It's not that I get blocked, really, so much as I don't always take the time to apply the correct kind of thought to this or that article or blog post to decide whether I can sustain enough opinion to write a blog post about it.
And then every once in awhile, an article - or in this case, an e-mail - grabs me by the collar and says "you have an opinion about this! YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY."
And about this e-mail, I certainly do.
Why does the President want to continue to hide illegal Thought Reading activities by the government under the ruse of ‘State Secrets?
Did we - the e-mailer, and I - just blow your tiny little mind? I thought so. You sit there, all comfy in your big glass-and-ivory tower, and you don't ask yourself these rhetorical questions. But we - the e-mailer, and I - we do. We think about it all the time. And we have some further questions.
Why did Obama hire so many Clinton employees in his White House, including Eric Holder who was in the Clinton Admin in when I was first abused by this technology? Why is Obama’s Admin so against holding government personnel responsible for crimes that they commit in office? [ed. note: Okay, this is actually a pretty good question.] Doesn’t a man who ran for President partly on the recommendation of his resume as a Constitutional Scholar KNOW that Thought Reading technology is anti-Constitutional against unlawful search and seizures?
You know what this is, don't you? Obama is an original intent scholar in disguise! There is no direct mention of thought-reading technology in the Bill of Rights, and therefore he doesn't believe that this is unconstitutional. If only there was some way we could have known that he felt this way prior to voting for him. It's too bad we can't read mi-oh ho ho, I see what you did there, sneaky.
I write as a U.S. citizen who has been subjected to thought reading technology & other tortures since 1994..I have been a victim for fifteen years. I have been remotely broadcast to, thought read, sleep deprived, had my heart palpitated and other techniques that I have heard fell under non-lethal microwave weapons programs. I believe that this technology supplies the intelligence that Attorney Mann reported to Michael Isikoff as being supplied to the D.O.J. under Attorney General-only approval and being back-doored through warrantless wiretaps; what Atty. Mann says some members of the D.O.J. have said is illegal.
Okay, look. The e-mailer was not shy about sharing hir personal data with this e-mail, including address and home phone number. This strikes me as an odd move for someone who has "no privacy, [and received] physical and verbal abuse and other threats." I'm most definitely not going to provide those identifying details, because it's quite clear to this layperson that ze is in very serious need of professional help. That's not going to stop me from publishing a post mocking several passages from it, however.
And here's the thing: I would still rather spend an afternoon ice-skating and/or shooting skeet with this e-mailer than spend five minutes with Andrew Breitbart.
Breitbart.tv -- published by Matt Drudge protégé Andrew Breitbart -- embedded a video with the headline "Shock Discovery: Community Organizers Pray TO President-Elect Obama"...
"Editor's note: We've updated this post with the longer version of the original event. As you'll see in the comments and related links there is a debate over what is actually being said. Does the crowd say, "Hear our cry, Obama" and "Deliver us Obama?" Or are they saying "Oh God?" In the longer version the first two repetitions seem to have a distinct "uh" sound at the end that resonates as "Obama." The later repetitions are a little fuzzier. Did some of the religious leaders present become uneasy? Or was there a mix of what was being said? Read some of the blogger analysis below. What do you think?"
I'm really not sure you want to know what I think, Editor.