’s long-standing commitment to serious and thoughtful coverage of the most important political and cultural issues of our day. The fact that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is young, and in the same age group as many of our readers, makes it all the more important for us to examine the complexities of this issue and gain a more complete understanding of how a tragedy like this happens.” – Rolling Stone magazine editors

New England businesses and local politicians announced intentions to boycott the issue out of respect for the bombing victims and because they refuse to “glorify the evil actions of anyone.”  The editors at Rolling Stone magazine issued a statement expressing their sympathy for the Boston bombing victims, but say that their article addresses “important political and cultural issues.”

Rolling Stone sees its article, titled: “The Bomber: How a popular, promising student was failed by his family, fell into radical Islam and became a monster,” as a way to “gain a more complete understanding of how a tragedy like this happens.”  All of the critics implicitly understand that when Rolling Stone puts someone on its magazine cover, Rolling Stone is elevating that someone’s status in our society. Rolling Stone doesn’t deny the cachet that comes with a cover photo on their magazine, but responds that it’s trying to understand how Tsarnaev, who is accused of injuring hundreds and killing three, became a monster—presumably because Rolling Stone understands bombing civilians is the act of a monster.

After one of many US drone strikes killed innocent civilians  in their countries, Pakistanis, Yemenis, Afghans, and Somalis must consider US President Barack Obama a monster, just as Bostonians see Tsarnaev as a monster.

July 10, 2008 Cover

Pakistani drone victims

“Fame for a Killer and His Cause”

Rolling Stone magazine had Barack Obama on its cover four times before the end of his first year in office.  Obama graced the cover of Rolling Stone seven times before the end of his first term.

August 20, 2009 Cover

By the time the hagiographic August 20, 2009 Rolling Stone cover appeared, drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen under Obama had exceeded the number of strikes during George Bush’s eight years in office.

May 10th, 2012 Cover

By the time the time Rolling Stone depicted a  smartly dressed, handsome President Obama on its May 10, 2012 cover, Obama had approved of hundreds of bombings that killed hundreds of civilians.[1][2]  By then Obama had even approved explosions that killed four Americans.[3]

Why has there been no controversy in New England over Obama’s cover photos on Rolling Stone magazine? 

Why was there no boycott out of respect for the bombing victims and as a refusal to “glorify the evil actions of anyone”?

Not only was there no controversy, one can be sure many Bostonians drive around with Obama bumper stickers on their cars, even as they pull into a Roche Bros. parking lot to shop or make a quick stop at a CVS store.  Perhaps, everyone in New England hasn’t yet learned that appearances can be deceiving. 

The Making of Monsters

In its attempt to “understand” how the “bomber became a monster,” the Rolling Stone article makes it clear from interviews of Tsarnaev’s friends and some of his writing on the internet that the bombing was Tsarnaev’s mistaken way of striking back at the country he saw “killing our innocent civilians.”

If bombing innocent civilians makes Tsarnaev a monster, between Tsarnaev and Obama: who is the bigger monster?

March 20,2008 Cover

November 8th, 2012 Cover

While we can expect another Rolling Stone issue with Obama on the cover, we shouldn’t expect a Rolling Stone article anytime soon attempting to “gain a more complete understanding” about how Barack Obama became a monster.[4][5]

_____________________

[1] “Living Under Drones: Death, Injury and Trauma to Civilians from US Drone Practices in Pakistan,” Stanford International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic (IHRCRC) and Global Justice Clinic (GJC) at NYU School of Law, September 25, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.livingunderdrones.org/report/ on July 28, 2013).

[2] “Emerging From The Shadows: US Covert Drone Strikes In 2012,” By Chris Woods, January 8, 2013, Mintpress News, (Accessed at http://www.mintpressnews.com/emerging-from-the-shadows-us-covert-drone-strikes-in-2012/45099/ on July 28, 2013).

[3] “Holder: We’ve Droned 4 Americans, 3 by Accident. Oops.” by Spencer Ackerman and Noah Shachtman, May 22, 2013,(Accessed at http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/05/4-americans-drone/ on July 28, 2013).

[4] “The Children Killed by America’s Drones. ‘Crimes Against Humanity’ committed by Barack H. Obama,” By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, January 26, 2013, (Accessed at http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-children-killed-by-americas-drones-crimes-against-humanity-committed-by-barack-h-obama/5320570 on July 28, 2013).

[5] “A List Of Children Killed By Drone Strikes In Pakistan and Yemen,” by Chris Miles, World, (Accessed at http://www.policymic.com/articles/24164/a-list-of-children-killed-by-drone-strikes-in-pakistan-and-yemen on July 28, 2013).

Good News

“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.” – astute observer and comedian Groucho Marx

Election Year 2012: Why should this time be any different?

As the next US federal election approaches, the economy is in terrible shape: the national debt is out of control, many are unemployed and suffer real hardship. Who isn’t concerned about the future? Meanwhile politicians, news media talking heads, cultural icon Madonna, and other minions of the state proselytize their faith in our democratic system of government as they try to convince us that all will be well if we merely exercise our precious right to vote for those whom the party system designates worthy to rule us.[1] During every election we’re subject to constant brainwashing in schools and by the media about the importance of our democracy.  It’s not difficult to explain the perseveration of the American electorate in their peculiar belief that everything will be all right if only they just cast their ballot for the correct individual. “This time will be different,” is the American populace’s mantra, despite decades of evidence to the contrary.

Supposedly elections give voters a chance to change the direction our rulers are taking things. In 2008, when Obama supporters supposedly voted for change, did they realize the kinds of changes for which they were voting?[2][3] In 2008, did Obama supporters know they voted for a dictator who would maintain a kill list and would arrogate the power to murder anyone without due process? [4][5]

One certainty after this election, no matter for whom you cast your ballot for murderer-in-chief , people overseas will get more drone strikes killing civilians and more war from the US government.[6] And we US citizens will continue to say “goodbye” to more of our liberties as the state spies on us at will with impunity in the supposed land of liberty where we pretend we have a 4^th amendment protection from our government.[7]

Don’t Despair

“Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: yet I say unto you, that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.” - Matthew 6:25-34

For anyone paying attention, it’s easy to give in to despair while waiting to see whether our federal government will ever get it right, especially when Mitt Romney, the man who promises to repair the economic catastrophe exacerbated by Obama, picks Paul Ryan as his running mate. Paul Ryan, who as Congressman Ryan:

• voted for the $700 billion TARP bank bailout aka the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008,
• voted for Medicare Part D in 2003 during the Bush administration, estimated to cost nearly $1 trillion from 2009-2018,
• voted to bail out General Motors in 2008.[8]

But don’t despair, I have recently had my eyes opened and would like to share some good news.

Like a Thief in the Night

“Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come.  But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into.  So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.” - Matthew 24:42-44

A thief in the night visited me on October 2^nd when I awoke floundering on the floor in the middle of the night unable to move and feel the left side of my body. I was taken to the emergency room at John C. Lincoln hospital where it became obvious that I had suffered a stroke which damaged parts of the right side of my brain.

Like many people, I thought I was acutely aware of how precious and fragile life is. Yet that night, I realized how I took my life for granted. I had never considered how quickly I myself could lose so much, so quickly without warning. After four days in the ICU at John C. Lincoln, I spent three weeks at Barrow Neurological Institute doing in-patient rehabilitation. I am now home and have started outpatient rehabilitation.

“But God said to him, ‘You fool! This very night your life will be demanded from you. Then who will get what you have prepared for yourself?’” Luke 12:16-21

After much time for contemplation during those three weeks, I’d like to share my reason for optimism with you.

Good Neighbors

“’Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?’

“The expert in the law replied, ‘The one who had mercy on him.’”- Luke 10:36-37

During my treatment and rehabilitation, I met many highly-educated, caring, and extremely patient people working in the medical field. I was the recipient of boundless care and compassion: not only from doctors, nurses, therapists, nurses’ assistants and techs, cleaning staff, but also from men and women developing products to assist those with health problems. During this time, I witnessed many dedicated and caring people making the world a better place, not because their government had mandated they pursue their particular career, but because they chose a career of compassion and care. No politician or government tells them how to care for their fellow human beings and treat them as if they are members of their own family.

‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ – Matthew 25:40

At the same time, my family also had the benefit of the wisdom, good wishes, prayers, kindness, and moral support of many people I’m privileged to call friends. No law told these people to help or how to help my family unless it was one written on their hearts by their maker or taught to them by their parents—their charity was, and continues to be, given freely from their hearts. It is also something for which I can never sufficiently express my gratitude.

During the last month, the world did not stop operating outside of my small area of existence. Just as most people go about their business daily without intervention by the state, most do not wait for the state to solve the problems of the world. Many work in their own way to make the world a better place while quietly going about their own business; just as anyone does an honest day’s work to satisfy their customers or their employer.

My good news is simple and nothing earth-shattering: the world can be a better place if we don’t wait for the state to do it for us and don’t put our faith in charlatans. The solution is each of us caring for each other, one person at a time.

___________________________

[1] “Madonna Booed for Urging Concertgoers to Vote for President Obama,” October 28, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.extratv.com/2012/10/28/madonna-booed-for-urging-concertgoers-to-vote-for-president-obama/ on Oct 31, 2012).

Madonna said, “Seriously, I don't care who you vote for ... Do not take this privilege for granted. Go vote.”

[2] “Five Specific Questions Journalists Should Ask About the Drone Strike Policy,” by Robert Naiman, (Accessed at http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/10/26-0 on October 26, 2012).

[3] “Obama Makes Unprecedented War Powers to Kill by Drone Permanent,” by John Glaser, October 24, 2012, (Accessed at http://antiwar.com/blog/2012/10/24/obama-makes-unprecedented-war-powers-to-kill-by-drone-permanent/ on Oct 31, 2012).

[4] “President Romney Can Thank Obama for His Permanent Robotic Death List,” By Spencer Ackerman, October 24, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/10/disposition-matrix/ on Oct 31, 2012).

[5] “Plan for hunting terrorists signals U.S. intends to keep adding names to kill lists,” By Greg Miller, Washington Post, October 23, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/plan-for-hunting-terrorists-signals-us-intends-to-keep-adding-names-to-kill-lists/2012/10/23/4789b2ae-18b3-11e2-a55c-39408fbe6a4b_story.html on 31 Oct 2012).

[6] “In Foreign Policy Debate, Romney Capitulates, Agrees With Obama,” by John Glaser, antiwar.com, October 22, 2012, (Accessed at http://news.antiwar.com/2012/10/22/in-foreign-policy-debate-romney-capitulates-agrees-with-obama/ on Oct 31, 2012).

[7] “In Supreme Court Case, Obama Tries to Block Challenges to Illegal Surveillance,” by John Glaser, October 29, 2012, (Accessed at http://antiwar.com/blog/2012/10/29/in-supreme-court-case-obama-tries-to-block-challenges-to-illegal-surveillance/ on Oct 31, 2012).

[8] “Paul Ryan’s voting record: Big-spending conservatism,” By ANDREW RESTUCCIA and SEUNG MIN KIM, Politico, Aug 14, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79688.html on Nov 1, 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).

[2] “Gov't seeks more than 1,700 secret warrants,” May 3, 2012, (Accessed at http://wtop.com/931/2851437/Govt-seeks-more-than-1700-secret-warrants on June 3, 2012).

[3] “Judge estimates 30K secret spying orders approved yearly,” by Michael Winter, USA Today, June 5, 2012, (Accessed at http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/06/judge-estimates-30k-secret-spying-orders-approved-each-year/1#.T87PXVLa9Id on June 5, 2012).

[4] “Surprise! TSA Is Searching Your Car, Subway, Ferry, Bus, AND Plane,” By Jen Quraishi, Jun. 20, 2011, Mother Jones, (Accessed at http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2011/06/tsa-swarms-8000-bus-stations-public-transit-systems-yearly on June 12, 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).

[9] “MSNBC host Chris Hayes says he has trouble calling fallen soldiers 'heroes,’ sparks controversy,” By Rheana Murray, NEW YORK DAILY NEWS, May 28, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/msnbc-host-chris-hayes-trouble-calling-fallen-soldiers-heroes-sparks-controversy-article-1.1085596 on May 31, 2012).

[10] “Memorial Day Reflections and Revisionism,” by James Bovard, Nov 15, 2011, (Accessed at http://jimbovard.com/blog/2011/11/15/memorial-day-reflections-and-revisionism/ on June 2, 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).

[12] “US military 'cannot find Iraq tape' ,” 8 Apr 2010, Al Jazeera, (Accessed at http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2010/04/20104814952153608.html on June 3, 2012).

[13] “We failed to follow bombing rules: Pentagon,” By Dan De Luce Jun 8, 2009, (Accessed at http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gYi4IDEtmbbgYaWKYw2vJ1kl2IEA on June 3, 2012).

[14] “Bradley Manning, WikiLeaks martyr?,” By MICHAEL KIRKLAND, UPI, Mar 13, 2011, (Accessed at http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/03/13/Under-the-US-Supreme-Court-Bradley-Manning-WikiLeaks-martyr/UPI-44541300001400/ on June 3, 2012).

[15] “Bradley Manning's military doctors accused over treatment,” by Ed Pilkington, guardian.co.uk, 15 Mar 2011, (Accessed at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/15/bradley-manning-military-doctors-treatment on June 12, 2012).

[16] “Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’s Principles and Will,” By JO BECKER and SCOTT SHANE, NY Times, May 29, 2012, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=8&&%2359;pagewanted=4&pagewanted=all on June 9, 2012).

[17] “Drone attacks create terrorist safe havens, warns former CIA official,” by Paul Harris, guardian.co.uk, 5 June 2012, (Accessed at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/05/al-qaida-drone-attacks-too-broad on June 9, 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).

[19] “U.S. government to use 'drones the size of GOLF BALLS to spy on AMERICAN citizens',” 8 June 2012, Daily Mail, (Accessed at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2156720/Eye-sky-U-S-government-use-drones-size-GOLF-BALLS-spy-citizens.html on June 9, 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:

• Were you as upset and did you call for advertisers to boycott Ed Shultz’ show when he called talk radio host Laura Ingraham a slut the year before?
• Did you call for advertisers to boycott Anderson Cooper’s show on CNN when Cooper used an equally derogatory term to describe people in the Tea Party?[12]
• Did you call for a boycott when Rachel Maddow, who also opposes the Tea Party movement, called Tea Party members “teabaggers”?[13]

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).