Li: ritual, propriety, etiquette. Hsiao: love within the family (parents for children and children for parents. Yi: righteousness--the noblest way to act in a situation. Xin: honesty and trustworthiness. Jen: benevolence, humaneness towards others. Chung: loyalty to the state and authority. --Confucius (Kong Fuzi)

All articles appear in reverse chronological order [newest first].

Post from FaceBook may not be viewable if not signed into FaceBook.
I believe the past is relevant, sometimes more than others of course. In most cases we are seeing history being repeated, so it is most relevant.


Here are some of the links I use to follow the money, fact check, learn more about legislation, issues and political statements. Do you have links that you use to combat misinformation or use as a solid source? If so, share away!

Snopes and Urban Legends are the oldest fact checking sites, but PolitiFact is probably the most efficient and popular.

Below is a list if sites I use:

Legislation: The devil is in the details. They often use safe titles and fluffy synopsis's to disguise the true goals of the bill. It's hard reading at times but hey, someone has to do

The Library of Congress is a great place to find all sorts of historic things. Fun just to surf also.

These two sights are not fact checking sites like the above but:

this one is great for looking up and reading the actual language of proposed laws. You can also look up laws passed in past congresses:

and this one is great for looking up actual labor statistics. You know for those charts that keep appearing comparing on presidents effect on jobs against another, or one party against another.

Surprise! Not everything coming out of politicians and t.v./radio pundits mouths are true. Check out these sites:

Usually when you want to check an email you can just copy the title in the subject line of the email into the 'Search" box on the websites page. If someone has changed the subject line in the chain email you may have to look for a key phrase or words to put into the search box.

I won't claim that any of these sights are free of bias, but I don't think any site, or any of us can make that claim. The question should be how bias, that's why I usually look at more than two sights on any subject and sometimes will look at all of them to see if anyone has a counter argument.

Over the years I have responded to chain mails because I think that, just like old fashion chain letters, they are for the most part deceitful and pray on the little old lady types who could be scared into keeping the chain going for fear of bad luck. That's never the intention of the person forwarding the chain mail, but it is the intention of the person who originated it.


Sadly, it seems many people like forwarding the chainmail's. I say this because as I have responded by correcting the chainmail's I have received less of them. I suspect that too many people prefer to receive chainmail's that fit into their beliefs more so than they want to hear the truth or facts about someone they would rather hate than know the truth. (??)

Some chainmail's have been sent so much that at one point I started cataloguing them on one this website to keep from having to re-answer the same chainmail every year. Click the "Spitting Back" link. There are 20 post under that topic and they all won't appear in the same listing so when you get near the bottom look for the 'Older Post' link. There is also a link ('Spam and E-Mail Hoaxes') in the 'Information' box for an explanation of how and why people start chainmail's and why they can be putting your mailing list at risk.'



No comments:

Search This Blog