Brain-Jockey

Rejoicing in Osama Bin Laden’s Death:One Christian’s Reflection

Written by Audrie Zettick on May 2, 2011

One of the biggest debates I’ve seen among friends, relatives and people I value is whether it is proper, moral or even Biblical to rejoice in the death of Osama Bin Laden. One of my first thoughts upon learning of his death is echoed in a quote by Mark Twain:

 “I’ve never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure.”

Forgive me, I’m only human.

I am relieved for–and revel with–the young military personnel who celebrated with great joy last night at the ultimate defeat of a man who has caused so much death, either directly or indirectly: the approximately 3,000 killed on 9/11, the many hurt or killed on the unprovoked attack on the U.S.S. Cole, and the many who have died protecting this country since the “war on terrorism” began. This does not even include the many civilians around the world who have been killed in bombings by those who looked to Osama bin Laden (OBL) for inspiration or religious guidance.

I rejoice for those military personnel who might see this as the beginning of an end to their deployments, an end to worry about returning from missions far way.  I pray and hope that it is this type of end, knowing the reality is likely much different.

I rejoice for the uplifted spirits of those directly and indirectly affected by the deaths on 9/11. 

And, yes, I’m human.  I rejoice in the end of an evil.  I would have rejoiced at Hitler’s end too.  I would, like now, have felt some joy, mostly relief but would not have gloated.  No thinking person likes killing.

Yet, on Twitter the night of the death of Osama Bin Laden, I saw some people go “over the line,” turning my kind of rejoicing into something else.  Awash in the type of filthy language, hate and vitriole that went beyond OBL.  Something akin to what you’d hear on the streets of a Middle Eastern country, perhaps. A level of discomfort crept in. Where is the line drawn over relief/happiness/joy (choose your word) that one element of evil is stopped dead in its tracks versus vengeful sentiment?  

I also saw some people implying that any “rejoicing” was wrong, influenced no doubt by the actions of the “over the line” celebratory statements of a few others.  Others became confused about their own reactions, feeling guilty about expressing any joy.

And thus, a lot of discussion today. 

Thankfully, most Christians I know think for themselves, trying to look to their Bible, their hearts, and the Holy Spirit for guidance.  It’s tempered their reactions, but produced guilt if they feel any bit of happiness that OBL is now in the hands of his God.  But this ability to think and not just feel is why from the time of William Penn to today, we’ve had differences regarding war, capital punishment and the like. Even if we disagree, we can revel in the fact that we are blessed with hearts to feel and minds to think and don’t mindlessly follow religious leaders, like some do. The past failings of many religions, Christianity included, are based on that trend of blindly following religion, with little thought to faith. 

That said… yes, the Bible exhorts us to love our enemies, to avoid reveling in their failure.

“Do not rejoice when your enemy falls, and do not let your heart be glad when he stumbles.” (Proverbs 24:17)

Further, 

“God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they would repent, and live” (Ezek. 18:23).”

 A wonderful quote from Martin Luther King, Jr. made the rounds today. 

“I will mourn the loss of thousands of precious lives, but I will not rejoice in the death of one, not even an enemy. Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that.”

 I could go on, but the point is made. Loving your “enemy” is a major tenet of the New Testament.  But also, there are times to rejoice at their defeat:

•  the Israelites rejoiced at the destruction of Pharaoh and his hosts.
• In Revelation 18-20, the church is called to find joy in “the destruction of antichrist, partly on account of their own deliverance and safety, and chiefly because of the glory of God, and of his justice displayed therein.”  (See King James and NIV translation here).    

Enemies aren’t always evil; in many places in the Bible the meaning of enemies is simply “those who oppose us.”  Often it means people with whom we personally have a gripe. The meaning of  ”falls” as in “enemy falls” is often thought to be “falling into sin.”  No, I don’t rejoice in that. 

But wicked rulers and blatantly unrepentant evil have always been enemies of God.  This type of evil tries to circumvent God’s will and purposes. It causes God anguish, especially when His people suffer. Nowhere does the Bible say I have to love this type of evil. I rejoice that God has wrought justice on people like Hitler and Bin Laden, using men as his (imperfect) vehicles here on earth.  I hold no illusion that there was any alternative, although I pray there will be alternatives in the future.  At the same time, I feel sadness that justice had to be accomplished this way.  I also hope for the day that there is no one to inspire a 12-year-old to strap on bombs and blow himself up for the purpose of killing innocent victims in the name of his religion.

I am relieved that OBL can no longer be a beacon for those that are choosing to put innocent men, women and children at risk, sometimes even between themselves and harm.  In that relief comes some guilt-free rejoicing, tempered and temporary.

Thankfully, I have a God who understands the Christian journey that leads me to believe this way, and will forgive me if I’m wrong.

The Real Gitmo

Written by Audrie Zettick on November 16, 2009

Hat tip to Tabitha Hale, who posted this video today by Steve Crowder about Gitmo.  Okay, you say, you’re not so into discussing Guantanamo Bay and the detainees.  You’d rather, say, read the massive Democrat health care bill.  Trust me on this one.  Grab a cup of coffee and sit down for about 12 minutes.  It’s worth it.  A humorous look at a very serious subject.  And you’ll learn something.

Power Comes Back To The People–The NY-23 Race (Appended)

Written by Audrie Zettick on November 1, 2009

If you haven’t already heard, the much ballyhooed NY 23rd district congressional race just became more interesting.  Party boss-backed Dede Scozzafava, a moderate to liberal Republican, withdrew from the race with 72 hours to go. (See her note from her campaign site here).  GOP Chair Michael Steele is now throwing resources behind Doug Hoffman, the Conservative Party candidate who, with Scozzafava in the race, was neck and neck in the polls with Democrat Bill Owens.

In a CYA move, Newt Gingrich has been quoted as saying ““the age of party leaders picking people is over.”  Supposedly he’s alluding to the fact that Scozzafava was selected by GOP County party chairmen.  Yeah.  Like his endorsing her wasn’t more of the same.  Newt’s nonsensical endorsement came only after Dede grudgingly agreed to sign a pledge not to raise taxes–and in spite of a record of voting for higher taxes, and being actively against even any small measure to limit abortion, among other issues.

As Ethan Demme of Keystone Conservative points out, Hoffman’s not the strongest candidate. (He has a great recap of the issue and links to other strong articles here).  As a former Congressional candidate and former county elected official myself, I’d have to agree.  Yet, if I were living in NY, I’d be in the position to have to support Hoffman as well, for reasons that surpass where he is on any one issue.

I support people who have a generally principled approach to decision making that is founded in the rule of law and a commitment toward limited government.  My conservative tendencies are often balanced with libertarian ones–thus I have supported people who may not pass the ultimate socially-conservative litmus tests– as long as they are not rabidly liberal, believe in personal responsibility and demonstrate in some way that human life is, let’s say, at least as valuable if not more so than snail darters or polar bears. With the candidacy of Scozzafava, people who are either fiscally or socially conservative were forced to seek another alternative.  

If the Democrat wins (or if Hoffman–who still has to prove himself–can’t hold on to the seat past one term) I won’t be blaming either the conservatives who supported him nor Scozzafava.  The fault will lie strictly with the GOP power structure in New York, who botched the election by making a backroom candidate selection and, more importantly, watering down GOP values by offering a candidate who almost ran for Congress as a democrat.

Addendum: I originally wrote this blog post on late Saturday night 10/31 and posted after midnight.  Now we find that Scozzafava endorsed the Democrat.  Why is anyone surprised?

Calling All Inventors: Speed Bumps for Government Spending

Written by Audrie Zettick on October 6, 2009

South of the border, speed bumps are apparently as common as tequila–though admittedly not so enjoyable. In an attempt to ameliorate the “dirty air” around Mexico City, government officials are facilitating the private development of “smart speed bumps.”  The idea: when a car going the correct speed begins to go over the bump, the speed bump flattens, letting the obedient driver avoid the usual abrupt “thunk” while helping his or her gas mileage. 

I believe in American ingenuity, so I’m calling on inventors to apply similar technology here in the U.S. of A.  Think of it: a smart speed bump to slow down government spending.  Balance the budget and see that government lives within its means, then it’s smooth sailing. Spend a few billion too much and thunk–the speed bump slams into place. 

Of course, the ability to recall elected officials and a requirement for a balanced budget would be a good substitute for a smart speed bump.  And they might clear the hot air around D.C. as well.

Brain Food

Written by Audrie Zettick on September 21, 2009

After a several-week technology meltdown that required a new hard drive, reinstallation of my software and restoring of my files (bless Carbonite!), I thought I’d start back to blogging with some light brain food.

Hat tip to The Write Side of My Brain, for this bit on Biden who reportedly says this about the effect of the GOP winning House seats in 2010,

“If they take them back, this the end of the road for what Barack and I are trying to do.”

 

Sounds like a GOP campaign ad tag line in there somewhere.  I couldn’t have said it better.

Moveon.org tries to move forward with their “Big Insurance Sick of It” Rallies, basically a counter protest to the tea parties albeit focused on health care.  According to their website, 100 rallies are planned so far. 

———————- 

Moveon guidance to Sick of It rallies: if confronted w/right wing protests, sing patriotic songs and make sure articulate spokesperson seeks media.  Now there’s spontaneous from-the-heart-protests-not-organized-by-big-groups for you. 

Actually, I have my own sign being readied in case I see any of these rallies in my area:

BIG GOVERNMENT: SICK OF IT.

ACLU and Me: Sometimes We Agree

Written by Audrie Zettick on August 15, 2009

A good friend sent me an email she’d received that contained a flash video by the ACLU.  It’s a fictional account of how we might all be ordering pizza in a year or two, given the Federal government’s propensity for collecting information on us.  Check it out.

They say humor is best when it’s based on reality.  I’d say this presentation is funny, except it’s also scary.  Do I think we as citizens would let our government get to this point?  Probably not. Yet it’s not too far fetched to think of a health insurance plan that knows what we eat and holds us accountable somehow.

The end of the presentation contains a link to a petition asking for repeal of the Real ID Act, passed by Congress in 2005 and requiring that all states share their motor vehicle databases to establish a national ID number for each of us. 

We may have worried over this in the Bush administration.  With the potential advent of a national health database, the concern has upped a few notches.   Given that, the ACLU encourages people to send this message:

Dear Friend,

The ACLU needs our help to protect Americans’ right to privacy today!

New technologies and government policies are eroding our personal privacy and creating a 24-hour total surveillance society.  One example is a dangerous program  ominously called the Matrix - that combines state government records with commercially available data to create a vast database capable of compiling and analyzing a profile of every American. 

Click on the postcard to watch this humorous flash video and tell Congress to protect your privacy now!

A couple years ago, I did a few consulting days for a state contractor who (at the time) was trying to pitch matrix-like technology to state government (I was not hired for this aspect of their operations).  The guy that contracted with me told me about it, asked me if I’d like him to put my name in the system to see what they found. It was an eye-opener for me.

Thus, when I saw this video from the ACLU, for once, I agree.

When I’m Wrong, I’m Right:The Truth About Private Health Insurance and Reforms

Written by Audrie Zettick on August 3, 2009

I chastise my college students for not checking the facts when they cite online articles.  It’s too easy in today’s quick-paced world to promote bad information.  I have them consider the source.

For my recent piece on Health Care Reform, I cited some information provided through Investors Business Daily, a reputable source for finance information.  I did a quick double check of their info, but it wasn’t thorough enough–so I’m in for some self-chastising.

What IBD stated was that provisions on Section 102, page 16 of HR 3200 would make it illegal to provide new individual private insurance.  After looking at that portion of the proposed bill, I used their information as part of a larger article on various provisions that would make us pine for the days when we had choice of private insurers. 

The Facts Mam, Nothin’ But The Facts

Turns out, a deeper look at that section of so-called “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009″ shows IBD was wrong.  Existing private health care plans won’t be “illegal” but would be “grandfathered” and allowed to continue.  They have up to 5 years to get in line with government-mandated standards on what health care benefits are covered.  However, they can’t enroll new members until they bring their coverage in line.   

So my statement that “private medical insurers are not allowed to enroll ANY new customers as of the first day that the government plan begins” actually should read “ private medical insurers who are not offering all the benefits mandated by the feds are not allowed to enroll ANY new customers as of the first day that the government plan begins.”

But here’s the full picture: H.R. 3200 limits employers’ options to provide a package of benefits that is affordable.  It will mandate what has to be covered.  When the government mandates that all policies have certain benefits the only thing that is certain is that the cost of providing insurance will rise.  HR 3200 and the bill put forward in the Senate both penalize employers who don’t offer health insurance–either 8% of payroll or $750 respectively. 

You don’ t have to be a CPA to figure out that businesses will do what is best for their bottom line.  Although employees are an important asset, business will look to invest their money where they get the biggest bang for the buck–product improvements, technology, etc.  Health benefits probably aren’t high on the list.  Even the most well-meaning companies will quickly figure out that paying penalties is less expensive than offering health insurance.  Employees will be forced to take the only other available option–the government plan.

So I’m still right: “Come 2020, we may be wishing we still had access to private health insurance plans, some choice in what those plans were and less government on our backs.”

Specter Town Hall Draws Jeers

Written by Audrie Zettick on August 3, 2009

Courtesy of Atlas Shrugs, here are some videos and other links that cover Arlen Specter’s Town Hall in Philadelphia on August 2.  Worth the watch. I couldn’t make the Philly event as I was busy yesterday at a local meet up with several Smart Girl Politics central PA members.  We plan to attend his Lebanon, PA town hall.

Here are upcoming Specter town halls. Wonder if he’ll be more prepared.  I’m certainly tired of the “we-haven’t-had-time-to-read-the-whole-health-care-bill” excuse we’ve heard from our elected reps. 

• Tuesday, August 11, 2009 @ 9:30am
  HACC – Lebanon Campus, Multipurpose Room
  735 Cumberland Street
  Lebanon, PA 17042
• Tuesday, August 11, 2009 @ 3:45pm
  Bucknell University, Trout Auditorium
  701 Moore Avenue
  Lewisburg, PA 17837
• Wednesday, August 12, 2009 @ 8:30am
  The Penn Stater, President’s Hall 4
  215 Innovation Boulevard
  State College, PA 16803-6603
• Thursday, August 13, 2009 @ 3:00 pm
  Belmont Complex
  415 Butler Road
  Kittanning, PA 16201

Planned Aging, Choice and Pining For The Good Ole Days-ADDENDUM

Written by Audrie Zettick on July 28, 2009

If recent health care reform proposals like ”America’s Affordable Health Choices Act” are passed, where might we be 5 or 10 years from now?  Here’s a link to the proposed bill by House Democrats.  Here’s a brief shot at why we might pine for the good ole days:

Choice–well, not so much. 

Despite the word “choice” in the title, private medical insurers are not allowed to enroll ANY new customers as of the first day that the government plan begins.  As Investor Business Daily notes, Page 16 of the American Health Care Choices Act of 2009 actually makes private health care plans illegal.  Hang on to any current coverage you have, since any new* policies (*ADDENDUM: new policies not in line with government mandates–see new article) written after the effective date of the Act will not be allowed.  But at least you’ll still have your current private coverage, right?

Choice–well, choice of one.

Except that there may no longer BE any private plans.  There are many reasons for this, as outlined by the Heritage Foundation.  But let’s keep this simple: 

Employers will have to offer health care coverage or face penalties.  For large businesses (who are the ones currently offering health insurance benefits), the penalties will likely be 40 to 60% of what they now pay in health insurance premiums.  If I was their CFO, I’d say drop the coverage, let workers take the public option and we’ll pay the penalty.  

But at least they’ll have AFFORDABLE health care, right?

 Affordable? Depends on your definition.

Obama declared that “Health care reform is not going to add to that deficit, it’s designed to lower it.”  Not so much, according to the CBO which estimates that the health care plan offered by the House Democrats will ”add more than $230 billion to the federal budget deficit over the next ten years.”

The doctors may have been bought off (see Pink Elephant Pundit here–but frankly after the Prez’ tonsil-yanking claims, I bet pediatricians are no longer supporting the WH), but ten years down the road, their financial fix morphs into a giant fiscal cancer where the deficit will probably force the only available health plan–the ”public option”– to ration care, lest costs spiral out of control.  

Planned Parenthood Aging:  Then, of course, there’s the provision to MANDATE ( see section 1233) that all seniors have Advanced Care Planning Consultation every 5 years.  While this sounds well-meaning–who can argue with giving seniors information on living wills–the topics REQUIRED every five years include an explanation of end-of-life services.  I can imagine how happy my 91-year old grandfather would be had this already been in effect.  If we start this at 65, he’d already had 6 forced sessions of hearing about planning for the end of his life.  Boy, that would encourage ME to go to the doc’s.

While “rationing” of services is technically not allowed to happen according to the bill, budget pressures combined with the Advanced Care Planning are certain to have a similar result. 

Good Ole Days

Come 2020, we may be wishing we still had: access to private health insurance plans, some choice in what those plans were and less government on our backs, telling us when and what to plan for as we approach our latter years….and wishing we didn’t have to persuade medical and government officials that we still deserve care in our elder years.

A Mad Hatter’s Summer of Events

Written by Audrie Zettick on July 13, 2009

Like Alice at the Mad Hatter’s tea party, taxpayers have recently been assaulted with many wish-it-weren’t-for-real events that make me watch for the white rabbit.  It’s been a Wonderland of events and characters.  Among them:

Queen of Hearts: Nancy Pelosi.  Politico recounts how she “whipped” together the votes for Cap and Trade, replacing “off with their heads” with dogged, in-your-face (and perhaps other body parts) persistence.  Worried more about her reputation than the content of the bill, witnesses recounted that she and her sidekicks even surrounded one holdout–Rep. Joe Baca–who then (surprise!) voted in favor of Cap and Trade.   No wonder Congressman Ciro Rodriguez sprinted like a rabbit out of the House chamber after surprising Pelosi with a “no” vote. 

The Card-Deck Queen’s Men–The eight Republican Congressmen–called jellyfish by Deroy Murdock but who more resemble the cowed cards–who enabled the House to pass Cap and Tax.   They fell flat on their faces when the Queen appeared, but these Congressmen plus others in vulnerable districts will be trying to paint the roses red as they attempt to cover up their mistakes.

Tweedle Dee, Tweedle Dum and Even More Dum: Some of my home state Congressmen who voted for Cap and Trade in spite of the fact that PA gets a majority of its electricity from coal (great editorial here).  It’s been estimated that Pennsylvanians will see over a $3,000 hike in annual electricity fees.  Here’s an estimated impact by Congressional District.

The Caucus Race (click here if you don’t remember this part of the story), represented by the G8 and especially India and China on climate change.  In Alice’s story, the animals, led on by the DoDo, have a nonsensical race ending in everyone getting meaningless prizes, with Alice finding her own prize, which she gives to DoDo who presents it back to her.  Yeah, we may be a high consumption society, but it’s our economy and innovations that have given much of the world the freedoms and standards of living that have grown from development.  Having the U.S. commit to harsher standards while India and China go nearly full speed ahead with development is an absurd gesture. Maybe we should all ride bicycles like they do in China.   

Plus, even though Climate Change Happens, even THINKING that anything we do will make any meaningful impact on Global climate change is the absurdest gesture of all.  The G8 nations committed to limiting global warming (by reducing carbon emissions) to no more than two degrees.  A large volcanic explosion could do just that and more (will they claim success?).  A closer look at Climate Change science and models shows that all the pain caused to our economy by legislation like Cap and Trade is much greater than the impact on the environment.

The Dodo: New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.  He is emphatic that global warming is a bigger threat to America than terrorism.   Enough said.

Cheshire Cat: played by Obama.  I considered casting him as the White Rabbit, since you can argue that the American public followed him down the rabbit hole.  The Cheshire Cat might be more appropriate, as this character appears to be wise, yet Alice never knows if the cat is really steering her wrong.  

Recent White House policy on Iran was every bit as perplexing as anything the Cheshire Cat said to Alice.  In spite of the recent election-sparked violence in Iran, Iranian officials were originally invited to our July 4 celebration–first time they’ve been invited since the Iranian Revolution.  Then they were disinvited.  Of course, this was after it was clear they weren’t intending to show up anyway.  In Wonderland, this all makes perfect sense. 

And proposed health care reform that claims to allow that we keep private insurance while all but ensuring disappearance of private plans is, well, perfectly sensible too.

Czar of Czars: Obama.  Maybe we need a remake of Wonderland, featuring the Czar of Czars instead of the Queen of Hearts.   ”With President Obama, the CZAR business has not only picked up.. It has been put on Steroids, Human Growth Hormones, Protein Shakes, Speed, and Epinephrine Shots.”  Motley Fool

“Drink Me” potion:  Alas, we the American people are at fault, willing to drink whatever comes our way if it looks to benefit us, darn the consequences.  Growth of Big Government is the result. As Robert Samuelson recently noted: “Without anyone much noticing, our national government is on the verge of a permanent expansion that would endure long after the present economic crisis has (presumably) passed and that would exceed anything ever experienced in peacetime.”  

Time to pull ourselves out of the Rabbit hole with a dose of reality.  I wish I’d wake up.