Eva Longoria wants our new president to address immigration and she’s ready to stand up and fight for her homeland of Mexico."First things first, our country is in a really tough position right now and I think definitely immigration will be addressed and I will be there to make sure that we're protected," Longoria told Tarts at a recent party.
And is it about time we devoted our resources to our neighboring land rather than pouring funds globally?
"It is unfortunate that we spend so much time as Americans all over the world, and we need to really focus a lot of our energy on our front porch which is Mexico and I hope that we'll be able to bring more attention to the a lot of the poverty and illiteracy and the educational programs in Mexico," the Desperate Housewives starlet added. "I would definitely love to help, we're going to be doing a charity in Mexico City next year and we're going to gather a lot of star power from Mexico and raise a lot of money for educational programs."
Her Homeland??
This dork was born in Texas, and it’s sure bet it was long after the Alamo.
So let’s take her down to the border, strip her of her U.S. credentials, give her a bottle of water, a tampon and a Pez dispenser and toss her over the fence.
Back to her “homeland”.
Muy Estúpida
Rosario Dawson intends to be a mom one day, but when her little ones do naughty things, the actress says she doesn’t believe in yelling — just torturing with her tongue."I think licking is a really great way of disciplining your child. It's definitely a lot better than screaming at them," Dawson told Tarts while promoting her new indie flick Explicit Ills which explores the somber state of the American health care system. "My mom did it to me for punishment, she loves to say that I came [from her] so she can do anything that she wants to me in public. If I was acting out or talking up or just being a precocious child as I was she would lick me and my face in front of all her friends."
Fox News
Fuck.
ideology and crisis
ReplyDeleteThe current economic crisis, coming, as it does, at the end of the dogmatically reactionary Bush administration, is opening the door to a new dialogue about the nature of capitalism, and the role of the state. Not since the sixties has there been the opportunity for such a far-reaching and essential look at our social arrangements, our economic system, and our political process. Since Reagan, who brilliantly took the country so far right that centrist democrats like Clinton looked like progressive visionaries, a truly progressive agenda has been totally on the margin.
Taking up the mantle of reaction, Bush postulated the perfect, in-itself, connection between democracy and capitalism. Free enterprise and political democracy were meant to be one in the same system. Any attempt to move the economy in a more compassionate direction was transformed into a challenge to democracy. As long as the economy, at least on the surface, was marching forward, this democracy is free enterprise and free enterprise is democracy formulation held sway. The collapse of the banking system, not from a socialist revolution, or a natural calamity, but under its own weight, is a wake up call to even the most jaded observer. The old saws, now being hoisted up absurdly by the House Republicans, that all we need is less taxation, less spending, is just not going to fly. People losing jobs and houses and health care and pensions are not convinced that these very real hardships are being caused by too much spending on social programs or raising the tax rate a few points. They know they were screwed by people who got rich at their expense, with the blessing of the government. This is not a marginal, radical opinion, everyone sees it.
How do we constructively engage this new situation? For all his fits and starts, I still am encouraged by Barack Obama and his willingness to put all the issues on the table. He and his financial team do not have an answer to the banking debacle yet, and there may not be one that is not without a lot of pain. But he is still laying out his vision on education, and health care. While the chattering class calls this over-reaching hubris, I think he is absolutely correct to say that these issues are all related, and that we cannot move forward without addressing them all on a macro level. This is truly daunting to the entrenched interests and they will fight back with all they have, and in every arena. It will get ugly. We need to support the full and far-reaching vision that will be necessary to get us out of this hole, and to a more viable society.
Germain,
ReplyDeleteThis is not "germain" to the topic. While we don't agree with your point(s) - by a long shot - we're posting it anyway because it's well-written.
Feel free to comment on a relevant post (something about Obama) and we'll be happy to rake you over the coals, point-by-point, but put another one in the wrong place and we'll probably reconsider posting it.
"Hola! Estúpida"
Don't let it be you.