For me, September of this year marks a decade of life in the United States of America. It’s not been a very comfortable experience. For ten long years I’ve been unable to precisely pin down what it is about this country that makes me nervous and uneasy.

On Sparrow Chat, I’ve written much about what I see as wrong in American society – the obsession with firearms, religion, and race; a lack of proper medical care for the disadvantaged; the sheer evil of out and out capitalism left to run rampant like some rabid beast loose among prey.

Perhaps I should have reached a conclusion a long time ago. After all, with hindsight, it was staring me in the face all the time. Maybe I just couldn’t – as the old saying goes – “see the wood for the trees”.

It took a simple segment on the CBS Evening News tonight to bring it all into focus. The answer was obvious.

Take a few moments to read the CBS transcript, entitled, “Life after deportation for U.S.-born children.”

(CBS News) TIJUANA, Mexico – The U.S. Border Patrol announced a new strategy Tuesday for catching illegal immigrants from Mexico: using improved intelligence to target repeat offenders.

These days, though, many Mexicans heading home outnumbers those coming to the U.S. Many of them had been deported, the result of stepped-up enforcement. CBS News correspondent Bill Whitaker reports what happens when families are forced to leave.

Every day Patricia Herrera walks her three children — 12-year-old Yasmin, 10-year-old Elizabeth, and 8-year-old Vicente — to school.

But these days, this familiar routine is on unfamiliar terrain. This family from Salt Lake City — these American children — have been uprooted to Tijuana, Mexico. These English-speaking children struggle to learn in Spanish.

“It’s different and it’s hard for me to understand what they’re saying here,” said one of the Herrera children.

Right across from the house they share with relatives is the fortified fence that marks the U.S. border. When Patricia was a baby, her mother sneaked her across. She grew up thinking she was a U.S citizen until she was stopped one day by federal agents. Caught a second time last October, she was deported. To keep her family intact, she brought her children — U.S. citizens — over in February.

“I was sad,” said one of the Herrera children.

“I was scared, I was shock, I was nervous,” said another.

Patricia Herrera said she is not adjusting well. “I never thought it would come to this, but it has. And it’s hard for them.”

Four years ago, Tijuana schools started seeing a steady flow of American students whose parents had been deported. When the U.S. economy fell into deeper recession, that flow became a flood. The schools are overwhelmed.

This school, Francisco Villa, is a prime example of what’s going on. Two years ago, there were no U.S. students enrolled. Last year, six enrolled; this year, 35. In all Tijuana schools, 2,000 students from the U.S. have enrolled so far this year.

Most feel trapped between two worlds. Cesar was born in Washington State. “I feel more American, he said, “because all my life I was over there.”

Jasleen was born in California. Whitaker asked her how is it different in Mexico than the U.S. “Like over there is cleaner,” she said. “Here, it’s kind of dangerous, like when it’s dark.”

Patricia can’t work because she can’t speak Spanish well enough. She studies every night with her children. She survives on money her family sends from Utah every week.

“I live right here on the borderline too,” she said. “And it’s hard to know that I look over there and [I say], ‘Oh, my God, if I could only get through there.’ But I know I can’t. So I have to accept and learn to live my life here.”

It’s a hard lesson many families from north of the border are having to learn.”^[1]

At first, you may think that segment (the video is available online) is about Patricia Herrera and her three children. It’s not. It’s about the United States of America. It’s all about what this nation has become.

Read the last paragraph again:

“It’s a hard lesson many families from north of the border are having to learn.”

‘A hard lesson’ – like maths, or Spanish?

There was no sympathy for the plight of Patricia and her kids in that report. Sure, it went through the motions, but the real point of the story was how well America was doing at getting rid of those it no longer wants. What it was really saying was, “Aren’t we suddenly so good at enforcing our immigration laws?”

And why not? After all, it’s what the majority of Americans have said they want to happen.

That one segment of a US evening news program clarified for me exactly what is missing throughout this country. It’s the reason for the fear-mongering that has persisted, and torn this nation apart for the last eleven years – since 9/11/2001. What’s missing from this country today can be summed up in one simple word:

Compassion.

There is no compassion in America today.

Oh, sure, you can all jump up and down and yell about how you did old Mrs Beidmeyer’s shopping for her, or, hey, what about those ‘Making A Difference’ segments on NBC News? Aren’t they about Americans being compassionate?

No, they’re not. They’re about Americans telling themselves how wonderful they are. They’re about ego-inflation. When the going gets a bit tough, you yell, “Look at us! We’re having it rough, yet we Americans are still wonderful people!”

No, you’re not. There’s not an ounce of compassion in you – unless it’s for yourselves. You’re very good at weeping, particularly when the news camera’s pointed in your direction. You wail and wallow when your kids get killed at the latest schoolhouse shooting, then go home and polish your AK47s.

You’d rather berate socialism, sneer at words like ‘welfare’, ‘benefits’, and ‘social medicine’ than help solve the problem of poverty in your own country.

“Let ‘em die! They’re no good. Let them get a job and pay their way if they want a doctor. It’s what we had to do.”

Of course, it’s easy to forget your father paid your way through college and got you that fancy, well-paid, position with his company that provides you with generous medical insurance and a nice private pension when you retire. It’s easy to forget the guy across town – you know, the area you never go to because it’s a bit dodgy and people sometimes get mugged – he’s dying and can’t afford a doctor because he never had a father…yes, it’s easy to forget him, isn’t it?

America is deporting its own citizens to another country, with a language they don’t understand, just so you can tune into Rush Limbaugh and pretend to nod sagely while he rants on about illegal immigration and “what are we going to do about it?”

Patrica Herrera didn’t come to America illegally. She was smuggled in as a small baby. She believed she was a US citizen. Suddenly, out of the blue, a load of stiff-necks chuck her out on her ear to appease the Limbaugh’s of this great nation, or some hard-boiled politician who knows just how to whip up your ego until you have less regard for a fellow human being and her children than you have for a desert jack-rabbit.

There is no compassion in the United States of America. That’s what is wrong with this country. That’s why I’ve felt nervous and uneasy for the last ten years.

Where’s there’s no compassion, there’s no humanity.

And when a nation has no humanity, it has nothing.

^{[1] “Life after deportation for U.S.-born children” CBS News, May 8th 2012}

It may well be that the presidential election in France holds little interest for the self-absorbed American public. It is, however, of immense importance to all the people of the Western world, for the ousting of Sarkozy by Francois Hollande marks a turning point that will set the right-wing, capitalist, establishments shuddering.

Like the Egyptians of the ‘Arab Spring’, the French people have become the first to raise the cry, “Enough is enough!”, and kick their far right ‘President of Bling’ to the touchline.

Hollande is a true Socialist. He promises to be a rarity among politicians: a man more concerned with the needs of the people than the lining of his own bank account. Sarkozy, like so many of today’s politicians, sold out his country to US corporations, and his own ego.

The new French president rides a motor scooter and has returned to his home in the 15th Arondissment of Paris, at least for now, saying he intends to stay there, rather than the overly grand, official, presidential residence at the Elysee Palace.

Hollande has promised to withdraw French troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2012; reduce the share of nuclear power in France from 75% to 50%; raise the level of income tax to 75% for those earning over a million euros, and recruit 60,000 new teachers.

We must wait and see how he fulfills these, and other promises. But of more importance is the symbolic victory of the French people, who have made the first move in taking back their country from the right-wing establishment who milked it, and most of the Western world, for far too long.

Not just in France will those who sleep on the most luxurious mattresses, beneath sheets of finest silk, above soft, deep-piled carpets, do so a little less easily tonight.

How long is a roll of wallpaper?

As one who owned a professional painting and decorating business in the UK for a number of years, I can tell you the answer. It’s thirty-three feet, or 10.05 meters. It always was thirty-three feet, or 10.05 meters, and there’s no reason not to believe it always will be.

If you think I might be wrong, please check out the links at the foot of this page.^[1][2]

It’s important that a roll of wallpaper be thirty-three feet, or 10.05 meters, because that allows for at least three drops per roll on most walls, even if the pattern drop is 20 – 24 inches.

If a roll of wallpaper was, say, sixteen and a half feet long, and the pattern drop was twenty inches, even on an eight foot high wall only one drop of paper could be utilized, leaving a near useless length of around seven feet.

One drop to a roll! Ridiculous! No-one could entertain that. The waste would make it economically unviable.

On this side of the Atlantic, Americans agree. Thirty-three feet, or 10.05 meters, is the right length for a roll of wallpaper.

Well, actually two rolls of wallpaper – in one roll.

A roll of American wallpaper is sixteen and a half feet long (I kid you not!). But as sixteen and a half feet is useless for wallpapering, US wallpaper manufacturers combine one roll into two rolls, but on one roll, if you get my drift?

Don’t worry if you don’t. I didn’t for quite some time. The whole idea is so ridiculous the human brain doesn’t handle it well – until, you realize the reason why US wallpaper manufacturers have devised this convoluted system.

They charge twice as much. They sell a single roll of thirty-three feet as a ‘double’ roll, and charge you double for it. I guess that’s why it’s called a ‘double’ roll! Of course, they’d like you to believe you’re getting twice as much on your roll, but you’re not. Thirty-three feet has been an industry standard for wallpaper rolls for forty-odd years, to my knowledge.

Recently, I purchased eight rolls of wallpaper. The website of the Sherwin-Williams Company advertised the paper at “$22.49 a roll”. They also stated, “This wallpaper is packaged in two rolls. It is priced in single rolls.”

I ordered eight rolls, expecting to receive four packages of two rolls, shrink-wrapped together, each thirty-three feet long. What I received was four individual rolls thirty-three feet long – only half as much paper as I’d expected and needed, each costing, not $22.49 but $44.98. The label informed me these individual rolls were ‘double’ rolls of paper.

To proceed with my decorating I would have to purchase double the amount of paper I’d received, at double the price. Nearly $360.00 for eight rolls of wallpaper.

No wonder they call them ‘double’ rolls. This is an obvious case of ‘double-dealing’.

To perpetrate such a scam in the United Kingdom would never be tolerated.

But then, I guess that’s what marks the difference between the evil Socialism, and Capitalism.

^{[1] “Wallpapers Direct (UK)”}

^{[2] “Ask.com}

Postscript: Since writing this article, I’ve priced a similar wallpaper in the UK. It works out substantially cheaper to purchase in the UK and have it shipped, than to buy one’s wallpaper on High Street, USA.

At last, Americans have the reassurances they’ve waited for. We can all come out onto the streets and dance in celebration after today’s speech at the Woodrow Wilson International Center, by John Brennan, Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, and Assistant to the President.

I swear these titles become more absurd with every passing Administration!

According to John Brennan, drone strikes are ‘legal, ethical, necessary and proportional, overseen with extraordinary care and thoughtfulness, and especially when the target is an American citizen’…though slightly less care and thoughtfulness is involved when the victims happen to be an innocent wedding party, or a group of Pakistani schoolkids playing happily outside their homes.

Take a moment to study the face of this man, imbued with ‘extraordinary care and thoughtfulness’.

It’s been a source of disquiet for (just a few) Americans that the technological achievement of robotic airborne assassination was, perhaps, less than ethical in its usage. John Brennan has now put their fears to rest.

Unfortunately, for the small minority of inconvenient souls not quite ready to swallow wholesale the propaganda of those so arrogant as to believe any utterance they make will be readily accepted as divine truth by the masses, John Brennan failed to supply any references to back up his nauseating statements.

Who, exactly, has reached the perilous conclusion that death dealt from the skies, without trial or justice, is legal, ethical, necessary and proportional? Did John Brennan consult the God Almighty on this issue, or even the head of his own Christian church?

Has he even consulted a dictionary?

Ethics

1. pertaining to or dealing with morals or the principles of morality; pertaining to right and wrong in conduct.

2. being in accordance with the rules or standards for right conduct or practice.

Where, in the name of sanity, is the morality, the rule or standard of right conduct, that decrees it acceptable to summarily apply the death penalty to persons thought to be possibly, or maybe, or remotely, likely to inflict some minor trauma on the Great United States of America? Surely, it can only reside, like some great malignant neoplasm, inside John Brennan’s head.

John Brennan added this postscript to his message:

…drone strikes usually take place with the co-operation of the host government, in full accordance with the law.”

Here, it seems, the Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, and Assistant to the President, has become totally confused over his words, perhaps, as a result of that cancerous tumor. He apparently used the adverb, ‘usually’, when he meant to say, ‘rarely’.

We know this to be true, as most airborne assassinations occur over Pakistan, and John Brennan will be more aware than most of us that the Pakistan government has been demanding the cessation of these cold-blooded killings almost since their inception.

John Brennan must be a very confused man. He’s obviously in need of a vacation. Where better than some peaceful haven, away from the trials, tribulations, and responsibilities of life in the Obama administration. (Sorry, I used the word, ‘trial’ illegally. It’s now been deleted from the American dictionary, considered unnecessary).

I’ve heard the mountainous areas of northern Pakistan can be delightful at this time of year, and would prove a suitably recuperative resort for our Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, and Assistant to the President.

Though, a word of caution Mister Brennan, I’ve heard it pays to keep an eye on the sky.

It’s not often that Sparrow Chat lends its support to a religious organization. Regular readers will be aware of the distaste this publication has for hierarchical, organized, religion. As a means of controlling large groups of the populace, and making vast sums of money into the bargain, religion is one of the greatest marketing, and propaganda, tools ever devised.

Today, though, the Catholic nuns of America have Sparrow Chat’s wholehearted support. A male-dominated, Mafia-style organization, known as the Vatican is accusing them of promoting ‘political views at odds with those expressed by U.S. Roman Catholic bishops, “who are the church’s authentic teachers of faith and morals.”‘

From Reuters:

The Vatican chastised the nuns for airing discussions about the ordination of women, the church patriarchy and ministry to gay people.

The Vatican also rebuked the nuns for spending too much time “promoting issues of social justice” while failing to speak out often enough about “issues of crucial importance to the life of the church and society,” such as abortion and gay marriage.

Determined to cleanse the sisterhood of “radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith,” the Vatican appointed Archbishop J. Peter Sartain of Seattle to effectively take control of the Leadership Conference, rewriting its statutes, supervising its meetings, and investigating its relationships with politically active groups.^[1]

The second paragraph of that Reuters quote encompasses much that is wrong with the Roman Catholic Church:

“The Vatican also rebuked the nuns for spending too much time “promoting issues of social justice”"

Social justice is never a priority for the Catholic Church. The Vatican is much more concerned with maintaining its hold over the faithful by pious doctrine and false moral teachings.

Women have never held any position of equality in this medieval organization. They are downtrodden, expected to be subservient to their male ‘superiors’, and above all, not allowed to think for themselves.

Being male in the Catholic Church has many advantages. A man can become Pope, even though his youth was spent as a Nazi. Male priests can sexually abuse young boys and girls while enjoying the protection of their bishops and cardinals.

While the nuns of America toil to do the work of their Savior, the men of the cloth preen their egos by sitting around pontificating over contraception, abortion, and the evils of being gay.

Can anyone doubt for one moment to which group Jesus of Nazareth would have pledged his support?

^{[1] “Vatican crackdown on U.S. nuns a long time brewing” Reuters, April 20th 2012}

You gotta laugh! What a farce! US Secret Service agents getting their hands smacked for dallying with prostitutes? Give me a break. This is the CIA we’re talking about. And all over $47.^[1]

Apparently, one of the floosies didn’t give value for money and rather than cough up an additional $47, the disgruntled guy raised a rumpus that now has the whole lot of them confined to barracks, and being laughed at by Mossad, Ogpu, Stazi, MI5, and every other shower of psychopathic, government-sponsored assassins on the planet.

“We let ‘the boss’ (Barack Obama) down,” says US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey.

Give me a break!

Less of a laughing matter is the irresponsibility of the US Internal Revenue Service, which is denying citizens their legal tax rebate because gangs are fraudulently infiltrating their ‘system’ (or lack of it) and claiming the rebates of dead servicemen and other unfortunate victims of this taxation scam.

Instead of doing the decent thing by admitting their security is non-existent and coughing up what they owe to the proper tax payer, the IRS just says, “Sorry, we’ve already paid you out. Not our fault if someone has hoodwinked us and stolen your money.^[2]

Perhaps if they came up with a proper ‘Pay As You Earn’ taxation system, like every other ‘civilized’ nation on the planet, such fraud could never be perpetrated.

The drawback is they then wouldn’t get to keep your overpaid tax money for twelve months, and earn all that lovely interest, which, by the way, legally belongs to you.

Still, if the prostitute you hired tonight didn’t perform to your satisfaction, and you got home to find a letter from the IRS informing you your tax rebate had been claimed by someone in Uganda, you can always head on over to New Jersey where they’ve just issued their first cannabis-growing permit to a company called, “Greenleaf Compassion Center.”^[3]

Who the hell thought up that crazy name?

There’s one minor drawback: the permit is for growing pot, but ‘Greenleaf Compassion Center’ isn’t disclosing their cultivation site. Now that’s hardly compassionate.

Oh, well, I guess it just isn’t your night.

^{[1] “Secret Service revokes security clearances of 11 accused of misconduct” CBS News, April 16th 2012}

^{{2] “Tax refund fraud affecting many innocent people” CBS News, April 16th 2012}

^{[3] “N.J. issues first permit for legal pot growing” CBS News, April 16th 2012}

I’m no great sports fan. I’d never heard of Ozzie Guillen until today, and frankly, it doesn’t bother me if I never hear of him again. I understand he has a passion for bullfighting. Those who take pleasure from cruelty to animals deserve no respect from me.

Yet today, I found myself sympathizing with Ozzie Guillen. He’s been punished for speaking his mind. Here, in the America that boasts constantly of its freedoms, Ozzie Guillen has been punished for daring to say he admires Fidel Castro.

Why are Americans not roaring their disapproval and demanding his reinstatement? He wasn’t being racist. He wasn’t suppressing a minority. He merely said he admired Fidel Castro. As a result, he’s been suspended for five games.

Oh, did I forget to clarify? Ozzie Guillen is the new manager of the Miami Marlins. I believe they’re a baseball team in…guess where?

Florida – yet again! It all happens in Florida. I’m tired of writing about the place.

Apparently, in Florida, you have the legal right to shoot unarmed boys on their way home from the candy store, but you mustn’t announce publicly your admiration for a socialist dictator.

Florida is full of Cuban people who fled the regime of Fidel Castro. America welcomed them with open arms because America hates Castro. They’ve tried to assassinate him on numerous occasions. In America it’s okay to assassinate people the government doesn’t like. These days they’re murdering folks in the mountains of Pakistan by remote control .

In 1959, Castro toppled the previous dictator of Cuba, Fulgencio Batista

Batista was America’s boy. He loved capitalism. He aligned himself with all the wealthy sugar plantation owners on the island, while keeping the rest of the populace in near slavery. America helped him by supplying the weapons for his secret police to commit gross acts of violence, torture, and public executions. In total, America’s boy was responsible for the deaths of around 20,000 Cubans.

Why was America so keen on Fulgencio Batista? Here’s what John F Kennedy had to say on the subject:

At the beginning of 1959 United States companies owned about 40 percent of the Cuban sugar lands—almost all the cattle ranches—90 percent of the mines and mineral concessions—80 percent of the utilities—practically all the oil industry—and supplied two-thirds of Cuba’s imports.”

And Kennedy didn’t stop there:

“Fulgencio Batista murdered 20,000 Cubans in seven years … and he turned Democratic Cuba into a complete police state – destroying every individual liberty. Yet our aid to his regime, and the ineptness of our policies, enabled Batista to invoke the name of the United States in support of his reign of terror. Administration spokesmen publicly praised Batista – hailed him as a staunch ally and a good friend – at a time when Batista was murdering thousands, destroying the last vestiges of freedom, and stealing hundreds of millions of dollars from the Cuban people, and we failed to press for free elections.”

Despite these remarks, John F Kennedy still did his level best to have Castro assassinated. The notorious Bay of Pigs affair was probably his greatest blunder.

It was to topple Batista’s evil, US-backed, regime that Fidel Castro returned to Cuba from exile in 1956. It took three years, but eventually Batista was forced to flee the island and Castro took over control.

He nationalized the industries and threw out the US corporations. In retaliation, the US began an economic embargo of the island, which began in 1960 and continues to this day, devastating the Cuban economy and forcing many into poverty.

While it could be argued that Castro’s regime was far from perfect – tales of torture, executions, and political prisoners kept in appalling conditions, abound – there is no doubt that the American government has taken every opportunity to blacken Castro’s name.

During Eisenhower’s presidency the CIA even joined forces with the Mafia in an attempt to assassinate him. When a superpower stoops that low it should ring warning bells right around the globe.

So, today, I join with Ozzie Guillen in stating my admiration for Fidel Castro. He’s stood against the corrupt and arrogant superpower of the United States for over sixty years, and they haven’t got him yet.

Now that’s some achievement.

Twenty years ago it would only have been used for dog-food. Since the 1990s it’s been in 70% of all processed beef products on the store shelf. ‘Pink Slime’ is the one that leaped off the production belt of secrecy and out into the limelight of public knowledge, thanks in no small part to TV chef, Jamie Oliver, who ‘outed’ ‘Pink Slime’ on a 2011 TV show.

What disgusted consumers the most was Oliver sloshing household bleach all over the stuff.

They’d probably be even more horrified if they realized ammonia is used extensively in the meat industry. How do they think those ‘oven-ready’ chickens remain un-putrified until they finally reach the supermarket shelves?

The answer is they’re stored in huge caverns filled with ammonia gas. Back in the mid-seventies, while training with the British RSPCA, I visited a poultry processing and storage plant. It was one of the largest in the country. I won’t mention the company’s name, but can assure you the processing was definitely not as ‘bootiful’ as the owner described his product on television. British readers will, no doubt, remember the relevant advertisement.

‘Pink slime’ is supposedly safe. It meets federal food safety standards. It’s only fault is it’s bloody disgusting.

Desperate to save their profits, the meat industry is fighting back with a new slogan: “Dude – it’s beef”. Wow! They’ve also called on failed Republican presidential nominee, Rick Perry, for assistance. He happily sampled the product and appeared to enjoy it.

The meat marketing companies knew it was disgusting, so they came up with the name, ‘Lean Finely Textured Beef’. That makes it sound quite appealing, and while it isn’t a lie, there can be no doubt of the obvious deception to the consumer.

It may be perfectly acceptable to describe a tin of ‘Lassie’ as ‘lean, meaty, chunks in a rich, taste-laden, gravy’ when the reality is a load of offal processed into lumps of gristle, but dogs aren’t too bothered what they eat so long as it tastes okay.

To treat human consumers as though they are no better than animals is an extreme insult, and a certain marketing disaster once the ‘pink slime’ hits the fan.

It’s sad that 850 employees have to lose their jobs because yet another food marketing scandal has come to light. Some folk appear to blame Jamie Oliver, or the media, but it’s not their fault.

No, the blame lies fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the meat processing industry. Deception will out, eventually.

We’re not their pets, we’re their customers, and it’s time they remembered that.

Two weeks ago, a seventeen year old black youth, Shawn Tyson, was sent to prison for life, with no possibility of parole, for the brutal, cold-blooded, murder of two young men from the UK, James Cooper and James Kouzaris. Both men were in their mid-twenties.^[1]

The two men were on vacation in Florida and strayed into the rundown Newtown area of Sarasota late one night while looking for an all-night cafe. Tyson, released from prison only that day after a conviction for shooting at cars, gunned them down as they stood in the road, defenseless, pleading with him to spare their lives.

Just about the time Shawn Tyson was learning he’d spend the rest of his life behind bars, Florida neighborhood watch man, George Zimmerman, gunned down black teenager, Trayvon Martin, in an incident that sent the US media into a frenzy and provoked marches and protests throughout the state.^[2]

On March 6th this year, not long after the Trayvon Martin killing, a disgruntled ex-teacher at the Episcopal School of Jacksonville, in Florida, walked back into the school carrying an AK47 assault rifle and shot the head teacher, Dale Regan. Ms Regan had been at the school thirty-four years. The man, Shane Schumerth, a Spanish teacher at the school had been fired earlier that day. After shooting the principle, he killed himself.^[3]

James Cooper, James Kouzaris, Trayvon Martin and Dale Regan, were all in front of the bullet. They are dead. Shane Schumerth killed himself with his own gun. Shawn Tyson, George Zimmerman, may as well be dead. Their lives are over, destroyed by the same weapons used to inflict their deadly violence.

It may seem that Florida is especially gun-violent. It isn’t. Similar stories abound all over the United States. In every state similar incidents occur on an almost daily basis.

I received this document recently in the mail, together with an unsolicited membership form.

It came from the National Rifle Association, based in Florida. I sent it back, unsigned.

Guns kill – that’s all they do.

^{[1] “Shawn Tyson gets life sentence for murdering British tourists in Florida” Guardian, March 12th 2012}

^{[2] George Zimmerman Innocent Of Racist Hate Crime” Sparrow Chat, March 20th 2012}

^{[3] “Two dead in shooting at Florida high school” March 6th 2012}

The latest revelation to spew forth from the Supreme Court of the United States is further evidence of how much this once august and independent establishment has become affiliated to corporate influence.

The question under debate is whether the federal government has the power to make medical insurance mandatory on every individual. Is it ‘unconstitutional’; does it attack those sacred principles: the rights and freedoms of the individual?

What the Supreme Court is totally ignoring is the very essence of government. Governments are appointed by the people specifically to regulate their affairs within the confines of the society in which they live. In a democracy, that means governing for the greater good of all – not just those at the higher echelons of society.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, disaffectionately labeled ‘Obamacare’ by its opponents, was an attempt by the US government to provide a framework of support for those people presently unable to afford medical insurance. ‘Healthcare for all’ was one of the platforms Barack Obama campaigned on, and the fact it helped him win the White House in 2008 is proof that a majority of Americans supported it.

Despite huge resistance from House Republicans, who forced substantial amendments to the bill and seriously weakened it, it managed to become law. There is little doubt, if Obama is elected to a second term, he will make every effort to strengthen those weaknesses imposed by his adversaries.

Unless, of course, the Republicans and their corporate masters bend sufficient Supreme Court judges to their will and force a legal ruling against the Act.

What began, only a few days ago, solely as a discussion on the legality of mandatory insurance, has now resulted in a proposition, by certain of the more ‘conservative’ (read: right-wing) judges to throw out the Act in its entirety.

If the US government is acting on behalf of the majority of the people in this matter, it seems that the Supreme Court most certainly is not. Which begs the question: on whose behalf are they acting?

The argument against mandatory insurance appears to hinge on a lack of precedent. Apparently, only once before has any US government tried to impose such a mandatory imposition. It was nearly two hundred years ago and only lasted a few months before being overturned.

Yet, it’s perfectly fine for any of the fifty states to do it, though they can be a little tardy. Take motor insurance, for example. Despite the advent of the Model T in 1908, Massachusetts was the only state requiring compulsory auto insurance until 1956. Most of the others followed suit in the 1960s and 70s, though Illinois allowed its citizens to drive around without insurance until 1990. God alone knows how many people died, or were maimed, from road accidents between 1908 and 1990!

Was Illinois merely protecting the ‘rights and freedoms’ of its citizens? Surely, not those who were mowed down by uninsured drivers?

The only US state still so irresponsible as to not demand mandatory auto insurance is New Hampshire. There, a penniless bum can swan around in any old pick-up truck and kill or maim whoever he chooses. If he has no money, they’ll likely get no recompense whatsoever.

Which begs a somewhat ironic scenario. Imagine for a moment, you lose your job, and with it, your family’s medical coverage. Bereft, you spend your last few hundred dollars on a vacation in New Hampshire. Whilst there, a drunken hobo from a tumbledown shack in the backwoods smashes his pick-up into you and your family. You spend weeks in hospital, only to discover on your discharge that the hospital’s taken your house and all your possessions as part payment for those huge medical bills.

You have no money, nowhere to live, and your only recourse is to move you and your family into the tumbledown shack with the drunken hobo who almost killed you all.

Maybe ‘Obamacare’ might seem a little more attractive from your new perspective.

What price your rights and freedoms, then?