Do you believe in "fake news"?

[holdem4884]

10 arguments against the Conservative "fake news" delusion.

1. The label of "fake news" is often used to dismiss or discredit any news that contradicts conservative beliefs or values, regardless of its accuracy.

2. Studies have shown that conservative media sources, such as Fox News and Breitbart, are more likely to spread false or misleading information than mainstream media outlets.

3. Many conservative politicians and media figures have a vested interest in delegitimizing the media in order to deflect criticism and protect their own interests.

4. The proliferation of social media and online platforms has created an environment where misinformation and propaganda can spread rapidly, making it difficult for people to distinguish between fact and fiction.

5. The conservative obsession with "fake news" is often used as a smokescreen to deflect attention away from real issues that affect people's lives, such as healthcare, the economy, and social justice.

6. The false equivalence between mainstream media outlets and partisan propaganda sources perpetuates the idea that all news is subjective, and that there are no objective facts or truths.

7. The "fake news" delusion undermines the credibility of the free press, which is essential for holding politicians and other powerful institutions accountable.

8. It erodes public trust in democratic institutions, making it easier for authoritarian leaders to gain and maintain power.

9. The proliferation of misinformation and propaganda creates a highly polarized and divided society, making it difficult to find common ground and work towards meaningful solutions to societal problems.

10. The conservative delusion of "fake news" is a form of epistemic closure that reinforces existing beliefs and prevents people from engaging with alternative viewpoints and information, ultimately leading to a less informed and less democratic society.

Mainstream media has shortcomings, but it follows basic journalistic standards and has credibility.

My cult prone mind is immune to logic, I'd make a great Wahabi Muslim.

I'm always right. If a fact contradicts my beliefs, it's liberal "fake news". I have secret knowledge. Conspiracies are everywhere. I'm so bright!

Liberals control facts, reason, and science. I'll lap up irrational nonesense all day long as long as it's coming from a conservative perspective.

[NewsReader]

1. False. It's a broad term that is used to label stories that are either totally false or misleading by removing important facts or adding false claims which totally change the overall meaning of the story.

2. Mostly false. Mainstream media tends to add little white lies into their articles or remove relevant facts to mislead people. That's dangerous. Conservative media is split. Some report straight factual news while the little-known sources that very few people even know about report propaganda which can easily be debunked. So people stay away from that unless they are looking for entertainment.

3. This applies to both ends of the political spectrum. Liberals and conservatives.

4. True. But there are a lot more smart people out there than it seems when browsing social media.

5. This applies to both ends of the political spectrum. Liberals and conservatives.

6. News and opinion can be both.

7. The press should be free. Share the news and let the people come to their own conclusion. No censorship.

8. Trust in the media is at record low because the mainstream media along with other sources seem to have a political agenda instead of simply informing people of what is going on.

9. Maybe the mainstream media should be less biased to begin with. Report news with little opinion or commentary and let people come to their own conclusion.

10. If the government and mainstream media did not drive the narrative and censor opposing viewpoints or counterarguments then there would be more trust and less partisanship.

[holdem4884]

Impressive. A cogent and well thought response. I actually appreciate and agree with almost all of your points.

I respectfully push back on #1. The term "fake news" as popularized by Donald Trump and the MAGA movement is not simply "used to label stories that are either totally false or misleading...".

It's routinely employed to discredit anything, including clear factual evidence and data, he or his supports find inconvenient or troublesome. This itself is an easily testable claim and demonstrably true fact.

[goaded]

1. No, she said "often", not "always".

2. Again, "are more likely to" makes that true.

3. Not equally

4. They're not targeting the smart people.

5. Just no. What Democrat has called something true "fake news", and if you can find an example, how many examples of just Trump himself saying it do you think are on record?

6. We've just seen evidence that Fox News were saying that Sidney Powell was a nutcase and liar while still putting her on air.

7. OK, but consequences for lying (see 6)

8. Uh, no, and trust in SCOTUS is even lower for the reason you attribute to the media.

9. Or just have the media explain their biases (99% are pro corporations because they're owned by them)

10. The fact that there is a Fox News (and OANN and Newsmax) shows that the government is not driving the narrative, let alone censoring anyone.

[SamIam96]

I completely agree with your assessment of conservative media. I'm often surprised by how willingly people believe these outlets.

I know a successful businessman. He's traveled the world, is wealthy and intelligent. When we talk, he's completely bought into the conservative media story along with all of its lies. If that isn't bad enough, he also mirrors the aggressive anger that's typical of conservative commentators. It's impossible to have a rational conversation about any of the issues that challenge our country. He quickly resorts to reciting the same talking points that are repeated across conservative news. When he's challenged, he can't respond for obvious reasons -- the conservative news is fake, so he descends to name calling and mockery.

For me, the biggest question is: how do we climb out of this hole?

[holdem4884]

What a question! I might have to write another question or a myTake on this. How do we indeed. I've always been an optimist so I'd rather not offer a pessimistic assessment but I don't see things getting much better for several reasons.

It's all about the rise of technology and social change, that is, things we can't stop but could direct.

The internet has provided unprecedented access to information but also to nonesense, and increasingly to echo chambers and confirmation bias. It's allowed people to feel more connected while actually becoming isolated.

Income inequality, demographic changes, and especially employment distribution from rapid technological change leaves people feeling distraught, frustrated, and bitter, they look for someone to blame. We are pattern seeking mammals, and tribalistic by nature, (why do people actually care who wins the SuperBowl or any sports game?)

[holdem4884]

You could understand that the answers are complex but it's much easier to fall into an echo chamber that tells you you're "right", it's all a conspiracy created by the liberal elites, blame immigrants, etc.

The rise of authoritarianism, nationalism, and hate groups are all tied into this.

Before the internet, baseless conspiracy theories were far less widespread than they are now. When people read books, newspapers, and magazines this type of thinking was largely siloed. The problems are vastly more systemic now.

Do you know what millennials cited as their #1 source of news in a recent poll? Tick-tock. 15 second videos. It's not just the youth that has diminishing attention spans but nearly everyone. This does not portend well for the future of understanding complex issues and critically analyzing information.

The thing about technology that is difficult to comprehend is that it grows at an exponential rate, not in the linear way we tend to experience everything. The changes will keep coming faster and faster and will just become increasingly impossible to keep up with. Sure there are helpful changes that could be made, like tech companies not programming their algorithms to feed your biases, but people are more likely to click away rather than subject themselves to something they find disagreeable and that reduces revenue. What company is going to do that?

Sorry for the bleak perspective, Trump, the MAGA crowd really destroyed my faith in rationality winning out. I'd love to have my a strong counter argument destroy my position.

[SamIam96]

I think the biggest problem are tech company's algorithms. Their goal is to maximize advertising revenue. To do that, they need to keep us in front of screens for as long as possible -- more time, more adds served. They've become very good at holding our attention. The better side of me hopes that the mindless hostility they've bred is an unintended consequence.

The only way to change the algorithms is for advertisers to demand change. They might be motivated if they believe their adds are more effective when viewed by an engaged mind instead of one zoned out on content that reinforces their worst tendencies.

I wish I could counter your analysis. 😞

[holdem4884]

"The only way to change the algorithms is for advertisers to demand change."

I believe you're correct and what a sad commentary that is. We live in a "free" society and yet our best hope is that self-interested advertisers will demand change. Not looking good..

[SamIam96]

Thank you for the MHO.

[Anonymous]

If you believe anything coming from mainstream media you’re dumb af. Nothing more to it. You can rant and make biased polla all you want, but there you have it. If you fr believe what these so called ”journalist” put out in the mainstream news you’re simply just dumb AF.

[Guardian45]

Funny how you talk smack as a Pink Anon.

[holdem4884]

I refuse to blindly believe what anyone says.

I'm a skeptic, that means unlike yourself I don't just deny claims that are inconvenient or reject evidence. Rather, I investigate and test claims, I seek evidence and logical coherence, to avoid fallacies and reduce biases. As a skeptic, I have a commitment to rational inquiry and empirical evidence. That's how you actually learn something about the world and discover truth.

As I've stated above, mainstream media has it's shortcomings but the test is whether it presents factual evidence that can be verified.

Non-editoral written mainstream media overwhelming passes the test. That's an objective, testable fact.

[exitseven]

So, just to revue the facts, none of the fake news media carried the Hunter Biden corruption story which they knew would adversely effect his father's chances to be elected president. They referred to the fact that the election was stolen as "the big lie"

They called Kyle Rittenhouse a murderer.

They said Justice Cavanaugh was a serial rapist.

Apparently being a democrat means never having to say you are sorry.

I could go on but you get the idea.

[holdem4884]

Well, well, well, it seems like we have an individual here who's been consuming a bit too much of the orange-tinted Kool-Aid. Let's unpack this ignorant comment, shall we?

Firstly, the idea that "fake news media" deliberately withheld information about Hunter Biden's supposed corruption is completely unfounded and baseless. The media has a responsibility to report facts, and if they did not report on the supposed corruption, it's likely because there was no concrete evidence to back up the claims.

As for the election being stolen, that is simply a baseless and dangerous conspiracy theory propagated by sore losers who cannot accept reality. The fact is that the election was free and fair, and President Biden. Trump filed over 60 lawsuits and lost all apart from a few minor procedural victories. No fraud of any significant was demonstrated in ANY case, even judges Trump appointed ruled against him

And let's talk about Kyle Rittenhouse. The kid killed two people, and yet some people have the audacity to call him a hero. The media calling him a murderer is simply a statement of fact.

[holdem4884]

As for Justice Kavanaugh, the allegations against him were investigated, and he was confirmed to the Supreme Court. The fact that he was accused of sexual assault and harassment by multiple women is a serious issue that should not be dismissed. Calling him a "serial rapist" would be an exaggeration of the known facts, but he was accused of assult and attempted rape during his confirmation hearings by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.

The idea that being a Democrat means never having to say you're sorry is just plain absurd. Democrats, like any other political party, are made up of individuals, and individuals can make mistakes. The fact that some Democrats may not apologize for their actions does not reflect on the party as a whole.

In summary, your comment is filled with baseless conspiracy theories, gross exaggerations, and outright falsehoods. It's a prime example of the toxic political climate we find ourselves in, where people would rather believe comforting lies than face uncomfortable truths.

[exitseven]

The evidence was Hunter's laptop which was known to be real but they spiked it anyway until after the election. If it was Trump and Don Jrs laptop they would have no problem screaming it 24/7 even if it was a fake.

[exitseven]

Kyle Rittenhouse was not a hero, just a guy defending himself. He was not a murderer. It was not his fault that two morons he killed kept trying to kill him even though the was holding a rifle. I guess this was Darwinism at it's finest.

[exitseven]

Can you name one fake news journalist that ever apologized or printed a retraction when the Trump Russian collusion story fell apart? The guys that got the Pulitzer for that bag job never gave that back either.

[exitseven]

Kavanaugh was harassed by democrats who found a woman who was under a psychiatrists care who thought she was raped by Cavanaugh. None of Cavanaugh's associates ever heard of this woman. It was obvious they found this woman and made up a story and either she wanted the attention or she was just a nut job. . It was obvious they accused him without any evidence.

[exitseven]

The fake news wanted Trump to resign because of all the covid deaths, They demanded it.
When the Covid deaths under Biden exceeded that number in a shorter time frame the event came and went without a mention by the fake news.,

[holdem4884]

Hunter Biden wasn't running for office and his Dad had nothing to do with any of the questionable stuff he did. It wasn't known to be real AND it wasn't relevant. You could make a case Don Jr would be different but only because he was active in Donald's campaign and regularly advised him throughout his presidency. Hell, most of Trump's family was in the administration. Hunter has no position, even advisory, within the government, Biden isn't nepotistic the way Trump was.

[holdem4884]

Covid deaths under Biden? You do understand basic virology and exponential growth, right? With variants, of course they were going to be higher before they came down given the low levels of vaccination and immunity. Trump's initial response was unconscionally horrible and that's when there were a real chance to do something impactful, at the very beginning.

[holdem4884]

As to tetra retractions? I don't reading that Trump colluded with Russia, I do recall reading that he may have and was being investigated for it because there was reason to suspect so. I also recall reading articles after the full Muller report was published that no collision between Trump himself and Russians was found. What more do you eat want?

[Slingblade1126]

Don't even go there! The media lied about the Steele Dossier, they lied about Don jr. calling his dad after meeting with Russians at Trump tower, they lied about Trump telling Cohen to lie to congress, they lied about his wife being a Russian prostitute, they lied about the Hunter's laptop being Russian misinformation! And don't say it had nothing to do with Joe Biden. Foreign countries were paying millions to Hunter and the "big" guy. Not saying the big guy is Joe but people familiar with the dealings are! Don't pretend that the media is all about reporting the facts. They haven't cared about the truth for over forty years!

[exitseven]

It turns out that the Big Guy did have connections to his sons business dealings. He rented the office space, had numerous meetings with Hunters associates and there exists a nice photo of the bunch of them playing golf.

[exitseven]

Trump was the one that got the vaccine produced. Even though it's effectiveness is questionable the rollout was totally botched by the Biden administration. Forcing people to put something into their bodies is not the American way.

[goaded]

@exitseven Have you been following the revelations in the Dominion lawsuit against Fox News? There are loads of messages talking about how they knew the election wasn't stolen and the people they were putting on air shouting about the big lie were crazy.

[exitseven]

@goaded can you explain why some of these machines were wiped even after a court order was issued not to wipe them? Why was nobody prosecuted for this? These unanswered questions are the reason half the country thinks the election was stolen.

[goaded]

Firstly, it's not half the country, secondly, many believe that because of Fox News which we know were lying about it.

You'll have to be more specific about the case, but I would expect that they were wiped before the court order, maybe because they were needed for another election. I know Republicans have been indicted for illegally accessing voting machines.

e. g. sentinelcolorado.com/.../

(Did I mention that Fox News were lying about the election?)

[exitseven]

@goaded Yes it is more than half the country. Many democrats know the election was stolen but since they got what they wanted they will not admit it.

[goaded]

You said "half the country thinks the election was stolen", that's obviously not true. The number is about a third (70% of Republicans), and it's not a matter of "not admitting" it, it's a matter of there being no evidence for it and even Fox News people understood it never happened even as they lied to their viewers. We have the evidence for that.

[holdem4884]

@exitseven You should read the exhaustive report:

LOST, NOT STOLEN - The Conservative Case that Trump Lost and Biden Won the 2020 Presidential Election.

They conclude: "... there is absolutely no evidence of fraud in the 2020 Presidential Election on the magnitude necessary to shift the result in any state, let alone the nation as a whole. In fact, there was no fraud that changed the outcome in even a single precinct. "

https://lostnotstolen.org/

[exitseven]

You should watch 2000 Mules. Oh, that's right, you can't because it was scrubbed from the internet.

[holdem4884]

That's because it has the integrity of a Nazi propaganda film. D'Souza's methods are shoddy and he makes wild assertions without evidence. Geolocation data in no way proves fraud.

[exitseven]

He explained Geolocation and it is a reliable science. It was discredited by the democrats. The movie had run for a couple of weeks but was not shown in very many cinemas. The ones that did show it usually had full attendance. It was also scrubbed from the internet. This was just the typical anti conservative censorship. Among people that saw it, the reviews were overwhelmingly positive. I do not know if you saw it but it certainly showed videos of actual fraud.

[goaded]

I'm sure they checked the weeks after the election to remove any suspected "mules" who were still going past that location on their way to work every day.

[holdem4884]

@exitseven Sure geolocation is reliable, but it's not nearly as specific as he claimed.

"The entirety of the claim rests on cell phone location data, which doesn’t remotely show that people were actually using the drop boxes (it doesn’t have the granularity to show that, as opposed to just walking or even driving by)"

More importantly, for the critically minded there are many other more plausible explanations for why these individuals might regularly pass by a dropbox.

If they were in some obscure location that people traveled to and from with no other discernable reason that would be compelling, but that's not what the data shows. They tend to be in high-traffic areas such as public libraries, shopping malls, municipal buildings, or schools.

My local drop box is in my public library, a location I pass probably 20 or 30 times a week. Did I deposit 20 ballots or is my drop box on a heavily trafficked street?

[holdem4884]

The entire movie is based upon faulty logic. It's similar to the following assertion:

There are GAG users who are abusive and perverted. exitsteven is a GAG user. Therefore, exitsteven is abusive and perverted.

To be clear, I don't think this about you. I'm just demonstrating the type of illogic used in the film. Despite how it's portrayed, his conclusions are not the logical deduction of the premises given.

[Redstang88]

It’s really not a debate if, it’s just a question how much of it is bullshit.
The media industry is first and foremost just that - a business. The left leaning bias is well established and either way stirring up controversy and other bullshit is simply good for business. And at the end of the day they’re always going to cater to the highest bidder

[OddBeMe]

Yeah first one is pretty accurate. MSM are corporations wanting commercial dollars. But their journalists have rules.

Project Verashithead and Joe Rogan don’t. Just means we should all corroborate facts wherever we get them.

[goaded]

We now know for a fact that Fox News was perfectly happy to lie about the 2020 election to their viewers.

[OddBeMe]

@goaded yeah. And I just read now the AZ attorney general sat on evidence to keep the big lie going. A Dem replaced him and found evidence AZ’s election was perfectly secure…how much tax payer money should that guy have to pay back?

[goaded]

I hadn't seen that yet. You amaze me not at all.

"Former Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich did not release to the public findings from his office that showed a series of 2020 election fraud claims were not backed up by evidence, according to documents released Wednesday by his successor. "

"Agents from the office of Brnovich, a Republican, had spent over 10,000 hours looking into potential voting irregularities and allegations of illegal voting, Mayes' office said in a news release. A September summary prepared by the attorney general's Special Investigations Section showed it had not turned up evidence that backed up the claims."
www.nbcnews.com/.../former-arizona-attorney-general-failed-release-report-disproving-elect-rcna71856

[OddBeMe]

@goaded I hope he’s held accountable…that’s their strategy by the way. Keep the govt obsessed about bullshit then point to how much money is spent on bullshit to prove govt sucks.

[HavicZero]

You have to love how this survey was designed to try to hurt. People's feelings when really it just shows that the author is an inept sociopath, Either an American woman or an American republican or just a russian piece of s***

[Anonymous]

Of course. Fake news has existed pretty much since 24 news sources came into being. When that came about it stopped being about being accurate as much as it became about being first. And that's when sponsors became involved. And at that point it stopped being news and became "entertainment". Now news sources cater to thier demographic.

[goaded]

There was real fake news, particularly during the 2016 election, but now, like CRT, the right-wing has used propaganda to get rid of its original meaning and use it as a weapon.

[goaded]

It's not the same as spin, but that's terrible, too.

The Heritage Foundation: "Database Swells to 1,285 Proven Cases of Voter Fraud..."
(They don't make a big deal about it being over 30 years and billions of votes, for some reason.)

[holdem4884]

Exactly. That number is INSANELY low given the votes. Assuming it's only 1 billion total votes (total Presidential votes alone exceed this) that's a fraud rate of.000001%.

[Guardian45]

The big news agencies, with the exception of FUX NEWS, do their best to provide credible, verifiable news.

ANYTHING Rupert Murdoch is Scheisse!

[loveslongnails]

I certainly believe it gets put out there. Sometimes it's knowingly fake, sometimes it gets so much spin on it that the facts get so corrupted and it's worthless information.

[gorydetails]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKMSgxgXie8

[goaded]

You do realise that that's all right-wing propaganda, don't you?

[PatriceONeal]

It takes a large amount of cognitive dissonance to suggest mainstream media has journalistic integrity and speaks to how brainwashed 80% of you are.

[holdem4884]

You're referring to a poll question, not the points I made.

Not all mainstream media has integrity, cable news is particularly problematic. FOX has recently made that abundantly clear.

However, if the question were about non-editoral print journalism from major periodicals, then it's overwhelmingly yes. The best there is within their limitations.

[PatriceONeal]

When I hear someone say "not all" I just know they're retarded. Nobody has ever said all, ever.

[holdem4884]

I should have been clearer. My statement was about most mainstream media journalists in contrast to right wing media which has absolutely no integrity at all.

Integrity is the quality of being honest, having strong moral principles, adhering to them consistently, and the willingness to do what is right even when it is difficult or unpopular. People with integrity are dependable and trustworthy, and they are often admired for their honesty and sense of responsibility.

[PatriceONeal]

You are really out of line claiming the sun is actually the moon.

[msc545]

Fake news labeling is a convenient way to deny the validity of anything you don't like without explanation.

[Anonymous]

I see a lot of claims but zero links supporting. And no, it is not my responsibility to "Google" it. It is your responsibility to support the claims.

[holdem4884]

I'd be pleased to do so if it was of utility but the people I've encountered who believe in Trump and MAGA "fake news" claims don't consider evidence that contradicts their worldview.

They likely wouldn't bother to check the sources. Even if they did, no matter how credible and objective, they'd call anything "liberal" that wasn't as far to the right as Canada Free Press, RedState, NewsMax, etc. and discount IT as "fake news" You can't break out of circle logic with these people.

[AngryCarl2]

There is fake news, but we need to remember where it is coming from, and why.

[MessofConfuzzled]

all news has some sort of political or social lean.

[holdem4884]

Everyone has biases but there are still some who do their best to be objective, that's at the core of true journalism. Editorializing and opining isn't journalism.

[MessofConfuzzled]

I think its mostly just opinion writing now

[noohair]

Social media is all fake.

[exitseven]

@noohair Finally, somebody that makes some sense.

[holdem4884]

@exitseven & @noohair

Calling it all fake can't be supported but it's not a reliable or credible source of information. Far too many people lack that discernment and fall for the most improbable, ridiculous, and baseless things they read.

The left has its nutcases but they don't have a leader and movement that routinely rejects empirical evidence and logical argument, using socal media as a bloodline.

What do you do what people reject rationality, reject anything that doesn't fit into their worldview as untrue without consideration, and only believes a narcissistic pathological liar is telling the truth?

[exitseven]

Sounds like all the people that watch CNN for the news and not the entertainment value.

[holdem4884]

@exitseven Anyone who gets their news from CNN or any other cable news outlet without reading widely and exposing themselves to alternatives is not going to be particularly well informed.

[exitseven]

that is true. Also people need critical thinking skills and a healthy amount of skepticism. This sort of thing is not taught in school anymore.

[holdem4884]

@exitseven Trump is a narcissistic pathological liar who consistently dismisses anything he finds inconvenient or threatening. This isn't just an opinion it's testable and can be objectively verified.

Trump never admits fault, he NEVER takes responsibility, he always deflects blame. I'm wrong? Out of his tens of thousands of hours of interviews, videos, tweets, and other public statements, there must be plenty of examples of taking responsibility and owning his mistakes.

Truman: "The buck stops here"
Trump: "I can always find a scapegoat because that's what cowards do."

[exitseven]

Biden: It was Trumps fault
Harris: It was Trumps fault
Buttigeig : It was Trumps fault
Myorkis: It was Trumps Fault

[holdem4884]

@exitseven You've committed a double error with your logical fallacy of "appeal to hypocrisy," attempting to discredit my argument by pointing out a similar or worse action by someone else.
I have no idea why you defend Trump, I have no interest in defending these people but I will correct your error:

Here are 5 specific examples of Biden taking responsibility after making a mistake:

September 16, 2021: Biden takes responsibility for the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, saying "I take responsibility for the decision" during a press conference.

August 26, 2021: Biden takes responsibility for the suicide bombing at Kabul airport, saying "the buck stops with me" in a speech to the nation.

February 17, 2021: Biden takes responsibility for the slow rollout of COVID-19 vaccines, saying "I'm responsible for the whole government" during a town hall.

March 28, 2019: Biden takes responsibility for his role in the passage of the 1994 crime bill, saying "I haven't always been right" during a speech.

June 3, 2014: Biden takes responsibility for his off-the-cuff remark that led to the resignation of an American diplomat, saying "I'm the vice president, I'm responsible" during a speech.

Kamala Harris: (she's a joke)

December 2019: Harris took responsibility and apologized for her campaign's handling of a sexual harassment complaint against a top aide.

Pete Buttegig:

February 2020: Buttigieg acknowledged that he made a mistake by initially supporting a policy that led to an increase in drug sentences.

Alejandro Mayorkas:

In a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mayorkas took responsibility for his role in creating an "appearance of favoritism" in the EB-5 visa program while he was director of U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

[holdem4884]

@exitseven Notice that I actually responded to the merits of your comment? If you can't do that you should be honest enough and at least have the self integrity necessary to conceded the point.

People like Trump who refuse to take responsibility for their mistakes and refuse to admit error are defensive, dishonest, arrogant, and lack accountability. They blame others or external circumstances for their mistakes and have no credibility.

These are weak-minded individuals who lack the basic human decency to own up to their actions and face the consequences of their choices. They are not fit to lead, nor are they capable of being productive members of society. They are parasites that thrive on the misery and suffering of others, and they have no place in a civilized world.