This is an example of Democrats jumping on the bandwagon to support the wealthy. How things change when they see a chance to score political points. In their zeal to trash the current administration, they've fallen into a trap and shown us how hypocritical they are.
PRESIDENT Trump tweeted yesterday that Nordstrom was being unfair to his daughter. The left, as usual, used this as an excuse to make false claims that he was nuts. That he was dangerous. On the contrary, what is more dangerous; A president that criticizes unfair business practices or a president who has been conducting a war against law enforcement. This criticism from the left isn't so much about what is right or wrong, but about what feeds an agenda and fills their coffers.
Right now the left is trashing PRESIDENT Trump on the behalf of a bunch of guys who have huge compensation packages, the kind of which were a source of scorn by these same exact Democrats only a few years ago. After all Barack Obama said; "There comes a time when you've made enough money". Apparently this doesn't apply if Democrats can use you to attack Republicans and especially attack Bush....er I mean Trump. So if the Democrats need a tax increase or need to get low-income voters on their side, they trash the evil rich. Now they're using the rich to attack PRESIDENT Trump. In effect, they are on the side of the rich man.
Blog: Which is better: a president who criticizes the police or one who criticizes Nordstrom?
PRESIDENT Trump tweeted yesterday that Nordstrom was being unfair to his daughter. The left, as usual, used this as an excuse to make false claims that he was nuts. That he was dangerous. On the contrary, what is more dangerous; A president that criticizes unfair business practices or a president who has been conducting a war against law enforcement. This criticism from the left isn't so much about what is right or wrong, but about what feeds an agenda and fills their coffers.
Right now the left is trashing PRESIDENT Trump on the behalf of a bunch of guys who have huge compensation packages, the kind of which were a source of scorn by these same exact Democrats only a few years ago. After all Barack Obama said; "There comes a time when you've made enough money". Apparently this doesn't apply if Democrats can use you to attack Republicans and especially attack Bush....er I mean Trump. So if the Democrats need a tax increase or need to get low-income voters on their side, they trash the evil rich. Now they're using the rich to attack PRESIDENT Trump. In effect, they are on the side of the rich man.
Blog: Which is better: a president who criticizes the police or one who criticizes Nordstrom?
February 9, 2017
Which is better: a president who criticizes the police or one who criticizes Nordstrom?
By Ed Straker
President Trump is being criticized for making critical comments of Nordstrom, which just dropped his daughter's product lines. Nordstrom claims that it is dropping her products due to economic reasons, but it is a big coincidence that Nordstrom, TJ Maxx, Marshalls, Neiman Marcus, and other retailers are dropping Trump products just as President Trump took office. The fact is that Nordstrom and other stores fear pressure from the left for selling Trump-branded products and so are proactively caving in to pressure. One wonders: if President Obama had sold an Obama-branded marijuana cigarette, would stores in California and Colorado be as quick to drop his product line when he became president? Probably not.
Predictably, the media are upset that Trump criticized Nordstrom for dropping his daughter's product line, calling it an "ethical dilemma." But the media saw no dilemma of any kind, ethical or otherwise, when President Obama and his henchman Eric Holder and his henchwoman Loretta Lynch went after the police forces of America and labeled them racist oppressors, feeding fuel to the fire to Black Lives Matter rioters everywhere and disincentivizing the police to do their jobs properly.
But you see, that was different, because that was about race and social justice. This is about Trump's products.
But taking a look at the list of corporate officers who run Nordstrom, I was a little surprised to find that of the top 13 officers, only one is a woman (predictably, human resources). That sounds more than a little sexist to me. What if Trump had criticized Nordstrom for being sexist? Would the media have minded?
And I couldn't help but notice that the three co-presidents of Nordstrom each make more than five million dollars a year in base compensation. ${Instrument_CompanyName} ${Instrument_Ric} People | Reuters.com
I have to wonder how many times that salary is compared to the basic sales clerk who works at Nordstrom. Isn't that enormous gap only fueling inequality?
How do you feel about the media defending a company that marginalizes women and pays huge salaries at the expense of its workers? In light of that, isn't the media's hand-wringing over such a racist, sexist, classist mega-corporation a reflection of their own lack of moral virtue?
Which is better: a president who criticizes the police or one who criticizes Nordstrom?
By Ed Straker
President Trump is being criticized for making critical comments of Nordstrom, which just dropped his daughter's product lines. Nordstrom claims that it is dropping her products due to economic reasons, but it is a big coincidence that Nordstrom, TJ Maxx, Marshalls, Neiman Marcus, and other retailers are dropping Trump products just as President Trump took office. The fact is that Nordstrom and other stores fear pressure from the left for selling Trump-branded products and so are proactively caving in to pressure. One wonders: if President Obama had sold an Obama-branded marijuana cigarette, would stores in California and Colorado be as quick to drop his product line when he became president? Probably not.
Predictably, the media are upset that Trump criticized Nordstrom for dropping his daughter's product line, calling it an "ethical dilemma." But the media saw no dilemma of any kind, ethical or otherwise, when President Obama and his henchman Eric Holder and his henchwoman Loretta Lynch went after the police forces of America and labeled them racist oppressors, feeding fuel to the fire to Black Lives Matter rioters everywhere and disincentivizing the police to do their jobs properly.
But you see, that was different, because that was about race and social justice. This is about Trump's products.
But taking a look at the list of corporate officers who run Nordstrom, I was a little surprised to find that of the top 13 officers, only one is a woman (predictably, human resources). That sounds more than a little sexist to me. What if Trump had criticized Nordstrom for being sexist? Would the media have minded?
And I couldn't help but notice that the three co-presidents of Nordstrom each make more than five million dollars a year in base compensation. ${Instrument_CompanyName} ${Instrument_Ric} People | Reuters.com
I have to wonder how many times that salary is compared to the basic sales clerk who works at Nordstrom. Isn't that enormous gap only fueling inequality?
How do you feel about the media defending a company that marginalizes women and pays huge salaries at the expense of its workers? In light of that, isn't the media's hand-wringing over such a racist, sexist, classist mega-corporation a reflection of their own lack of moral virtue?
Last edited:
