Please wait, your request is processed...

lafemme

Recent comments by this user

Obama's Faith-Based Plan

Very good point about not interpreting legal terms based on literal understanding. The separation clause has been under constant attack since fundamentalism began impacting presidential policy since the 1980s, not to mention the so-called "originalists" on the Supreme Court. We wouldn't even be having this discussion if the line hadn't been blurred. Obama should start there as his premise and explain how his efforts are distinguishable and wouldn't continue to violate this essential right - that is, if he really is the "change" candidate. posted 07/02/2008 at 15:27:43

An Obama supporter by necessity, I think this initiative is problematic at best. Yes, our morality is codified in our laws as it relates to basic rights, but to use it in way that obfuscates the line between religion and government is disturbing UNLESS, as someone mentioned, it is handled with utmost transparency, and there is immediate redress for when it slips into prohibited areas. On peripherally related note, I always thought the churches previously associated with Obama would be penalized based on their use of the pulpit to promote Obama's political campaign - our tax laws are designed such that religious organizations are relieved of tax obligations based on their purely religious purposes. Once that line is crossed, it seems, at the very least, they should be taxed accordingly. Federal support for faith-based initiatives should be pulled the second they veer off-course, if they should do so. posted 07/02/2008 at 13:46:38

Defending Wes Clark

And to say that which we've all been thinking for a while, anyway. posted 07/01/2008 at 16:13:28

McCain has been getting free ride through scrutiny-land purely based on his military service, and I still wonder why he is so untouchable. Obviously, he deserves much praise and honor for the service, but to use it as basis not to examine his record is another journalistic failure. Predictable that the media takes one sentence of an entire paragraph of truth-speaker General Clark's statement and creates a headline out of whole cloth. Instead, the media prefers to dub McCain a "maverick" despite his clear flip-flopping on every issue previously distinguishing him from his brethren. posted 07/01/2008 at 12:51:20

Bush Gives Dems STDs

Administration is lawless and hateful, but even worse is the Democratic leadership that puts up with "terrorist-loving" and other Administration spin, then cow-tows to Administration's requests. Eunuchs, all - even that very unstateswoman leader, Ms. Pelosi. Certain powerful mainstream media outlets have become as establishment as the politicos they report upon, pontificating in their own similar bubble of disconnect from what is actually happening in the world of everyday citizens. There's no excuse for this. The media culprits must regain self-criticism inherent in good journalism. Recall their defensiveness when called to task for their reporting on the primary and overall response to Scott McLellan's book (criticizing them for same reasons) to see how far they've strayed. The government and these media outlets are almost indistinguishable. posted 06/20/2008 at 11:28:26

Ignore The Failed Former Oilman In Front of the White House

Thanks for the explanation. Unbelievable. posted 06/19/2008 at 19:54:39

An article published recently stated that both Bush and Cheney are hundreds of millions of dollars richer (Cheney, in particular) due to their energy/oil investments after eight years in office. I thought public officials, particularly when they are directing policy in these fields, are expected to divest their investments before taking office. What happened here? Just one more feather in their cap to make the American public feel stupider for allowing them to be in office for two terms straight? posted 06/19/2008 at 09:33:20

Is America Ready for Another White Male President?

The time for the white man to lead exclusively has come and gone. It wasn't so much the primary campaigns that brought that to the fore as much as the exclusively white-man-political-punditry. Truth is the punditry was not comprised solely of white men, but it might as well have been since talking points always matched up and were limited in quantity, and no one came to an original conclusion the entire time. Perhaps it was because they all worked for corporations run by . . . almost exclusively white men.

The same could be said for the many supposedly patrician-type leaders in Congress and on the national scene who mirrored each other's statements to little avail. Ah, but I digress . . . . posted 06/16/2008 at 14:53:56

Hooked on Hillary

Every Democratic patrician suggesting that Hillary step aside from the race now that she is doing better than ever just betrays the eunuch-contingent of the party. Bring it to the convention, as someone posted below. Time to teach the country about the process that goes beyond pundit talking points and learn what American democracy is all about. Both candidates and the party, itself, will be the better for it. posted 03/31/2008 at 14:29:52