Archive for the ‘Business’ Category
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CRIME, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, FACEBOOK, GUN CONTROL, MARTIN LUTHER KING, MISSISSIPPI ATTORNEY GENERAL MIKE MOORE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SECOND AMENDMENT, SELF-DEFENSE, SLATE, STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAWS, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. CONSTITUTION, U.S. NAVY SEALS, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUITS
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on February 19, 2018 at 12:19 am
The victims of the violence are black and white, rich and poor, young and old, famous and unknown. They are, most important of all, human beings whom other human beings loved and needed. No one—no matter where he lives or what he does— can be certain who will suffer from some senseless act of bloodshed. And yet it goes on and on.
–Robert F. Kennedy, April 4, 1968
Senator Robert F. Kennedy announcing the murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
What should the surviving victims of gun massacres do to seek redress?
And how can the relatives and friends of those who didn’t survive seek justice for those they loved?
Two things:
First, don’t count on politicians to support a ban on assault weapons.
Politicians—with rare exceptions—have only two goals:
- Get elected to office, and
- Stay in office.
And too many of them fear the economic and voting clout of the NRA to risk its wrath.
Consider Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama.
Both rushed to offer condolences to the surviving victims of the massacre at the Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado, on July 20, 2012.
And both steadfastly refused to even discuss gun control—let alone support a ban on the type of assault weapons used by James Holmes, leaving 12 dead and 58 wounded.
Second, those who survived the massacre—and the relatives and friends of those who didn’t—should file wrongful death, class-action lawsuits against the NRA.
There is sound, legal precedent for this.
- For decades, the American tobacco industry peddled death and disability to millions and reaped billions of dollars in profits.
- The industry vigorously claimed there was no evidence that smoking caused cancer, heart disease, emphysema or any other ailment.
- Tobacco companies spent billions on slick advertising campaigns to win new smokers and attack medical warnings about the dangers of smoking.
- Tobacco companies spent millions to elect compliant politicians and block anti-smoking legislation.
- From 1954 to 1994, over 800 private lawsuits were filed against tobacco companies in state courts. But only two plaintiffs prevailed, and both of those decisions were reversed on appeal.
- In 1994, amidst great pessimism, Mississippi Attorney General Mike Moore filed a lawsuit against the tobacco industry. But other states soon followed, ultimately growing to 46.
- Their goal: To seek monetary, equitable and injunctive relief under various consumer-protection and anti-trust laws.
- The theory underlying these lawsuits was: Cigarettes produced by the tobacco industry created health problems among the population, which badly strained the states’ public healthcare systems.
- In 1998, the states settled their Medicaid lawsuits against the tobacco industry for recovery of their tobacco-related, health-care costs. In return, they exempted the companies from private lawsuits for tobacco-related injuries.
- The companies agreed to curtail or cease certain marketing practices. They also agreed to pay, forever, annual payments to the states to compensate some of the medical costs for patients with smoking-related illnesses.
The parallels with the NRA are obvious:
- For decades, the NRA has peddled deadly weapons to millions, reaped billions of dollars in profits and refused to admit the carnage those weapons have produced: “Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.” With guns.
- The NRA has spent millions on political contributions to block gun-control legislation.
- The NRA has bitterly fought background checks on gun-buyers, in effect granting even criminals and the mentally ill the right to own arsenals of death-dealing weaponry.
- The NRA has spent millions on slick advertising campaigns to win new members and frighten them into buying guns.
- The NRA has spent millions attacking political candidates and elected officials who warned about the dangers of unrestricted access to assault and/or concealed weapons.
- The NRA has spent millions pushing “Stand Your Ground” laws in more than half the states, which potentially give every citizen a “license to kill.”
- The NRA receives millions of dollars from online sales of ammunition, high-capacity ammunition magazines, and other accessories through its point-of-sale Round-Up Program—thus directly profiting by selling a product that kills about 30,288 people a year.
- Firearms made indiscriminately available through NRA lobbying have filled hospitals with casualties, and have thus badly strained the states’ public healthcare systems.
It will take a series of highly expensive and well-publicized lawsuits to significantly weaken the NRA, financially and politically.
The first ones will have to be brought by the surviving victims of gun violence—and by the friends and families of those who did not survive it. Only they will have the courage and motivation to take such a risk.
As with the cases first brought against tobacco companies, there will be losses. And the NRA will rejoice with each one.
But, in time, state Attorneys General will see the clear parallels between lawsuits filed against those who peddle death by cigarette and those who peddle death by armor-piercing bullet.
And then the NRA—like the tobacco industry—will face an adversary wealthy enough to stand up for the rights of the gun industry’s own victims.
Only then will those politicians supporting reasonable gun controls dare to stand up for the victims of these needless tragedies.
2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CENSORSHIP, CHEATSHEET, CNN, COMMUNICATIONS, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, FACEBOOK, FACEBOOK JAIL, FAMILY VALUES, FORTUNE, JOE BARTON, MARK ZUCKERBERG, MICHAEL MARTIN, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, RUSSIAN TROLLS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOCIAL MEDIA WEBSITES, SPAM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on January 25, 2018 at 10:39 am
Years ago, Michael Martin, a Los Angeles-based computer repair expert, offered me some advice I have found absolutely essential.
“When you call Technical Support,” he said, “they’re accessing the same information you can get via the computer.
“Most of the time they’re going to have you put the Restore Disk back into the computer and restore it back to default. It wipes out everything on your computer. Technical support costs a lot of money for a company—to hell with your data.
“Be very cautious when you get on the phone with any computer company and they advise you to run the Restore Disk.”
Michael Martin
What Martin said about the unwillingness of computer companies to provide technical support applies just as much to social media websites.
Consider the case of Facebook, the largest social media and networking service. According to its “Newsroom,” it had more than 1.37 billion daily active users on average for September 2017.
Such a huge audience attracts advertisers. And this, in turn, has armed Facebook with total assets of $64.961 billion (2016). These revenues have given its founder, Mark Zuckerberg, an estimated net worth of $75.2 billion.
Yet, for all the billions pouring into Facebook’s coffers, the company refuses to provide a way for its users to directly contact Facebook headquarters.
This may not seem important. But the following case will demonstrate why it is.
A short while ago, a friend of mine (whom I’ll call Janet) sent Zuckerberg a letter, which opened:
“Today while chatting with someone on Facebook I found myself bounced from the page. I was instructed to log in again. When I did so, I got the following message:
| |
Secure Your Account
Hi Janet, we think your computer is infected with malware, and it’s spreading spam through your Facebook account. We’ll walk you through a few steps to explain more and scan your computer for malware.
|
“Naturally, my first reaction was to contact Facebook to find out what, exactly, was meant by Spam. I quickly found, however, that although Facebook’s customers like me have made you a billionaire, they aren’t considered important enough to be provided with direct support for resolving problems like this.
“All that I could do was put a message on file with your ‘Report a Login Issue’ page. I received no response, so I sent another. This, too, has gone unanswered.
“At the bottom of the ‘Report a Login Issue’ page is this: “Thanks for taking the time to submit a report. While we don’t reply to every report, we’ll let you know if we need more details.”
“In short, even after a customer puts a help-request on file with Facebook, s/he has no guarantee that s/he will even receive the courtesy of a reply, let alone the help needed to resolve the problem.
“Is this really what you are proud to call customer service?
“I think it’s entirely appropriate to ask people I don’t know—and who want to roam freely through my computer—exactly what it is they believe is Spam. Because if it isn’t Spam, there’s no reason for them to be roaming freely through my computer.”
Mark Zuckerberg
Janet never received a reply from Zuckerberg—nor from anyone subordinate to him.
Facebook is still the most popular social platform on the Internet. At one time, AOL was the big dog on the block, too. And an April 13, 2015 article on CheatSheet warned that history could repeat itself: “Three Reasons Young People Think Facebook is Lame.”
So did a second article, published in Fortune on April 7, 2016: “Facebook Users Are Sharing Fewer Personal Updates and It’s a Big Problem.”
No doubt a major reason for this is the arrogance of Facebook’s censors.
Another friend of mine—Jim—recently got kicked off Facebook after getting this notice:
The offending post was a news story about Texas Congressman Joe Barton. It described how he had sent a series of smarmy emails to numerous women—while, of course, posing as a paragon of “family values.”
Jim sent a letter to Facebook’s headquarters at 1 Hacker Way, Menlo Park, California 94025.
“If Facebook is going to hold its users to a set of standards, those standards should be clearly and specifically posted. Certainly a legitimate news story—no matter on what the subject—should fall within allowable posting guidelines. But apparently Facebook’s anonymous censors do not agree.
“Facebook functions the way the gods of the ancient Greeks were believed to act: In a totally arbitrary manner, whose decisions, however unwarranted, are beyond appeal.”
Many Facebook users have described—on Facebook—how they have been put in “Facebook jail.” One user offended censors by his too-frequent use of the “Like” option. How this violated Facebook’s terms of service was never explained.
During the 2016 Presidential election, Russian trolls used Facebook, Twitter and Google to post misleading articles and comments. These may well have influenced the outcome of that election.
As a result, these companies are now under widening Congressional investigation.
This is no time for social media companies to needlessly offend those who make their profits a reality.
"HAMILTON", ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BLOOMBERG, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BLUESKY, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HILLARY CLINTON, HUFFINGTON POST, JAMES COMEY, JOHN OLIVER, MEDIA MATTERS, MERYL STREEP, MIKE PENCE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEIL YOUNG, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER RULES, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, X
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on January 24, 2018 at 12:07 am
On May 9, 2017, President Donald Trump abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey.
Reports soon surfaced that his reason for doing so was that Comey had refused to pledge his personal loyalty to Trump.
Just 72 hours after firing Comey, Trump issued a threat to him via Twitter: “James Comey better hope that there are no ‘tapes’ of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!”
And Twitter’s reaction to such a blatant threat?
Silence.
James B. Comey
From the start of his Presidency, Trump has put his ambitions, excuses and rants on social media. And this has unnerved foreign leaders as well as Trump’s fellow Americans.
As CNN Political Analyst Julian Zelizer outlined in a July 3 article:
“Putting aside the specific content of the recent blasts from the Oval smart phone, the President’s ongoing Twitter storms make all leaders uneasy. The heads of government in most nations prefer a certain amount of predictability and decorum from other heads of state.
“To have one of the most powerful people in the room being someone who is willing to send out explosive and controversial statements through social media, including nasty personal attacks or an edited video of him physically assaulting the media, does not make others….feel very confident about how he will handle deliberations with them.”
On December 12, 2017, Trump used Twitter to attack New York United States Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.
Kirsten Gillibrand
Gillibrand was among six Democratic senators who called for Trump’s resignation after sexual harassment allegations forced three Republican and Democratic members of Congress to resign.
Trump tweeted: “Lightweight Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a total flunky for Chuck Schumer and someone who would come to my office ‘begging’ for campaign contributions not so long ago (and would do anything for them), is now in the ring fighting against Trump. Very disloyal to Bill & Crooked-USED!”
“I see it as a sexist smear. I mean that’s what it is,” Gillibrand replied in a press conference. “It’s part of the President’s efforts of name calling and it’s not going to silence me, it’s not going to silence me. It’s intended to silence me.”
So how does this behavior apply to “The Twitter Rules”?
Abuse: You may not engage in the targeted harassment of someone, or incite other people to do so. We consider abusive behavior an attempt to harass, intimidate, or silence someone else’s voice. [Italics added.]
On February 17, 2017, Trump tweeted: “The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!”
On July 2, 2017, Trump tweeted a video showing him punching a man with the CNN logo superimposed on his head during a WWE wrestling match.
And on August 15, the President retweeted a cartoon photo of a “Trump Train” running over a CNN reporter.
Yet Twitter’s Terms of Service state:
Hateful imagery and display names: You may not use hateful images or symbols in your profile image or profile header. You also may not use your username, display name, or profile bio to engage in abusive behavior, such as targeted harassment or expressing hate towards a person, group, or protected category. We will begin enforcing this rule on December 18, 2017. [Italics added.]
So how do Twitter’s top executives justify allowing these repeated violations of “Twitter Rules”? On September 25, the company tweeted:
“We hold all accounts to the same Rules, and consider a number of factors when assessing whether Tweets violate our Rules.
“Among the considerations is ‘newsworthiness’ and whether a Tweet is of public interest. This has long been internal policy and we’ll soon update our public-facing rules to reflect it. We need to do better on this, and will.”
Twitter has never acknowledged publicly that Trump has violated any of its guidelines. It rarely even acknowledges Trump’s tweets.
So what gives?
Money.
Trump’s apologists have fiercely defended his tweetstorms, claiming they allow him to bypass the media and “communicate directly with the American people.”
One of those apologists is former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, who said: “I believe it’s really important to have these conversations out in the open, rather than have them behind closed doors.”
Jack Dorsey
In April, 2017, Twitter announced that it had added 9,000,000 new users, its largest quarter-over-quarter jump in two years.
“We believe Twitter is the best at showing you what’s happening in the world and what’s being talked about,” said Anthony Noto, Twitter’s chief financial officer.
“Having political leaders of the world as well as news agencies participating and driving that is an important element to reinforcing what we’re the best at.”
In short: Trump is good at attracting more Twitter users. and if the company needs to overlook his blatant and repeated violations of its “Twitter Rules,” so be it.
Twitter has been so plagued by trolling that potential investors like the Walt Disney Company refused to taint their own reputations by partnering with it.
But that hasn’t led high-ranking Twitter executives to end their Faustian pact with the biggest Twitter troll of all.
And, as all devotees of the Faust legend know, there comes a time when the Devil wins the bargain.
"HAMILTON", ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BLOOMBERG, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BLUESKY, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HILLARY CLINTON, HUFFINGTON POST, JAMES COMEY, JOHN OLIVER, MEDIA MATTERS, MERYL STREEP, MIKE PENCE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEIL YOUNG, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER RULES, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, X
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on January 23, 2018 at 12:04 am
According to “The Twitter Rules,” posted on the Twitter website:
We believe in freedom of expression and open dialogue, but that means little as an underlying philosophy if voices are silenced because people are afraid to speak up.
In order to ensure that people feel safe expressing diverse opinions and beliefs, we prohibit behavior that crosses the line into abuse, including behavior that harasses, intimidates, or uses fear to silence another user’s voice.
Context matters when evaluating for abusive behavior and determining appropriate enforcement actions. Factors we may take into consideration include, but are not limited to whether:
- the behavior is targeted at an individual or group of people;
- the report has been filed by the target of the abuse or a bystander;
- the behavior is newsworthy and in the legitimate public interest.
Abuse: You may not engage in the targeted harassment of someone, or incite other people to do so. We consider abusive behavior an attempt to harass, intimidate, or silence someone else’s voice.
Unwanted sexual advances: You may not direct abuse at someone by sending unwanted sexual content, objectifying them in a sexually explicit manner, or otherwise engaging in sexual misconduct.
Hateful conduct: You may not promote violence against, threaten, or harass other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease. Read more about our hateful conduct policy.
Hateful imagery and display names: You may not use hateful images or symbols in your profile image or profile header. You also may not use your username, display name, or profile bio to engage in abusive behavior, such as targeted harassment or expressing hate towards a person, group, or protected category. We will begin enforcing this rule on December 18, 2017.
So much for the official version of what Twitter users—and non-Twitter users—can expect from those charged with policing Twitter.
Which leads to the question: Why hasn’t Twitter policed—and purged—the single greatest abuser of its “Twitter Rules”: Donald Trump?
Consider:
Donald Trump’s tweet-first-and-never-mind-the-consequences approach to life has been thoroughly documented.
From June 15, 2015, when he launched his Presidential campaign, until October 24, 2016, he fired nearly 4,000 angry, insulting tweets at 281 people and institutions. The New York Times needed two full pages of its print edition to showcase them.
Donald Trump
Among these targets were:
- His Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton
- His fellow Republican Presidential candidates
- Actress Meryl Streep
- News organizations
- President Barack Obama
- Comedian John Oliver
- Obamacare
- Singer Neil Young
- The state of New Jersey
- Actor Arnold Schwarzenegger.
His Twitter assaults have often dominated entire news cycles for days on end.
As President-elect, he continued these assaults—such as the one on November 18, 2016.
On that evening, Vice President-elect Mike Pence attended a Broadway performance of the hit musical “Hamilton.”
After the curtain call, the actor Brandon Victor Dixon—who plays Aaron Burr—respectfully addressed Pence:
“We are the diverse America who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us, our friends, our children, our parents, or defend us and uphold our inalienable rights. But we truly hope that this show has inspired you to uphold our American values and to work on behalf of all of us.”
Brandon Victor Dixon
The Official Tony Awards Youtube Channel, CC BY 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
Dixon—who is black—was rightly alarmed.
Trump had received the open and enthusiastic support of the Ku Klux Klan, American Nazi Party and other white supremacist groups. Since his election, white thugs had assaulted blacks and other non-whites across the country.
Trump’s reaction to Dixon’s plea came in two Twitter rants:
“Our wonderful future V.P. Mike Pence was harassed last night at the theater by the cast of Hamilton, cameras blazing. This should not happen!”
And: “The Theater must always be a safe and special place. The cast of Hamilton was very rude last night to a very good man, Mike Pence. Apologize!”
And during his first two weeks as President, Trump attacked 22 people, places and things on his @realDonaldTrump account.
Then, on March 4, 2017, in a series of unhinged tweets, Trump accused former President Barack Obama of tapping his Trump Tower phones prior to the election:
“Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!”
“Is it legal for a sitting President to be ‘wire tapping’ a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!”
“I’d bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!”
“How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!”
Thus, without offering a shred of evidence to back it up, Trump accused his predecessor—on Twitter—of committing an impeachable offense.
President Barack Obama
On May 9, 2017, Trump abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey.
Reports soon surfaced that his reason for doing so was that Comey had refused to pledge his personal loyalty to Trump.
Trump had made this “request” during a private dinner at the White House in January.
Another unpunished violation of Twitter’s Terms-of-Service was about to occur.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANCHOR BABIES, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FBI, ILLEGAL ALIENS, illegal immigration, IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (ICE), JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, Kamala Harris, MEXICO, MICHELLE OBAMA, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RACKETEER INFLUENCED CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS ACT, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SAN FRANCISCO, sanctuary cities, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, U.S.-MEXICO WALL, UPI, USA TODAY, WAL-MART
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on January 17, 2018 at 12:56 am
The Federal Government is heading for a shutdown by January 19.
A major reason for this is Presidential Donald Trump’s demand that Congress fund a massive, impenetrable wall along the U.S.-Mexican border.
Its purpose: To end illegal immigration from Mexico.
And Democrats—seeing this as an election-year issue—are totally opposed to the wall.
During his 2016 Presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly boasted: “I will build a great, great wall on our southern border, and I will make Mexico pay for that wall.”
But there are serious obstacles to erecting such a barrier:
- The United States/Mexican border stretches for 1,954 miles—and encompasses rivers, deserts and mountains.
- Environmental and engineering problems.
- Squabbles with ranchers who don’t want to give up any of their land.
- Building such a wall would cost untold billions of dollars.
- Drug traffickers and alien smugglers could easily tunnel under it into the United States—as they are now doing.
There are, in fact, cheaper and more effective remedies for combating illegal immigration.
Illegal aliens crossing into the United States
(1) The Justice Department should vigorously attack the “sanctuary movement” that officially thwarts the immigration laws of the United States.
Among the 31 “sanctuary cities” of this country: Washington, D.C.; New York City; Los Angeles; Chicago; San Francisco; Santa Ana; San Diego; Salt Lake City; Phoenix; Dallas; Houston; Austin; Detroit; Jersey City; Minneapolis; Miami; Denver; Baltimore; Seattle; Portland, Oregon; New Haven, Connecticut; and Portland, Maine.
These cities have passed ordinances that ban municipal funds or resources from being used to enforce federal immigration laws. As a result, police or municipal employees are not allowed to inquire about citizens’ immigration status.
(2) Indict the highest-ranking officials of those cities who have actively violated Federal immigration laws.
In San Francisco, for example, former San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris—who is now California’s United States Senator—created a secret and illegal program called Back on Track, which provided training for jobs that illegal aliens could not legally hold.
(3) Even if some indicted officials escaped conviction, the results would prove worthwhile.
City officials would be forced to spend huge sums of their own money for attorneys and face months or even years of prosecution.
And this would send a devastating warning to officials in other “sanctuary cities” that the same fate lies in store for them.
(4) CEOs whose companies—like Wal-Mart—systematically employ illegal aliens should be held directly accountable for the actions of their subordinates.
They should be indicted by the Justice Department under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, the way Mafia bosses are prosecuted for ordering their own subordinates to commit crimes.
Upon conviction, the CEO should be sentenced to a mandatory prison term of at least 20 years.
Convicting a score of CEOs would prove a more effective remedy for combating illegal immigration than stationing tens of thousands of soldiers on the U.S./Mexican border.
Word would quickly get around—and CEOs across the nation would take drastic steps to ensure that their companies strictly complied with Federal immigration laws.
(5) The Government should stop granting automatic citizenship to “anchor babies” born to illegal aliens in the United States.
A comparable practice would be allowing bank robbers who had eluded the FBI to keep their illegally-obtained loot.
A person who violates the bank robbery laws of the United States can be prosecuted for bank robbery, whether he’s immediately arrested or remains uncaught for years. The same should be true for those born illegally within this country.
If they’re not here legally at the time of birth, they should not be considered citizens and should—like their parents—be subject to deportation.
(6) The United States Government—from the President on down—should scrap its apologetic tone on the right to control its national borders.
In 2010, Michelle Obama visited New Hampshire Estates Elementary School in Silver Spring, Maryland.
A second-grader said: “My mom, she says that Barack Obama is taking everybody away that doesn’t have papers.”
“Yeah, well, that’s something that we have to work on right?” replied Mrs. Obama. “To make sure that people can be here with the right kind of papers, right?”
The girl then said: “But my mom doesn’t have any….”
Obama: “Well, we’ll have to work on that. We have to fix that, and everybody’s got to work together in Congress to make sure that happens.”
Mexico doesn’t consider itself racist for strictly enforcing its immigration laws. Neither should the United States.
(7) Voting materials and ballots should be published in one language: English.
In Mexico, voting materials are published in one language—Spanish.
Throughout the United States, millions of Mexican illegals refuse to learn English and yet demand that voting materials and ballots be made available to them in Spanish.
(8) The United States should impose economic and even military sanctions against countries—such as China and Mexico—whose citizens make up the bulk of illegal aliens.
Mexico, for example, uses its American border to rid itself of those who might demand major reforms in the country’s political and economic institutions.
Such nations must learn that dumping their unwanted’s on the United States now comes at an unfavorably high price. Otherwise those dumpings will continue.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BBC, BLOOMBERG, BUZZFEED, CALVIN COOLIDGE, CBS NEWS, CHERYL BEHYMER, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOS, DAILY KOZ, EMPLOYERS, FACEBOOK, FISHER & PHILLIPS LAW FIRM, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GLASSDOOR, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HUFFINGTON POST, JERRY BROWN, JOB-SEEKERS, MEDIA MATTERS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALARY HISTORY, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SUSAN EGGMAN, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE INTERCEPT, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UNEMPLOYMENT, UPI, USA TODAY, USA TODAY NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, WAGE GAP, X
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on January 3, 2018 at 2:38 am
“All those who have written upon civil institutions demonstrate…that whoever desires to found a state and give it laws, must start with assuming that all men are bad and ever ready to display their vicious nature, whenever they may find occasion for it.
“If their evil disposition remains concealed for a time, it must be attributed to some unknown reason; and we must assume that it lacked occasion to show itself. But time, which has been said to be the father of all truth, does not fail to bring it to light.”
Niccolo Machiavelli knew what he was writing about.
And now, California legislators have wisely—if belatedly—acted on that warning by reigning in the vicious nature of corporate employers.
As of January 1, it is now illegal for California employers to ask job applicants about their former salaries and benefits.
Governor Jerry Brown signed a new state privacy bill into law during the last week of December, 2017.
This is good news for applicants who believe they shouldn’t be judged on how much—or little—money they earned in the past.
The truth is that, for decades, employers have used “salary histories” to discriminate against applicants who earned large—or small—salaries in their previous jobs.
For example: If an applicant had been paid a miserly wage even though he had performed major tasks for an employer, the new potential one would use that low salary as a weapon against him: “Well, it says here you earned $—– in your most recent job. Why should we pay you more than that?”
And if an applicant had earned a high salary, an employer would often use that against him: “We can’t afford to match that, let alone give you more than that.” In many cases, employers simply refused to give a reason for refusing to hire the applicant.
In either case, it was clearly an “I win/You lose” situation.
And, naturally, when employers whined about how expensive it was to pay a living wage to those who made their profits a reality, they never mentioned the exorbitant salary paid to their own CEO.
According to Glassdoor: “Across all companies, the average CEO pay was $13.8 million per year, the average median worker pay was about $77,800, and the average ratio of CEO pay to median worker pay was 204. In other words, on average, CEOs earn around 204 times what his or her median worker earns.” 
One job-seeking applicant tried to finesse the salary history demand by filling out the job application form except for the salary history part. He then attached a cover-letter, which read:
“I am interested in speaking with you or one of your representatives about the above-named position. I have filled out the required application—-with the exception of the box inquiring into my Current/last Income.
“I have in the past responded to ‘Salary History’ inquires and have found these have only one purpose: To elicit the lowest salary received, so that the salary to be offered can be adjusted to that level.
“I have been paid on a per-hour basis, a per-assignment basis, and on a bi-weekly basis. Each of these salaries was for a different job, and each job required a specific set of skills and efforts on my part.
“I am prepared to discuss in detail how my skills and experiences can prove of use to your company. But I do not discuss past salaries earned with anyone but the Internal Revenue Service.
“If you are prepared to hire on the basis of what I can do for your company, and not on the basis of what other employers have paid me in the past for assignments that had nothing to do with your company, please contact me at your earliest convenience.”
As of January 1, 2018, California job-seekers will no longer have to worry about that part of the application.
Supporters of the law believe it will help reduce the notorious wage-gap between male and female employees.
“Women negotiating a salary shouldn’t have to wrestle an entire history of wage disparity,” said the bill’s principal author, California Assemblywoman Susan Talamantes Eggman.
California’s new law also requires potential employers to disclose a salary range for the job in question, should an applicant ask about it.
This arms job seekers with valuable information because they will now know how much a company is willing to offer for that position.
In the past, employers held that information close to the vest as one more way of gaining control over their potential employee.
Although California has long been a trailblazer in employee/employer relations, it was not the first state to pass such a law. Oregon, Delaware and Massachusetts had already passed laws forbidding employers from asking about salary history.
Many employers and their paid shills believe that President Calvin Coolidge was right when he said: “The man who builds a factory builds a temple; the man who works there worships there.”
Cheryl Behymer, an attorney for the law firm Fisher & Phillips, which represents employers, said: “Here’s another point where the government is dictating to an employer how to conduct its business and employers resent that.”
As do all tyrants forced to relinquish any part of their tyranny.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, ARMAGEDDON, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, FACEBOOK, JESUS CHRIST, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEW YEAR'S DAY, NEW YEAR'S EVE, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, RIOTS, SALON, SAN FRANCISCO, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOREN KIERKEGAARD, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE MILLENNIUM, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, Y2K
In Business, History, Social commentary on January 2, 2018 at 12:06 am
New Year’s Eve, 2017, now lies behind us.
But for those who consciously lived through December 31, 1999, there will never be another New Year’s Eve like it.
New Year’s Eve is traditionally a time for people to reflect on the major events of the previous 12 months. Some of these are highly personal. Others have been shared by the entire country.
Some of these remembrances inevitably bring pleasure. Others bring pain.
But at the heart of every New Year’s Eve celebration is the fantasy that you get to start fresh in a matter of hours. And with that fantasy comes hope—that, this time, you can put your sorrows and failures behind you.
New Year’s Eve, 1999, was marked far more by apprehension and fear than joy.
- Fear of Y2K—that our highly computerized, globally-interconnected world would crash when the “19″ at the start of every year was replaced with a “20″.
- Fear of Armageddon—that Jesus, after dying 2,000 years ago, would return to destroy mankind (except for those 144,000 righteous souls He deemed worthy of salvation).
- Fear of the Millennium itself—of ending not simply another decade and century but an entire thousand-year period of history, and thus losing our historical ties to the familiar highlights of our own (and America’s) past.
And, especially where Y2K was concerned, news commentators were quick to stoke our anxieties.
For those living on the West Coast of the United States on December 31, 1999, the day began with news reports of celebrations of the New Year in such distant countries as Australia and New Zealand.
“So far,” each of these reports ended, “there have been no reports of Y2K-related outages.”
But the underlying message was clear: Stay tuned—it could still happen. And this message kept blaring for the rest of the day and into the evening.
Long before New Year’s Eve, TV newscasters repeatedly warned that, when midnight struck on January 1, 2000, the three places you did not want to be were:
- In an airplane.
- In an elevator.
- In a hospital.
Countless numbers of people in America and around the world stocked up on food, water, batteries and other essentials for surviving an emergency.
Merchants and police feared widespread rioting and violence. If Y2K didn’t set it off, then fears of a heaven-sent Apocalypse might.
In San Francisco, along Powell Street—a major center of tourism and commerce—store owners boarded up their doors and windows as New Year’s Eve approached. Many closed earlier than usual that day.
At 9 p.m. California time, a friend of mine turned off a VCR and turned on a local news station to watch celebrations—or chaos—unfold in New York City.
If the lights went off in New York at midnight Eastern time, then, in three more hours, the same would happen in California.
When he saw lights glittering in Times Square, he felt reasonably certain that Y2K would probably be a dud.
Fortunately, no Y2K disasters occurred.
Three people I know decided to throw an “End of the World” party. They didn’t believe the world was coming to an end. But they decided to throw an “absolute last blast” party as though it were.
Among the items they stockpiled for this occasion:
- Country pork spareribs
- Yams
- Crabs
- Apple cidar
- Black olives
- Fresh cranberries
- Avacodos
- Chocolate chip ice cream
- Lambrusco
- Gin and tonic water
- Root beer
- Smoked cheese
- Artichoke hearts
- Pumpkin cream mousse cake
- Chocolate cake
- Pickles
- Asparagus
It was definitely an unforgettable night.
New Year’s Eve 1999 is now 18 years distant. But some lessons may still be learned from it:
Each year is a journey unto itself–filled with countless joys and sorrows. Many of these joys can’t be predicted. And many of these tragedies can’t be prevented.
Learn to tell real dangers from imaginary ones. Computers are real—and sometimes they crash. Men who died 2,000 years ago do not leap out of graveyards, no matter what their disciples predict.
Don’t expect any particular year to usher in the Apocalypse. In any given year there will be wars, famines, earthquakes, riots, floods and a host of other disasters. These have always been with us–and always will be. As Abraham Lincoln once said: “The best thing about the future is that it comes one day at a time.”
Don’t expect some Great Leader to lead you to success. As Gaius Cassius says in William Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar”: “Men at some time are masters of their fate. The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but in ourselves that we are underlings.”
Don’t expect any particular year or event to usher in your happiness. To again quote Lincoln: “Most people are about as happy as they make up their minds to be.”
If your life seems to make no sense to you, consider this: The philosopher Soren Kierkegaard once noted: “Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards.”
1984, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRISTMAS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, FACEBOOK, FOX NEWS, GEORGE ORWELL, JESUS, MEGYN KELLY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SANTA CLAUS, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, STARBUCK'S, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WAR ON CHRISTMAS
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on December 28, 2017 at 12:22 am
The annual “war on Christmas” is over—for now.
Every December, Americans relive the traditions of the Christmas holiday season:
- Christmas trees
- Nativity scenes
- Singing carols
- Exchanging gifts with family and friends.
And if you’re an employee of Fox News, creating fresh ways to stir up controversy over a non-existent “war on Christmas.”
Stirring up false controversies is a daily assignment for the alleged reporters of Fox News, which is owned by Right-wing oligarch Rupert Murdoch.
But Christmas is special, so, each year, the executives at Fox find a new way to stir up emotions by resurrecting the “war on Christmas” slander.
In 2013, it fell to Fox hostess Megyn Kelly to carry the ball. And she did so on December 11 on “The Kelly File,” her then-popular Fox News program.
Referring to an article by Slate writer Aisha Harris on “Santa Claus Should Not Be a White Man Anymore,” she said:
“When I saw this headline, I kinda laughed and I said, ‘Oh, this is ridiculous. Yet another person claiming it’s racist to have a white Santa.’
“And by the way, for all you kids watching at home, Santa just is white. But this person is maybe just arguing that we should also have a black Santa. But, you know, Santa is what he is, and just so you know, we’re just debating this because someone wrote about it, kids.”
Of course, Santa Claus is a completely fictional character. Arguing about his skin color is as pointless as arguing about his weight.
But Kelly wasn’t content to talk only about Santa. So she turned next to Jesus, a historical figure about whom we have not a single reference to his appearance, let alone a picture.
“Just because it makes you feel uncomfortable doesn’t mean it has to change. You know, I mean, Jesus was a white man, too,” Kelly said.
“He was a historical figure; that’s a verifiable fact—as is Santa, I want you kids watching to know that—but my point is: How do you revise it, in the middle of the legacy of the story, and change Santa from white to black?”
Santa Claus a verifiable historical figure? Not even Charlie Brown, in the annually telecast “Peanuts” Christmas special, would make that claim.
Like Fox News, Donald Trump has found there’s a lot of support to be gained by claiming there’s a “war on Christmas.”
In 2015, Starbucks issued a plain red cup minus imagery, triggering a backlash among image-obsessed Christians, who saw it as an “attack” on Christmas.
When Trump—then running for President—learned of the change in Starbucks cups, he was outraged. Or claimed to be.
“Did you read about Starbucks?” Trump asked supporters during a rally in Springfield, Ill. “No more ‘Merry Christmas’ at Starbucks. No more. Maybe we should boycott Starbucks.
“If I become president, we’re all going to be saying ‘Merry Christmas’ again,” Trump told the crowd—as if, by becoming President, he could, like a king, issue such an order. “That I can tell you. That I can tell you! Unbelievable.”
Donald Trump
On November 17, 2016, a Trumpster using the screen name Baked Alaska came up with a new idea to intimidate Starbucks.
Going on Twitter, he advised fellow Trumpsters to proceed with “Operation #TrumpCup.” All they had to do was:
- Go to Starbucks & tell them your name is Trump.
- If they refuse take video
- Pls share and spread the word.
One Trumpster subsequently posted on Twitter the following: “I got my Starbucks with Trump name. He yelled Trump get your drink #TrumpCup“
Another one proudly tweeted: “@bakedalaska did this today. They didn’t want to, said it was too political. I reminded her the campaign was over & he’s our president now. pic.twitter.com/LHgi7Vqexh.”
And after Trump became President, his fanatical followers were quick to thank him for “allowing us to say ‘Merry Christmas’ again.”
They did so in a $1 million ad that began running after Christmas Day.
Sponsored by the pro-Trump political action committee, America First Policies, the ad features several “average Americans” thanking Trump in the style of a king’s subjects paying homage to an absolute monarch:
Narrator: “Every day, Americans are standing up to thank President Trump for making America great again.”
Man: “Thank you for cutting my taxes.”
Man: “Thank you for fixing our economy.”
Woman: “Thank you for keeping my family safe.”
Man: “Thank you for putting America first.”
And, at the end, a little girl says, “Thank you, President Trump, for letting us say ‘Merry Christmas’ again.”
In George Orwell’s classic novel, 1984, Oceania is always at war with Eurasia or Eastasia. Its citizens are kept in a constant state of frenzy as they’re directed to search for endless “enemies of the state.”
This, in turn, allows the unseen rulers of Oceania to run their dictatorship without interference.
It’s a blueprint for power not lost on the men who run Fox News.
Or on Donald Trump
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CLASS WARFARE, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DANA CARVEY, DICK CHENEY, ECONOMIC DISPARITY, FACEBOOK, FRANK CAPRA, GEORGE BAILEY, HENRY F. POTTER, IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE, JAMES STEWART, LIONEL BARRYMORE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MOVIES, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW Y ORK TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UNEMPLOYMENT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Business, Entertainment, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on December 25, 2017 at 12:01 am
Every Christmas, TV audiences find comfort and triumph in the rerunning of a black-and-white 1946 movie: It’s a Wonderful Life.
It’s the story of George Bailey (James Stewart), a decent husband and father who hovers on the brink of suicide—until his guardian angel, Clarence, suddenly intervenes.
Clarence reveals to George what his home town, Bedford Falls, New York, would be like if he had never been born. George finds himself shocked to learn:
- With no counterweight to the schemes of rapacious slumlord Henry F. Potter, Bedford Falls becomes Potterville, filled with pawn shops and sleazy nightclubs.
- With no George Bailey to save his younger brother, Harry, from drowning in a frozen pond, Harry drowns.
- With no Harry to live to become a Naval fighter pilot in World War II, he’s not on hand to shoot down two Japanese planes targeting an American troopship.
- As a result, the troopship and its crew are destroyed.
George is forced to face the significant role he has played in the lives of so many others.
Armed with this knowledge, he once again embraces life, running through the snow-covered streets of Bedford Falls and shouting “Merry Christmas!” to everyone he meets.
Audiences have hailed George Bailey as an Everyman hero—and the film as a life-affirming testament to the unique importance of each individual.
But there is another aspect of the movie that has not been so closely studied: The legacy of its villain, Henry F. Potter, who, as played by Lionel Barrymore, bears a striking resemblance to former Vice President Dick Cheney.
Henry F. Potter
It is Potter—the richest man in Bedford Falls—whose insatiable greed threatens to destroy it. And it is Potter whose criminality drives George Bailey to the brink of suicide.
The antagonism between Bailey and Potter starts early in the movie. George dreams of leaving Bedford Falls and building skyscrapers. Meanwhile, he works at the Bailey Building and Loan Association, which plays a vital role in the life of the community.
Potter, a member of the Building and Loan Association board, tries to persuade the board of directors to dissolve the firm. He objects to their providing home loans for the working poor.
George persuades them to reject Potter’s proposal, but they agree only on condition that George run the Building and Loan. Reluctantly, George agrees.
Later, Potter tries to lure George away from the Building and Loan, offering him a $20,000 salary and the chance to visit Europe. George is briefly tempted.
But then he realizes that Potter intends to close down the Building and Loan and deny financial help to those who most need it. Angrily, he turns down Potter’s offer:
“You sit around here and you spin your little webs and you think the whole world revolves around you and your money. Well, it doesn’t, Mr. Potter!
“In the whole vast configuration of things, I’d say you were nothing but a scurvy little spider.”
It is a setback for Potter, but he’s willing to bide his time for revenge.
On Christmas Eve morning, the town prepares a hero’s welcome for George’s brother, Harry. George’s scatter-brained Uncle Billy visits Potter’s bank to deposit $8,000 of the Building and Loan’s cash funds.
He taunts Potter by reading the newspaper headlines announcing the coming tribute. Potter snatches the paper, and Billy unthinkingly allows the money to be snatched with it.
When Billy leaves, Potter opens the paper and sees the money. He keeps it, knowing that misplacement of bank money will bankrupt the Building and Loan and bring criminal charges against George.
But at the last minute, word of George’s plight reaches his wide range of grateful friends. A flood of townspeople arrive with more than enough donations to save George and the Building and Loan.
The movie ends on a triumphant note, with George basking in the glow of love from his family and friends.
But no critic seems to have noticed that Henry Potter’s theft has gone unnoticed. (Uncle Billy can’t recall how he lost the money.) Potter is richer by $8,000. And ready to go on taking advantage of others.
Perhaps it’s time to see Potter’s actions in a new light—that of America’s richest 1%, ever ready to prey upon the weaknesses of others.
Justice never catches up with Potter in the movie. But the joke-writers at Saturday Night Live have conjured up a satisfactory punishment for his avarice.
In this version, Uncle Billy suddenly remembers that he left the money with Potter. Enraged, George Bailey (Dana Carvey) leads his crowd of avenging friends to Potter’s office.
Potter realizes the jig is up and offers to return the money. But George wants more than that—and he and his friends proceed to stomp and beat Potter to death.
The skit ends with with George and his friends singing “Auld Ang Syne”—as they do in the movie—as they finish off Potter with clubs.
America is rapidly a divided nation—one where the richest 1% lord it over an increasingly impoverished 99%.
The time may be coming when many Americans are ready to embrace the SNL approach to economic justice.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANITA STAVER, AP, BATHROOMS, BOYCOTTS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALISTS, CHRISTIAN RIGHT, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, LIBERTY COUNCIL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PACE UNIVERSITY'S LUBIN SCHOOL OF BUSINESS, POLITICO, PROTESTS, RAW STORY, RESTROOMS, REUTERS, RIGHT-WINGERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TARGET DEPARTMENT STORES, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TRANSGENDERS, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, VIOLENCE
In Business, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on November 23, 2017 at 11:09 am
On April 19, 2016, in a blog post, Target announced that its customers could use any bathroom or fitting room that matched the gender they thought they belonged to.
“We welcome transgender team members and guests to use the restroom or fitting room facility that corresponds with their gender identity,” read the official Target statement.
“Everyone deserves to feel like they belong. And you’ll always be accepted, respected and welcomed at Target.”
Target corporate headquarters
Target posted its new policy in response to North Carolina’s HB2 law requiring men to use bathrooms marked “MEN” and women to use bathrooms marked “WOMEN”.
This was clearly a Politically Correct sop to the “transgender” community.
To drive home this point, Target converted half of its famous red bull’s-eye logo into a gay-pride rainbow.
The announcement won Target much praise on social media. On Target’s Facebook page, the following posts appeared:
“I want to tell you that I will forever be a Target shopper.”
“You have, again, shown that your stores are inclusive and meant to be a safe haven, and I intend to repay your loyalty with my own.”
But others were enraged, and made no effort to hide it.
“Shame on Target,” read one post. “Restrooms have placards depicting gender on them for a reason. I will not step foot in another Target.”
Since its 2016 announcement, more than 1.2 million people have signed a pledge to boycott the store owing to its transgender policy.
The protesters’ goal: Force Target to reverse its policy—or, failing that, to hit the retailer in its pocketbook by persuading customers to shop elsewhere.
So far, Target CEO Brian Cornell has refused to budge: “We took a stance and we are going to continue to embrace our belief of diversity and inclusion,” he said on CNBC.
Critics have held protests at Target stores across the country—and show no signs of ending.
Many are demanding access to bathrooms of the opposite sex to prove that “perverts” can now prey on women and children as a result of the policy.
One male protester entered a Target store and asked an employee if he could use the women’s bathroom because that’s where he felt comfortable. The employee gave him permission and said that if any women complained, “they can come and we will speak to that.”
Eighty million Americans shopped at Target’s stores every month before the bathroom policy change.
“The boycott is not going to last very long,” predicted Larry Chiagouris, a professor of marketing at Pace University’s Lubin School of Business in New York: “There is a big difference between signing a petition compared to not taking advantage of a big sale at Target. People will always take advantage of the sale.”
The boycott has cost Target millions in lost sales and added expenses. Shopper traffic and same-store sales started sliding for the first time in years after the revised bathroom policy announcement.
Target has been forced to spend $20 million installing single-occupancy bathrooms in all its stores to appease critics of the policy-change.
In 2016, sales fell nearly 6% in the three quarters after the announcement—compared with the same period in 2015. Same-store sales have dropped every quarter since the post.
Yet Target continues to stick to its revised bathroom-use policy.
Right-wingers have loudly claimed that Target’s bathroom policy puts women in danger. But they have refused to condemn their own leader—Donald Trump—for entering “women’s only” locker rooms.
Donald Trump
During an appearance on The Howard Stern Show in 2005, Trump described going backstage at the beauty pageants while the contestants were undressed.
“Before a show, I’ll go backstage and everyone’s getting dressed, and everything else, and you know, no men are anywhere, and I’m allowed to go in because I’m the owner of the pageant and therefore I’m inspecting it. You know, I’m inspecting because I want to make sure that everything is good.
“You know, they’re standing there with no clothes. ‘Is everybody okay?’ And you see these incredible looking women, and so, I sort of get away with things like that.”
According to a BuzzFeed story, Trump did just that in 1997 with former Miss Teen USA contestants. Four contestants—including one who was 15—said that Trump walked into the dressing area while they were changing.
One of them called it “shocking” and “creepy” and said she rushed to cover herself. Another recalled that the contestants were “just scrambling to grab stuff… whatever garments they had.”
And when insults, threats and boycotts fail to gain the results they desire, Right-wingers can always be counted on to resort to violence.
Anita Staver, president of the Orlando-based Liberty Council, a theocratic law group, says she will be taking her gun inside the restrooms at Target stores from now on.
On April 22, 2016, she posted on Twitter: “I’m taking a Glock .45 to the ladies room. It identifies as my bodyguard.” #BoycottTarget @Target
Those opposed to Target’s bathroom policy aren’t going to change their minds—no matter how Neanderthal this appears to Target’s management.
Eventually, the retailer will be forced to choose between placating the “needs” of a minority most Americans regard as perverted freaks—and its own bottom line.
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CRIME, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, FACEBOOK, GUN CONTROL, MARTIN LUTHER KING, MISSISSIPPI ATTORNEY GENERAL MIKE MOORE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SECOND AMENDMENT, SELF-DEFENSE, SLATE, STAND-YOUR-GROUND LAWS, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. CONSTITUTION, U.S. NAVY SEALS, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUITS
STOPPING THE GUN MASSACRES
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on February 19, 2018 at 12:19 amThe victims of the violence are black and white, rich and poor, young and old, famous and unknown. They are, most important of all, human beings whom other human beings loved and needed. No one—no matter where he lives or what he does— can be certain who will suffer from some senseless act of bloodshed. And yet it goes on and on.
–Robert F. Kennedy, April 4, 1968
Senator Robert F. Kennedy announcing the murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
What should the surviving victims of gun massacres do to seek redress?
And how can the relatives and friends of those who didn’t survive seek justice for those they loved?
Two things:
First, don’t count on politicians to support a ban on assault weapons.
Politicians—with rare exceptions—have only two goals:
And too many of them fear the economic and voting clout of the NRA to risk its wrath.
Consider Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama.
Both rushed to offer condolences to the surviving victims of the massacre at the Century 16 Theater in Aurora, Colorado, on July 20, 2012.
And both steadfastly refused to even discuss gun control—let alone support a ban on the type of assault weapons used by James Holmes, leaving 12 dead and 58 wounded.
Second, those who survived the massacre—and the relatives and friends of those who didn’t—should file wrongful death, class-action lawsuits against the NRA.
There is sound, legal precedent for this.
The parallels with the NRA are obvious:
It will take a series of highly expensive and well-publicized lawsuits to significantly weaken the NRA, financially and politically.
The first ones will have to be brought by the surviving victims of gun violence—and by the friends and families of those who did not survive it. Only they will have the courage and motivation to take such a risk.
As with the cases first brought against tobacco companies, there will be losses. And the NRA will rejoice with each one.
But, in time, state Attorneys General will see the clear parallels between lawsuits filed against those who peddle death by cigarette and those who peddle death by armor-piercing bullet.
And then the NRA—like the tobacco industry—will face an adversary wealthy enough to stand up for the rights of the gun industry’s own victims.
Only then will those politicians supporting reasonable gun controls dare to stand up for the victims of these needless tragedies.
Share this: