Can Celebrities Be Invited To A Wedding?

I've had bourbon this afternoon and the Giants won.  That's the only explanation as to why I have spent 25 minutes and counting trying to craft a 140 character Tweet to convince Seamus Dever, Juliana Dever, and Nathan Fillion to come to my wedding.  I must be drunk, but so help me, these people are so much fun to watch on TV and follow on Twitter.   I'm convinced they are like me, only famous.  Wine, trivia, and nerdism?  Plus being on Castle?  I'm totally rooting for my sister to become a famous LA actress now just so I can hang out with these people, just because they seem like fun.  It would be like winning the lottery, only more awesome. 

Not that I'm a stalker or anything.  At least, I hope I'm not.  Can one be convinced of celebrity soulmates without sounding creepy? 

Do famous people ever get invited to weddings?  Wouldn't that make a damn good short story?  Or is that the bourbon talking? 

It's the bourbon.  But hey, life's short.  Plus, who wouldn't want to be invited to a wedding in Pacific Grove, California? 

So yeah, awesome creative types.  If you want to come to a wedding on the shores of the Monterey Bay in October, let me know.  We plan signature cocktails.  That's right, signature cocktails.  Also, fedoras.  Think Mad Men meets John Steinbeck by the sea.

Who's Occupying Occupy SF?

Last Monday, protestors linked to the Black Bloc element of the Occupy movement vandalized more than 30 businesses and several cars. Yeah, that's exactly the way to end systemic economic inequality.

The Occupy movement disavowed this element, much as they disavowed violent elements in protests in Oakland earlier in the movement. It's easy to disavow someone who is wearing a mask and is ostensibly anonymous, of course. A disclaimer may not be enough of a response. Occupy SF and Occupy Oakland need to be careful not to allow civil disobedience, or even anarchy, to be conflated with plain vandalism.

If you want to disavow people such as those who rampaged through Valencia Street, you need to help police expose these elements that have attached themselves to you like parasites. They discredit the entire movement. Violence against property of the very people you are trying to protect? To try to justify that as collateral damage in the service of freedom of expression, or as rage against oppression, is right out of Orwell, it seems to me. You say they are the "Black Bloc," and you try to ennoble them with this image of masked vigilantes, but this is not helpful, and it is dangerous, because it serves as the perfect shield for self-indulgent people using any excuse to break things. This isn't targeted; this isn't a political statement when you smash windows of the working class store owners.

Let's say you're correct, and that in some cases physical conflict is needed.  Even if this is so, violence should be limited, and you must understand the consequences.  It will alter perceptions of what you are fighting for.

Maybe these vandals aren't legitimate protestors. Fine. Maybe these are unhappy people who like breaking things. Maybe these are young kids, trust fund kids from Marin out for a thrill beyond panhandling on Haight Street before driving home in BMWs. I know they don't reflect the majority of sincere protestors. But you have cell phones with cameras. You can identify the bad elements. Yes, people who thoughtlessly damage the property of innocent bystanders are at the very least selfish, and while they may not be bad people inherently, they are a bad element in your group. Don't tell me you don't know who these people are. Even with masks, you will know who these people are, because you have seen them with regularity. You can figure out who they are.

It doesn't have to be a case of you versus authority with absolutely rigid boundaries; fight and protest authority when authority is abused; help establish authority when other elements, other protesters, abuse the rights of other people.