Carmen Bassin 
Member since Feb 24, 2011

Recent Comments

Re: “Animal house

I had a hard time with this piece. It was well written and informative, unsentimental and direct, so that wasn't it. And not because of politics...I am not judging or moralizing about hunting or taxidermy, but reading about this process did strike me personally. I just kept thinking how odd (for me) it seems to go to all that trouble to kill something and then go to even more trouble to make it look like it is alive. And then I couldn't get the vision of a human morgue out of my mind imagining lifeless people being manipulated into life-like poses instead of deer and antelope playing at being alive while dead. Well, whatever....this article, in all it's detail and obvious respect for the artists and their craft, still left me with a feeling of loss. But not one that I expect anyone else to feel or would condemn if they didn't feel. It is entirely personal.

Posted by Carmen Bassin on 11/08/2011 at 8:17 PM

Re: “Endorsements 2011

If you accept the original premise that money and free speech are interchangeable then of course you will support the Citizen's United ruling. You don't hear a great outcry of horror from businesses regarding this whacky logic. And the last time I looked, The Independent is a business.

Now I know I'm just a simple real life human being who grew up thinking free speech was about the freedom to express myself through the spoken or written word. If this issue was simply about restricting that sort of speech, where actual words come out of a person's mouth, than yeah, nobody wants to infringe on that right. But here, political speech is money, lots and lots and lots of money and corporations are now persons---and that is the leap of logic that I cannot seem to overcome, despite it being deemed appropriate by the greatest court in the land and endorsed by The Independent.

Let's not forget the eloquent dissent written by Justice Stevens and joined by Ginsburg, Breyer and Sotomayer that spoke about how this decision was a rejection of the common sense of the American people who have recognized the corrupting influence of corporate electioneering for some time now. "It is a strange time to repudiate that common sense. While American democracy is imperfect, few outside the majority of this Court would have thought its flaws included a dearth of corporate money in politics."

Common Sense. I wonder how the majority on the Court would define that.

So explain to me again, how this ruling is good for me. How, by allowing unfettered corporate influence on our election process in the form of free speech/money somehow upholds my own individual rights to free speech/talking. And how inferring personhood on corporations somehow protects me from the potential corruption of the press/media being used as a propaganda machine?

I have to say, so far the only thing protecting me from Fox News is how I use my remote control.



Posted by Carmen Bassin on 10/30/2011 at 9:11 AM

Re: “etc.

This issue of religious symbols erected on public land is going to the Supreme Court this month via Utah Highway Patrol Association v. American Atheists. I guess in Utah they erect 12 foot high crosses along highways commemorating state troopers killed in the line of duty. Crosses taller than an upright grizzly bear...

http://www.scotusblog.com/?p=130301

Posted by Carmen Bassin on 10/29/2011 at 10:04 AM

Re: “Pat Williams on "outright lies, blatant theft, and political skullduggery"

...and what does the President mean when he says these troops are being ordered home??? The troops come back to the US and then what? Deployed to Afghanistan? North Africa? Very cagey language. Just because they are coming home doesn't mean they are staying home...more lies and political skulduggery for sure. Nothing a politician says can be taken at face value....nothing.

Posted by Carmen Bassin on 10/26/2011 at 9:04 PM

Re: “Jane, meet Dick. Jane, be Dick.

....and I also got a kick out of the king of queens cover...very clever

Posted by Carmen Bassin on 10/21/2011 at 2:34 PM

Re: “Jane, meet Dick. Jane, be Dick.

I really loved this story. It took me by pleasant surprise. When Spritzer is introduced I’m thinking this is kind of strange for a drag queen…because when I think of drag I don’t think of a drag king…how refreshing, entertaining and informative this piece turns out to be. Completely enjoyable.


The telling of it is done in a straightforward and unsentimental manner and yet it is filled with powerful conviction that is emotional without being whiny or bitter or self-pitying. There is brashness but it is not the in your face, I am gay hear me roar kind although there is a steady rumble throughout which oozes confidence and equality.


I like how it’s about sexuality without any mention of sex. I like the history lesson that teaches how our puritan principles have bungled the message. The last line, if it were complete would be love thy neighbor as thyself…the golden rule so to speak. Although a little cliché and dramatic, it does tie in perfectly with the minister’s family embracing and loving this child of theirs luckily realizing that sexuality is not the core essence of a person and that the metaphors in the bible are better understood when not taken so literally.

I hope it gets a lot of positive response. Great writing.

Posted by Carmen Bassin on 10/21/2011 at 1:55 PM
Posted by ucantmakeitup on 10/19/2011 at 2:39 PM

All Comments »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
 

© 2014 Missoula News/Independent Publishing | Powered by Foundation