Where Are They Now?

Occasionally, a television program will check in with a former, high-profile person, who has either fallen from public view, or has regained media attention for a different reason.  Perhaps it is a former professional athlete, who is working a regular job, or a movie star dealing with drug addiction.  Who can forget former/current lead singer from Van Halen, working as an EMT?  These are considered human interest stories and they help to illustrate how fragile position is, once you rise to the top.

These type of stories happen all around us, every day, but never make the news.  But that's not what I want to write about today.  Today, I want to write about inconsistency, something we all exhibit at times, often without realizing it.

I tend to be somewhat obsessive.  If I believe in something, I believe in it all the way, until I'm given ample evidence my belief is mistaken.  As an example, I believe in being nice to people, regardless of my mood, or how they treat me.  Although it is difficult at times, I make an effort to restrain my urges, smile and walk away.

When someone is inconsistent in their beliefs or actions, I feel the need to point it out.  This is why I make a habit of pointing out people, who have declared acceptance of a particular religion, when they commit acts inconsistent with their expressed beliefs.  Therein lies my own inconsistency; I enjoy doing something that can hardly be considered "being nice".  I'm not perfect, just shaved, or at least my neck is.

Just a few weeks ago, before captured Boston Marathon bombing suspect, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had arrived at the hospital to be treated for his wounds, Republican lawmakers were urging this U.S. citizen be declared as an enemy combatant.  Amongst the early demands were those from Senators Graham (R-SC), McCain (R-AZ), Ayotte (R-NH) and Representative King (R-NY).  Others jumped on this bandwagon, which was halted quickly by President Obama's announcement that the suspect would not be declared an enemy combatant.  In the following days, others came out criticizing this decision, including Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN).

Now we see reports that the FBI has thwarted a potential terrorist attack in Minnesota, by a convicted felon, also a U.S. citizen.  This potential terrorist was allegedly in possession of pipe bombs, other explosive devices and firearms, including a Romanian AKM assault rifle.  Currently, this man is being held for the crime of a convicted felon in possession of a firearm, while the investigation is underway.  Here is a link to a detailed story, since today this story has disappeared from the news:  Montevideo man's terror attack against police foiled, FBI says. 

The question I need to ask is where are all those Republican demands today?  Why have there been no calls for this man to be treated as an enemy combatant?  Why has no member of Congress stated "extreme interrogation techniques" should be used to determine the extent of this conspiracy?  Where is Rep. Bachmann on this, a potential attack that threatened her home state and the people she is being paid to represent?  Where are the demands this person's rights need to be ignored in the interest of fighting terrorism?

Are there degrees to terrorism?  Is an attack that kills and injures innocent bystanders somehow worse depending on the nationality, race or religion of the terrorist?  Is a deluded, white supremacist felon somehow a better person than an educated Muslim extremist?  And the question that will never be asked:  How is it possible for a convicted felon to come into possession of multiple firearms?

If you're an elected official, try to be consistent.  Either demand Buford Rogers be given enemy combatant status, or admit that your reactions were simply an expression of your belief in the rightness of racism.