Many teens and their parents ought to heed a warning that three Major League Baseball players are now learning. Comments tweeted or posted on social media can last a very long time.

In July, Atlanta pitcher Sean Newcomb, Washington shortstop Trea Turner and Milwaukee reliever Josh Hader were called out for tweeting racist, sexist or homophobic tweets several years ago.

All three have apologized, as they should, but Turner’s comments might be the most telling. He should not have said it in the first place. And the comments will tend to stick to him for a while.

“It’s not when I said the things I said. It’s that I said them at all,” said the 25-year-old Turner, whose tweets were in 2011 and 2012 when he was in college. “That’s a clear learning point from this to make sure that anybody is aware of what they’re saying at all times. No matter how you use it or what context you think you are using it in, words hurt. It’s wrong and inexcusable for what I said.”

Newcomb’s and Hader’s comments were made when they were teens.

Once out on social media, even comments that are supposed to be private can be found years after they were made, as the three players are finding out.

And there will be consequences, not only for athletes or other personalities, but for everyone. Potential employers have increasingly checked out candidates.

According to a 2017 CareerBuilder survey, 70 percent of employers use social media to screen candidates before hiring. Three in 10 employers have someone dedicated to solely getting the scoop on your online persona, according to the survey.

Deleted tweets, private messages — just about anything — can be unearthed these days. For teens, the potential dangers of that are endless, from college admissions to rookie job interviews.

“Last year, there was a widely reported case of 10 students who had been accepted to Harvard who had those acceptances rescinded because of racist social media posts. The posts were supposedly in a private chat,” psychologist Shane Owens, who treats adolescents, college students and young adults in New York, recently told the Associated Press. “Most kids are not able to appreciate the long-term consequences of their actions.”

Our advice would be not to put out anything on social media that you would not want the entire world to see because there is a chance that could happen. And there will be consequences.

• Dave Mathews

Dave Mathews: 409-683-5258; dave.mathews@galvnews.com

Managing Editor — Design

(49) comments

Steve Fouga

There's at least a decent chance the president's ill-advised tweets will be used against him in future legal proceedings.

Carlos Ponce

Two chances - slim and none. They can try but nothing will come out of it.

Steve Fouga

They WILL try, and then we'll see what happens.

George Croix

One consequence is the New York Times will still hire you, and defend you, after you post your racism towards white men..... [whistling]

Rusty Schroeder

Sad but true. How that is acceptable with no consequence is why the media and newspapers are deemed "fake news", no accountability yet quick to slander.

Jarvis Buckley

Stevo-I have got to give you credit, you never quit. Wish you would come over to the "right" side.

Steve Fouga

Jarvis, I have, from time to time.

I think I've posted before, that in 12 presidential elections I've voted for 4 Republicans, 4 Democrats, and 4 times I didn't vote. I strongly believe in our party system, but I have no party allegiance. My favorite hopeful in the 2016 election was John Kasich. By far, most of my friends and family are conservative.

I just think the most prominent Republicans of today are serious weasels: Trump, Cruz, Ryan, Nunes, McConnell... And I think Trump is downright dangerous to our country.

George Croix

About half a nation refusing to accept the results of an election is the most serious "threat to our democracy', which is the actual danger, of all.
imo

So far, the biggets danger from Pres. Trump is to a lot of people are in danger of no longer having an excuse to be dependent......
Oh, the humanity.....

Steve Fouga

George posts: "About half a nation refusing to accept the results of an election is the most serious "threat to our democracy'"

George, this refusal is due to many people feeling that Trump was elected in part because of Russian interference and in part because of Comey's actions. And, as you unfailingly point out, the Obama administration didn't have the good sense to expose the Russian interference. In other words, Trump was not elected legitimately. They feel that in a straight-up fair contest, lousy-Hillary would have beaten lousy-Trump.

You're damned right that these feelings are a threat to our democracy.

George Croix

Steve, the "Russian interference', nothing new there, relied on people being dumb enough to believe what they read on the internet, OR actually give their passwords to a collection of computer bytes...so, I'd ask, why aren't those folks mad at THEMSELVES?
Of course, I know the answer to that one already....
As for Comey, the simple fact is had Hillary NOT tried to circumvent the rules by building her own potty server and also conniving with her aids, associates, and even POTUS to work through those back channel means, there would have been NO Comey involved in the first place, so, why isn't Hillary the one the easily led folks are mad at?
I got that one already, too....
Simple fact is, the 'resistance' exists to provide cover for the dumb or dishonest folks. imo, who cannot accept any blame for themselves or direct it to the actual reason Hillary lost - which is because she's Hillary, who has made a lifetime career off coattailing off the efforts and/or subterfuges of others.....
Did anyone with even one working brain cell expect Putin to want Hillary to win after she tried screwing over his election in 2011?
Problem is, ask 100 people on the street, and maybe one will even know about that...and, who's fault is that.....
The 'Russian blamers' would do a lot more for themselves to buy a big mirror, look in it, and see the primary problem.....the ones the Russians, Chinese, Iranians, et al can exploit virtually at will...because they have no will of their own, except what's given to them to think by people more concerned with their own power than with improving the lot for ALL Americans....as is happening right now, at least for right now, under this Admin....
Again, imo.....

Carlos Ponce

"this refusal is due to many people feeling that Trump was elected in part because of Russian interference..."
Could it be they are.........wrong? When you tune into the the FAKE NEWS media outlets and 91% of what you hear is Left wing anti-Trump propaganda, what do you expect? And when something GOOD happens you hear "crickets" from them.

Steve Fouga


George asks: "why aren't those folks mad at THEMSELVES?"

Steve answers: because those folks voted for Trump, and they believe the end justifies the means. Hillary voters were not fooled by Russian bots and trolls. I doubt many voters who had planned to vote for Hillary had their minds changed by the Russians. A few independent voters did. But large numbers of Trump supporters who were wavering on whether to even vote, because he was so far behind, got their @sses in gear, and voted for Trump. Of course loyal Republicans already planned to vote for Trump, so they didn't change their vote, they just became unwitting mules for the Russians, spreading propaganda via social media.

George asks: "why isn't Hillary the one the easily led folks are mad at?"

Steve answers: You're talking about two different groups of people. The easily led folks are those who were fooled by Russian bots and trolls, and decided to vote for Trump because of Russian influence on their little minds.

George says: "Simple fact is, the 'resistance' exists to provide cover for the dumb or dishonest folks.

Steve says: That's not a fact at all. That's your opinion. The "resistance" actually exists to protest the outrage of a Trump presidency.

George wonders: "Did anyone with even one working brain cell expect Putin to want Hillary to win after she tried screwing over his election in 2011?"

Steve answers: Of course not, but that isn't what matters. What matters is the Russian interference in the election. It was illegal, and if the Trump campaign was complicit in the interference, they will be prosecuted for it.

George claims: "The 'Russian blamers' would do a lot more for themselves to buy a big mirror, look in it, and see the primary problem...because they have no will of their own"

Steve answers: LOL, this could have come straight from a Fox News opinion piece. I have plenty of will of my own, and every "Russian blamer" I know does also.

George mentions that the Trump agenda is "improving the lot for ALL Americans....as is happening right now, at least for right now..."

Steve says: Maybe. I think it's a close call. Please observe that essentially NO Republican candidate is campaigning on tax cuts and wage growth. Why? Because they understand the typical American has realized little, if any, benefit from them. Inflation has pretty much kept pace with the wage gains and minuscule tax cuts most Americans have seen. Better than nothing? Possibly. We'll see in a few years when the impact of built-in tax increases and a bloated deficit kick in.

Carlos asks about Russian blamers: "Could it be they are.........wrong?," meaning wrong about Russian interference in the election.

Steve answers: Yes, they might be wrong. But that's why we have the Mueller investigation. We'll see how it turns out. My prediction is that we will eventually find out that the Russians DID interfere in the 2016 presidential election, that the Trump campaign conspired with the Russians in said interference, and that the interference DID affect the outcome.

Carlos Ponce

And I doubt many voters who had planned to vote Trump had their minds changed by the Russians.
Russians had absolutely NO EFFECT on the actual voting, ZERO, ZIP, NADA!
Trump won because he campaigned in the swing states that gave him an Electoral advantage. Hillary on the other hand did not do a good job at campaigning. She ran a TERRIBLE campaign!
Roping the media?????? GIVE ME A BREAK!

Steve Fouga

Hillary ran a terrible campaign. And still would have beaten Trump if not for Comey and the Russians.

Carlos Ponce

" And still would have beaten Trump if not for Comey and the Russians." Pure speculation not based on anything factual. But you are entitled to your opinion. Truth being Trump ran a better campaign. [beam]

Carlos Ponce

Tell you what, Steve. Gather your fellow Democrats together and re-nominate Hillary for a re-match in 2020. Doubtful many Democrats will go along with that plan.

George Croix

Cute, and only 180 degrees off on most....keep trying

Ps: The folks known to be and definitely were complicit in Russian interference have already gotten a pass from you....

Steve Fouga

Why are we discussing Hillary? Didn't she lose? It's funny how you guys maintain a grudge against the folks your candidate either beat or lost to, years ago.

Start thinking about the future. It's about to happen.

Carlos Ponce

"Didn't she lose?"
I know that.
The world knows that!
But Steve Fouga still insists she "still would have beaten Trump if not for Comey and the Russians." You're suffering from collusion delusion, Steve! Fine! Ask for a re-match - IF YOU DARE!

Jim Forsythe

"The ability of Hannity and the rest of pro-Trump media to build on a counter-narrative to anything that's bad for Trump is invaluable for the president, both because it gives the GOP rank-and-file something to pay attention to that isn't Robert Mueller and because it helps muddy the waters around the Russia investigation,"
"Counter-narratives like the one Hannity has helped build around the Russia investigation -- in part by acting like the real crime is the leaking, or the surveillance, or Fusion GPS, or Uranium One-- also gives Trump loyalists a reason to avoid focusing their scrutiny on Trump himself," he asserted.
Different commentators and companies play different roles. Fox News's Tucker Carlson, for instance, is more "anti-anti-Trump" than "pro-Trump." His colleague Pete Hegseth is more explicitly boosterish of the president.
"One of the more striking features of the contemporary conservative movement is the extent to which it has been moving toward epistemic closure. Reality is defined by a multimedia array of interconnected and cross promoting conservative blogs, radio programs, magazines, and of course, Fox News. Whatever conflicts with that reality can be dismissed out of hand because it comes from the liberal media, and is therefore ipso facto not to be trusted."

George Croix

NOoooooo....not 'Fox Derangement Syndrome' for my friend Jim!!???!!!
Say it ain't so.
There's a reason it's the #1 cable news network for years now...and also #1 in the cable commentary programs......
They ARE two different categories, although the other networks don't seem to be able to separate one from the other.....[beam][beam][beam][beam]

Carlos Ponce

[yawn][yawn][yawn][yawn][yawn]
Wake me when you post something substantive rather than Leftist CNN Propaganda.
[sleep][sleep][sleep][sleep][sleep]

Steve Fouga

Fox News is a straight-up propaganda network, the very best example of what can go wrong in a nation that values freedom of the press. It's for people who can't stand the truth.

It's the most-watched cable news network only because most viewers are split among the other news sources. People wishing to watch propaganda watch Fox; the rest watch everything else.

Carlos Ponce

"propaganda network"???
The times I've seen FOX they always present both sides, Liberal and Conservative, Left and Right, Democrat and Republican. Liberals don't like going on the air on FOX because their statements will be questioned unlike CNN, MSNBC, et al where Liberal views are accepted without question.
Steve, be honest, which cable news do you watch?

Steve Fouga

Mostly MSNBC. They have the most talented anchors in the business -- dynamic and fun to watch. They're the most left-leaning of the cable networks, so I have to sift off the chaff. I'm able to do this, being a person who is able to think for himself. Same with the New York Times and the Chronicle, which is where I get most of my print news.

Occasionally I glance at CNN. More mainstream than either Fox or MSNBC. Their anchors aren't up to the level of MSNBC, and neither are their reporters. They're more balanced, however.

I never watch Fox on purpose anymore, like I did in the old days of Bill O'Reilly and Greta Van Susteren. Sometimes it's on at a relative's house or a restaurant, or one of the other networks shows a clip of Fox to make fun of them. Fox has the most biased coverage I've seen outside of TASS and Pravda.

All told, however, I don't average an hour per day of cable news.

Carlos Ponce

So Steve watches "Mostly MSNBC". That explains much.[rolleyes]

George Croix

That’s the funniest thing you’ve ever posted, Steve
But, maybe you consider Benghazi, the secret server, the dossier, the Bill and Loretta tarmac meeting, etc to be propaganda, since we’d know little or nothing about any of those subjects among many others were it not for Fox. If that’s propaganda on your planet, then time for you to call home...call home. 🤗

George Croix

I stand corrected.
That comment about MSNBC 'talent' is the funniest one you've ever posted. The Fox propaganda one comes in at #2.
So far.....

Steve Fouga

It's weird, I know about those things, and yet I haven't seriously watched Fox News in years. Gee, I must have learned about them from MSNBC, NYT, other MSM. Heck, Mother Jones broke the dossier story. By watching and reading the media I consume, I will know what's happening at least as quickly and in a less filtered state than you will watching Fox.

If you want the most evenhanded treatment of news, watch ANYTHING but Fox.

Carlos Ponce

Try watching FOX, Steve. And not just snippets out of context from your Leftist news sources.

George Croix

The laughs just keep coming.
The 'resistance' must be contagious....

"If you want the most evenhanded treatment of news, watch ANYTHING but Fox."
Where 'even handed' is a synonym for 'one sided', you're right.
Looking for a viewpoint from more than one side of an issue is as common on the 'anything' networks as hen's teeth. Try to find 'opposing view' footage - it'll keep you occupied for...a while.....
Only in the Great State of Denial is that not so. Even a short time viewing footage shows a decidedly if not completely in a few cases monolithic broadcast orientation.

Yep. Quality news...like last December when a domestic terrorist set off a pipe bomb in an NYC subway station, CNN ignored that while reporting on how many diet sodas the President drank per day....alluding to possible dementia from it....without proof....
Hard hitting....professional...,. [beam][beam][rolleyes][whistling][cool][lol]

But, perhaps best of all, was the breathless 'anything networks' coverage of 'it was the video'....better 4 Americans dead than a bad word against the folks who PURPOSELY lied the coverup to try to not effect the 2012 Elections.

Believe what you want....my grandson believes in the Tooth Fairy....but he's only 3 years old.....

Steve Fouga

George says: "Believe what you want....my grandson believes in the Tooth Fairy....but he's only 3 years old....."

Thanks, George. Like you, I DO believe what I want. Free country, and all that...

You've probably seen this chart depicting news sources according to partisan bias, quality of content, and degree of news vs opinion. It has been widely praised and derided by both liberals and conservatives. Certainly not scientifically accurate, but interesting and thought-provoking: https://www.allgeneralizationsarefalse.com/media-bias-chart-3-1-minor-updates-based-constructive-feedback/

It's also interesting that Fox News itself reported in April 2018 that Fox is the LEAST trusted cable news source, by a long shot... But believe what you want. That's what I do, but I also do a little research and sometimes modify my views based either on reality, or on the overwhelming viewpoint of others.

Carlos Ponce

"It's also interesting that Fox News itself reported in April 2018 that Fox is the LEAST trusted cable news source, by a long shot"-Steve Fouga Really?
"No, Fox News did not put up graphic showing it was the least trusted network"
https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2018/apr/13/blog-posting/No-Fox-News-did-not-put-up-graphic-showing-it-was/
"That’s what bloggers claimed in a post that leaves out important context and details about the graphic." That figures!
"Fox News accidentally puts up a poll graphic that shows how they are the least trusted network," said boinboing.net in an April 9 post.
Facebook users flagged the post as being potentially fabricated, as part of the social network’s efforts to combat online hoaxes."
Looks like Steve was DUPED! Steve, next time check out your facts before posting. Even Leftist Politifact says this was fraudulent.
For the record, over the last few years:
2014:
"POLL: Fox Is The Most Trusted TV News Source In America"
https://www.businessinsider.com/chart-fox-is-the-most-trusted-tv-news-source-in-america-2014-6
2015:
"Fox News is the most trusted national news channel. And it’s not that close."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/03/09/fox-news-is-the-most-trusted-national-news-channel-and-its-not-that-close/?utm_term=.d8eb367cc936
"Poll: Fox News most trusted network"
https://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/fox-news-trusted-network-poll-115887
2016:
"Fox News is most-trusted TV news/commentary source: poll"
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/17/fox-news-most-trusted-tv-newscommentary-source-pol/
2017:
"Cable News Viewers Still Turn To Fox First"
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2017/cable_news_viewers_still_turn_to_fox_first
2018:
"Fox News Is Most Trusted News Source in Trump's America—As Faith In Media Plummets"
https://www.newsweek.com/fox-news-most-trusted-news-source-trumps-america-781822
"Fox News Channel: Most Watched, Most Trusted"
http://insider.foxnews.com/fox-news-channel-most-watched-most-trusted

Steve Fouga

"Looks like Steve was DUPED!" -- YES! By Fox News! Can't believe everything you see on Fox.

Carlos, your examples are unconvincing. First of all, I don't care about media statistics prior to about 2017, when we're talking about today. You're mired in the past, and things change.

Second, sorry, but I don't trust Rasmussen polls, just like you don't trust certain polls. Third, even your other 2018 example admits the Fox results are skewed because most of its viewers are Republicans, and Republicans don't trust any other news sources. I can't say for sure (not willing to do the research), but I bet most Democrats and independents rely on a larger number of sources, so no one source is trusted overwhelmingly compared to the others.

To be fair, I don't really trust any media. If the subject is something I'm truly interested in, I research it. But to be clear, I trust Fox News the least. It's a propaganda outlet.

Carlos Ponce

Steve, it was a fake report. It was not on FOX. Read the Left wing Politico report. And since you loathe FOX it's obvious you never saw any actual report.
And I gave a variety of sources saying FOX is trusted. So you don't trust Rasmussen. How about The Washington Post? Newsweek?

Steve Fouga

Carlos, those sources are fine, but the Newsweek article was to me, more damning than convincing. It pointed out that Fox scored so highly because most of its viewers are Republicans, who don't trust any source except Fox. In other words, the Republicans polled said they trusted Fox and didn't trust anyone else, basically because they didn't watch anyone else. It also says that Trump is essentially running a fake news campaign to undermine trust in sources other than Fox. Do you believe that, too?

Carlos Ponce

No, no I do not. But being NEWSWEEK they had to put a Liberal spin into it. Too bad. Newsweek used to be decent.

Carlos Ponce

Steve, I wonder if the FAKE NEWS you cited can be traced to Russians. Did the Russians plant FAKE NEWS about FOX? If so, that would mean you were colluding with Russians![wink]

Steve Fouga

NO COLLSION! I didn't know about it! I wasn't there!

Carlos Ponce

We'll find out when Herr Mueller calls you in........

Jim Forsythe

George, maybe you missed the coverage. CNN was not the only group that covered it. I remember on our local TV.

, Tue December 12, 2017
(CNN)It was the latest lone wolf attack to target New York City. And it might have been worse.
A man wearing a homemade pipe bomb set off the explosive in a busy transit hub on Monday, injuring five and setting off panic during the morning commute.
https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/11/us/new-york-possible-explosion-port-authority-subway/index.html
December 12, 2017
Authorities say bomber mocked Trump before subway attack https://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/nation/article/Authorities-say-bomber-mocked-Trump-before-subway-12425833.php


George Croix

That's great, Jim.
The pipe bomb incident happened on December 11, 2017.
The 12 cans of Diet Coke got national TV audience airtime...for hours....on the 11th.
Initially posting a .com mention rather than prime time tells all we need to know about that...It doesn't count for much to sound the alarm tomorrow about news that may impact others right now....except to Mr. van Winkle......
CNN is beaten only by MSNBC in their rush to be behind so they can use airtime making up things to hyperventilate about Pres. Trump.....You can find out all the Monday news you want on Tuesday after they get through showing their B-hinds......
I'm waiting for them to put 'Nobel Prize Winner' Krugman back on to bring us up to date on the breathless hourly announcements a couple years ago about how we are now in the global recesssion and economic collapse he, and they, said then candidate Trump would cause just by being elected......[beam][beam][beam][beam]

Jim Forsythe

George, I forgot that that it happened on the 11 of December, but should have as it was the same day as 9/11.
I was also under the impression that you were thinking that CNN and others did not cover it. As I remember the news on TV made a big deal of it because of the possible ties to ISS.

"Man in custody after ‘attempted terrorist attack’ near Times Square:"
Posted 5:31 AM, December 11, 2017, by CNN Wire, Updated at 12:16PM, December 11, 2017
By Brynn Gingras, Emanuella Grinberg and Eliott C. McLaughlin, CNN
Updated 10:58 AM ET, Tue December 12, 2017 https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/11/us/new-york-possible-explosion-port-authority-subway/index.html
These are some of the follow up stories , the next day.
Suspect in attempted 'terrorist attack' pledged allegiance to ISIS, officials say
Pipe bomb suspect pledged allegiance to ISIS, in 'attempted terrorist attack'
Updated: 11:58 AM ET, Tue December 12, 2017
(CNN) - It was the latest lone wolf attack to target New York City. And it might have been worse.
A man wearing a homemade pipe bomb set off the explosive in a busy transit hub on Monday, injuring five and setting off panic during the morning commute
https://lite.cnn.io/en/article/h_eefa8ff4fac8389e04f6a03621ed4962

George Croix

No, Jim, I was pointing out that CNN, et all, are so petty that reporting on Diet Coke drinking habits of POTUS to get in their 'resistance' efforts was their PRIMARY 'news item' AT the time the bomb story was fresh and unfolding.
Reporting it later, after hyperventilating about nothing (Only 12 Diet Cokes a day? That guy is a rank amateur at Diet Coke drinking.....[beam][beam]), pretty well tells all one needs to know about their journalistic integrity, or at least prioritization. Kinda like when they reluctantly admitted it WASN'T 'the video' after all, after giving a couple weeks of cover to that cover up......
NO news organization gets it right every time...the problem is when an effort is not even made to do so, or the effort is an obvious politically driven cover for what should be unbisaed reporting.
The 'news' ain't what it once was...maybe it never was, and we only now have the means to find out we're getting snookered and herded like cattle up a milking chute.....
Maybe...

Jim Forsythe

George, CNN reported about the bomb attack and also ran other stories that most likely we written before this happen.
One of the thing a editor has to do is determine how much space each story gets. Unless you are suggesting that the bombing should have been on all pages, then other stories are going to get space. All Presidents have had the press report on there bad habits. Below is a story that said Trump and Clinton had the same type of habits for drinks and phone.

(CNN)President Donald Trump downs a dozen Diet Cokes each day, The New York Times reported this weekend. His love of the bubbly beverage is shared by many Americans and at least one of his predecessors. President Bill Clinton was frequently photographed with a can in his hand and reportedly placed a Diet Coke -- along with a now-outdated cell phone and other items -- in a time capsule at his official presidential library.

Steve Fouga

Though I was never a president, Diet Coke was my go-to drink until my then-fiance reported that carbonated soft drinks were a possible cause of bone-density loss. Osteoporosis runs in my family (including some of the men), so in August, 2006, I stopped drinking carbonated soft drinks -- both sugared and diet, cola and non-cola, caffeinated and decaf. I haven't had one since.

Now, it turns out the sodas might affect only women, cola-based sodas might be the only culprits because they contain phosphoric acid, it might be caffeine that causes the problems rather than other ingredients, it might be that by ensuring a high-calcium diet (I do) it's possible to overwhelm the effect of the drinks, and it's likely that carbonation has nothing to do with bone density. As with so many subjects, further research leads to more insight from which to make decisions. Or, it makes it even more confusing.

So I might be taking up the refreshing beverage again in the near future. Or not. 🤔😊😎

Jarvis Buckley

Steve if you watch MSNBC , you are a soon to be socialist. I had high hopes for your conversion , George &
Carlos have been trying to intervene ,
but I think they are just beating their head against the wall. You are articulate enough , to really help
this forum. If you would be fair & balanced. Fox is jus fighting back against the fake news media. Surely you can see that. Over 90 percent
Of the news media is negative towards our president . If not for folks
Like George & Carlos & a few others on this forum. It would all be negative. If not for Fox News cable &
MSM would only spew the socialist few point . Maybe over the next 7 years you will see the results of President Trumps hard work. MAGA

George Croix

But, Jarvis, if not for Steve and the rest of the 'resistance' what would we talk about except what we already agree on??
Boooring.......!!
[beam][beam]

George Croix

Yet, for all this angst about 'attacking the news', all was quiet on the left front when our last President couldn't order a cup of coffee without getting the words 'Fox News' in there somewhere....
Either we forget so soon, or remember, and are just pretend otherwise.....
Sounds like a high school prom date where both participants promise to be on their best behavior.....then, well.......

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.