Name Your Sources, Trump

Letter to the Editor published in today’s local newspaper:

President Trump said that all information put out by the press should have a named source attached to it. Why doesn’t he show the way by naming the sources of his “information?”

  • Who counted the votes for him and told him that he won the popular vote in November?
  • Who told him that most undocumented Mexicans were “bad hombres?”
  • Where does he get his information about Muslims?
  • Who told him that torturing suspects is ethical and really works?

When asked why he incorrectly claimed that his Electoral College victory was the largest in modern history, he simply said “Someone told me.”

I think sources are important and, if Trump thinks so too, he should show us how it’s done.

23 thoughts on “Name Your Sources, Trump

  1. These two shows might have some relevance to “verifying facts…verifying sources” and how to apply appropriate BROAD critical-thinking skill sets to claims people make and news/sources that in this age are a penny-a-dozen and often not so reliable! Consider…

    Last night on the National Geographic Channel “Explorer“, host Aasif Mandvi interviewed Emmy Award-winning journalist Ted Koppel about modern news media and its precedent-shift & that effect on unwitting viewing reading Americans. The 25-min interview was very poignant and profound and worth the watch!

    Later in the evening I was also fortunate to catch the ShowTime documentary “Gringo: The Dangerous Life of John McAfee.” And it was a great illustration of how psychiatric megalomania is exhibited. Whether the documentary is true, half-true, or untrue, isn’t initially significant. Any clinical psychologist would dig much deeper into the (bipolar/manic) extreme behaviors of McAfee and the like — for example, going from a yoga instructor/guru lifestyle, then admitting those years & Colorado clinic were all totally bogus, then behaving like a paranoid proud demi-warlord and then must flee that country!!! Hello? — is all serious cause for AT LEAST an extensive psych evalution! Hah! If nothing else he is the epitamy and definition of (entertaining?) megalomaniac. Period. They are a dime a dozen, especially in this world of fertile social media & unwitting audience-pandering!

    I found the similarities between McAfee and tRump to be remarkably similar!

    Liked by 2 people

      • Sure Nan. I specifically liked Koppel’s point about the shifts of corporate journalism from one of ‘getting it right through extensive fact-checking, researching, and broad perspectives‘… to one of ratings/revenues first above quality expansive reporting. And the fact that there are TOO MANY bad or average news platforms and reporters to choose from for Americans allowing an undisciplined learner to simply listen/watch/read what matches their own experience and beliefs, whether fact or fiction — two digressive forces for an already semi-illiterate to illiterate populace. :/

        When a populace sacrifices its youth’s quality education (esp critical-thinking skills!) for the insatiable capitalism money-monster, history has proven time and again that a volatile socioeconomic divide emerges. Meanwhile, the U.S. for the last 2-3 decades has struggled to stay even in the Top 20 of highest ranked educational systems by nation. Go figure, huh. Then what does our leadership do? Appoint Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education. She will be sure to continue our trend or point it downward with her postures on education — which eventually trickles to ability of a populace to apply critical-thinking skills… or rather not even know what those are. ๐Ÿ˜ฆ

        Liked by 1 person

  2. tRump’s main source is his warped mind. tRump and Republicans, especially of late, give the word hypocrite new meaning. Google the word “hypocrite”, and tRump and Paul Ryan’s pictures pop up. I deeply, truly hate Putin’s Orange Puppet and his band of mindless followers.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. Hello Nan. tRump and crew have this weird warped view that what they demand of others they themselves are exempt from. For example the people in the cabinet are required to divest of things that might cause a conflict of interest. They have been selling stocks and shares in companies. However tRump feels he is exempt from what his employees must do. Congress routinely exempts itself from laws they pass for others. Mark Foley worked hard to make stricter punishments for anyone who used the internet to attempt sexual relations with minors, while he himself was using the internet trying to find minors to have sex with. So they say others must do, others must have, others should feel… but never themselves. IF you find out anything please let me know. I have curiosity but can’t seem to get a clear picture. Hugs

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Back in the last century, when I were a wee lass, ie a trainee journalist, anything and everything had to be attributed. There was no opinion apart from the editor’s column. He said this, she said that, the council report showed this. And, if we put forward one point of view, we had to get the other side. Thank goodness for blogging where we can all be as biased as we want!

    I am more than happy to criticise Seรฑor Trump, but it has to be said, journalism these days is pretty crap.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Agreed Roughseas. And audiences sometimes/often can’t even determine what is crap or bogus and what is good/excellent. Perhaps it has to do with impatience and speed, or an unwillingness to suspend (temporarily) judgements — an obsession or addiction to A-or-B… Black-and-White ONLY!?

      Those who ARE excellent American journalists and editors (granted, few these days) have joined with many acclaimed scientists in saying that with the advent of the internet and sharing/access of information, and its modern speed of communication, that determining what is true or untrue SHOULD be easier to check than ever before! Yet, “facts don’t seem to matter” to too many audiences or learners! Hah! WHY this is so is even more mind-boggling! ๐Ÿ˜ฎ

      Liked by 1 person

        • Hah. Well thank you RS for being thoughtful about my well-being(?), feelings(?) or others here? If that is your hesitation? Hahaha. But for me personally, you are more than welcome to say whatever you think/feel here. After all, it IS the internet and blogosphere and I would like to hear/read your answer. ๐Ÿ˜‰


          • Well for once, it isn’t all about you!
            Actually, it was about lack of intelligence, critical thinking, inability to research, and far more interest in consumer goodies than books, news, topical issues etc. You get the drift.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Those 5 or 6 points are all certainly valid and are often demonstrated/proven by large numbers of gullibility or in some cases pure obstinance and flat denial.

              P.S. “…for once“? Haha. I’ve always enjoyed your spunk Roughseas. ๐Ÿ˜‰ โค

              Liked by 1 person

            • I should admit here Nan that I do sometimes play-the-part (fictionally in my own head) of self-absorbed, smart, sexy Pretty Boy, ala Steven Colbert(?) when he was on the Comedy Channel. Love him! Anyway, very infrequently I might go too far with that satirical PROtagonist character. Though I am close to perfect, I still have a wee-bit of imperfection. ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜›

              Perhaps Roughseas was playing the antagonist part she does so well? ๐Ÿ˜€ โค

              Liked by 2 people

        • Roughseas, I’m not sure what you meant by your comment … “Well for once, it isnโ€™t all about you!” I have never noticed The Professor talking about himself only. In fact, I find his comments generally focus on issues… and to me, your comment came across as an insult. Perhaps this was not your intent. Words alone (as on the internet) can be deceiving.

          In any case, I agree with your observation about the “Editor’s Opinion.” Nowadays just about everything that’s in print is someone’s opinion. They may include some “facts” but ultimately, it’s their “take” on a situation. And whether we like to admit it or not, we all absorb the parts that agree with our personal perspective.

          Did you happen to watch the video on Ted Koppel? I really think he nailed it.

          Liked by 1 person

Don't Be Shy -- Tell Us What You Think!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.