When attempted cleverness and typos collide

As anyone who puts their pants on one leg at a time should know by now, I often times write and talk about current events, especially when it comes to the world of politics. Based on the current definitions of the terms, most people view me as an uber-liberal Democrat, but I view myself as a pragmatic progressive independent who leans Democrat. I didn't come to be this way because of parental influence. My father's always been an independent, has voted every such way, and while he may be progressive at his core, he never talked politics to my brother or I when we were growing up. His side of the family leaned Democrat, but rarely ever spoke about politics when my brother or I were around during the holidays. My mother's side of the family, on the other hand, has leaned Republican, has been more outspoken about their political beliefs, but outside of her since passed father, they've tried to stray away from such discussions when my brother and I have been in town. My mother happened to be a hard-core Republican until 2004, when she changed her tune, and 13 years later, she's further to the left on the political spectrum than I am - to the point when I even have to butt in and play devil's advocate on the side of conservatives when the two of us discuss politics. So, my parents wanted me to think for myself, make up my own mind, and figure out what I believed regarding politics with little to no influence coming from them. I honestly didn't care about politics until the 9/11 attacks occurred, at which point I decided to start reading, researching, and finding out more about the world of politics. From this reading and research, I decided equality was of the utmost importance to me - that people should be treated equally in the eyes of the law, regardless of their age, gender, race, creed, orientation, etc. I also saw that stricter gun laws, when enforced nationally, tended to result in fewer gun-related injuries and deaths. I learned that abstinence-only education and less access to contraception resulted in more unwanted pregnancies and abortions, which ran contrary to pro-lifers goals, but coincided with their platform. I discovered that our defense spending was greater than the next 7 to 10 countries combined, and speaking of overspending, that the death penalty was a greater expenditure than life imprisonment without parole. I read consistent analysis on human's impact on climate change and climate change's impact on the world. I sadly learned that not everyone has the same opportunities growing up, whether it be with regard to healthcare, education, leisurely activities, transportation, etc. I saw that, while religion may be able to positively affect people as far as how they treated others, science was more beneficial to living in the ever-changing present, and properly adjusting and adapting in the future. Through all of these findings and more, I came to be the progressive independent I am today. In saying that, I often times share articles that touch on scientific findings, breakthroughs in cures, healthcare reform, poverty, gun violence, discrimination, etc. I'll be much more likely to share a fact-checker debunking a conspiracy theory than to post a debunked conspiracy theory. While many may want to view these articles as strictly political, I don't see (most) of them as being about politics, but about people's livelihoods. Why is it "political" to want to bring attention to gun violence in this country? Why is it "political" to share analysis on healthcare reform bills? Why is it "political" to call out politicians' lies via reputable fact-checkers? Why is it "political" to share stores which illustrate racism and sexism aren't dead in this country?

Just a few days ago, an old acquaintance of mine decided to comment on my barrage of articles on Facebook, by posting a comment which said, "I just did a study that said 99.99999% of Craig Rozniecki's friends on Facebook, democrat and republican, want there pages to not have any more of his BS Political Posts."

Not only do the poster's typos detract from his attempted cleverness, but he unintentionally illustrated what's wrong with alleged fake news, as well as hard-core supporters on both sides of the aisle when attempting to engage in civilized discourse.

There are still some reasonable Republicans in the country, but sadly, it seems as though the Tea Partiers, right-wing talk radio show hosts, and Fox News talking heads have taken over the party's narrative, which has placed the entire party in a bad light, dug them a growing hole, and unless some moderate GOPers stand up to and attempt to alter the party's narrative, it's going to be difficult for them to fully get themselves out of it. Just because an article or a study contradicts one's opinion, that doesn't make it fake news. Let's get right down to it, that's all "fake news" is. If Donald Trump or one of his hard-core supporters spouts the two words "fake news," that simply means they don't want to believe the accuracy of the article/study. That's it. Guns kill approximately 33,000 people per year? "Fake news!" Around 97% of climatologists believe in climate change? "Fake news!" Blacks, women, and LGBTs still get discriminated against? "Fake news!" No, actually, it's not. Just because one doesn't want to believe something, doesn't make it false, and the more we attempt to close the doors to reality, the more difficult it's going to be to engage in civilized discourse with those who leave those doors open, and with that, limiting the positive impact we can leave on the world around us. When we neglect the truth, we neglect the needs of millions around us, which impacts our past, our present, and our future. Truth isn't political; it's essential, and the more we deny it, the more damage we're going to do in both the short- and long-term. Embrace truth before the truth becomes that we have nothing left to embrace.