Agenda? Sheesh
I never wrote that there was a conflict of interest. That was you. She CHOSE to identify herself a certain way which lent credence to a identity as an innocuous military wife just posting a response to an article when, in fact, she is more than that.
She IS a journalist and she IS on the staff ("Researcher") of Anti.war.com and she WRITES for them. QED (Check out the right side of the page http://antiwar.com/who.php). Also a Nexix/Lexis search shows that she is a regular letter to the editor writer to the Washington Times
So, when posting here or writing there.....
Why be disingenuous? What is the purpose of the "deception"? Who benefits?
Waht's wrong with an agenda of haveing people say who they are?
If I were writing an article for "Dog Fanciers" magazine, the "about the author section" would read "owner of a Border Collie and a Featherhaired Retriever" -- not "regular poster to Free Republic" Why? Because what is most relevant facts to dog fanciers are the dogs I own, not my political views.
When Stella wrote for a military magazine, the most relevant fact to other military personnel reading the article was that she was "the wife of a career military officer", period. I really don't see how Stella described herself, as being the least bit deceptive.
Most of the writing endeavors you have described aren't even paying gigs (as in a professional journalist) I know, because I have written articles for similar sites -- and I also know that after having written one articles for one site three years ago, they still list my name as part of their "contributing staff" -- it's a joke really, intended by the owners of the site to make the website sound like it has more muscle than it really does. I haven't even talked to them in nearly a year.
The idea that "career military officer's wife" is "innocuous" and has no other vocation or interests is a very subjective (and sexist) call. And it is "a call" that -- in this internet age, is easily checked by anyone in about 30 seconds by loading her name into an internet search engine and finding out, just as you did.
Requiring full disclosure indicates that there was some possible conflict of interest or "hidden agenda" on Stella's part. I don't see it.
I actually think this whole discussion between you and me is a big tempest in a teapot.