Going through email this am I opened a Twitter notice and discovered this was following me:

Marriage Works! Ohio 

@MarriageWorks 

Providing Life Skills for Lasting Relationships! We nurture the development of healthy relationships, marriages and families throughout Southwestern Ohio.

Dayton, Ohio · http://www.trustmarriage.com 

(!) So, I checked 'em out. They are an offshoot of  http://www.elizabethnewlife.org/
It took a while to discover that yet another slimy "Christian" entity using obscuring semantics as a cover for their real intent, has decided to follow me. Yuck. Why? To keep tabs on a guy posting not-so-favorable pictures and articles about Republicans on Twitter? Probably. And possibly to later o troll my posts and try to engage me in a "debate?" Again, probably.

Having dealt with these nut over the past decade or two, I have no interest in engaging them on any level, because they are irrational. They do not accept deductive logic or believe in biology. And I believe they would like to inflict their weird beliefs on society by making their beliefs into laws.

Anyway, I'll block 'em as soon as I post this as a warning on Twitter in the form of a URL to a blog. People who try to sidle up to me using semantics to try and hold my suspicions at bay as long as possible are dishonest and frankly, very creepy. It reminds me of the question: "Have you been saved?"

Yuk.

photo by Terrance McCormack 

Are we losing the very freedoms the Tea-party folks claim they want?

Findlaw article on the 4th amendment to the Constitution: http://goo.gl/7mWLe

Findlaw article on the 5th amendment to the Constitution amend http://goo.gl/DSfBt 

"nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"

These days the fourth and fifth amendments to the Constitution are just barely hanging on. The pertinent language of the fifth is above and the pertinent language of the fourth is "probable cause."
Where is the probable cause when African American youth are stopped on the street and frisked? How many people sit in jail for weeks or months awaiting trial and end up losing life, liberty or property as result?

The federal government is now frisking all of us on a daily basis without any real probable cause. How do I know that? Because if they had probable cause they'd be getting a warrant to search for the purpose of prosecuting the person being electronically or postaly frisked.

Their (government operatives') interest appears to not be attempting to arrest wrong doers but rather to get as much information as possible in order to what? Data-mine it? Store it against some potential future need?

Whatever their reason, the government bureaucrats with the assistance of elected officials routinely ignore fourth and fifth amendment rights. I'm sure in so doing that they've prevented crimes. Possibly crimes that would be at the very least, shocking. The problem is that they're trading security for freedom.

Open societies by their nature are subject to attack by unscrupulous individuals and organizations. There is a fine balance, though, between protecting people and causing those same people to lose the protections set up to guard individuals from the tyranny of the majority.

I just thought I'd point this increasingly scary fact out to people who might care.

Emperor Still Minus Clothing.

David Dickson wrote the following here.

"“Occupy” also made the [banished words] list, due to the Occupy Wall Street movement, which has sprouted up copycat groups nationwide, from Occupy Oakland to Occupy Ann Arbor." - my edit for clarity

No.  This is simply Bullshit.  "Occupy" may have made the list, but only an idiot or ideologue would state the rest.  There are no copycat groups. Occupy is a single movement of many people with some disparate goals, but an overall need to make the voice of Everyman/Everywoman as resonant as that of the wealthy.  That it has manifested nearly everywhere is due in part to lazy, sloppy, and biased reporting currently on offer.  In fact, I'd say that over time the so-called reporting inside articles such as the one above, has in no small way, added to the disparity as concerns income and to the faux claim of equal opportunity for all.  A claim that's for a long time now, been camouflage for the behind the scenes machinations of the powerful and their sycophant "news" organizations who make claims to be consumed by people who are so used to being marketed to, that they can no longer distinguish between fact and assertion.

Off that topic - slightly:

Opportunity still exists, but the powers that be have quietly erected barriers to entry so high, that the average person, even one with an advanced education, will find it more than just difficult to assault.  It's easier if you're tall, attractive and deep voiced - not to mention well-connected and very lucky.  But it's a lot more complex than just working hard or being lucky.  For instance, if you want to open a McDonalds franchise you will need to be in possession of over a million dollars of non-leveraged (unmortgaged) property in liquid form (cash, bonds, other securities) or don't bother.  Much the same is true of other non-franchise enterprises, but at least there you can borrow (from relatives - banks will laugh at you).  Thus taking your family down with you if you're underfunded for cash-flow emergencies (and almost everyone is - except those from wealthy families).

David then goes on to state:

"But the word and the movement’s message has been co-opted by the very corporate interests the Occupy movement stands against. "    

Another stinking pile.  Who equates Jay-Z's t-shirts with the Occupy movement other than a single lazy and sloppy reporter who makes sweeping unsupported statements such as the one above?  He's probably hoping to bullshit the easily bullshat citizenry still waiting to see clothes suddenly appear on the naked emperor.

Look, don't burn the goddamned flag!  I don't care how passionate a person is, committing some acts or using some language does more damage to your cause than any outsider possibly could.  You want the American public to embrace your movement?  Don't do or say anything that will cause the average Joe to think you're just another punk-ass, spoiled brat, ungrateful, parasite who is bound and determined to get someone else to pay/take responsibility.

Burning the US flag is not free speech.  It's stupid.  Using Communist or Socialist terminology or jargon such as "the peoples whatever," is equally stupid.  The Average American does not pay all that much attention in history or civics class.  Most just want to put in their time, graduate, drink beer and have sex.  They're not the least bit interested in politics or deductive logic.  Most, in fact, are much more likely to be interested in the existence of ghosts or zombies than any evidence that it's not possible for such things to exist.

They are, though, very susceptible to the claims of demagogues.  People who play on their emotions rather than presenting  cogent logical arguments supporting one abstract position or another.  So, when you behave in ways that allow the demagogues to say "see, I told you they were un-American," all you're doing is making the demagogues' lives easier and yours harder.  I don't care how good it feels to burn or damage some symbol, don't burn the fucking flag, moron!  it's stupid!

Zero.  As in nobody, not even bots are reading what I've written lately.  Okay, I'm not exactly a scintillating writer.  On the other hand, I might be worth a glance or two.  Maybe I should ask for donations?  Just about every source I read is asking for donations at the moment.  Some of them in ways that piss me off, like Democracy Now's flash screen that forces you to bypass it's not-very-subtle demand for moola.  Hell, those people have WAY more money than I do.  Instead of asking me for mine, they should be offering  me a share of theirs.  Anyway, I'm still concerned that I'm just wasting my time.

A shorty.  I found this article in a list of news articles I used Google notifications to read.  I often refer to myself as an independent or a left-leaning independent.  And according to the article, I must be right 'cause I don't really fit either list.  On the "liberal" list, I watch Masterpiece, but very rarely as most of the time when I dial up PBS, Antique Road Show is on.  I loathe that show.

As for the "conservative" list I watch CSI and Top Gear.

Actually, I think the report is probably so much bullshit.  Most of the "liberals" I know read.  The TV shows I'm aware of that "liberals" watch include such things as NOVA and shows on the Science channel, National Geographic channel and so on.  As for "conservatives" I'm less sure.  One that I know fits the description of cop shows but wouldn't watch a Barrett-Jackson auction for anything.

What else do I watch?  Movies.  In particular Science Fiction, adventure and thrillers. Favorite TV shows?  At the moment, Warehouse 13 and The Walking Dead.

In looking at my profile and then my previous post, I'm going to amend the politicized comment a bit.  As I said, the Occupy Wall Street movement is probably the most important political movement in the 21st century.  But how different is it from the Vietnam Veterans of America movement?  Not very in several aspects.  A lot of what motivated Vietnam vets to get involved with Bobby Mueller's organization had to do with jobs, income inequality and virtually no political voice in Washington.  At the time, the VFW and American Legion guys seemed to see VN vets as some sort of  second class bunch not fighting a war, but rather a "police action."  This despite night after night of gruesome battle footage on all three major networks.

So, how bad was unemployment?  Really bad.  I can't remember actual statistics anymore, but VN vet unemployment was probably double that of non vets or vets who no longer claimed to be vets.  But that's only part of it.  African American unemployment was staggering.  Something like 20%.  And Peurto Rican vets?  Almost double that of what were known then as Blacks (I note that the spell checker does not recognize "Peurto Rico.")

How 'bout education?  Well, by then the congress had pretty well stripped the GI Bill educational component.  Whereas a WWII vet could get tuition and books (not to exceed 500 dollars per year) and a monthly stipend, a Vietnam vet got a monthly allowance based on whether s/he was full time or part time.  In either case the monthly amount for the Vietnam era was absurd.  Nobody would have been able to go to school, raise a family and buy books/supplies on the pittance referred to.  Most vets were obliged to hold down a job while attending university or some other form of higher education and/or to borrow the money through student loans.

These factors and one other issue concerning veterans who were unable to appeal denials of compensation benefits except through the same VA boards that had denied them in the first place, motivated me to get involved.  But my horizon then was narrow and only involved the rights of Vietnam veterans.

So, now I'm re-engaged but at a much more intense level supporting the issues raised by Occupy Wall Street and other 99% movements.