Fake News

Generally an unmoderated forum for discussion of pretty much any topic. The focus however, is usually politics.
Post Reply
User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 21328
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Fake News

Unread post by O Really »

Yeah, but these are some of the same people that blamed Obama for everything that happened before he was in office, too. And then spent another year or so whining whenever anybody pointed out that Bush the Younger had also once been President*. So it's perfectly reasonable that to a Trumpette, anything positive after Jan 20 was His doing.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50660
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Vrede too »

Yeah, but they're so stupid and dishonest as to say that anything positive before Jan. 20 was Trump's doing.
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Mr.B »

Vrede too wrote: Image

http://p2a.co/A4eVD3F
FAKE !
(I'm no longer a Trump supporter, but I call b.s. where I see it.)


From Vrede's link ... (link not dated)
"This week a draft executive order was leaked from the White House that is shocking in scope. It authorizes religion to be used as a reason to discriminate in hiring, public services and benefits, healthcare, adoption and foster care services, education and more. The order targets LGBTQ people and women, but it would also affect those of minority faiths, nontheists and almost anyone else." :lol:



TRUTH:

"There were rumors on January 30 that President Donald Trump is preparing to sign an executive order that would have an impact on the LGBTQ community. A White House spokesperson told NBC News that one is not in the works at this point. Trump also issued a statement, confirming plans to keep a 2014 Obama executive order to protect LGBT workers in place.

However, the rumors were enough to cause the Human Rights Organization to grow concerned. The group called the rumors “deeply troubling.”

It’s also been rumored that the President plans on signing a “religious freedom”-type executive order that would also impact the LGBTQ community. However, a White House official has told BuzzFeed News that they do not have plans to do so “at this time.”

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 21328
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Fake News

Unread post by O Really »

The article may have sensationalized the content of the proposed order, but the "leak" was real, as is the concept of the proposal. President*Trump has stated more than once that he supports what he refers to as "religious freedom" as defined by the ability to discriminate. President*Trump has also used (in the past and since becoming President*) the "trial balloon" technique of unofficially tossing something out to see what happens. He's done it with nominees, as well as with policies.

President*Trump is incredibly ignorant about government, politics, foreign relations, and law, but he is a salesman par excellence. You can generally assume that anything that looks like it came from TV promotion, sales technique, etc. is probably intentional and his. He's spent a career as a high-dollar used car salesman, changing odometers, bondo-ing over rust, and bragging about "such a deal." Prime non-politicized example, "Trump University."
Or the members of Trump Jupiter golf club, whose (winning) lawsuit had nothing to do with politics, but with shoddy, dishonest business dealings.

He is trolling his (majority) opposition with stuff to get them to run around in circles of outrage, and unfortunately it's working. We need less, not more, coverage of his utterings.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Mr.B »

O Really wrote: "President*Trump has stated more than once that he supports what he refers to as "religious freedom" as defined by the ability to discriminate."
What I picked up on in the news about "religious freedom" was that Trump was considering eliminating the law that prevents ministers, preachers, pastors, (or whatever) from supporting candidates in the pulpit. Currently, churches can lose tax-free status by doing so.

Personally, I believe a church should leave politics out of the pulpit, and the majority of religious leaders I know feel likewise, and have not endorsed any candidates. I do know a couple who I feel are radically fundamental and would jump at the opportunity to bash a candidate not of his personal choice.

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 21328
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Fake News

Unread post by O Really »

President*Trump uses "religious freedom" to mean whatever he wants at the time. Yes, he stood up at a meeting of religious people, and has said since, that he wanted to get rid of the Johnson Amendment that prohibits churches from being both tax-exempt religious organizations and political organizations at the same time. Follow the logic:
1. Hi, I'm an organization that has a bunch of members, raises funds for our own operation and for our charities, owns some property, and hires some people, but I'd like to be tax-exempt.

2. OK, why do you think you can be tax-exempt?

3. I'm a religious group.

4. OK, that's good. We won't make you pay tax.

5. Good deal. Now we'd also like to be a political action group - make endorsements, raise money, campaign as an organization, use our organization name as endorsements, etc.

6. Nope. Political action groups are not tax-exempt, no matter if they are also churches or not.

So what's unreasonable or "anti-religion" about that?

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50660
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Vrede too »

There's no "religious freedom" involved at all. Trump lies, again. Pastors and churches are already perfectly free to be as political as they want to be. They just can't claim tax exemption at the same time. As anyone with half a brain can see, this is as much a protection for religion as it is for the public. Remove the prohibition and all those billions in political donations would rapidly go to churches and make them nothing more than front groups for fat cats that want to buy our democracy without they or their political operatives pretending to be pastors even having to pay taxes on their income. Trump likely knows this and likely knows that his proposal will never fly politically or constitutionally. He's just pandering to the uber gullible and whiny, perpetually victimized rightwing believers.

Also, not that it's ever mentioned by those manipulating rightwing believers, pastors are already perfectly free to be as political as they want to be on their own time while their churches maintain tax exempt status. They just can't do it from the pulpit or otherwise exploit church resources for base political ends in the process.

Finally, it's not just rightwing Christian politicos that could benefit from removing the prohibition. Lefties could also set up fake church political front groups so that Soros and others could skate, as could fake mosques using tax free Mideast oil money to skew our democracy. The only difference is that lefties understand all of this while righties are idiots.
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Mr.B »

O Really wrote:President*Trump uses "religious freedom" to mean whatever he wants at the time. Yes, he stood up at a meeting of religious people, and has said since, that he wanted to get rid of the Johnson Amendment that prohibits churches from being both tax-exempt religious organizations and political organizations at the same time. Follow the logic:
1. Hi, I'm an organization that has a bunch of members, raises funds for our own operation and for our charities, owns some property, and hires some people, but I'd like to be tax-exempt.

2. OK, why do you think you can be tax-exempt?

3. I'm a religious group.

4. OK, that's good. We won't make you pay tax.

5. Good deal. Now we'd also like to be a political action group - make endorsements, raise money, campaign as an organization, use our organization name as endorsements, etc.

6. Nope. Political action groups are not tax-exempt, no matter if they are also churches or not.

So what's unreasonable or "anti-religion" about that?
I said "tax-free", I meant "tax-exempt" (guess I better not say anything about "joking" .. that ain't allowed, anyway) :oops:

That's what I meant. There's nothing "anti-religious" about the Johnson Amendment; however churches, a few ago, were warned in a letter from
a Christian Law firm how much trouble they could get into by "trumping" (no pun intended) from the pulpit...however, it torques me that so-called
tax-exempt organizations can mail reduced-rate mailings to me that support a candidate or some other off-beat cause.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Mr.B »

Vrede too wrote:"Pastors and churches are already perfectly free to be as political as they want to be. They just can't claim tax exemption at the same time."
No they're not; not in the church regardless what YOU claim they can/cannot do.

"As anyone with half a brain can see, this is as much a protection for religion as it is for the public."
Glad you had just enough faculties to see it.

"Remove the prohibition and all those billions in political donations would rapidly go to churches and make them nothing more than front groups for fat cats that want to buy our democracy without they or their political operatives pretending to be pastors even having to pay taxes on their income."
Billions....? So that's why Sharpton, Jackson, & Barber (all Dems) have questionable tax issues? I wouldn't be too worried nor lose sleep, no one's going to buy your democracy or take away your livelihood.

"Trump likely knows this and likely knows that his proposal will never fly politically or constitutionally. He's just pandering to the uber gullible and whiny, perpetually victimized rightwing believers."
Personally, I believe he's deliberately playing with your minds just to piss you off! :lol:

"Also, not that it's ever mentioned by those manipulating right-wing believers, pastors are already perfectly free to be as political as they want to be on their own time while their churches maintain tax exempt status. They just can't do it from the pulpit or otherwise exploit church resources for base political ends in the process."
As well as you're free to spout your hateful left-wing rhetoric off your company's premises. Pastors don't own their churches, nor do the congregations own their pastors. People are free to believe what they wish, whether it be your ramblings or those of a pastor...it's called "Freedom of Speech".

"Finally, it's not just right-wing Christian politicos that could benefit from removing the prohibition. Lefties could also set up fake church political front groups so that Soros and others could skate, as could fake mosques using tax free Mideast oil money to skew our democracy."
Lefties, righties, off-the-wall, cults, FSM .... anyone claiming a religious exemption would have to be included; however, I'll reiterate, I wouldn't be too worried nor lose sleep, no one's going to buy or "skew" your democracy or take away your livelihood.

"The only difference is that lefties understand all of this while righties are idiots."
No, the difference is that paranoid ultra-leftists are idiots for believing that the sky is falling.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Mr.B »

Funny. All I want to know is, in which of the 57 states is Bowling Green located?
Whoever taught Kellyanne history (or geography) must have been Obama's teacher as well... also, about that math....

"... it is just wonderful to be back in Oregon, and over the last 15 months we've traveled to every corner of the United States.
I've now been in fifty .... seven states? I think one left to go. One left to go. Alaska and Hawaii....."


Isn't it amazing the amount of hate and character demeaning that can directed at a mere slip of the tongue......

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 21328
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Fake News

Unread post by O Really »

Read in context, Conway's "error" was not a slip of the tongue nor "one misspoken word." Try taking what she said she meant "terrorist" and putting it at the end of her sentence in place of "massacre." Yeppers, that makes it all clear now. :roll:

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50660
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Vrede too »

(Salt Lake Tribune) Editorial: Trump’s promise to allow churches to back candidates is a bad idea. For everyone.

Religious organizations of all stripes should be very wary of President Trump's promise to "totally destroy" the part of the U.S. tax code that conditions a nonprofit organization's tax-exempt status on its abstention from partisan politics....

Many evangelical and other conservative faith groups gritted their teeth to support Trump, in hopes that he would further some of their political and social goals. But the president's attack on the 1954 Johnson Amendment to the Internal Revenue Code would do the faithful no favor. The idea belongs very firmly in the category of, "Be careful what you ask for."

The rule is named for then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson, D-Texas, who proposed the idea that Congress passed and Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed. It was, at the time, not considered controversial.

The idea was, and is, that any organization that is subsidized by tax-free status — shifting onto others the burden of paying for schools and roads and defense — should not be able to take that advantage into the political realm by endorsing or opposing candidates for political office.

The law keeps no one from speaking out on moral, social and political issues. It doesn't even stop anyone from endorsing or opposing candidates, though it doesn't allow them to keep their tax break if they choose to go there. So the claim of some religious leaders, mostly on the conservative side, that the rule violates their First Amendment rights to free speech and religion is not grounded in fact.

Contributions to campaigns, by individuals or corporations, are not tax-deductible. So if it were possible to make tax-deductible gifts to churches — and other non-profits, right and left — and for those groups to turn around and use that money to support or oppose candidates for public office, then those organizations would suddenly become a legalized conduit of dark money that donors large and small could funnel to campaigns.

Is that really what American churches want to be known for?

The fact is that membership in organized religion is falling in the United States, especially among members of the millennial generation. And the perception among younger adults that churches are already too political is a leading reason for that abandonment....

A call from the president for churches to become more overtly politically active, up to and including the endorsement of political candidates, might seem like a gift to some faith groups.

It wouldn't be. And the churches should be the first to see that.
As we've said. If I cared less about our democracy I might be fine with Trump and the rightwing believers' moronic plan to destroy religion and start worshiping corporate fat cats instead.
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

User avatar
Boatrocker
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 2059
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:53 am
Location: Southeast of Disorder

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Boatrocker »

Vrede too wrote:
(Salt Lake Tribune) Editorial: Trump’s promise to allow churches to back candidates is a bad idea. For everyone.

Religious organizations of all stripes should be very wary of President Trump's promise to "totally destroy" the part of the U.S. tax code that conditions a nonprofit organization's tax-exempt status on its abstention from partisan politics....

Many evangelical and other conservative faith groups gritted their teeth to support Trump, in hopes that he would further some of their political and social goals. But the president's attack on the 1954 Johnson Amendment to the Internal Revenue Code would do the faithful no favor. The idea belongs very firmly in the category of, "Be careful what you ask for."

The rule is named for then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson, D-Texas, who proposed the idea that Congress passed and Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed. It was, at the time, not considered controversial.

The idea was, and is, that any organization that is subsidized by tax-free status — shifting onto others the burden of paying for schools and roads and defense — should not be able to take that advantage into the political realm by endorsing or opposing candidates for political office.

The law keeps no one from speaking out on moral, social and political issues. It doesn't even stop anyone from endorsing or opposing candidates, though it doesn't allow them to keep their tax break if they choose to go there. So the claim of some religious leaders, mostly on the conservative side, that the rule violates their First Amendment rights to free speech and religion is not grounded in fact.

Contributions to campaigns, by individuals or corporations, are not tax-deductible. So if it were possible to make tax-deductible gifts to churches — and other non-profits, right and left — and for those groups to turn around and use that money to support or oppose candidates for public office, then those organizations would suddenly become a legalized conduit of dark money that donors large and small could funnel to campaigns.

Is that really what American churches want to be known for?

The fact is that membership in organized religion is falling in the United States, especially among members of the millennial generation. And the perception among younger adults that churches are already too political is a leading reason for that abandonment....

A call from the president for churches to become more overtly politically active, up to and including the endorsement of political candidates, might seem like a gift to some faith groups.

It wouldn't be. And the churches should be the first to see that.
As we've said. If I cared less about our democracy I might be fine with Trump and the rightwing believers' moronic plan to destroy religion and start worshiping corporate fat cats instead.
Trump’s promise to allow [INSERT DUMBSHIT IDEA HERE] is a bad idea. For everyone.
I will not lie down.
I will not go quietly.

User avatar
Boatrocker
Lieutenant Commander
Posts: 2059
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:53 am
Location: Southeast of Disorder

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Boatrocker »

Vrede too wrote: . . . If I cared less about our democracy I might be fine with Trump and the rightwing believers' moronic plan to destroy religion and start worshiping corporate fat cats instead.
I just wish it was even possible to destroy religion. If we managed it on a short term basis, there's also the inevitability of some collection of dim-wit RWers inventing a new one. And, as Lazarus Long pointed out, men rarely (if ever) manage to create a god better than they are.
I will not lie down.
I will not go quietly.

User avatar
rstrong
Captain
Posts: 5889
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2012 9:32 am
Location: Winnipeg, MB

Re: Fake News

Unread post by rstrong »

Prominent First Amendment attorney Marc Randazza supports Trump's pledge to let churches engage in politics.
I support the idea of getting rid of the Johnson Amendment – at least for churches. Political speech is the core of the First Amendment. Freedom of Religion is right smack next to it. I don't want a priest refraining from giving a particular line in a sermon because it would create negative governmental action. I similarly don't want someone to feel like they have to check their participation in the political process for the same reason. But, when I merge freedom of religion and freedom of speech, it really becomes troubling.
[...]
But, there's a catch.

Churches themselves should not be able to claim tax-exempt status.
...And he gives good reasoning for that too.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50660
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Vrede too »

Boatrocker wrote:
Vrede too wrote: . . . If I cared less about our democracy I might be fine with Trump and the rightwing believers' moronic plan to destroy religion and start worshiping corporate fat cats instead.
I just wish it was even possible to destroy religion. If we managed it on a short term basis, there's also the inevitability of some collection of dim-wit RWers inventing a new one. And, as Lazarus Long pointed out, men rarely (if ever) manage to create a god better than they are.
Yeah, I should have said: destroy religion as we know it. People here will have huge incentive to worship the most co-opted churches, but others will limp along.

Heck, if I could get more political bang for my buck by donating to a "church", why not? It's not like "faith" will mean as much anymore.
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50660
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Vrede too »

Donald J. Trump Verified account
‏@realDonaldTrump

Congratulations to @FoxNews for being number one in inauguration ratings. They were many times higher than FAKE NEWS @CNN - public is smart!
Trump is dumb.
CNN Communications Verified account
‏@CNNPR

@realDonaldTrump

Image
Then, there were all those that watched on CSPAN, ABC, CBS, NBC/MSNBC, PBS, etc.
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50660
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Vrede too »

Kuwait denies it imposed travel ban praised by Trump

Kuwait has denied a media report which said it had imposed a travel ban on citizens from several Muslim-majority countries, a story which U.S. President Donald Trump praised on Facebook.

"Smart!" a post on Trump's official Facebook page said on Thursday, linking to a report on Jordanian news website Al Bawaba which alleged that Kuwait had "mirrored" a decision by the Trump administration to temporarily bar travelers from several countries.

The article alleged that "Syrians, Iraqis, Iranians, Pakistanis and Afghans" would not be allowed to enter the Gulf state "while the blanket ban is in place".

But Kuwait's foreign ministry refuted the report, which was widely picked up by news websites popular with Trump supporters including Breitbart, Infowars and Sputnik.

Kuwait "categorically denies these claims and affirms that these reported nationalities ... have big communities in Kuwait and enjoy full rights," a ministry spokesman was quoted as saying on state news agency KUNA on Friday.

Citizens of the countries mentioned visit Kuwait regularly, it added....
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

User avatar
Vrede too
Superstar Cultmaster
Posts: 50660
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 11:46 am
Location: Hendersonville, NC

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Vrede too »

Vrede too wrote:
Mr.B wrote:... and he (Trump) spoke his mind, rather than sugar-coat his words.
:lol: I have severely debilitated psych patients that do that. We lock the cabinets, medicate them and put a guard on them.
Swedes scratch heads at Trump's suggestion of major incident

:lol:

Damn lying, pro-Islamist media! The article does also mention the Bowling Green Massacre (Conway), but it neglects the Atlanta jihadi attack (Spicer).
Always be yourself! Unless you can be a goat, then always be a goat.
-- the interweb, paraphrased
1312. ETTD.

Mr.B
A bad person.
Posts: 4891
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:22 pm

Re: Fake News

Unread post by Mr.B »

Nobody, but nobody, makes mistakes; especially those in the political arena.
If you don't believe me, just ask Barrack Obama; people in all 57 states he's visited know this to be fact.
Vrede too wrote:
Mr.B wrote:... and he (Trump) spoke his mind, rather than sugar-coat his words.
:lol: I have severely debilitated psych patients that do that. We lock the cabinets, medicate them and put a guard on them.
Now that we know who has access to the drug cabinet, that explains your narcissistic and condescending nature.

Post Reply