My Photo
In An Age Of Universal Deceit, Telling The Truth Is A Revolutionary Act.......George Orwell

Monday, February 20, 2017

Abbie Hoffman Moment

Friday, February 17, 2017

Through The Lens Of Siriunsun's Camera

Monday, February 13, 2017

Abbie Hoffman Moment

Sunday, February 12, 2017

More Retailers Drop Ivanka's Label

As an update to yesterday's post about Ivanka Trump's unprofitable brand name and Kellyann Conway's unethical promotion of the same via the White House, the news was shared by CNN earlier today that Sears and Kmart have also dropped Ivanka's goods from their stores. This is to be expected. Online sales of Ivanka's brand dipped 26% this past January by comparison to January of 2016. Brick and mortar stores have not done any better with it. There's no reason to continue wasting space on something that does not sell. Something that seems a bit convoluted and warped is the statement make by a senior marketer at "Ivanka Trump" Rosemary Young stated, "We believe that the strength of a brand is measured not only by the profits it generates, but by the integrity it maintains."

That's interesting. Every successful retailer measures its merchandise by the profits it generates. Elected officials, however; are measured by the integrity they maintain. It appears that the Trumps and their employees have mixed up priorities. At no time in Donald Trump's public life has integrity been a measure of anything he considers important. Generated profits, on the other hand, are a different matter, altogether to the Trumps.

Saturday, February 11, 2017

Kellyann Conway Ethics Violation

An interesting trend we often see when we have a republican president is that fashion also becomes more conservative and less lavish. If Ivanka was really that good at the business and planning aspect of her enterprise, she would have anticipated this. Recessions are much more common during Republican administrations, and Ivanka Trump should have updated her collections to reflect that phenomena. Nordstrom and a handful of other retailers that once carried Ivanka's label have taken the step of dropping her brand, due to slumping sales. Ivanka's paternal DNA unit, Donald Trump, noted businessman and Clown In Chief, feels otherwise. He thinks it is only spite, not a business decision, and has even taken time away from state decisions to tweet that Ivanka has been "treated unfairly!"

As if this nonsense was not enough for one day, Kellyann Conway jumped on Fox And Friends and plugged Ivanka's line! The fact that such an action violates CFR §2635.71, federal ethics law stating that one may not use public office for private gain. Conway's self described "free commercial" was inappropriate and unlawful. Reportedly, Donald Trump was displeased with her actions, but as Conway has not been "fired", we really do not know what "the donald" thinks; except that he has the notion that Nordstrom has an obligation to carry a line of clothing that does not sell. If Donald Trump is truly such a great businessman, he should know better.

This is an huge conflict of interest.  The White House is not a private market for womens' ready to wear, and it is also not the president's personal market place. Nor is it the personal market place of any member of his family. As for the contrast between "fair" and "unfair"; Trump should take a look at Kellyann Conway, and the fact that she has gotten away with violating an ethics law, and yet remains employed. He fired Department of Justice attorney, Sally Yates, for simply doing what is right, yet Conway gets a free ticket to do things that are wrong while she is at work. That's unfair.

Wednesday, February 8, 2017

Coretta Scott King's Letter

Yesterday, on the Senate floor, Mitch McConnell stopped Elizabeth Warren from reading a letter written by Coretta Scott King, the widow of Martin Luther King, Jr., in 1986 concerning Jeff Sessions, the man nominated by Donald Trump for the office of United States Attorney General. From 1981 to 1993, Sessions was an assistant state's attorney in Alabama. He failed to get confirmed as a federal judge in 1986 because of his consistent racist remarks, and unjust prosecution of blacks for voter fraud. The 1985 prosecution of three black men for tampering with fourteen ballots is one such case; all the defendants were acquitted. Coretta Scott King's letter outlined the problems Jeff Sessions has with minority races, and opposed his appointment to an office where equality and fairness are required. Her words are just as relevant today as they were in 1986. The only reasons Mitch McConnell would not want to hear them are a lack of interest in American citizens, and racism.

Here is Mrs. King's letter, that Mitch McConnell did not want read:

"I write to express my sincere opposition to the confirmation of Jefferson B. Sessions as a federal district court judge for the Southern District of Alabama. My professional and personal roots in Alabama are deep and lasting. Anyone who has used the power of his office as United States Attorney to intimidate and chill the free exercise of the ballot by citizens should not be elevated to our courts. Mr. Sessions has used the awesome powers of his office in a shabby attempt to intimidate and frighten elderly black voters. For this reprehensible conduct, he should not be rewarded with a federal judgeship.

I regret that a long-standing commitment prevents me from appearing in person to testify against this nominee. However, I have attached a copy of my statement opposing Mr. Sessions’ confirmation and I request that my statement as well as this be made a part of the hearing record.

I do sincerely urge you to oppose the confirmation of Mr. Sessions."

Tuesday, February 7, 2017

Laura McNish Racist

Okay, Laura McNish; you got your own way. My work is no longer displayed in the place where you saw it and got angry. It really doesn't make a difference to me, as I only did it to contribute to this community. What do you contribute? Have you amended seven years of falsely filed property taxes yet?

You know.......I heard, from an extremely reliable source, that you are on a mission to rid Marshall County Kansas of any and all bi-racial marriages, so much so that you interfere in the marriages of couples in which more that one race is involved during any proceeding, such as child custody or adoption, that involves the court. Is that so? Besides deviating from the first amendment, what will such harassment achieve? I guess that question is rhetorical, so I will provide the general public with an answer: you are a racist, and your goal is to drive anyone who is African, African American, Latin, Native American, Jewish or Middle Eastern, LGBT, or disabled out of Marshall County, Kansas. You have even been observed threatening to harass the administrators of local public schools for equal and just treatment of minorities.

Monday, February 6, 2017

Abbie Hoffman Moment

}, 10);