By Debbie Schlussel
It’s sad to learn of the death of Farrah Fawcett from cancer.
As a kid, I was a fan of “Charlie’s Angels,” the TV show which–if you watch it now–doesn’t stand the test of time. Much was made of the “jiggle” that was part of the show, but that was more evident on sillier shows, like “Three’s Company.” And the three women detectives on the show were something of a new phenomenon for America: classic beauties with brains and guns, who were also sexy. They showed us that women with guns were cool and could protect themselves from the bad guys. They held guns, but didn’t act masculine or “kick butt.” They had class and style.

From the Schlussel “Charlie’s Angels” Cards Collection

I played with Charlie’s Angels dolls, the Charlie’s Angels Van, and collected the trading cards and stickers. And I had the Farrah Fawcett doll and a Farrah Fawcett styling head–a large face with Farrah’s hair and features that you could style and make up with play cosmetics. I always insisted that, when I went for a haircut, the stylist styled my hair to look like the famous Farrah hairstyle of the ’70s, with long tousled curls and waves.
Although my favorite of the Charlie’s Angels was and still is Jaclyn Smith, Farrah Fawcett was a classic blonde American beauty from Texas whose looks were stunning and timeless.
Fawcett was kooky after “Charlie’s Angels,” which she left after a short stint–just one season. She did a perverted naked Playboy body-painting video, a bizarre interview with David Letterman, and chose to deliberately have a son out of wedlock, helping to set a disastrous trend (son Redmond O’Neill’s drug addictions and criminal behavior bear out the negative tendencies of kids born to single mothers). She left Lee Majors to live with Ryan O’Neill and helped make non-married live-in relationships fashionable.
But some would say that compared to the celebrities of today, her life was tame in comparison. And her illness and early death from cancer are sad and lamentable. It’s sad for me because I grew up on the Farrah Fawcett dolls and cards and posters.
I will always remember her for that classic beauty. And for the fact that, these days, you rarely see (non-police) women with guns–the “good guy” women–on broadcast TV series anymore.
As I looked through my “Charlie’s Angels” card collection in recent weeks, I note that all of the pictures of her are stunning and gorgeous. But the most beautiful ones–the sexiest–are the ones with her holding a gun. Yes, that’s one of Farrah Fawcett’s contributions–far more important than her famous sexy poster in a red bathing suit–to America: in a day and age when political correctness didn’t run television programming, Fawcett and her fellow Angels made it cool for women to enjoy and practice the Second Amendment.
Farrah Fawcett, Rest In Peace.

By Debbie Schlussel
When Ronald Wilson Reagan accepted the Republican nomination for President in 1980 in Detroit, he stayed at the beautiful Ponchartrain Hotel, a tall glass and onyx black jewel prominent on the city’s skyline. It’s my favorite building within the city limits, and in my opinion, one of the most visually stunning.
At that time, it was a symbol of Detroit’s contemporary elegance and business deals in a down but then-not out auto industry. The Ponchartrain was Reagan campaign headquarters, and it was the seat of the Reagan Revolution for that momentous summer in U.S. history that set Reagan and his movement on its way and sent a hint to Jimmy Carter to start packin’.
But, now, that same skyscraper hotel–no longer a Ponchartrain, and now a struggling independent called the Detroit Riverside Hotel–is a symbol of how far Detroit has declined since the Reagan Presidency.

Reagan Revolution Hotel Now Decrepit Symbol of Decline
In town this week for a National Baptist Convention, hundreds of convention goers had the misfortune of staying at this hotel that has fallen far from grace–a hotel that probably had no business being open but desperately needed to stay open to get the business.

The hotel–in sweltering 90 degree heat and humidity–had no air conditioning, no changed bed sheets and linens, and limited staff . . . all because it can’t pay its bills. And lots of guests are angry, many having moved out before their reserved stay was over. It’s very sad.
The former Ponchartrain is one of the most beautiful, but mostly empty, buildings on Detroit’s skyline. It was built when the auto industry was privately owned and flourishing. It is across the street from the famed Renaissance Center building where the bankrupt GM is currently headquartered. And like GM, the former Ponchartrain is also in bankruptcy. In 1980, America’s auto industry–including GM–was just starting to recover from the Japanese auto invasion. And it was still a non-government entity. Now, the government owns the neighbor across the street. And things are bad.
The hotel’s decline is not entirely its owners’ fault. It’s mostly Detroit’s fault. Forever declining because of bad city “leadership,” decreasing population (a huge Black flight has followed the ancient White flight), and declining business in the city, it’s like many Detroit businesses–it can’t stay afloat. There are no customers.
I don’t celebrate this, because even in the few times I visit the abandoned downtown Detroit ghost town, the outside vision of the contemporary mod architecture of the former Ponchartrain sparkles and delights with it’s cool corners, lines, and edges.
Sadly the outside is deceiving. Inside, the hotel declines like every other famous site and building in the city limits.
And it rots irretrievably along with the rest of the city. The city never recovered from the late ’60s riots which promised that Black power replacing White politicians would move the city forward. As I’ve noted on this site, it led Detroit back to the Dark Ages.
The 1980 Republican National Convention was really on of a series of last hurrahs here. The Detroit Tigers World Series wins were among the others. But the former Tigers Stadium where those wins happened was allowed to rot for decades, before finally being demolished this month. The Detroit Pistons, who also won in the late ’80s and early ’90s, had long ago moved way out to the far suburbs. A Superbowl, Major League Baseball All Star Game, and Final Four NCAA Basketball Tournament events were carefully, artificially staged incidents. The Superbowl was replete with 7-day leases for new bars and restaurants that came and went in a week, while the real decay continued behind the extremely “managed” scenes.
Sadly, America said good-bye to the Reagan Revolution and hello to Obama socialism. And the decline of the Reagan Revolution hotel is concomitant with the decline of the formerly Reagan Revolution America.
It’s a spectacular building. But only on the outside. Inside, it rots from the core. Just like our once proud nation.

By Debbie Schlussel
It’s rare when Western hostages are able to escape from Islamic terrorists. The terrorists don’t have Western values, but they’re not dummies. And usually, those who escape are Westerners being held not by hardened Islamic terrorists but by incompetent low-level thugs seeking expensive ransoms only.
And we’ve seen that the only Westerners that are voluntarily released are America-hating, Islamo-pandering far lefty reporters, like Jill Carroll, who are more valuable alive and free as useful idiots filing pan-Islamic “journalism” stories instead of in continued captivity or dead. when they’ve got you, they’ve got you . . . unless they–and only they–decide to let you go.
I’m very suspicious of the story of New York Times reporter David Rohde’s “escape” from the Taliban, which I wrote about on Monday Morning. The guy’s regular New York HAMAS Times reports hated on America and promoted the Taliban. And that’s probably the reason he was allowed to “escape.” I also don’t buy that he was able to quickly find his way out of the Taliban outback in the middle of nowhere.

Two of a Common Kind:

Anti-Western Urinalists Christiane Amanpour and David Rohde
And, as I already noted, Al-Jazeera–the Terrorist News Network run by America-hating Muslims–agreed to stay mum on the Rohde story. That doesn’t happen unless the kidnapee is “down with the struggle.”
A friend of mine in the know sends this, which I think captures the suspicious story in wonderful context:

Dear Debbie,
I was just rereading your article on David Rohde, the New York Times reporter who escaped from Taliban captivity. Is it possible that he was permitted to escape? I understand that he, like the late Daniel Pearl, was sympathetic to the Islamic side, or at least felt that he had an obligation to tell the other side of the story. Sort of like telling the Nazi side during World War II.
He and two other men made their way back to an American camp. Lets face it, there were not road signs, and the Taliban know how to count. A newspaper I read had an article last week about how Americans are arming Pakistan not to fight the Taliban but to fight Pakistani tribesmen who have been mistakenly identified as Taliban. There are all kinds of spins you can put on something.

David Rohde & His Taliban Buddies
Yup. Sadly, no-one is asking the New York Times or Rohde these questions. Just like they don’t ask questions about the Iranian faux-uprising leader’s Hezbollah leadership and murder of Americans.
Things aren’t always as they seem. You need to read between the lines and dig deeper. If it’s in the headlines of the mainstream media, chances are, something entirely different is going on.
Something smells here. And it’s not just the regular rotten smell of the New York Times in general.

By Debbie Schlussel
Islam Scholar Dr. Andrew Bostom made a great comparison. He compares the green phony democracy stuff in Iran that blind Westerners are eating up to “Soylent Green”–the recycled green “matter” (which turned out to be recycled dead humans) that ignorant humans ate in a desolate future in the great early ’70s Charlton Heston flick. He calls it “Mousavi’s Soylent Green Revolution.” He has more on how supporting the green protestors is perpetuating Iran’s culture of hate–to the point of these young revolutionaries kicking helpless puppies!
Washington Times and syndicated columnist Diana West takes it a step further, riffing off of Andrew’s comparison and calling Westerner’s blind cheering for the Iranian protesters, “Soylent Green Revolutionary Syndrome,” an excellent moniker. West calls the Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens to the carpet over his absolutely disgusting pandering to Islam and an extremist Mousavi-supporting Iranian Shi’ite cleric.

When I read Stephens’ barf-worthy column in yesterday’s paper, I wanted to hurl. He talks about how “allahu akbar”–the Muslim terror chant that allah is the “greatest” or “greater” than our G-d–“sounded so sweet” and how Mousavi–the founder of Hezbollah and the man behind the bombing murders of hundreds of our Marines in Beirut (more on that below)–practices “mercy-Islam.”
Read both of their worthy, on-target take-downs–Andrew’s and Diana’s.
And then, there’s your chief martyr–Mr. Mousavi. I’ve already told you several times (including here, here, and here) about how he was 1) chosen by the Ayatollahs to be a candidate in the first place, 2) was a Khomeini acolyte, 3) fomented the 1979 Iranian revolution which held Americans hostage for 444 days, 4) started Iran’s nuclear development program, 5) supports the destruction of Israel, 6) founded the Hezbollah terrorist group which murdered over 300 U.S. Marines and Embassy officials in Beirut, and 7) is allied with Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the mastermind of the Hezbollah bombing murders of over 114 innocent people at the Jewish community center and Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires Argentina in the ’90s.
Now, we learn that not only did he found Hezbollah, but that he is responsible for the butchery of our Marines in Beirut . . . while they slept (and while they were there to protect Muslims from Israelis and Lebanese Christians).

“They Came in Peace”: Memorial to Marines Slain in Beirut

Three decades ago Mir-Hossein Mousavi was waging a terrorist war on the United States that included bloody attacks on the U.S. embassy and Marine Corps barracks in Beirut.
Mousavi, prime minister for most of the 1980s, personally selected his point man for the Beirut terror campaign, Ali Akbar Mohtashemi-pur, and dispatched him to Damascus as Iran’s ambassador, according to former CIA and military officials.
The ambassador in turn hosted several meetings of the cell that would carry out the Beirut attacks, which were overheard by the National Security Agency.
“We had a tap on the Iranian ambassador to Lebanon,” retired Navy Admiral James “Ace” Lyons related by telephone Monday. In 1983 Lyons was deputy chief of Naval Operations, and deeply involved in the events in Lebanon.
“The Iranian ambassador received instructions from the foreign minister to have various groups target U.S. personnel in Lebanon, but in particular to carry out a ‘spectacular action’ against the Marines,” said Lyons. . . .
Lyons said of Mousavi . . .”[H]e was in a principal position and had to be aware of what was going on.”
Lyons, sometimes called “the father” of the Navy SEALs’ Red Cell counter-terror unit, also fingered Mousavi for the 1988 truck bombing of the U.S. Navy’s Fleet Center in Naples, Italy, that killed five persons, including the first Navy woman to die in a terrorist attack.
Bob Baer agrees that Mousawi, who has been celebrated in the West for sparking street demonstrations against the Teheran regime since he lost the elections, was directing the overall 1980s terror campaign.
But Baer, a former CIA Middle East field officer whose exploits were dramatized in the George Clooney movie “Syriana,” places Mousavi even closer to the Beirut bombings.
“He dealt directly with Imad Mughniyah,” who ran the Beirut terrorist campaign and was “the man largely held responsible for both attacks,” Baer wrote in TIME over the weekend.
“When Mousavi was Prime Minister, he oversaw an office that ran operatives abroad, from Lebanon to Kuwait to Iraq,” Baer continued.
“This was the heyday of [Ayatollah] Khomeini’s theocratic vision, when Iran thought it really could export its revolution across the Middle East, providing money and arms to anyone who claimed he could upend the old order.”
Baer added: “Mousavi was not only swept up into this delusion but also actively pursued it.”
Retired Adm. Lyons maintained that he could have destroyed the terrorists at a hideout U.S. intelligence had pinpointed, but he was outmaneuvered by others in the cabinet of President Ronald Reagan.
“I was going to take them apart,” Lyons said, “but the secretary of defense,” Caspar Weinberger, “sabotaged it.”

Figures. Weinberger of Jewish ancestry was an anti-Semite, who hated Israel and pandered to Muslims and Arabists.
Just like all of you greeniacs are doing today.
The more things change . . . .
In case you forgot about the 1983 bombings or don’t think those are important, here’s a refresher.

By Debbie Schlussel
Like you, I couldn’t care less about the topic that American masses have at the top of their priority list: the split of dumb reality show (redundant) participants Jon and Kate Gosselin, who have eight kids. Whenever I hear about it, I think “Jon and Kate Plus Hate,” because I hate hearing about it. Who cares? Not me.
But, now, Jimmy Kimmel has come up with this hilarious new reality show, and I gotta say . . . I still wouldn’t watch it:

By Debbie Schlussel
Just one thing to say about Gov. Mark Sanford–a guy who is the chief executive of a state and thinks he can just wander off to some chick on the beaches of South America without anyone noticing . . . on Father’s Day Weekend, no less:
Dude, You’re a Governor! Hello . . . .
Okay, so maybe now, he’s a future ex-Governor, but don’t bet on it. Americans have short memories. On the other hand, he could have driven her over a bridge and drowned her and gotten away with it (like someone else who once had Presidential aspirations a/k/a “Club Ted”).
Yes, I know that the locale of this song is in Brazil, not Argentina. But you get the point.

By Debbie Schlussel
We already know that plenty of major American cities are “sanctuary cities,” prohibiting police from asking people their immigration status or turning over known illegal aliens to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
But, now, not only is Los Angeles a sanctuary city, California’s Appellate Court says the whole state is. That’s the essential content of a 25-page decision the court issued, last week, in Harold P. Sturgeon v. William J. Bratton et al., Break the Cycle et al., Interveners and Respondents. With the involvement and backing of the ACLU, the court affirmed that it’s illegal to use illegal alien status–known illegal alien status–to start a police investigation.

Gracias & Shukran, Stupid Gringo Infidel Judges
It’s absurd. Being an illegal alien is, by definition, illegal. Thus, the adjective before the word “alien.” An illegal alien who is here is breaking the law. If you break any other law, the police can use that to start an investigation. But now, the People’s Republic of Granola’s appeals court elevates that crime above all others. It’s apparently no longer enough for probable cause or even reasonable suspicion.
We might as well just open the borders. We know that Los Angeles County, from which this case emanated, is the country that spends $44 million a month for benefits for the kids of illegal aliens.
And yet, who cares about the cost? We need to be tolerant of lawbreakers if they’re not here legally. We need to elevate them above all others.
Thanks, California, for the trend-setting of fruits, nuts, and flakes. The state has been the trendsetter in speeding up the moral and cultural death of America and now the border obliteration of America.
In case you were wondering, the black-robed idiots who issued this 25 pages of toilet paper are H. Walter Croskey, Joan D. Klein, and Patti S. Kitching.

By Debbie Schlussel
One of the biggest problems with Congress is that it doesn’t apply the laws it makes for the rest of us, to itself. Congressmen and Senators are hypocrites. That’s a big part of why many of us support term limits. Those who make the laws need to live among us and feel what it’s like to have the laws they make applied to themselves. They need to experience the difficulties, the effects, the consequences.
Unfortunately, that’s never the case. Career politicians live their whole careers in the elite stratosphere of Capitol Hill never feeling the effects of their work on the little people.
And it’s the same with medicine. When I worked on Capitol Hill, I marveled at the great health plans that Members of Congress and Senators get (and their staff members, in most cases). When I got sick or hurt once, I got sent to a doctor’s office around the corner, and I didn’t pay a dime or have to show proof of insurance.
Not sure if that’s still the case, but our federal elected officials still have sterling silver health plans, unlike the rest of us.

The real test of Obamacare is whether these politicians wishing to impose socialized medicine on the rest of us, will do so for themselves.
Here’s how they fare now, compared with you:

Congressional lawmakers . . . paid less at the doctor’s office under their own insurance than the national average in 2008 but also shelled out up to 13% more for premiums, the studies show.

Before you read this part, keep in mind that McClellan headed the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services under Bush and his brother, Mike, was the Bush turncoat press spokesman. Under McClellan, he ignored billions of dollars of Medicaid fraud by pregnant Muslim aliens and their Muslim doctors, when it was brought to his attention. So, he was part of the problem of high medical expenses, not the solution.

Mark McClellan, a doctor and economist at the Brookings Institution, said he believes members of Congress are getting a good deal. McClellan helped develop a report for the Bipartisan Policy Center that recommends using lawmakers’ premiums as a benchmark for taxing purposes.
“It’s significantly more generous than most Americans are getting,” said McClellan, who suggests Congress could raise money for a health care overhaul by taxing premiums that exceed those included in their own plan.
Lawmakers’ health insurance, which is the same available to all federal workers, is part of the equation. Members of Congress also receive care by a physician at the Capitol for a small fee and treatment at military hospitals – the same offered to presidents and visiting dignitaries, watchdog groups say. . . .
Lawmakers choose from a range of private insurers. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management does not track how many members of Congress enroll in individual plans, but a Blue Cross Blue Shield preferred provider organization (PPO) is the most popular for all federal employees, according to the agency.
That Blue Cross plan scored well in an analysis by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service. The report found the federal plan had lower deductibles and co-pays than “typical” PPOs but did not rate as well as an average health maintenance organization (HMO). . . .
A Kaiser survey found the average PPO premium for individual coverage was $4,802 in 2008. For a family, the premium was $12,937. The federal plan’s premiums were higher ($5,386) for individuals but lower ($12,335) for families, according to the Office of Personnel Management.
The government paid 69% of that premium for a family, less than the 73% average. . . .
Lawmakers can also utilize taxpayer-subsidized care at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington and the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Md. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., had bypass surgery at Bethesda in 2003. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., battled cancer last year with treatments received at both sites.
Pete Sepp, a spokesman with the National Taxpayers Union and an expert on benefits received by members of Congress, questioned whether those additional perks skew how lawmakers look at health care.
“It sure can’t help their perception of what the average consumer has to deal with,” he said.

Exactly.
Free Healthcare for Everyone! Meet Your New Doctor . . .

By Debbie Schlussel
As longtime readers know, my biggest problem with the movies that Hollywood puts out is not that they’re mostly utter garbage (which they are). It’s that studios pour gazillions into marketing crass, crude, sex-laden, F- and S-bomb encrusted movies to young kids.
That’s yet again the case with “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” a/k/a Transformers 2–a long, boring, stupid movie marketed heavily to children. I mean, after all, it’s Transformers–a set of mechanical toys from the ’80s–upon which the movie is based. And M&M/Mars and Target are doing joint promotions to kids with gross-tasting peanut-butter and strawberry M&Ms (I tried ’em–yuck!) and chances to obtain cute M&M gumball machines.
But Hollywood execs don’t care that too many Americans let them raise their kids. They don’t take the responsibility seriously. They only take their bank accounts seriously. And that’s why we have crap like “Transformers 2.”

Yes, the movie is filled with cars/transformers and cool special effects . . . so many effects that my mind was numbed beyond the numbing of almost two-and-a-half hours of stupid on the big screen. And that’s why, even though it stinks, this movie will make tons of money and top the box office.
And yes, it’s filled with hot women, like Megan Fox, and an ivy league seductress who is actually a decepticon. But is that really for seven year olds? Want your kid staring at butt shots of a 20-something vixen leaning over a motorcycle in barely there jean shorts? Fine for older teens and 20-somethings, but your young kid? Do you want your eight year old son oogling at a sexy, scantilly clad decepticon trying to have sex with the movie’s dull hero (Shia Lebeouf) and then having dangerous metal tentacles coming out of her rear end and sex organs? How ’bout the various scenes of dogs having sex or rubbing up against Megan Fox’s leg?
Want your kids repeating crude jokes about “sucking sacs” and other references to oral sex? Repeating f-, s-, and a-hole words, which make up a good deal of the movie dialogue? How ’bout the p-word? That’s in there, too. Thanks, M&M/Mars, you really know how to market to kids by promoting “Transformers 2” to them.
Then, there’s the “story”/plot. It’s hard to tell that there’s actually one in this movie. And that’s fine. We know people don’t go to “Transformer” movies for the storyline. But, remember, I liked the first “Transformers” movie (read my review), though that also had a lot of four-letter words and crude references to masturbation, etc.–not suitable for kids. The first movie did have a story–a cute one and a great good-triumphs-over-evil message. In this one, well, not so much. It’s more like: awkward teen goes to Ivy League School, while Decepticons fight good transformers, two hot chicks fight over teen, he has dopey Hispanic roommate/internet guru, and they all end up in Egypt and Jordan (which strangely are right next to each other–yup, even Hollywood has wiped Israel off the map). Ruins of the ancient city of Petra (now in Jordan) are shown to be just yards from the Egyptian Pyramids. Yup, this movie won’t teach your kid geography either . . . but it’ll teach ’em most of George Carlin’s seven words. Terrific.
The movie is so stupid, it’s like a three-year-old wrote it. I know I’ve said the same about “Land of the Lost” (read my review) and “Year One” (read my review). And this movie is in tight contention with those two to be the summer’s dumbest, worst flick.
I know I’ve lectured you before about the morons who call themselves “parents” who take their kids to movies like “Friday the 13th” and “The Watchmen” (read my review). But this movie isn’t much of an improvement. Yes, it doesn’t have the “R” rating and isn’t graphically violent and full of blood and wanton killing like those. But that doesn’t mean it’s good for your kids’ minds.
Or your own.
Simply a waste of time, ten bucks, and 2.5 hours of life you can’t reclaim after the fact.
Skip it.
ONE MARX

By Debbie Schlussel
It’s not just the Islamic green people are donning in solidarity with extremists in Iran that’s fake.
The other green–eco-friendly claims on products–are also often fake. They’re no different than “Soylent Green”–the product made from you know what from the Charlton Heston movie of the same name.
And it’s yet more evidence that this eco-maniacal stuff is just an empty fad. A trendy, hip thing that’s expensive and harmful for America.

The federal watchdog that’s supposed to crack down on product labels that make false environmental claims has taken almost no enforcement action over the last decade, even as “green” marketing claims have exploded, agency records show.

Green Love is for Suckers

Companies touting eco-friendly products or biodegradable packaging are supposed to abide by guidelines issued by the Federal Trade Commission in 1992. The FTC can take companies that ignore the so-called “Green Guides” to court and seek fines to reimburse consumers.
Since May 2000, the FTC has taken legal action against only three companies for violating the guidelines. All three complaints were announced June 9, the day of a congressional hearing about environmental marketing.

Hey, whatta coincidence! Or as the French would say, “Quelle Coincidence!”

“There has been little to no enforcement of the 1992 guides,” says environmental consultant Kevin Tuerff, whose company started a website aimed at exposing ads with questionable environmental claims. “They need to pick up the pace.”

Uh, no, they don’t. If fools want to believe in this BS, let ’em part with their money over this false eco-religion. Not the American taxpayers’ job to police their fads and mind cults.

From 1992 to 2000, the FTC generally filed two or more complaints a year, but enforcement dropped off under President Bush.
The FTC’s James Kohm acknowledges the agency hasn’t aggressively enforced its main environmental guidelines in recent years, in part because of a lack of resources. . . .
The companies cited by the commission June 9 improperly advertised their products as “biodegradable.” All three cases were filed May 20.
Environmental marketing has exploded recently: a survey in the last year by environmental marketer TerraChoice of 12 large U.S. stores found more than 1,700 products that boasted of green credentials. Eco-friendly claims are made by items ranging from liquor to sport-utility vehicles to pesticides.

In my view, I’m glad the government isn’t looking into these claims. If you buy something based on eco-friendly fantasies, you’re a fool. And you deserved to be scammed by these mini-scams based on the giant scams called “climate change” and “global warming.” No amount of government waste and bureaucratic advertising police will cure that, nor should it.
Still, whether or not they are investigating truth in eco-advertising, here’s my shameless–but true–eco-friendly marketing ploy: DebbieSchlussel.com . . . no paper (unless you print it out), zero waste, zilch carbon footprint, 100% biodegradable. But one caveat: we don’t recycle here. It’s mostly new (and improved).