Search Results: getting engaged

If you grew up with your father in the home, and if you had a good relationship with him, then he probably was the most important man in your life. . . for a period of years. But, at some point, his importance assumed a lower position and another man, most likely a man near your age, became the most important guy in your life. When did that happen? When you started getting a crush on boys? When you started dating? First kiss? When you became sexually active? When you agreed to have an exclusive relationship? When you got engaged? How did your father respond to his loss of status in your life?

FYI The "American Forces Network" online will show you what's playing worldwide if you want to see for yourself.

Now, first I realize it's VITALLY IMPORTANT that troops get news from home - it makes them less homesick and provides a sense of normalcy when you hear the Yankees collapsed in 5 games (Let's Go Mets)!

But should they be getting news from a network where the following happened:

"The hosts “have open access to spread their conspiracy theories to US troops,” VoteVet states. “And now we know they knew they were lies — just to boost their ratings in referencing Fox settlement of the Dominion Voting lawsuit of libel $800K for their "knowingly false claims".

In fact, Fox Broadcasting Company, LLC is a USA commercial broadcast television network owned by the Fox Entertainment division of Fox Corporation. As such, it avoids the stricter standards required of other journalism outlets.

In fact, during the lawsuit Fox Attorneys stated in the record:

The 'general tenor' of the show should inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' "

The Trump appointed judge then states: "Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes."

She added, "Whether the Court frames Mr. Carlson's statements as 'exaggeration,' 'non-literal commentary,' or simply bloviating for his audience, the conclusion remains the same — the statements are not actionable as they are entertainment.

The decision specifically references Fox News prime-time hosts Laura Ingraham, Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity, each of whom was accused in recent court filings of knowingly spreading Donald Trump's false claims of 2020 election fraud.

So, should troops be watching "entertainment" as news? Purveyors of false claims, lies, misinfo & disinfo per the courts?

The difference between the Democrats and the Republicans in this election is stark.
Democracy depends on at least two healthy political parties that can compete for voters on a level playing field. The founders hated the idea of political parties, but quickly figured out that parties tie voters to the mechanics of Congress and the presidency.
And they do far more than that. Parties allowed for the idea of loyal and legitimate opposition, which in turn allowed for the peaceful transition of power. That peaceful exchange enabled the people to choose their leaders and leaders to relinquish power safely. Parties also create a system for criticizing people in power, which helps to weed out corrupt or unfit leaders.
But those benefits of a party system depend on a level political playing field for everyone, so that a party must constantly compete for voters by testing which policies are most popular and getting rid of the corrupt or unstable leaders voters would reject.
In the 80s, radical Republican leaders set out to dismantle the government that regulated business, provided a basic social safety net, promoted infrastructure, and protected civil rights. But that system was popular, and to overcome the majority who favored it, they began to tip the political playing field in their direction. They began to suppress voting by Democrats by insisting that Democrats were engaging in “voter fraud.” They worked to delegitimize their opponents by calling them “socialists” or “communists”. By the 1990s, extremists in the party were taking power by purging traditional Republicans from it.
When a political party has so thoroughly walled itself off from the majority, there are two options. One is to become full-on authoritarian and suppress the majority, often with violence. Such a plan is in Project 2025, which calls for a strong executive to take control of the military and the judicial system and to use that power to impose his will. The other is for us to reject it.