That Hillary — she really knows how to manipulate us! (Well, according to Fox News). 
For instance, when she fell and hurt her head, Fox was absolutely convinced that it was faked. Obviously it didn’t really happen; she just lied in order to get out of testifying about Benghazi (in one of the many hearings the Republicans have wasted our taxpayer money on).
Well, that narrative has come and gone, because now the question from Fox is, “Does this minor concussion from a year and a half ago prevent her from being President?” Karl Rove even accused her of having “brain damage.”
I am not making this up.
Hey, remember when Fox admitted it was wrong about the fake injury? Ha ha! Just kidding! Maybe in an alternate universe.
The Fox version is this: either she faked it and thus is unfit or she didn’t fake it and thus is unfit. There is no winning scenario for them.
“What we clearly need,” they will say next, “is for Hillary to release her Health Certificate. The long form.”
(Remember: you read it here first.)
In this day and age, with internet memes and political extremists spouting accusations through cable TV and talk radio, it is very good to be a skeptic.
But there is one difficult requirement: You have to be a skeptic about things you desperately want to be true. Otherwise, you’re a hypocrite. 
When I was in high school, I was the skeptical kid who challenged the mainstream, especially about religion. I thought that being cynical and skeptical was the duty of an intelligent thinker. That’s how science works, after all.
“I refuse to believe without proof,” I’d say. And then I’d go and read all the books about UFOs and the Bermuda Triangle and Chariots of the Gods.
Over time, I started realizing that I could not claim to be an intellectual skeptic if I was only skeptical about things I really didn’t believe anyway. I needed to be skeptical about everything, and especially the stuff I wanted to be true.
I see this all the time in the political and religious debates I have. People are skeptical about claims made by their political opponents but blindly swallow anything said by those whose views match their own. Liberals believe all sorts of crazy memes that pop up about Sarah Palin even though most of them are false. Conservatives believe all kinds of stupid things about Obama that they would never accept if said about one of their own politicians. Religious folks believe all sorts of things said by their God while laughing at the crazy things people in other religions believe about their God.
You can’t have it both ways.
Being skeptical is an important part of life — it’s how you don’t fall prey to charlatans and people who want to take advantage of you. It’s how you learn, because you research and find out for yourself what the truth is.
But you have to be an equal opportunity skeptic and realize that people on your side exaggerate and lie, too. And you have to be smart about it.
“I am a skeptic,” you may say. “I am skeptical that 97% of all climate scientists think there is climate change.” No, you’re just being willfully ignorant. You are aiming your skepticism only in one direction. You are only being skeptical about things that benefit you and are refusing to be skeptical about your side. You need to inform yourself and look at the evidence you like with the same skeptical eye as the evidence you don’t like.
Otherwise, you’re just a hypocrite.
Hooray! I get to do two of these posts in one week!
With this decision, anti-gay marriage wins in state courts rise to a grand total of zero. 
In the last year, we’ve had decisions in Arkansas, Illinois, Michigan, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and Virginia. Meanwhile, Hawaii, New Jersey and Rhode Island have removed the provision by the legislature, without a court decision.
That’s now eight decisions out of eight in the past year which have knocked down these laws. Not one court case has gone the other way. The breaking down of discrimination has been 100% effective. So to my friends who keep insisting these laws are constitutional: How’s 100%? Is 100% enough for you? What percentage will convince you?
“Marriage is a fundamental right of all citizens, which neither tradition nor the majority may deny,” said Judge Dale. “The defendants offered no evidence that same-sex marriage would adversely affect opposite-sex marriages or the well-being of children. Without proof, the defendants’ justifications echo the unsubstantiated fears that could not prop up the anti-miscegenation laws and rigid gender roles of days past.”
Last fall, I blogged about a Florida teacher who was suspended for forcing her students to say the Pledge of Allegiance.
Texas doesn’t stand for that kind of thing. They’ve suspended the kid for refusing to stand. 
(Insert comic German accent) “You vill obey und salute the government. Ve do not appreciate individual thought here!”
Of what use is a forced pledge? If someone forces you to say something against your will, what’s the point? How is it meaningful? Does the irony not hit people? “We are forcing you to pledge against your will — for freedom!!!”
The United States Supreme Court held that no one could be forced to say the pledge over fifty years ago in a case involving the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who persuasively argued that such a pledge violated their religious beliefs concerning worshiping objects or something. It has been the law of the land ever since. Here’s what the court said:
If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein. If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us.
We think the action of the local authorities in compelling the flag salute and pledge transcends constitutional limitations on their power and invades the sphere of intellect and spirit which it is the purpose of the First Amendment to our Constitution to reserve from all official control.
But Texas!
Say the pledge because you mean it, and not because you have to. That’s true patriotism.
A large percentage of Republicans, urged on by Fox News, are convinced that Benghazi is the worst example of corruption ever in American politics. Worse than Watergate, worse than Iran/Contra, worse than the Teapot Dome Scandal. Awful, terrible scandal.
They can’t quite explain what the scandal is, though. The best I have ever been able to figure out is that bad decisions were made. It’s not like there were accusations of bribes being taken or something. 
“But the Obama administration is full of corruption!” they say, citing the fact that there have been exactly zero Obama administration officials charged with crimes (as opposed to Bush, or especially their hero Reagan, whose numbers dwarf even Nixon’s list).
These conspiracy lovers have convinced themselves that there is something there. They’re convinced it exists, even though there’s no evidence for it. Like Bigfoot. (The fact that most of the same people have no idea where Benghazi even is tells you something.)
They tried to tie Obama to it — remember Romney accusing Obama of not calling it a terrorist action even though Obama is on record the day after the incident calling it just that? Romney foolishly bought the conspiracy nut’s version of the story, which was clearly and blatantly not true. And they haven’t stopped! (You think it’s a coincidence that many of these people are the same ones convinced that Obama was born in Kenya?) These people have been caught lying more than once about Benghazi, which is why the rational media has mostly been ignoring them. (Fox, of course, left rationality long ago.)
Now they’re trying to tie Hillary to it, since she’s the latest threat. So far, it hasn’t worked … the hardcore crazies are riled up, but those people were never going to vote Democratic anyway. Polls show that the majority of Americans see this as the airless political stunt it is.
ventrellaquest.com 