DOJ RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS RE WEBSITE CHANGE -- NO ANSWERS AT ALL

Here is the form letter response I got in response to my rather detailed commentary to the DOJ webmaster. I know of one other person who got the same response and I'm sure all questioners will get the same. Why should we expect more from a DOJ that works only for Holder and "his people" (his words) and President Obama? As for me, I'm totally disgusted with these guys, but more disgusted with the voters. At this moment, Obama is giving a speech that is a good one for "organizing" but absolutely not for governing. 

SUDDEN ANNOUNCEMENT: Fox News has cut Obama's speech. They announced that they expected reports on China and some other issue and they were not in the business of "giving free campaign to Obama." It is all this president knows!!! And, 40% of mindless people will support him reflexively...... mostly trough-feeders!!
WEBMASTER RESPONSE
Thank you for your interest in the Department of Justice website. The department debuted the site’s new design in October 2009 with a focus on making the site easier to use.
The design was inspired by the architecture of the main Depa rtment of Justice building in Washington, DC. For instance, we sampled the limestone from the building to create the site’s main background color. We used architectural photos as headline images to anchor major pages. We incorporated a quote from the building’s façade into the design as well.
All of these design choices were guided by the goal of creating a final design that was modern, while at the same time evoked the tradition, independence and seriousness of purpose of the Justice Department.
Information about the quote may be found here:
We hope you find this article informative and thank you for your interest in the Department of Justice. We welcome your ideas and suggestions on how we can continue to provide you with a superior web experience.
Sincerely,
Webmaster
U.S. Department of Justice

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

AMERICAN AIRLINES -- MORE ABOUT UNIONS AND CH 11

I apologize for the structure of the post below, with no segmentation, but the system refuses to do it my way. To my post yesterday re AMR's chapter 11 filing relating my experiences over many years flying with AA, an AA pilot wrote a thoughtful comment that caused me to think a bit more about the precursors to conditions of their bankruptcy. Frankly, I have what is perhaps too much experience with trade unions and their excesses, but know less about others such as the airlines. After learning more about the negotiations of AA with their unions, I now think it's justifiable to post the comments below. I've seen too many industries destroyed by union excesses coupled with management incompetence in caving to excess demands. Start with coal (dead for many years), steel, textiles, shoes, electronics manufacturing, and more.  The Detroit 3 (once the big 3) deserves special mention. As their costs rose to $72/hour (fully loaded) and costs in the southern industry w...
Read more

LEFTIST MIND-SET OF TODAY -- REFLEXIVE, THOUGHTLESS SUPPORT FOR THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

"Trying to persuade a prejudiced mind is as Sisyphean as trying to open a closed mind is Quixotic." Mann, May 2012 In a blog post herein below on May 1, 2013, I outlined what we who manage people and enterprises know as absolutes about performances of people who are put into management and supervisory positions for which they haven't requisite qualifications. For those who have progressed through several jobs to their level of incompetence, this is known as the Peter Principle as defined by Laurence J. Peter. In all likelihood, all who have managed people for any length of time have seen this principle played out. While Peter's observation applies to progression through multiple job levels, if a person is put into any job for which he is unqualified, the concept is also valid. Elective political positions is where I see this most often played out. The election of Barack Obama as President of the United States is the most significant example of this in my lif...
Read more

ETHANOL -- The worst mandate ever gets even worse

When politicians get control of science and the inept or dishonest scientists, nothing good comes of it. There are many examples -- global warming (aka climate change) is the most prominent. The ethanol mandate, although a part of the climate change mania, stands on its own as arguably the most ridiculous mandate of all time. President Jimmy Carter, who was influenced by a misguided college professor, can be charged with the mistake of promulgating the ethanol mandate.  Of course, Al Gore is the politician who played the global warming issue like a drum and has benefited financially from it. Use of ethanol in motor fuel is not a net positive either in costs or in impact on the environment.... enormous hype to the contrary notwithstanding. Ethanol does not have the positive effect on the environment as touted. It has only about 60% of the specific energy of petroleum fuel, which begs use of more fuel to achieve the same energy as petroleum fuel. And, so it does. I have my own exp...
Read more