Comments by "Elizabeth Loveland" (@Shineon83) on "TalkTV"
channel.
-
348
-
266
-
255
-
249
-
116
-
109
-
101
-
78
-
59
-
50
-
40
-
36
-
32
-
29
-
26
-
24
-
24
-
21
-
18
-
16
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
Haha….Luckily, she CAN’T….Sentebale (the African charity, whose name means “Remember Me”) was established long before MM came into the picture….The foundation’s format (of being run and operated by a Board that works pro bono, and is composed of mainly very wealthy individuals with track records of charitable involvement, and impeccable reputations) cannot be changed, barring a major catastrophe ….
…Furthermore, “Sentebale” has an additional stopgap measure aimed at preventing fraud : Funds are directly administered —not by the Board—but by an independent, third-party accounting firm (believe it’s “Ernst & Whinny”), which is also responsible for conducting quarterly audits on the charity….Sentebale’s charter instructs that: 90% of received donations be distributed on a quarterly basis (four times a year), with 10% reserved from every quarter in order to address unforeseen needs (with “needs” defined in the text as being “catastrophic events,” such as war, earthquakes, major floods, major pandemics, etc ), in which case, at the Board’s discretion, all remaining funds may be immediately distributed”….
In other words, Sentebale represents the “gold standard” for how all charities SHOULD be set up and administered (which also makes it VERY clear that MM had no hand in it :)
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Kinsey, your bone structure is so near-perfect, your eyes, naturally large, and your mouth (though a bit over-wide, when using dark lipstick) has a nice shape, that you’re one of the few women who still look lovely without makeup (and I DO have some professional knowledge on the subject)….
….When you DO go back to your war paint, I would make two suggestions : Use a NEUTRAL lip shade—to deemphasize your mouth’s width (and do NOT extend lipliner to your mouth’s corners—end liner 1/4–1/8” prior to the mouth’s natural corners)…Even more important: I would DEF go LIGHTER (more translucent) on your foundation + powder…You have naturally lovely skin—you don’t need such HEAVY COVERAGE foundation (it’s the over-HEAVY foundation + powder you use, I’ll wager, that the viewer was referencing…it’s VERY artificial-looking and aging)…A tinted moisturizer, followed by light powder, should be perfect for you (and will give you a much more “natural” look)….
The blush, eyeshadow & brows you normally wear—and their application—all look good; they are nice neutrals, and require no changes…You could easily do without the false eyelashes, and switch to a light mascara—but, up to you….However, I really think that if you were to make those two changes (lip shade + foundation/powder) you won’t be hearing any more complaints about your “makeup.”….People will only see the lovely (and natural) YOU.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@karenfrederick8991 ….Yes, unfortunately, the few H&M charities I had a chance to examine (Archewell , The VING Project & SmartWorks) have all, indeed, been incorporated in the State of DE (which tends to, by itself, ring “alarm bells” for charity watchdog groups, as DE has among the weakest oversight laws—and extremely opaque corporate accountability laws—making it the #1 State for incorporation by new businesses, and where most corporations—not charities—list their company headquarters)….
Neither Archewell nor VING appear to have separate entities ( a main board, an oversight committee, and an accounting group—which would provide “checks and balances” on where money is coming from, how much there is, where & how much is distributed—and whether donations are coming from “acceptable” sources)….
In both cases (info on SmartWorks was incomplete), the “Board” members from both charities appear to wear several hats (note: These are NOT considered “Best practices” for charities)….Both charities also appear to be “withholding” an unusually high % of donations received (usually, if “withholdings” exceed 20% of annual monies received, the charity is required to “explain” the reasons—along with providing proof such funds are secure)….However, as H & M’s charities, themselves, are incorporated in DE, such strict charity laws may be easier to skirt….If I were the Feds/Revenue, I would be going over H & M’s books with a fine tooth comb….
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@helenfrew2319 ….You are so very wrong……IF the pilot had acquiesced, and allowed the family to fly, he would have been exposing his employer to 100% liability for any nut-related allergic reactions the kid might have—including those due to one or two passengers “sneaking” a few nuts…. (And, through experience, I would say that those would be the type of parents to “sue” the airline—no matter what steps were taken)….
As both a flight attendant AND the Aunt of a boy with life-threatening nut allergies, I have seen this scenario from both sides……The parents behaved in both a medically foolish AND an entitled manner….As ANY experienced traveling parent of a kid with severe medical issues knows: You must be able to completely CONTROL your environment for it to be safe (even consuming a 100% peanut-free dish in a restaurant whose other dishes may contain peanuts will often send the sufferer into anaphylaxis)……There was simply NO WAY that such an environment could be properly controlled—and the parents (instead of running to the Press to whine) should have KNOWN it.
“What” should they have done? What thousands of other parents in similar circumstances do : Rather than expecting others to “secure” their son’s environment, they must get into the habit of doing it themselves….There are multiple options : Driving, taking a private train compartment, taking a private compartment on a ship, or by signing up for one of the burgeoning scheduled flights for ppl with medical needs (which cater to allergy sufferers, diabetics, etc)….
You are, I fear, in danger of falling into the Leftist Lollyland of, “The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many”
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1