9/11 for Fun and Profit

Like most of you, I have sat through at least five "salutes" to the brave and innocent victims of the worst attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor. I saw dozens of people srtruggling to control their emotions and some who simply couldn't. I sympathized with them all, but I couldn't help but notice how long the cameras lingered until either tears came or the survivor controlled him/herself and continued. I remembered the time-honored dictum of the worst of the media - "If it bleeds, it leads."

I watched a program of remembrance by survivors of the attack (between commercials). I remembered the countless souvenirs which were offered at the time (paperweights made from  genuine remainders of the World Trade Center) and I reflected on all that has happened to our personal freedoms since that horrible day that were never mentioned on its tenth anniversary.

Let's assume we really wanted to honor the people killed and the familes devastated by the attack of nineteen fanatic religionists on September 11, 2001. Suppose we were serious about the magnitude of the attack and wanted to demonstrate how deeply we felt the pain, the outrage and the sense of loss 9/11 meant to us. What would have happened if some member of Congress proposed that on that day all television programming would only consist of naming each one of the victims of the bombing as well as the thousands of Americans who have died in the resultant wars caused by those nineteen fanatics?

I can picture the outraged howls of protest from the networks as milllions in lost revenue went up in smoke, much more important than the smoke that rose from the twin towers ten years ago. I can hear the screams from the sponsors of programs that sell deoderant and beer as they see their profits sacrificed to something as non-productive as silent remembrance.

And how about us? Would the American people happily give up the latest episode of their favorite soap opera or reality show just to watch the names or pictures of men and women who gave up their lives for what they believed was what President Obama called "a timeless ideal that men and women should govern themselves; that all people are created equal, and deserve the same freedom to determine their own destiny?"

Can we picture an America that could put the pursuit of the dollar ahead of human sacrifice? If we can't, then fanaticism has truly won and we deserve to become part of the dust of history.

USA - Where Everything's for Sale.

Ever since I put this as my signature on e-mail, I've gotten comments and questions about why I put it there. BTW, not all the comments were polite. This piece is a defense against charges that I am a communist, a fascist, an Islamist or simply anti-American.

I've asked everyone who's questioned the signature to come up with one thing in our society that ISN'T for sale and I've been met with large amounts of silence. One person replied, "love" and this seemed reasonable until I suggested that this meant no one marries for money - and this was obviously the wrong thing to say because the person I was speaking with hung up the phone. I was, however, gratified that no one even suggested our government since even the most trollish of people don't think our respresentatives put the common good ahead of personal or political gain as reflected in campaign contributions. Education is clearly for sale unless you can tell me with a straight face that all kids in this country get an equal shot at a good education. Health? Perhaps you've read that many drugs, including some necessary to support life, are in short supply because they've gone off patent and are in the public domain - which means the drug companies can't make as much money from them and so have discontinued their production.

The last straws, of course, were those who suggested justice as an unpurchasable commodity. This might have been before four San Francisco police, accompanied by two employees of Apple Corporation, invaded a citizen's home without a warrant in order to look for a lost iPhone prototype, which was not found. If a typical citizen tried that, I wonder what the outcome would have been. And let's not talk about high-priced lawyers.

Speaking of justice, does anyone seriously think that money doesn't play a part with folks like Lindsay Lohan, Charlie Sheen or any number of professional (oops, I mean college) athletes who seem to think the law is for "the little people," as Leona Helmsley called them? Is it a coincidence that the great majority of inmates in our prisons are poor or is it just that the poor are fundamantally morally inferior to the people at the top of the income ladder? Everyone knows wealthy people don't do drugs or mess with minors. Ask Roman Polanski. Prostitution? That's obviously something the rich don't do. They marry a number of times and throw exclusive parties in between.

We've mentioned patented drugs, but how about general medical care? Does money have anything to do with how long people live or how well? Why are there so many more doctors per capita in areas with very high incomes? Could it be that the system is rigged a little? Making a doctor go into hock for a couple of hundred grand is a great motivation for that doctor to look for places he can make the most money. Hint: this is not in the poor part of town.

The pat answer for this is that we have to allow free enterprise and "the market" to regulate our way of life. Since Cuba provides free education through medical school and since Cuba is a communist state, the thinking is that providing free medical training is communistic. Never mind that Denmark has a higher life expectancy than we do and its people register a higher level of happiness in life. Denmark is socialist!!!!!! Therefore what they do must be wrong. Look at their taxes!! The fact that most Danes think not having to worry about medical expenses, schooling or elder care might be worth the money has nothing to do with it. It's socialistic!!

O.K. I'm waiting for some blistering replies.