And then there is big brother

Recent Pizza Order where the pizza company knows a bit too much about the caller. The funnyscary part is that we aren't all that far away from this scenario from being reality.

Chicago Live!

Next weekend, I'm taking jenny, Miriam and my G/F to see the play Chicago in San Jose. I'm not much for plays, but jenny asked that we take her as her b/d gift, so, we take her to a night full of singing and dancing and such. The last live performance I've gone to was a ballet of Nutcracker a few years ago. I'm not the hugest performing arts fan. Well, actually, I'm neither huge nor a fan. hehe

When I became a Christian

One of the most ridiculous phrases that Christian Fundelmentalists use is "When I became a Christian..." which is usually followed by some overly restated nonsense of something they've supposedly discovered since "becoming a Christian". To start off with, 99% of the people who use that phrase were born Christian. Most of them were prolly had a Christian baptism before they turned 18. In fact, I'd be willing to bet a large portion of them never even once changed from one Christian religion to another. These people use the phrase "When I became a Christian..." to intentionally mislead their audience into thinking they have had a pre-Christian life, so they can seem to have some legitimacy when they try to encourage others to convert to their own particular brand of Christianity. Additionally, as mentioned, "When I became a Christian..." is usually followed by some nonsense. It is nonsense because what they usually state is something universal to all Christian religions. Given the fact that most of these people are born into Christianity, it is unlikely they made any amazing (and by amazing, I mean to say extremely redundant) discoveries about their faith, having been taught the faith from birth. Trust me, when you grow up a Christian, nothing regarding faith is an amazing revelation cuz the faith is learnt at a very early age. In that scenerio, being amazed at some new discovery about one's faith is a bit like being amazed that one can spell a word one uses every day. (Of course, if someone has psychological problems, all bets are off. lol)
That is why for almost all Christian Fundamentalists, using this phrase is an intentional twofold lie.

Travel to the Present with Me

Bad Kitty, I like your intentionally provocative statement to my post of a Good Housekeeping article circa 1955, regardless of your context. I'm assuming your comment is taken from an S&M angle. I thought about addressing S&M tastes when I posted that article, to have some fun with it. However, I decided against it because the nature of the article was not mutual joy and respect for each other roles as tops and bottoms, but actual unhealthy degradation of women (the feminine) in general, which is something I stand firmly against.
However, if I'm misunderstanding you, please enlighten me.

fcsuper link whore

Here are the sites that I know have links to It's Trouble

Painfullycool - Not Me
Strange Cousin Susan
My Two Sen
Just Beneath the Surface
A New York Escorts Confessions
Just Call Me Naughty
Way Too Many Unruly Oranges
The Degenerate Speaks

Please let me know if It's Trouble appears on a blog not mentioned above. I'd like to have a complete a list. (I know of two other blogs where Its Trouble is listed, but they are inactive sites, so I'm not bothering to mention those.) I'd like to have a complete list cuz I'm considering the idea of having a blog roll of my favorite posts each month from blogs that backblog It's Trouble.

Federal Sentencing Guidelines Struck Down

The Supreme Court came along way to re-establishing the role of the Constitution of the United States of America this week in Federal criminal law. They struck down the mandatory use of the Federal Guidelines for sentencing of criminals because the system used evidence and accusations not tried before a jury, or any court of law for that matter. [Side note: Evidence that was thrown out of court during the criminal trial for being unproven or inadequate was often used in the sentencing phase anyway; which was extremely unconstitutional and undermined the authority of the court.]
There is one problem with the Supreme Court’s decision. The Supreme Court chickened out by determining that the system should be used as a recommendation for sentencing of criminals. This cop-out is due in part to the fact that several of the current members of the U.S. Supreme Court helped draft the unconstitutional system 20 years ago and they are still partial to it. Even with the abolishment of its mandatory nature, the continued use of the Federal Guidelines still undermines the Constitution. However, the overall decision by the Supreme Court is at least a step in the right direction.
I fear that the real lesson to be learned here is going to be lost on the politicians who are now scrambling to patchwork a congressional response to this groundbreaking decision. The real lesson is this, the U.S.A. should have a standard sentencing system for criminals, but that system should not use accusations and evidence that hasn’t been tried before a court, or been thrown out of court. All facets of sentencing should directly derive from facts presented at trial.
My hope for this country is that the Supreme Court will be more centralist and politically neutral at some point, allowing them to make untethered decisions that hold the Constitutional higher than extreme leftist and neo-conservative ideologies.

Problem with being a centralist is that I’ll prolly never be happy with anyone in power. My best hope is that the left and right are equally struggling against other. More equal and intense the struggle, the less likely our Government is going to be used to infringe on the rights of any persons protected by the U.S. Constitution. Right now, we are way out of balance.