Wading Thru The Crap 💩 has a Facebook page!
New blog posts are shared there First as well as important articles about politics and fake news alerts.
As well as the occasional funny memes.
New blog posts are shared there First as well as important articles about politics and fake news alerts.
As well as the occasional funny memes.
Many of you may have heard of the bills H.R.610 & H.R. 899 that were introduced to the house on January 23, 2017 by Republican Representative of Iowa Steve King and February 7, 2017 by Republican Representative of Kentucky Massie Thomas. These bills deal with the department of education termination, education funding/school voucher program and school lunch nutrition. The summary statements are:
H.R. 610 Introduced in House (01/23/2017)
Choices in Education Act of 2017
To distribute Federal funds for elementary and secondary education in the form of vouchers for eligible students and to repeal a certain rule relating to nutrition standards in schools.
(Steve King tried to introduce similar legislation at the end of last year (Sept. 22, 2016, H.R. 6119 (114th)), dealing with the repeal of Michelle Obama’s nutrition regulations and nothing came of it.
H.R. 899 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, February 7, 2017
Mr. Massie (for himself, Mr. Amash, Mr. Biggs, Mr. Chaffetz, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Jody B. Hice of Georgia, Mr. Jones, and Mr. Labrador) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce
To terminate the Department of Education. (Federal)
The Department of Education shall terminate on December 31, 2018.
As of 03/17/2017 no related bill information has been received for H.R.899 – To terminate the Department of Education..
There is mass “Trump Hysteria” surrounding these bills as well as intense hatred for The Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, even though neither introduced either of these bills. President Trump’s first full day in office was the day H.R. 610 was introduced to the house and Mrs. DeVos was confirmed the day H.R. 899 was introduced, (February 7, 2017). So neither of them wrote either bill. However, they both support school of choice, and less government.
Many conservatives believe that because the Department of Education costs tens of billions of dollars each year that it is completely unnecessary, and we really don’t need one on the Federal level, when we have 50 separate State Departments of Education. Personally, I don’t think we should get rid of the entire department, but it could use a complete overhaul. I’m sure many of our government agencies need reorganization. I do believe we need the protections that are implemented on a federal level so that states have a standard to live up to.
The general consensus with HR 610 bill is it’s dead at committee. There hasn’t been an action since 01/23/2017 when referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce. It only has two co-sponsors, (Rep. Harris, Andy [R-MD-1]*, Rep. Franks, Trent [R-AZ-8]*,) and one other that withdrew support earlier this month, (Rep. Olson, Pete [R-TX-22], date withdrawn 03/09/2017, explanation H2004). I’m told that if a bill has no support/sponsors it has no chance of passing. I’ve read this one has 0.001%-2% chance of making it to law.
As of 03/16/2017 no related bill information has been received for H.R.610.
As far as H.R. 899 goes, it’s said it’s very unlikely this bill would pass in either the House or the Senate, but if it did, the H.R. 610 would be considered moot, since this bill eliminates the Federal Department of Education.
As of 03/17/2017 no related bill information has been received for H.R.899 – To terminate the Department of Education.
Rep. Massie states that “states and local communities are best positioned to shape curricula that meet the needs of their students”. In addition Rep. Massie stated that, “It’s time we get the feds out of the classroom and terminate the Department of Education.” It is unlikely that this bill would pass in the House or Senate.
These bills might be dead in committee, but it is a perfect example to why people need to not let the media or anyone else divert your attention from the real issues. Everyone is so focused on Russia, tax returns that mean nothing and whether the president of our country has the authority to enforce our laws that have been in place for decades. People are letting real things slip through the cracks unnoticed. The bad things and the good things too. It’s important to recognize the good things as well as know what’s bad and why they are bad or good. There is so much fear mongering from media and those who just want people to agree with them. Fear is a very effective motivator.
There are no heroes or villains in politics. Politicians don’t care about the people, they care about who is in their pocket. Both sides of the isle contradict themselves depending on how it affects their political stance today. They can all be hypothetical at some point in time.
Many don’t like President Trump, because they believe he’s no different than the other politicians of DC, but I do see that he does want us as a country to succeed. (That will only make him look good.) I also want to believe that he wants us as individuals to succeed. He may not always be doing things the way you would, but giving him a chance has proven so far that he’s done some good, more good depending on what side of the aisle you lean to.
The stalling of a bill means either
(a) it’s a bad bill
(b) Congress is ineffective, or
(c) both (a) and (b).
The bill would have done other things as well, vis-à-vis school choice, but anyway, it appears to be at a dead end.
And while I still want you to be hair-on-fire mad about this bill, it’s likely dead in the water because whoops right-wing homeschool advocates hate it too.
Turns out The Home School Legal Defense Association, which claims 84,000 members and like a lot of right-wing organizations outweighs its membership numbers on the Republican Hill, has come out strongly against King’s bill because it “would be a slippery slope toward more federal involvement and control in homeschooling.”
How House Bill 610 Could Affect Kids With Disabilities, Because There’s Been Some Confusion via Romper.com March 10, 2017
H.R. 899, which calls for the termination of the Department of Education entirely. Constituents rightly reacted with horror to such a bill, and it’s unlikely to pass. H.R. 610 is called the Choices in Education Act, and is largely billed as an advancement of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos’ ill-conceived school voucher program, but it would effectively abolish the Department of Education, as well. Calling for block grants for school vouchers are part of the bill, but it would also repeal two laws protecting students, and severely limit the scope of the department’s authority.
repeal the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, which would significantly restrict federal funding provided to public schools by the U.S. Department of Education as well as limit the department’s overall functions. But if this foundational legislation of American public schools is repealed, that means equal opportunity protections for students would also be eliminated, including special education resources for students with special needs, including IEPs.
In sum, DeVos’s school choice bill is just bad legislation overall — but when you really take a close look at it, you can see just how many different areas of education will be impacted, including special education.
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 has been reauthorized by Congress every five years. During the Bush era, it was renamed as the No Child Left Behind Act. Under Obama, it became the Every Student Succeeds Act. No matter the name, it afforded the necessary protections that special education students have come to expect as standard in American public education, specifically ensuring schools that receive federal funding must provide support for students with disabilities. ESEA also provided dedicated grants for special education centers.
House Bill 610 to Defund Public Education-
Truth! & Fiction!
Summary of eRumor:
GOP Rep. Steve King of Iowa has introduced H.R. 610 to defund public education.
H.R. 610 would dramatically change how federal education dollars are doled out, and it would lead to less federal funding for public schools by redirecting some funds to private school and homeschool students.
But the claim that H.R. 610 would completely defund public education isn’t entirely accurate.
Specifically, H.R. 610 would repeal the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), which was passed as part of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “War on Poverty.”
Congress reauthorized the measure in 2015 as the Every Student Succeeds Act. Before that, it was known as the No Child Left Behind Act. The Department of Education explains that federal block grants supporting school districts in low-income areas have been a primary piece of the legislation over the last 50 years:
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was signed into law in 1965 by President Lyndon Baines Johnson, who believed that “full educational opportunity” should be “our first national goal.” From its inception, ESEA was a civil rights law.
ESEA offered new grants to districts serving low-income students, federal grants for textbooks and library books, funding for special education centers, and scholarships for low-income college students. Additionally, the law provided federal grants to state educational agencies to improve the quality of elementary and secondary education.
Again, H.R. 610 would repeal ESEA and limit the authority of the Department of Education — marking a dramatic shift in how public schools are funded. The Department of Education would only be authorized to administer education funding in federal block grants to states, a portion of which would have to be administered to private and homeschooled students, according to the text of the bill:
The bill establishes an education voucher program, through which each state shall distribute block grant funds among local educational agencies (LEAs) based on the number of eligible children within each LEA’s geographical area. From these amounts, each LEA shall: (1) distribute a portion of funds to parents who elect to enroll their child in a private school or to home-school their child, and (2) do so in a manner that ensures that such payments will be used for appropriate educational expenses.
To be eligible to receive a block grant, a state must: (1) comply with education voucher program requirements, and (2) make it lawful for parents of an eligible child to elect to enroll their child in any public or private elementary or secondary school in the state or to home-school their child.
Critics of H.R. 610 argue that the bill would have a disproportionately negative impact on public schools in low-income communities because it would repeal ESEA, which has provided a significant source of federal funding to them. The Department of Education reports that more than about 56,000 public schools and 21 million children would be impacted by changes to Title I funding:
ED’s most recent data on participation in the program are from school year (SY) 2009-10. In SY 2009-10 more than 56,000 public schools across the country used Title I funds to provide additional academic support and learning opportunities to help low-achieving children master challenging curricula and meet state standards in core academic subjects. For example, funds support extra instruction in reading and mathematics, as well as special preschool, after-school, and summer programs to extend and reinforce the regular school curriculum.
That same year Title I served more than 21 million children. Of these students, approximately 59 percent were in kindergarten through fifth grade, 21 percent in grades 6-8, 17 percent in grades 9-12, 3 percent in preschool, and less than one percent ungraded.
Supporters of H.R. 610 argue that children from underperforming “Title I” public schools in low-income areas would be able to use a voucher to attend a better private or charter school under H.R. 610.
So, it’s true that H.R. 610 would have a major impact on how federal education funding is doled out, and it would have a more dramatic impact on low-income or “Title I” school districts that received federal grants through ESEA. But the claim that H.R. 610 would defund public education isn’t completely accurate, either. Students would seemingly have less incentive to “opt-out” of better performing public schools, likely leading to minimal impact on those districts. That’s why we’re calling this one “truth” and “fiction.”
The bill has no wording protecting Special Needs kids, no mention of IDEA and FAPE.
Some things ESSA does for Children with Disabilities
-Ensures access to the general education curriculum.
-Ensures access to accommodations on assessments.
-Ensures concepts of Universal Design for Learning
-Includes provisions that require local education agencies to provide evidence-based interventions in schools with consistently underperforming subgroups.
-Requires states in Title I plans to address how they will improve conditions for learning including reducing incidents of bullying and harassment in schools, overuse of discipline practices and reduce the use of aversive behavioral interventions (such as restraints and seclusion).
Tell your representatives to vote no on H.R.610 – To distribute Federal funds for elementary and secondary education in the form of vouchers for eligible students and to repeal a certain rule relating to nutrition standards in schools.
Please sign to protect school funding for special needs kids. This bill’s wording means that states will have to either fully fund IDEA with state money or accept its inevitable death.
Contact your representative and find yours here:http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/
PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION Against H.R. 610
MoveOn Petitions – Vote NO on House Bill 610
Protect the Department of Education and Vote Against H.R.899
For Conservatives and Libertarians
It was abundantly clear early on in the hearing that the American people are rightfully frustrated with the extreme partisanship in Washington, D.C. The Democrats in the hearing room were far more interested in delivering political cheap shots and scoring points for their special interest friends than having a fair and balanced discussion about Mrs. DeVos’ qualifications and her philosophy for education reform. It was a sad and sorry spectacle.
Mrs. DeVos joined our cause in Ohio to create a voucher program to allow parents to send their kids to private schools that do a better job of educating special needs students. Thanks to Mrs. DeVos advocacy, my son, Sam, gained access to a better school and is now a high school graduate. I know that Betsy DeVos has a big heart and deep concern for all students in America, especially the most vulnerable children.
While the Democrats in Washington were grandstanding, Mrs. DeVos was composed, articulate and passionate in outlining her belief that education policy should be driven, first and foremost, by what is best for school children and their parents.
The education establishment and labor bosses in the teacher’s unions are fiercely opposing Mrs. DeVos because they know she is tough, determined and driven by one thing and one thing only; to raise the bar on education in America.
Betsy DeVos places parents like me and kids like Sam first, which is why I believe she will be an excellent education secretary.
VIDEO : Betsy DeVos Haters Actually Agree With Her When Not Given Her Name
This is an interesting comment I found that I thought I’d share:
Here is a brief breakdown of some facts about House Bill 610 to help quell some of the hysteria whipped up by radical progressives and the NEA, SEIU and other leftist organizations. Let’s start out by stating that Public Education in America today has a dismal record of educating our children. When I was growing up in the ’50 & ’60’s America was number one in literacy world wide…then the Federal Government and the Unions took over. Today, we don’t even rank in the top ten in math & science. What the heck happened? When the Federal bureaucratic pinheads, the Teacher’s Union officials and the ACLU finished tinkering with it, our Public Educational System became more concerned with social engineering, emphasizing on things like diversity, gender identity, social justice ( whatever that is ) and equality of outcomes and the changes in curriculum reflected those new-age courses. State governments and local school administrators and teachers lost control of their students and whether or not they were learning anything worthwhile for the real world. It became more about feelings than about facts and results. All you have to do is talk to Corporate HR Directors to find out that our Federal Education Department is failing our children miserably. We are having to recruit people from places like India, China, Pakistan and South Korea because our American children are not being prepared with the proper skills to succeed in our own economy. That is the number one reason you have seen this significant rise in Home Schooling and some parents sending their children to parochial schools even if it doesn’t fit their religious tradition.
Something had to be done and I believe that School Choice and the Parental Voucher System is a good start. If a Public School is failing to teach the students and cannot be brought up to snuff…then it needs to be closed and it’s students and their parents given a choice to send their students to a school where they are doing their job. We spend the highest amount per student on Public Education and get the poorest return on our investment. Money is not the problem but you wouldn’t believe that if you listen to the Democrats…wonder why.
I have found in my 70+ years that politicians are always easiest to control at the local level. The farther it moves up the food-chain the less influence we taxpayers have over the outcomes. Time to bring education back to the states and localities where the parents and PTA can have greater control over decisions made for educating our children. We owe these future generations nothing less.
The classrooms of today are the governments of tomorrow!—
Don’t Panic Over the “No Hungry Kids Act” – Plus a New Bill to Ensure School Food Safety – via TheLunchTray.com March 7, 2017
..readers need to know that King has been trying to gain traction on this bill in the last three congressional sessions and it’s never gone anywhere.
Sources I’ve spoken with in D.C. believe this current iteration of the bill will meet the same fate, noting that it has few co-sponsors and hasn’t been scheduled for a mark-up in the House Education and Workforce Committee. And PredictGov, which assesses the chances of a bill becoming law, gives HR 610 a mere 2 percent chance of enactment. (Apparently, the portion of the bill pertaining to education funding also seems to be a nonstarter, with observers assessing it as “dead on arrival.”)
Passing House Bill 610 would dismantle some of the strongest aspects of public education – via Dallas News March 15, 2017
Study: Private school vouchers favored by DeVos don’t offer real advantage over public schools
A sobering look at what Betsy DeVos did to education in Michigan — and what she might do as secretary of education
Status pending, but nothing done since January https://legiscan.com/US/bill/HB610/2017Status
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Republican 3-0)
Status: Introduced on January 23 2017 – 25% progression
Action: 2017-01-23 – Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Pending: House Education And The Workforce Committee
Text: Latest bill text (Introduced) [PDF]
REMOVAL OF NAME OF MEMBER AS COSPONSOR OF H.R. 610
(House of Representatives – March 09, 2017)
REMOVAL OF NAME OF MEMBER AS COSPONSOR OF H.R. 610
Mr. OLSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that I be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 610.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania). Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas? There was no objection.
Ivanka Trump, a successful business woman, very classy with impeccable taste, and a big heart. What’s not to like? She’s been under scrutiny since her father first started his campaign for president and it’s just gotten worse since he won the election. Should she be punished by the media and the left because of their hate for her father? Or should they try to embrace her as an ally, because of the major influence she has on her dad? I think it’s the latter.
Ivanka has already been in her father’s ear about continuing former President Obama’s LGBT Rights Executive Order. (President Donald J. Trump Will Continue to Enforce Executive Order Protecting the Rights of the LGBTQ Community in the Workplace) She also helped organize a meeting this week, with the President, Prime Minister of Canada and some very power successful women to address some of the women’s right issues that have been a concern of the left recently, Canada-United States Council for Advancement of Women Entrepreneurs.
Ms. Trump could have a very powerful impact on the direction of President Trump’s Administration. The President has already said that she always encourages him to ‘do the right thing.’ Her guidance, and caring heart may be just what us women need in the White House. I would suggest we try and “make nice” with her.
It’s a VERY popular theory, and many consider it fact, that President Donald J. Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump’s brand has been dropped by many retailers, because of a sales decrease. However, if you do a little digging that might not be the whole story.
As Online Boycott Grows Study Shows Millennial Women Stick With Ivanka Trump’s Brand OCT 26, 2016 @ 08:00 AM -via Forbes
Each woman surveyed was asked: “In light of Ivanka Trump’s involvement with the Trump campaign for president, how likely would you be to consider buying her line of shoes or clothing?”
They responded as follows:
Extremely Likely 18%
Very Likely 33%
Somewhat Likely 32%
Not Very Likely 11%
Not At All Likely 6%
Meanwhile, a campaign calling for a boycott of all things Trump, including Ivanka’s apparel and shoe lines, has been gathering social media steam.
Inside Ivanka, Inc: $100M Apparel Sales, And A Bid To Move Some Manufacturing Back From China 7/21/2016 @ 12:24PM -via Forbes
The company doesn’t include a breakdown of revenues by brand in its financial filings, but its 2016 annual report notes a $29.4 million increase in sales of Ivanka Trump’s fashion line from the year before.
Most articles paint a dreary picture of a decline in sale at Nordstrom’s and several other companies. They are mostly copy paste articles that use almost the same exact language. I see that kind of thing a lot. Many news sources will pick up the same story and they will basically copy/paste it and then it ends up coming from 10 different places. (But no matter how many pick up the story and publish it, that doesn’t make it true. That is why finding the truth is so hard these days.)
There are reports of a significant gains in sales at stores such as Macy’s and Bloomingdale’s. There is also information from the brand itself claiming to have a significant rise in overall sales.
Sales Of Ivanka Trump’s Clothing Line Declined In 2016 February 11, 2017 -via Opposing Views
Nordstrom saw $14.3 million in sales in the fiscal year that ended in January, down from $20.9 million the year before.
Nordstrom is not the only store in which sales of Ivanka Trump’s products are down, according to CNBC. An analysis of email receipts by Slice Intelligence reveals sales of Ivanka’s line are down in a number of online stores, most notably following the 2016 presidential election. Online sales of her products fell 26 percent in January 2017 from January 2016.
Ivanka’s line did see sales growth in a handful of retailers. Online sales from Macy’s grew 30 percent, while sales from Bloomingdales.com grew 9 percent in the fourth quarter. However, growth was still slower this fiscal year compared to the previous year.
Ivanka Trump’s brand takes another hit– via kdvr 2-12-2017
Rosemary Young, senior director of marketing at Ivanka Trump, told CNNMoney last week that the brand was growing and experienced “significant year-over-year revenue growth in 2016.”
“We believe that the strength of a brand is measured not only by the profits it generates, but the integrity it maintains,” Young said.
Retailers like Bloomingdale’s, Amazon, Lord & Taylor, Macy’s and Zappos all still carry Ivanka Trump products.
Ivanka Trump has taken a leave of absence from her namesake company since her father won the presidency. She has no formal role in the administration but is expected to have a voice on issues such as women’s empowerment and child care.
Ivanka Trump’s Brand Says Nordstrom Hasn’t Dropped Them Things are getting messy. FEB 4, 2017 6:30PM EST –via Teen Vogue
… Ivanka Trump brand is refuting the claims made by Nordstrom. On Friday, a spokesperson told Refinery29 that they were still in business together, but their merchandise has simply been moved to in-store only. “Nordstrom ordered both apparel and shoes for the spring, and followed through with the orders on the apparel,” the Ivanka Trump brand claims. “They canceled the shoe order, kept the apparel order and moved the apparel from online into stores. It’s there.”
Nordstrom is still admit about their reasoning for dropping the line saying it’s because a drop in sales, but according to this article:
… a source that claims to be near to the first daughter told Refinery29 that wasn’t the case with Nordstrom. “They couldn’t handle the political pressure, someone new came in, and there was a change in the attitude toward the brand,” they told the website.
“I learned a long time ago that I can’t control the opinions of others or what they project on me. All I can do is live my life, and I’ve tried to do that,” she tells me a few minutes into our interview. It’s a classic Ivanka statement, as if to say, I’m perfectly clear about who I am; it’s not my fault what other people decide to think. It’s easy to understand why she feels that way, and why Ivanka—always poised, always on message—seems to work so hard to keep her image under control.
…Net sales of just the clothing arm of the company were up $11.8 million during the first 6 months of 2016 compared to the first 6 months of 2015 as it sold its products online and at department stores, according to public filings from one of Ivanka Trump’s major licensing and manufacturing partners. Forbes reported that Ivanka’s clothing line generated $100 million in revenue last year, and sales were up $29.4 million from the previous fiscal year. The private company will not confirm specific sales figures, but do say their sales went up 37% last year, and that the growth rate has held pretty steady this year. And the website’s traffic is up 50% over last year, thanks in large part to Ivanka’s heightened public profile.
Is Ivanka Trump’s brand losing its bling? –– via Fox 6 Now and http://www.nbc-2.com/story/34460378/is-ivanka-trumps-brand-losing-its-bling -NBC 2
The brand would tell you “no.” A spokesperson for the first daughter’s fashion label said Wednesday that the brand’s overall sales were up 21% in 2016 compared to the prior year.
… plenty of retailers that are still carrying the brand. A spokesperson said over 800 retailers — including Bloomingdale’s, Amazon, Lord & Taylor, Macy’s and Zappos — all carry Ivanka Trump products.
Even with all these reports of significant rises in income for the Ivanka Trump Company, Nordstrom’s continues to insist that they are discontinuing the brand because of a decrease in sales. However, there is an email from Nordstrom’s sent to their employees floating around, that was allegedly sent two days before their announcement of their decision to quit offering the Ivanka Trump Brand.
…two days before Nordstrom dropped Ivanka’s line, the company’s three presidents sent an email to all company staff criticizing President Donald Trump’s controversial travel ban, Daily Mail reports.
The email, obtained by the Seattle-based newspaper “The Stranger,” said,
We literally have thousands of employees who are first and second generation immigrants.
Every one of your unique qualities brings a richness that allows us to better reflect and serve the multicultural communities we’re a part of and ultimately makes us a better company.
We are a better place with you here, no doubt about it.
It’s important that we reiterate our values to all of you and make it clear that we support each of our employees. We will continue to value diversity, inclusion, respect, and you can count on that. (the full email can be read here)
But, in reality, the brand wasn’t performing badly. Nordstrom’s came under political fire from a series of hardcore anti-Trump activists, according to People Magazine.
There are both boycotts of Ivanka Trump’s Brand and Boycotts of the stores that have dropped it.
#BoycottNordstrom Swings From Left To Right After Ivanka Trump Drop – via Investor’s Business Daily 2/03/2017
It was not too long ago that #BoycottNordstrom had a different audience, however, many of whom were concerned about the Trump family’s potential business conflicts of interest….
Grab Your Wallet has been vocal in trying to get shoppers to boycott stores that carry Trump-affiliated merchandise.
Nordstrom shares rose 0.9% to 43.90 in the stock market today, (2-3-17) well off intraday highs of 46.09 as the stock tries to break a downtrend going back to early December.
Macy’s rose 6.5% Friday on continued buyout buzz, after advancing 5.2% on Thursday. Amazon slid 3.5% after reporting weaker-than-expected sales and revenue guidance late Thursday.
So what is it? Is Ivanka Trump Brand sales up overall and only down at a handful of stores?
Or is someone on either side fudging the real story? It’s hard to tell. Because of my own personal experience with trusting the mainstream press; I can’t help but question the dozens of articles that are basically copied and pasted over and over from news source to news source that state a negative bias against the Trump name.
President Trump and his Councilor Kellyanne Conway have been under duress for sticking up for Ivanka and stating that she has been treated unfairly by the retailers that have dropped her brand and by the media. Critics are saying that they are using their political positions to further Ms. Ivanka’s success. (Which is unlawful.)
Here’s How Ivanka Trump Responded to Women Boycotting Her Clothing Line October 27, 2016 11:02 a.m – via NY Mag
“Well, the beauty of America is people can do what they like, but I prefer to talk to the millions, tens of millions of American women who are inspired by the brand and the message that I’ve created,” Ivanka said.
She went on to say that her “advocacy of women” started long before the presidential campaign began. “I never politicized that message,” Ivanka added. “People who are seeking to politicize it because they may disagree with the politics of my father, there’s nothing I can do to change that.”
There has been controversy in the past year over a few instances when Ivanka wore her own accessories and apparel on TV for her father’s interview with 60 minutes and Republicans National Convention.
Ivanka Trump’s Company Scrambles Over ’60 Minutes’ Bracelet Criticism -via NBC NOV 15 2016, 1:25 PM ET
A “fashion alert” was initially sent to journalists on Monday by Monica Marder, vice president of sales for Ivanka Trump Fine Jewelry. It promoted Ivanka Trump as wearing “her favorite bangle from the Metropolis Collection” on the CBS News show. The bracelet costs $8,800 to $10,800. “Please share this with your clients…” the email said.
….The interview was not the first time Ivanka Trump used her father’s political spotlight to highlight her brand. In July, the former model marketed a blush pink sheath dress she wore at the Republican National Convention. The dress, which retailed at a more affordable $138, quickly sold out.
This past week both President Donald J. Trump, and Kelley Anne Conway, stuck up for Ms. Ivanka and were criticized for breaking the law. It’s illegal to use your political office to promote yourself or friends for profit. Which is a valid law and makes perfect sense. Many in the past have gotten away with doing this though.
The same news sources that were telling me just weeks ago about girl power and striving to be successful women for equality are now very anti-Ivanka Trump. The same news sources that were just telling me that ‘us’ women have to stick together and stick up for each other, are now tearing down one of the most successful women in our country. Not because of something she did wrong, but because of who her dad is, and they don’t like him.
Now hypothetically, what if we were talking about Chelsea Clinton? Say, she has a successful fashion brand, while her father is president. The same father who was caught in many unfavorable acts against women. Not just talk and not just one but many. If the same thing was happening to her right now, how would the woman from “the left” be acting?
Ivanka Trump has focused on empowering women to be successful. She even markets her brand as a celebration of women.
http://ivankatrump.com/about/ –via her website
It’s a celebration of women working at all aspects of their lives. Women who transition between their various roles in professional and personal capacities: building careers, raising children, nurturing relationships and pursuing passions.
For instance former President Barack Obama plugged Blackberry at the beginning of his presidency. Some may argue that it wasn’t for his personal gain, however do you know for positive sure that he hasn’t any ties, has never had any ties or friends with ties to that company? I don’t.
Reflections on the Greatest Free Product Endorsement Ever 11/08/2012 @ 9:28AM -via Forbes
January 7, 2009, days before his inauguration and in the face of having to give up his personal phone for security reasons as his predecessors had done, the President-elect said, “I’m still clinging to my BlackBerry. They’re going to pry it out of my hands.” This was a product that was of such great use to him, and represented his connection to the life he was leaving, that he would force his Executive Office of the President (EOP) to change protocol so that he could keep his cherished device. This is the sort of endorsement that companies dream about.
Samsung, selfies and the branding of Barack Obama April 3, 2014 -via Washington Post
During a concession speech in April 2008, Obama spoke in front of a crowd that included someone in an Abercrombie & Fitch shirt. The FITCH part of the shirt was very visible. The company’s spokesperson told the New York Post, “Thanks to the Obama campaign for the great product placement. We wish we had thought of it.”
First Ladies Have Often Made Use Of Their ‘Brands’ Friday, February 10, 2017 -via Valley News
Roosevelt showed up in print and television commercials endorsing bread products, margarine and even the burgeoning airline industry. The latter featured a portrait of Roosevelt seated on a plane, serenely knitting above this quote: “I never cease to marvel at the airplane.” Roosevelt was surprised at her ability to push products, historians recalled, but in the years since the selling power of first ladies has been well documented.
Their position is unsalaried and the work is unofficial, but presidents’ wives have used their platforms to promote worthy causes, promote their husbands — and, sometimes, promote themselves….
…Jimmy Carter’s younger brother Billy, who gained celebrity for his boozy, good-ol’ boy likability. In the late 1970s, he endorsed a product called Billy Beer. The cans read: “Brewed expressly for and with the personal approval of one of America’s all-time Great Beer Drinkers — Billy Carter.”
Former First Lady Michelle Obama isn’t innocent of promoting friends either. Read on to her own quote about being happy to give designers a “boost.”
Like Conway, Michelle Obama boasted about ‘boosting’ sale of designers
By EMILY JASHINSKY (@EMILYJASHINSKY) •2/9/17 – via Washington Examiner
In an interview with Vogue, First Lady Michelle Obama explicitly acknowledged that one of the questions she considered when choosing fashion designers was, “Can I give them a boost?”
According to Vogue, Obama remarked, “There are definitely designers that I love, people I love to work with. And who they are as people matters. Are they good people? Do they treat their staff well? Do they treat my staff well? Are they young? Can I give them a boost?”
The implication here, of course, is that Michelle Obama deliberately exploited her position as first lady to “boost” the sales of private businesses.
There are more instances where these sorts of things have happened and I don’t remember anyone making such a mountain out of it. I’m not saying that it’s right to or it’s legal to use your political platform to make money or make money for family or friends. There is clearly a law saying that is illegal. All I’m saying is that it’s not anything new. Why is it a bigger deal when the Trump Administration has done this, rather than the people that have done it in the past? Shouldn’t we hold all persons to the same standards? If the laws aren’t enforced for everyone, only a select few, that is just unethical.
Women around the globe should be very happy that Ivanka Trump is in the White House, especially the women of America and those who aren’t fans of her father. She has a very good and strong influence on him. She’s ambitious, successful and she cares about women’s rights; everyone’s rights. With her in her father’s ear he will always advocate for women, because he will never want to let “his little girl” down.
I’ve seen a lot of comments on social media of people that do not like Donald Trump as our president, because they are terrified that LGBTQ Rights are in jeopardy. So are they?
Not that I can find sound evidence of, however there are tons of #fakenews that will tell you otherwise.
Here is the manipulation from the press. I saw this on other sources as well. These stories were printed the day, before President Trump was expected to announce his actions on LGBTQ Rights policies.
Reuters claiming that he probably would NOT protect the rights of #LGBTs.
Lies and implications like this are dividing the nation.
They are breaking up relationships, causing tension and ruining families.
I know this, because it’s happening to me and people I love.
LGBT advocates scared, despite White House words on equality
If you search this topic there are all sorts of anti-LGBT rights Trump Administration claims. I had to wade through A WHOLE LOT OF CRAP to find any TRUTH.
Here is officially what is ACTUALLY going on. This is also the promise President Trump made throughout his campaign. Despite the negative claims and scare tactics from the media. Trump announced his executive order to keep in place #LGBTQrights
Obama’s Protections for L.G.B.T. Workers Will Remain Under Trump
Photo Credit: A flag appeared during the New York City gay pride parade in June.
BRYAN R. SMITH / AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE — GETTY IMAGES
Statement from The White House:
“President Trump continues to be respectful and supportive of L.G.B.T.Q. rights, just as he was throughout the election,” the statement said. “The president is proud to have been the first ever G.O.P. nominee to mention the L.G.B.T.Q. community in his nomination acceptance speech, pledging then to protect the community from violence and oppression.”
Below is all I could find, so far on the original text of the order from the Obama Administration. When I get time to do so, I will do more digging. I had to wade through a lot of crap, just to get even this. There is so much fake news about this subject, it’s ridiculous!!!
Fact Sheet: Taking Action to Support LGBT Workplace Equality
Here is another article and it has a mixture of truth and some bias quotes, including this one. Most likely added to make you doubt that you should feel safe that everyone’s rights will be protected.
*Another manipulation by the media* (Are you seeing the pattern yet?)
Trump continues Obama order protecting LGBTQ federal workers
“Donald Trump has done nothing but undermine equality since he set foot in the White House,” HRC President Chad Griffin said at a news conference hours after Trump signed the order.
Griffin asserted — without providing evidence — that the administration “is still considering an (executive order) that would discriminate against LGBTQ people.”
I have yet to find any real evidence of that claim. I highly doubt this will happen, because it would only raise even more division and drama in the country. It would cause all kinds of protesting and a lot of mad people. (I, personally, would also be very angry, if that happened.)
Not only that, but it would go against the actual promise that President Trump made during his campaign to be supportive of LGBTQ people’s rights. So far, everything he has done since being our President, has been on his campaign check list, with only slight revisions. These revisions were improvements, that should be satisfying the democratic party.
I will update this post as the information is revealed.
See how CNN Debunks their own fake story about the inauguration photo of President Donald J. Trump 2017
Most of the public has seen the comparison photos of Obama’s Inauguration and Trump’s.(Allegedly that is Trump’s 2017 Inauguration photo on the left and Obama’s from 2009 on the right.)
Above is the photo that went out to the public, just an hour or so after President Trump’s 2017 inauguration was over with.
When I first saw this article, it came from CBS, with a photo credit to Reuters. I knew it was #fakenews. It made me so angry, that I had to post it, to my facebook page, and call it out to the rest of my friends. I included this statement:
I also posted on several news page’s articles, from Facebook, that had picked up story. The story spread like wildfire, in a matter of a few hours. I kept telling people that it was a fake story, and the other things that I have said, in the quote above. I will believe what I saw on live TV, with my own eyeballs. The place was packed all the way to the Washington Monument. There is no way that this picture was taken at the time of his swearing in. Not to mention the fact that it was raining. I was criticised, called every offensive name you can think of, including the absolute worst things you can think of, by every #TrumpHater. It’s very disheartening to know you are right, and no one believes you. The hate was so thick I could have cut it with a knife.
Below you will see a video I found. You can imagine how happy I was to see it. I immediately went to search the heck out of it and make sure it was legit. First I went to CNN, because it claims that CNN debunks their own story. Apparently CNN was either the source of the story, or one of the news sources that jumped on it, as soon as they saw it. (No wonder Trump has been calling them fake news. Right?) After searching CNN I couldn’t find it, but I went and search “giga pixels inauguration day 2017 Trump”. Bam! I left the link for you below the video.
Here is the link so you can see for yourself:
In the video the claim is the President Trump Inauguration picture was actually taken at 8:00 am on Friday January 20, 2017. Deliberately a manipulation to cause drama in the public eye.
Now my questions for you are.
These are all questions that trouble me. Especially because by making you think that no one was there, they manipulated how you feel about the peaceful transfer of power, between our previous President Obama and our new controversial President Trump. You have been mad and stress for over a week and this story helped start the tension. It also has help incite the violence and several people have been HURT because of the tension.
Honestly, in my own opinion, I do not think he overreacted. He could have reacted better. He could have tried to calmed down before he made a statement, however he has every right to be mad. We all have a right to be very mad!
We all think our opinions are right.
#AlternativeFacts is a horrible way of saying, #ADifferentPerspective, but this is what, I believe is the meaning. With this blog my intent is to bring to my readers, just that.
A different perspective is not a bad thing. We all get so caught up in the passion of how we believe, our personal feelings, experiences and opinions…sometimes it’s hard to see any other perspective through all of our own fire.
We all think our opinions are right. What you think are facts, I may know something else that you haven’t read or seen yet, as well as you may have seen or read something I haven’t. The facts I know are a different way of looking at the same thing. As well as vise versa. This is why creating a dialogue between one another is so very important. We can not just spout off anger and then shut down, just because we think our opinion is the right opinion. We will not get anywhere doing things like that.
Listening to each other is key. Educating ourselves is key. RESPECTING EACH OTHER IS KEY. The hating and the name calling is not helping anyone’s cause.
I’ve found that the bias from any news media these days has forced us to read the same story, 3-5 times in order to navigate our way through what the facts actually are and what is the opinions of the author. It’s making it exhausting to try and stay informed. This is not an acceptable practice for any news source to use.
A news source should be giving the straight up factual news and then letting the public decide how they feel about it. That means not leaving out convenient facts, because they do not fit their own agenda/opinion. This also means not trying to turn stories into positives or especially negatives to create angst and/or any other feelings in the public. It’s irresponsible as a journalist. If you are going to be an opinion writer, start a blog like I did.
I’ve also found that the more hateful, outrageous, and inciteful the headlines are the more the media will use them, even if they don’t really have anything to do with the actual story. They do it to get your attention, if a story is posted on social media, they want you to click it. The more clicks the more money for the ads that are supporting their website.
Did you know that most of Americans don’t even read beyond the headlines? Many of them will make a negative comment regarding their opinion and not even know what they are commenting on.
“the average news consumer in the United States is a headline-reader — at best. A new study by the Media Insight Project, an initiative of the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and the American Press Institute — the entire thing is enlightening about how we consume (and don’t consume) news — affirms this fact.”-via The Washington Post
In conclusion, it’s best to do your research, and stay informed. Don’t just stay on page one of your search results. I tend to navigate through at least 10 pages. That way you can read the same story from many sources, and include a variety, between left wing/right wing/ and independent opinions. It’s also helpful to look for old news from years past, because you might find that the news is now changing the narrative from the facts of history they were reporting several months or years ago.
Good luck everyone! I hope you all feel better soon and God Bless America!
Source: Washington Post
Americans read headlines. And not much else.