The Kind-Hearted Smart Aleck

I really hate that it's gotten to this point, but sadly, on December 14th of 2016, I feel I must explain the differences between satire and fake news. Sadder yet, renowned satirist Andy Borowitz has now decided to include the words "NOT THE NEWS" front and center on each and every one of his articles, because apparently, we're too stupid to figure that out for ourselves (well, some of us). I bring up Borowitz because, earlier today, a Facebook friend of mine commented on one of his articles, saying, "Fake news should be outlawed!" This prompted me to explain the differences between the two, in a condensed fashion, saying, "It's satire. If we went down that slippery slope, all comedy would be outlawed. There's a stark difference between 'fake news' with the intent of misinforming mass quantities of people to provide aid for a particular political agenda, and 'fake news' with the intent of stimulating thought and laughter by poki...

So, I got a good laugh in this morning. As I normally do every day, I checked out the Columbus Dispatch  letters-to-the-editor because I tend to find the majority of them so ridiculous, I either shake my head and laugh or feel the need to rebut the letter(s) with those crazy things called facts. It was a different story with a letter I read today. I laughed, but not at the letter that was written. I laughed at the headline the Dispatch decided to use for the letter. The letter was written by one John C. Hamler of Columbus, and read as follows: "The Saturday Dispatch editorial 'A pattern of failure' is yet another biased bashing of the Obama administration. Since the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, the Republican plan for America is to cut taxes for the rich, take jobs from the middle class, cut benefits to the poor and take the vote away from those who don't support them. The U.S. Supreme Court has ensured that the Republican Party is the best...

The mantra makers vs. takers has been increasing in its usage and effectiveness in recent years. The image of a person on welfare has gone from that of a single mother working multiple low-paying jobs and still not being able to fully support she and her kids to one of a person laying on the couch, watching game-shows, while smoking weed. This image distortion has led to states either pursuing or successfully proposing and enacting laws to drug-test people on welfare. They claimed that this distorted image of those on welfare was an accurate one, that we'd prevent many drug users from receiving our taxpayer money, and would save a great deal of money in the process. Upon further inspection, these claims and predictions haven't rung true. Florida was the first state to enact such a law. How is it doing? Not great... Before Judge Mary S. Scriven of the Federal District Court decried the law as being unconstitutional, 4,086 such drug-tests were documented. Of those 4,086 potenti...