What's been keeping me from posting about Trump?
Cowardice in the sense that Bernie and Hillary supporters seem to be so disconnected from what I generally think of as "truth" that it actually seems dangerous now to speak your mind if you believe the Donald.
Which I do...
At least I do way more than I have been able to believe any President since maybe JFK.
But why do the BS&HRC people seem so disconnected to me? Bernie Sanders's message this past political season had appeal. He was making a lot of sense to me but I've never really thought of myself as a Communist, never trusted Communists, so it troubled me that he was of that persuasion. Hillary Clinton on the other hand came across to me as a Neocon stooge, probably CIA. It seemed to me that every time she spoke to the voters she lied about one thing or another. That was long before the WikiLeaks email releases made it appear to me and to many others that she was corrupt to the core.
Find a Liberal who is willing to admit either of those realities? I dare you to go look!
This vast chasm between what is true and what the Left won't admit to leaves me sensing danger. It seems safer to not go public with my perspective rather than face the wrath of an irrational populace.
The existence of these two polar opposite realities triggers cognitive dissonance in my thinking, a high level of stress that leads me to think I should question my own reality even though I know that my perceptions are well-founded. The Left here in America last year decided they wanted a covert and seriously nasty woman as their President, as the so-called leader of the free world, rather than a Communist.
And that was before the conventions! Way before the election!
What has happened since the conventions is even worse.
If you don't know what I am talking about, it's probably because you rely on the "Mainstream Media" for your "facts"
In a recent Rolling Stone interview, President Obama made this comment:
Well, the most important thing that I'm focused on is how we create a common set of facts. That sounds kind of abstract. Another way of saying it is, how do we create a common story about where we are.
I mean, since when are facts abstract? What makes a story more acceptable than hearing and studying actual facts?
I'll tell you what.
Facts imply non-fiction.
Stories can be as fictional as the storyteller wants them to be.
When it comes to perceiving reality, this is the perfect example of what makes this political era so conducive to cognitive dissonance.
Nothing either needs to be or is expected to be true or real. It just needs to be something we hold in a common consensus and you just aren't American if you don't agree with the "curated journalism" (again Obama's words), the mainstream media's concocted story.
The "curated journalism" version of who Donald Trump is, what he actually means when he speaks, is that Trump lies, lies, lies, lies. I hear it every time I tune in to "curated journalism". I especially hear it when I listen to NPR. Listening to NPR turns my stomach now just as much as Fox News did back in the George W. Bush Neocon era. Everything is spun to fit the biased narrative. No attempt is made to actually practice professional journalism where the point is not to tell a political story but rather the point is to give the audience as faithful an understanding as possible, you know, stick to the facts and give us a thorough understanding, not an editorial perspective or "curated journalism" consensus. The way Mainstream Media reports the stories they tell now simply has to be intended to induce cognitive dissonance. It certainly isn't aimed at reporting the facts or helping us understand. Instead it's about making us believe the worst.
As long as we the people of the United States of America believe "curated journalism", we will never understand our new President. I for one find it both challenging and rewarding to understand what he says without bias, suspend disbelief and just hear him from his own perspective.
My goodness, no sooner do I point out NPR's ceaseless accusations against the President than I hear a refutation right on NPR. This morning, actually. A female correspondent was answering questions why she didn't call the President out as the liar he is and she explained that the definition of a lie infers intent and nobody knows what Trump's intent is. So she used other words instead in her reporting of the President's false claims. She did mention that there wasn't a consensus in her organization concerning the use of the word liar. Actually just before I heard this lady I had heard a Maine Public Radio news anchor use the term lie with reference to President Trump so what I said still stands. I still am hearing Public Radio call President Trump a liar.
Second Update Today! 1/25/17
Case in point...
Only recently have I become aware of Tucker Carlson's amazing ability to think on his seat, so to speak, with an admirable sense of humor but lacking the kind of vindictive faux superiority of - for instance - Jon Stewart. Here in this interview with a liberal writer Carlson skillfully points out what I am talking about. They discuss Kellyanne Conway whom I have come to admire as one of the straightest shooters in politics in recent decades, an honest and trustworthy person.
Here's a YouTube link for this interview