Wednesday, June 06, 2007

Update on “Freedom of Speech, Denied”

Last September, in a post I titled Freedom of Speech, Denied, I noted that Karen Fletcher, whom I described as a writer of “revolting rot,” was being prosecuted for writing about the sexual and physical abuse of children.  Note, once again, that Ms. Fletcher was simply writing about this, not DOING this.

There has not been alot of news about this case available since September 2006.  In fact, the most recent news item I can find on the case was published May 10, 2007 by the Pittsburgh City Paper.

The piece does provide a bit of additional detail, and it does note that Ms. Fletcher is being represented by Lawrence Walters, whom the paper describes as “a nationally known First Amendment lawyer.”

I’ve not heard of Mr. Walters, but, I’ve not had the need of a First Amendment attorney, yet.

The piece also relates that the prosecuting attorney, one Mary Beth Buchanan, is also going after a company called Extreme Associates for obscenity.  That case was dismissed by one judge, only to have Mary Beth continue to hound the company for obscenity through the use of the appellate courts.

To make a long story short, Ms. Fletcher’s travails are currently continuing due to Mary Beth Buchanan’s attitude, which goes something like this.

The fact that the stories were ficticious is irrelevant, Buchanan said last fall.

I stand, firmly, with what I stated last September when I first posted on this subject.

What is at issue, here, is the denial of freedom of speech, plain and simple.  The speech being protected may be disturbing, it may be down right disgusting, and may appeal to the lowest form of humankind which can walk upright and supposedly think, but it is still the denial of freedom of speech.

The Pittsburgh City Paper titles the story Dirty Words.

Posted by John Venlet on 06/06 at 03:41 PM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Credit Ratings For Sale

Do you know your credit score?  Did you know that if your credit score is high enough, say above 750, you just might be able to make some money from that fact?

Only a low credit score stood between Alipio Estruch and a mortgage to buy a $449,000 Spanish-style house in Weston, Fla., a few miles west of Fort Lauderdale.

Instead of spending several years repairing his credit rating, which he said was marred by two forgotten cell phone bills and identity theft, the 37-year-old real estate agent paid $1,800 to an Internet-based company to bump up his score almost overnight.

The article continues further in.

Instantcreditbuilders.com, or ICB, helped Estruch boost his score by arranging for him to be added as an authorized user on several credit cards of people with stellar credit who were paid to allow this coattailing. Parents also use this practice when they add their children to their credit cards to help them build solid credit.

This bit of information of course has many lenders up in arms, whining for legislation, natch, and let’s not neglect to mention that the major credit bureaus are also a bit perturbed.

If you want to sell your excellent credit rating for profit, though, you had better hurry.  Fair Issac is re-tooling their software, as are the three major credit bureaus, to combat this loophole.

‘Piggybacking’ roils credit industry

Posted by John Venlet on 06/06 at 02:39 PM
(0) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Good Question with Good Answer

Writing at Townhall.com, John Stossel titles a piece Why Is Profit a Dirty Word?

From the piece.

When did profit become a dirty word?”

I wish the oil executives would face the media. They could say something like:

“What are you complaining about? What do you think we do with our profits? Buy fancy cars and homes? Well, we do, actually, but nearly all the money goes to looking for more oil and following environmental rules that you want us to follow. You should want us to make more profit. Anyway, we make less profit per gallon than your beloved government takes in taxes.”

But Big Oil never shouts back at the reporters. I guess I can’t blame them, given the hostility of the economically ignorant media.

The “economically ignorant media.”  Good answer, and I might add that the economically ignorant media passes their ignorance on, in buckets full, to the economically ignorant public.

Posted by John Venlet on 06/06 at 02:27 PM
(2) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink

Well, That Was Interesting, I Guess

It seems I did not have all my ones and zeroes in line, after all.  The ole laptop has not been communicating well, today, with my wireless router so I’ve replaced cables, reset the modem, the router and what not.  I truly dislike having to mess with this tech stuff.

Posted by John Venlet on 06/06 at 02:23 PM
(1) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages