jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (69 posts)

I just saw it on the Fox News Channel. Fake News? I wish.

  1. abwilliams profile image84
    abwilliamsposted 4 months ago

    Tuned into the News this morning, first Story;a man, Oscar Lopez Rivera,     involved in over 100 bombings across America, was being Honored in a Parade...on American soil.
    2nd Story; A Play, Shakespeare in the Park, same City as the Parade, New York,but in this Play, Julius Caesar isn't the main character, a likeness of our President is, as a bloody live rendition of his assassination takes place every night, there in the Park.

    For the many, Left of Center, here on HP, I saw these stories on the Fox News Channel. Does that mean that Mr. Rivera wasn't really involved in bombings across America? Were the Images of him in the Parade, waving like a Beauty Queen, fake too?
    What about the Images just witnessed, of a likeness of Donald Trump, being murdered, on a stage, for entertainment. 
    Is this fake too, because it is on the Fox News Channel?
    Am I not really seeing what I think I am seeing?

    1. Live to Learn profile image80
      Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      No it isn't fake. I don't think many things are 'fake news' so much as the spin any particular outlet chooses to put on it. If it is a conservative spin it is usually called fake news. A liberal spin gets called news. Using the same basic facts to start the report.

      1. abwilliams profile image84
        abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        So true LTL.  In the past, common sense was the greatest filter for making such determinations.
        I really feel sorry for those going through life, waiting on the spin, to know how and what to think.
        All that spinning must wreak havoc on heads not on straight to start with.

        1. colorfulone profile image90
          colorfuloneposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Leftards who are virtue signaling for the assassination of Trump are too effing stupid to know that they are painting targets on themselves if Trump is now assassinated.

          CNN's Fareed Zakaria hailed the Trump assassination lay as a "masterpiece". His employers sponsors it. CNN sounds more like the Communist News Network or ISIS.

          1. abwilliams profile image84
            abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Oh my God, "masterpiece",  had not heard that. I shouldn't be surprised.
            I can't even imagine what would be taking  place, if the person depicted in this 'Play' being murdered, was Obama or Mr./Ms. Clinton....
            Sick stuff!
            Isn't there a movie from a few years back in which George W. Bush is assassinated? Vaguely remember something.
            Again....sick minds, sick stuff!

            1. colorfulone profile image90
              colorfuloneposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              I don't remember a movie like that, but I am very selective about what I watch.  I wouldn't put it past the Hellywood Illuminati and the Deep State though. 

              Those that took the blue pill are caught in the Matrix where nothing is real.

        2. ahorseback profile image40
          ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          +++++++++++++++++++++++++

    2. crankalicious profile image85
      crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Did you do any research at all, or did you just buy what you saw on Fox hook, line, and sinker. From just some brief research, it appears that Mr. Rivera had some connection to a group that carried out bombings, but was never himself convicted of any such thing. Is this a good reason to have him in the parade? Probably not. I wouldn't. Governor Cuomo, a Democrat, refused to participate because of it.

      Most of the people at the parade weren't there to celebrate him. In fact, it's unclear if any of them were. Most of them appeared to oppose his appearance, but since they weren't there to celebrate him, they didn't boycott the parade.

      So what exactly is your point? You're just outraged that some imbecile invited this guy to the parade? Or are you suggesting that it was an organized effort to push some agenda? If so, where is your evidence for that?

      As for pretend assassinations, I dislike Donald Trump, but I think most Americans agree that people who are doing pretend assassinations and holding his severed head are going way too far, just like most Republicans came out and denounced the pictures of President Obama with a noose around his head when he was President.

      I'll just say this because I've been thinking it: we're going to need a centrist to govern this country. Somebody neither the left or the right is super happy about, but somebody who respects both sides and finds a way to get people to compromise.

      1. Live to Learn profile image80
        Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Wouldn't that be nice.

      2. abwilliams profile image84
        abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Yes I did Cranky and so I changed 'responsible for' to 'involved in'.
        I am glad that you agree, he shouldn't have been honored in a parade.
        I never saw Obama's head in a noose. Not sure who did that or what the setting was, but if I had seen it, I would have instantly condemned it. I remember being at a Tea Party in Orlando and a person showed up with a sign similar to what you're describing, he was immediately surrounded and booed off the property (found out later that he had no interest in the Tea Party movement, he was just trying to find a camera, for his tacky sign)

        What we really need....is a Constitutional Conservative governing the Country, haven't had that since Reagan.
        Trump is a Centrist, as far as I can tell and people are more divided than ever.

        1. crankalicious profile image85
          crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Never saw this:


          https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13568274.jpg

        2. crankalicious profile image85
          crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          You think Trump is a centrist? That might be the craziest thing I've heard anybody say in reference to Trump.

          1. abwilliams profile image84
            abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Well he certainly is not Conservative, he certainly is no Ronald Reagan.
            Ted Cruz scares him, so he had to take him out quickly.
            He was a registered Democrat for most of his life. Not sure when he switched Parties.
            He talks of rebuilding roads, bridges and infrastructure; I've heard that from the Democratic Party for decades.......not saying we don't need it, it has just always been a Democratic talking point (and just that...ALL talk, as if they care!!)
            One of his confidants his daughter Ivanka, is Liberal and yet so very hated by the Left. Very odd!
            Trump seems to me to be a middle of the road kind of guy.  I'm sorry if you see that as "Crazy".

            And.....if you had not have shared the ROPE pic, I would have gotten through life without seeing it. It is disturbing!

        3. crankalicious profile image85
          crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          I think you might be sorely disappointed in how a "constitutional" conservative would interpret the second amendment.

          1. ahorseback profile image40
            ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Please explain just how a constitutional conservative  interprets the second amendment ?

            1. crankalicious profile image85
              crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              I've read a number of interesting interpretations of "A well-regulated Militia". Some look at that phrase as defining what follows and that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is predicated under their duties in a Militia.

              While I would not expect most conservatives to interpret it this way, somebody who is an expert on the Constitution and the intent of those who wrote it might.

              Ultimately, I think that the modern interpretation of the second amendment is just that, an interpretation that has been modernized to accommodate changes in our culture.

              1. abwilliams profile image84
                abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                I do not see this Amendment as being open for interpretation, in the least!

                "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
                the Right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

                If this Amendment was only to apply to Militia, Part Two would have never needed to be written.

                Farmers, shopkeepers and Prarie dwellers, muskets in hand, helped to win the Revolutionary War. 
                They All depended on their guns for day to day survival.

                This Amendment is So Important......it is the only Amendment which ends with the words, "shall not be infringed"

                Infringed - encroached or trespassed upon, limited, restricted.

                1. crankalicious profile image85
                  crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Are you a constitutional scholar? Are you aware of the intentions of the founders?

                  A sentence has a subject. In this sentence, the subject is "A well regulated militia". Therefore, it is a possible interpretation of the sentence that the other parts of it modify the subject - a well regulated militia. Take out "a well regulated militia" and the sentence is pointless. This is one interpretation. Whether you agree or not is irrelevant. It's a valid interpretation and one that many constitutional scholars and originalists use.

                  1. abwilliams profile image84
                    abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    No I am not a Constitutional Scholar, but Antonin Scalia was!

                    "The Constitution is not a living organism, it IS a Legal Document and it says what it says and it doesn't say what it doesn't say." -Justice Antonin Scalia

              2. Live to Learn profile image80
                Live to Learnposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                I agree that the modern interpretation is modernized to accommodate changes in our culture but, that is how the constitution was designed. To reflect the thinking of the culture as it evolved. Nothing written in stone is of use in a changing world. It cannot be a living document if it cannot change with the times.

                That said. I'm wholeheartedly against the federal government starting a push to create regulations. Once started it will only end in private ownership of firearms being banned.

                1. abwilliams profile image84
                  abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  No, No, No.
                  The Constitution IS the Supreme Law of the United States. 
                  The Bill of Rights aren't  mere suggestions, they may not be etched in stone, but they exist for our Protection.
                  They exist to Limit the Government.

                  "The Constitution is not a living organism, it IS a Legal Document and it says what it says and it doesn't say what it doesn't say."
                  - Justice Antonin Scalia

      3. GA Anderson profile image83
        GA Andersonposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        Come on crankalicious, you speak of doing research, but your own "brief research" leaves a lot to be desired - in the form of critical support.

        You say "...it appears that Mr. Rivera had some connection to a group that carried out bombings..."

        But, my "brief research" finds him described as; "one of the leaders," "the chieftain," and "the Mandela" of that organization. My "brief research" also found he was a co-owner/co-renter of at least one of the apartments found to be bomb making centers and schools, and that at his trail he "... admitted committing every act with which he was charged, but declared himself a political prisoner and refused to take part in most of the trial proceedings."

        Yep, that is some connection alright, but I don't think it is the "some" that you intended to imply.

        As for his supporters... it wasn't hard to find references to "His supporters followed, carrying signs that read, "Oscar Lopez Rivera is our Mandela." and "Lopez Rivera was cheered and booed as he stood proudly clutching a Puerto Rican flag when the parade stepped off..." and "A supporter in the parade heard her booing and shouted back, "This is your history!"

        Yet your research left you unsure if any of the parade's viewers were there to support him? Wouldn't references to supporters marching with signs be a clue?

        And as for the "imbecile" that invited him? It was the board of the organization that has been running the parade since 1958, and incorporated in 1995 as a non-profit, the National Puerto Rican Day Parade. The same organization that gave him their  "National Freedom Hero" award,  (which he declined to accept after the resulting public outcry).

        That was your "imbecile."

        .. and that was "some" brief research.

        GA

        1. crankalicious profile image85
          crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Point taken, but again, depends where you look. My research, which was indeed brief, did not seem to conclude that his participation was approved by any more than a smattering of people.

          That said, the approval of his participation was ridiculous and unwarranted.

          1. GA Anderson profile image83
            GA Andersonposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            You are right crankalicious, it was a misstep, and it appears a lot of politicians and sponsors thought so too.

            But even so, it is still a great thing that those "imbeciles" have to freedom to make such ill-considered public choices. From imbeciles and idiots to true Samaritans and sincere servants - we are one hellava mix.

            ps. I do know where I would place di Blasio in that listing, and it wouldn't be among the true-hearts.

            GA

            1. crankalicious profile image85
              crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              I think it's unfair to assume di Blasio was making any political statement with his participation. Who knows why he didn't bow out, but if politicians bowed out of every parade where somebody distasteful participated, they'd never go to a single parade. Unless he made an explicit statement of his support for this guy, I wouldn't hold it against him that he participated.

              1. GA Anderson profile image83
                GA Andersonposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                Well, Ok.  It's fine that you see it that way. To be fair, I should too, but from my perspective, he already has too many demerits to warrant any leniency. (like the soda or table salt restrictions controversies)

                You are probably more right than me, (yes, I know it should be "I") on this one. But I ain't budging!

                GA

                1. crankalicious profile image85
                  crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  What's your issue with the soda tax?
                  It's kind of an interesting issue. I'm not sure where I stand, but I live in a city that's trying to implement it.
                  Also, while I'm asking questions, what did you think of Trump's cabinet meeting today? Myself, I thought it was one of the most embarrassing things I've seen any President ever do and it's the most silly, weak thing I've seen Trump do so far. Is he really that lacking in self-esteem that he needed that? Further, does he really think anyone is going to buy it and that he's not going to be ridiculed mercilessly for it?

                  1. PrettyPanther profile image85
                    PrettyPantherposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    I saw that, it was bizarre, embarrassing and scary. It is now being reported that Trump is seriously considering firing Mueller.

                    WTF?

                  2. GA Anderson profile image83
                    GA Andersonposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    Hi crankalicious,

                    My problem with the attempted soda tax is that it was an attempt at forced social engineering through the tax system. That is wrong. I know that the 'justifications', (defray medical costs of soda drinkers, etc.), may seem comparable to the justification for cigarette taxes, but I don't agree. It is a step too far.

                    As for that cabinet meeting... I don't know what to think. It seems too ridiculous to me to be sincere. When I first saw it I thought it was some kind of comedy skit. I still don't know what to think. If it was real, then every speaker at the table has lost a bit of my respect.

                    I am still waiting for the tweet that says, "Ha Ha, it was just a joke... gottcha!"

                    GA

              2. abwilliams profile image84
                abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                di Blasio is a walking, talking Political Statement.

                1. colorfulone profile image90
                  colorfuloneposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Pedogate: President of NY Young Democrats/de Blasio staffer arrested for child porn as young as 6 months old.
                  Posted on May 27, 2017
                  https://fellowshipoftheminds.com/2017/0 … -as-6-mos/

                  Sick!

                  1. crankalicious profile image85
                    crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    Agreed, sick! What is your point? That de Blasio has some culpability? And what about Trump's pussy grabbing? What about his walking in on young pageant participants while they were naked? Is there any equivalency or are just the actions of Democrats concerning to you?

      4. crankalicious profile image85
        crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        The story on the Trump play is more bs. Did you just watch Fox News and regurgitate exactly what they said word-for-word?

        Do you know what Shakespeare's Julius Caesar is about?

        Were you as outraged when the same play was performed using Obama's likeness in place of Caesar?

        Why was it news for Fox when it's Trump's likeness but not when it's Obama's.

  2. ahorseback profile image40
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Fake News ;...... what news ?

    A few years back in a business management position I attended several management seminars , On thing that I took away from these meetings was that the organizers preached the eventual disappearance of "common sense " among  employees and employer relations , i remember thinking then "What ? No way ",   but here it is  the empty nest of common sense . 

    Yes Virginia !   Today , politically speaking ,   people have to be told what to believe , but also , how to think or  so the media would have you and your offspring believe .  Me , I can handle it all myself ,  your kids are already lost by the way , they are handed a prepackaged mindset all the way from  pre-school to  college and everytime  you hear them speak - tell me you don't recognise  that "one speak "mindset.

    Independent thought ; a thing of the past .

    1. colorfulone profile image90
      colorfuloneposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      The programming is meant to brainwash. It works so well, but it doesn't work at all when you are aware of it, because then you can see through it...(most of the time). 

      I believe the government needs to defund the liberal arts.  People should demand it, taxpayers should not be supporting vile hatred from a death cult.

  3. Kathleen Cochran profile image86
    Kathleen Cochranposted 4 months ago

    "Somebody neither the left or the right is super happy about, but somebody who respects both sides and finds a way to get people to compromise."  We had somebody and she won by 3 million votes.

    And thanks to the progressives who have commented here.  You've expressed your views concisely and without calling anybody a snide name.

    1. ahorseback profile image40
      ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      "......won by 3 million popular votes ........" And lost  33 states ,....... to bad she wasn't running for Mayor of NYC or the one you live in .   

      Newsflash ; Hilary lost .

    2. crankalicious profile image85
      crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I think what I've learned here is that liberals think Hillary was a centrist and Tea partiers think Trump is a centrist. Man, we can't even agree on what a centrist looks like.

      And oddly, I have to agree with ahorseback. Hillary lost. I think she would have lost no matter what because she ran a bad campaign that had few interesting ideas and was mostly just anti-Trump. The DNC needs to be gutted of its morons and rebuilt from the ground up.

      1. ahorseback profile image40
        ahorsebackposted 4 months agoin reply to this

        I'm amazed that Hilary continues in her "election loss fault "campaign tour and I think , How can she keep  blaming all but herself ?   I would have to argue the centrist thing though ,  she's a chameleon speaking to the identifying crowd  .

        1. abwilliams profile image84
          abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          I think that IS her career now, the "election loss fault" campaign tour!
          Hillary (one L or two?) a Centrist?  A middle of the road kind of gal? Kathleen, seriously?

  4. ahorseback profile image40
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    Trump IS a centrist , always has been or an avowed democrat . Calling Trump  right wing is  a no burger.

    1. abwilliams profile image84
      abwilliamsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Yep. I'm so glad that he is in and Hillary is out.....on her Tour.
      While Trump has shown great Promise in many areas, he still has far to go. I am pulling for him and for a Greater America.

    2. crankalicious profile image85
      crankaliciousposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Trump is most definitely NOT a centrist. Wherever he may have been in his past, he's very far right now and every single policy he's put forth so far is very far right. Every person he's hired is far right.

      What exactly does a centrist look like in your world?

      Hillary is far closer to a centrist than Trump. She's liberal in terms of social policy, but her business policy is right of center. She's generally a corporatist. And her military policy was also fairly right of center. She was certainly no pacifist, which would be left.

  5. ahorseback profile image40
    ahorsebackposted 4 months ago

    If Trump did fire Mueller . who could blame him ,  there have been O items of legitimate obstructionist  charges that Trump is  in any way  guilty of .     Liberals simply hate Trump and yet it's not even so much that  as the fact that they can't get over the election results !   

    Essentially , the moron --media keeps handing the left stones and bricks to throw at the Trump limo and they keep throwing them , guess what , Trump loves that . Keep it up !

  6. abwilliams profile image84
    abwilliamsposted 4 months ago

    Well stated ahorseback. Truth!

 
working