Archive for clothing

"Ooo! Ooo! Who are you wearing?" "USPS, duh."

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

who are you wearing usps

The United States Postal Service has budget issues that could be rectified, as you'll see in the email below. Doing away with the 75 year pension funding requirement would do wonders, but Republican hatred for unions and their goal to privatize America fuel their obstruction and destruction.

Meantime, the USPS is trying to pull in a little extra cash by introducing a collection of-- wait for it-- hip, "cutting edge" men's clothing and accessories. Women's wear is coming.

No, I'm not kidding. I can see it now, a giddy Ryan Seacrest on the Red Carpet calling out to Bradley Cooper, "Oo! Oo! Who are you wearing?" "Dude... USPS. Who else?"

L.A. Times:

The collection, to be called “Rain Heat & Snow,” will be made through a license agreement with Cleveland-based apparel firm Wahconah Group Inc. The Postal Service will not incur any cost and will collect royalties from sales, according to USPS spokesman Roy A. Betts.

The deal, which Betts said is “in the development and test phase,” will include outerwear, sportswear, casual wear, athletic wear and seasonal wear.

The clothing line, or “smart apparel,” will incorporate electronics like iPods that can be hooked up to, say, a jacket with volume controls on the sleeve.

Now if they can come up with a women's line of eye-popping designer gowns with plunging necklines and backless backs plus ban-worthy see-through fabrics and thigh-high slits (equipped with discreet Internet hook-ups) and create a little runway buzz and tons of name-dropping, they may be on to something.

Fun fashion news aside, “It’s called the U.S. Postal Service because it is a service, not a corporation.” The following email came to me from CREDO Action. I got a similar one from Color of Change, so it's good to see different groups are all over this:

The United States Postal Service announced last week that due to budget shortfalls, mail will no longer be delivered on Saturdays starting in August.

It's true the post office faces financial challenges. But the financial problems are in large part a direct result of an onerous and ill-considered 2006 law called the "Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act" (PAEA) that mandates pre-funding the postal service retiree health care and pension benefits for 75 years — something that no other government agency or private company is forced to do.

The vast majority — 85% — of the budget red ink comes from this pre-funding mandate despite the fact that, according to the post office Inspector General, the pension is over-funded and reserves for retiree health care are far higher than the federal government as a whole, the military and almost all Fortune 1000 companies.1

Tell Congress: Don't let Republicans kill the post office. Click here to sign this petition automatically.

Even with the declining levels of "snail mail," the post office still manages to deliver to every household in America a total of 563 million pieces of mail for an incredibly low cost. It does it efficiently, and without a penny of taxpayer money.2

But it's that very self-sufficiency that drove Congressional Republicans to hatch a long-term plan to destroy the agency by starving it of the ability to maintain services. By forcing the USPS to save an outrageous and unneeded nest-egg, the agency has been increasingly removed from revenues which would help it keep pace with the innovation of FedEx and UPS.

As a result, the post office has closed branches in some of the most rural areas, where it was the only government-affiliated location for miles around.

Rural post offices in particular are important institutions. Closing them, especially in areas with little or no access to broadband internet service, could have a major impact on the communities they serve. And closing them won't save much money.

Tell Congress: Don't let Republicans kill the post office. Click here to sign this petition automatically.

Undermining public services is exactly what Republicans have been doing since the Reagan-era, by cutting off normal, healthy revenues for any reason they can find — even if it requires doing something that in any other circumstance would be branded as total lunacy. FedEx and UPS would never be required to meet the same savings requirements as the USPS.

By making the public believe that government services are underfunded and poorly managed, Republicans can force more cuts, and eventually privatize services altogether, handing over public goods to private corporations that enrich a select few at the expense of many.

And if the USPS dies, FedEx and UPS will have been delivered an entire, centuries-old industry at wholesale cost.

But all of this can be avoided by making simple and popular reforms to the postal service like those proposed last year in a bill by Delaware Senator Thomas Carper. His bill would have allowed the USPS to stretch out payments for future retirees for the next 40 years, while recouping $11 billion the government has overcharged the postal service.3

If Congress can't get its act together and implement these necessary and simple reforms, the postal service will be forced to continue cutting staff and services. Legislators must act now to repeal the PAEA and put the post office back on equal footing.

Tell Congress: Don't let Republicans kill the post office. Click the link below to sign this petition automatically.
http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=6996482&p=usps_sat_delivery&id=55073-3929408-8oa51Ux&t=8

Thank you for standing up for the post office.

Jordan Krueger, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Ann Romney "knows what it's like to struggle". You can tell by her $990 tee shirt.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Yesterday Paddy posted Ann Romney on Mitt: ‘There’s a wild and crazy man inside there’. The photo above is a screen grab from that video.

That quote was bad enough. What makes the "to know us is to love us" moment worse is what she's wearing in that vid. No, I'm not criticizing her taste in clothing... just marveling at the price tag. Via Syleite:

According to a saleswoman at Krakoff’s Madison Avenue store, [Ann Romney's] silk tee costs $990.

Now, now, before our trolls get all huffy, nobody is saying being rich is a bad thing. We'd all love to have as much money as the Romneys do, but come on, there is so much hypocrisy going on here, it makes a 99%er's head spin.

First, the Mrs. Willard who owns the nearly-$1000 tee is the same one who knocked her multi-million dollar brains out to prove to voters how she "knows what it's like to struggle" just like us:

But see, Ann, many of us struggle to buy one lousy $9.90 shirt at Cheap Tees R Us AND cope with health issues.

Note to Romneys: One way to help Americans relate to you better is to attempt to be just a weensy bit like us (or at least learn how to empathize).

And that's not the only problem. The GOP has spent years blasting Democrats for being "detached elitists," for getting $400 haircuts (never mind Paul Ryan’s $350 wine), for wishing more kids could attend college, or even for enjoying wind surfing.

Meanwhile, their own candidate pals around with owners of NASCAR and NFL teams, buys his spouse not one, but two Cadillacs, uses car elevators, and renovates his $12 million home by adding on 3,600-square foot basements... and foots the bill for $990 tee shirts.

For a little perspective, a headline from the L.A. Times about Michelle Obama's wardrobe during the 2008 campaign season reads, Michelle Obama's cheap dress drives others to don the same:

A picture's worth 990 words.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

AUDIO: Sharron Angle agrees with host that we have "domestic enemies" within Congress; VIDEO of Bachmann added

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Thanks to Greg Sargent for sharing more evidence of what a loon Sharron Angle is:

[G]iven some of her previous claims -- particularly her assertion that people may soon resort to "Second Amendment remedies" if Congress continues along its current course -- it's perfectly legit to ask her if this is what she really believes.

This brilliant bit of audio from the wackydoodle who opined that "black as a color was thoroughly evil, invoking the supernatural and especially the devil,” referring to high school football jerseys.

UPDATE: I meant to add this earlier, totally forgot. Good times, good times....

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

PhotOh! The wicked, ungodly Sharron Angle: Devil in black.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

About twenty years ago (good lord, 1992 was that long ago?), Sharron Angle objected to "a local high school's use of black football jerseys, arguing that the dark color was ungodly and wicked, Bill Roberts of Nevada's Pahrump Valley Times recently reported."

While some detractors made the argument that adopting the new color was unacceptable simply as a breach of tradition, Angle -- who was in the midst of an eventually successful campaign for school board -- and others argued that wearing black jerseys was closer to sacrilege.

"I cannot quote scripture as they did to justify their point but the gist of their argument was that black as a color was thoroughly evil, invoking the supernatural and especially the devil," Roberts reports. "Whichever argument prevailed, school administrators caved in and prohibited the Muckers from wearing the black apparel."

I take it Sharron never owned a little black dress or, say, a black suit or jacket.

Oh wait. Never mind:

The devil made her do it.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

"So is this Michelle’s F-You message to the Gulf coast?"

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

The rightie bandwagon of hate is so out of touch, so full of nasty spew, one wonders how they got this way. How did their prejudice become so ingrained? Who taught them to loathe other people, especially wonderful ones like Michelle Obama?

Especially those who don't look like them:

First Ladies choose their wardrobe very carefully. Why would Michelle select this dress? It is not just ugly; it looks like oil spill.

So is this Michelle’s F-You message to the Gulf coast?

Brilliant conclusion.

Yes, yes, of course, it's so obvious. Michelle Obama hates the Gulf Coast. All of it. Every single resident, especially-- dun-dun-dunn-- the white ones!

And what says F-You Gulf Coast better than a dress?

Ohh, that sly First Lady, sneaking in a secret message via her clothing. Why, I nearly missed it!

For more ridiculous stories about desperate attempts to smear not racist people with outrageous accusations, go here and here.

I can't think of a worse segue than this one leading into our quarterly fundraiser?

The fact is, TPC does need donations, unfortunately. Since we've expanded the site to fit our needs, we now pay for the domain name and the server, among other things... like my cranky, transmission challenged car.

Did I mention I lost my teaching job of 14 years last January? We know many of you are in the same boat, or worse, as we are, and we empathize.

We also now have a subscription service set up where you can pledge a small (or large) monthly amount to help us out. An extra added shout out THANK YOU to those who have already donated. We appreciate the hell out of you.

So, for those who are able, and are so inclined, we are once again put in the position of asking for assistance.

We thank you so much for your loyal readership, and for your generosity.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare