It's true; fake news is a problem.

[SkepticThinker]

That what he says, he also owns multiple million dollar estates. How come he hasn't divided his own money amongst the poor?

Um, because that's not in his platform? Part of his platform includes raising taxes on the rich. If he is rich, then that means he supports raising taxes on himself. Funny how he didn't change his stance on that once he started earning over $1 million.

 

[Revoltingest]

I guess so ... he just strikes me as someone who only values things that will benefit him personally. Which I guess are still considered values, of a sort.


Ugh, I think her pantsuits are one of the worst things about her. There are nice pantsuits out there, she's just not wearing any of them.
Obama knows how to dress.

Hillary needs to dress differently from Obama.

Look at us....I'm trying to make you think better of both Hillary & Donald.
I am the personification of fairness & balance!

 

[sealchan]

Um, because that's not in his platform? Part of his platform includes raising taxes on the rich. If he is rich, then that means he supports raising taxes on himself. Funny how he didn't change his stance on that once he started earning over $1 million.

I've never heard it explained that socialists don't allow for rich people. That is one of the exaggerations that people make up. It is just that socialism means that everyone's needs should be considered and not just a winner take all attitude. I doubt that pure socialism would be to anyone's liking especially given how things went in the former Soviet Union. But a chosen medium where fair play is involved with certain basic needs being met for all humans: health care, emergency response, military and police protection, basic education...

Those who work hard, learn more, innovate...should always see some additional yield, the potential for greater personal wealth should always be allowed but we don't need to allow someone or some "class" of people to become so wealthy that they effectively escape the same sort of responsibilities to the society that the rest of us have.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I've never heard it explained that socialists don't allow for rich people. That is one of the exaggerations that people make up. It is just that socialism means that everyone's needs should be considered and not just a winner take all attitude. I doubt that pure socialism would be to anyone's liking especially given how things went in the former Soviet Union. But a chosen medium where fair play is involved with certain basic needs being met for all humans: health care, emergency response, military and police protection, basic education...

Those who work hard, learn more, innovate...should always see some additional yield, the potential for greater personal wealth should always be allowed but we don't need to allow someone or some "class" of people to become so wealthy that they effectively escape the same sort of responsibilities to the society that the rest of us have.

Exactly.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Hillary needs to dress differently from Obama.

Dressing like Obama would be an improvement for her.

Look at us....I'm trying to make you think better of both Hillary & Donald.
I am the personification of fairness & balance!

Stop it ... you're scaring me a little bit.

 

[Revoltingest]

Dressing like Obama would be an improvement for her.

Everyone has their own personal style.
Hillary's blandness suits her physique better than Obama's blandness.

This is style....

 

[Enoch07]

Um, because that's not in his platform? Part of his platform includes raising taxes on the rich. If he is rich, then that means he supports raising taxes on himself. Funny how he didn't change his stance on that once he started earning over $1 million.

Because its BS. Actions speak louder than words.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Because its BS. Actions speak louder than words.

Actions like pushing for an increase in taxes on the 1%ers?

 

[Enoch07]

Actions like pushing for an increase in taxes on the 1%ers?

No action there, yet. Just banter.

Actions would be something like selling one of his multiple multimillion dollar homes that he doesn't use but a few days out of year. Then using that money to help the very people he pretends to care about. Not that it matters, Bernie is going to get shafted by the DNC again. Because Biden is eating his lunch right now.

 

[Shad]

Um, because that's not in his platform? Part of his platform includes raising taxes on the rich. If he is rich, then that means he supports raising taxes on himself. Funny how he didn't change his stance on that once he started earning over $1 million.

Which shows he will only pay when forced to. Ergo does not walk the walk.

Do note Bernie keeps changing what 1% means.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Which shows he will only pay when forced to. Ergo does not walk the walk.

Do note Bernie keeps changing what 1% means.

Huh? He doesn't have to push for the policies he has been pushing for years and years. If he had changed his tax policy after becoming a 1%er, now that would be a problem. But he hasn't. Why you think that's a negative, I don't know.

 

[SkepticThinker]

No action there, yet. Just banter.

Uh yeah, I'm guessing the "action" will come, if he's elected president.

Actions would be something like selling one of his multiple multimillion dollar homes that he doesn't use but a few days out of year. Then using that money to help the very people he pretends to care about. Not that it matters, Bernie is going to get shafted by the DNC again. Because Biden is eating his lunch right now.

Or he could do something normal and donate to charity. Which he has done.

 

[Shad]

Huh? He doesn't have to push for the policies he has been pushing for years and years. If he had changed his tax policy after becoming a 1%er, now that would be a problem. But he hasn't. Why you think that's a negative, I don't know.

Look at the amount he claims for charity. He could be giving the government more money with no issue but doesn't. Look at his reaction when a reporter pointed this fact out.

 

[Revoltingest]

In the news.....
Seeing Is Believing: Fake News May Lead To False Memories, Voter Study Finds

I've seen it happen...people I know remembering things that didn't happen,
eg, Sarah Palin saying "I can see Russian from my house!".

 

[Milton Platt]

This has been going on for a while where the right complains about fake news while the right manufactures fake news.

Both right and left complain and both right and left produce it. And it isn't confined to politics or political parties.

 

[Revoltingest]

This has been going on for a while where the right complains about fake news while the right manufactures fake news.

If you'd listened to NPR, you'd have heard multiple interviews
with Democrats who make fake news for the purpose of
discrediting the right. They openly admitted this motive.
It's all wrong...no matter which side does it.

 

[sun rise]

If you'd listened to NPR, you'd have heard multiple interviews
with Democrats who make fake news for the purpose of
discrediting the right. They openly admitted this motive.
It's all wrong...no matter which side does it.

cite for that NPR accusation?

 

[Revoltingest]

cite for that NPR accusation?

It wasn't an accusation....just news.
Here's one....
We Tracked Down A Fake-News Creator In The Suburbs. Here's What We Learned
If you want more, tis your burden to broaden
your sources for more balance.

 

[sealchan]

It wasn't an accusation....just news.
Here's one....
We Tracked Down A Fake-News Creator In The Suburbs. Here's What We Learned
If you want more, tis your burden to broaden
your sources for more balance.

This article seems to support the idea that right wingers lap up fake news like chow hounds while left wingers are like "meh".

Interesting to learn just how profitable something immoral can be in an essentially unregulated market. Maybe we need new government regulation in this area.

 

[sealchan]

Both right and left complain and both right and left produce it. And it isn't confined to politics or political parties.

Here's an article to substantiate that

Liberals and Conservatives Are Both Susceptible to Fake News, but for Different Reasons