Take the daily news we tend to absorb. What motivates what we see or read? The headlines tend to grab us--based upon our individual stances or beliefs--and we're often ensnared by the headlines and never read the details of an article or listen to the details of newscasts. Then, when we don't bother with the details, but want to share what we just read or heard, we become arbiters of spreading *fake news* if in fact, what we shared was not truth. Allowing headlines to ensnare us is a human flaw--we all do it--and this is one of the reasons why we saw what happened in 2016--false headlines led many to believe lies about Hillary Clinton. Okay, this isn't about Hillary, but it does serve to make the point being made--we are flawed human beings and sometimes, we allow our biases to interfere with good judgment.
Recent news (not fake, but very real) has revealed that Donald Trump is an un-indicted co-conspirator in crimes involving campaign violations (and others as we'll soon see). He was listed as "individual 1" in a sentencing memo for Michael Cohen--his former fixer. At any rate, many people--including Republican elected leaders--have chosen to ignore the obvious because it doesn't gel with their personal biases. In fact, Orrin Hatch (invisible glasses) has even stated that if trump has committed a crime, he doesn't care. Kevin McCarthy has said, "if campaign violations is a crime, then we'd have to prosecute a number of people in Congress" (not exactly a statement that builds trust or faith in our elected officials). As a consequence, trump supporters (Cult45 and MAGAts), tend to believe the menace because he tweeted, "totally cleared the president. Thank you," after the sentencing memo dropped. Why? He didn't read the memo to discover he was referenced in it. And because of his ego and narcissistic tendencies, he would never admit it anyway, at least not publicly. Word on the street has it--he's totally unnerved by the findings, but since his supporters only watch Fox News, they'll never know the truth of the matter because--they're not interested in truth, just in finding news that supports their thinking.
Someone on Twitter earlier today suggested that we go back to the Fairness Doctrine where all sides are presented in the media so then the consumer would be able to make wise decisions about the news. In theory, it sounds good, but wouldn't it make more sense to educate the public in how to recognize credible sources of information? First of all, the consumer of information has to "want to know truth" in order to recognize it when it's being told. How do we determine truth? What are the facts/evidence supporting what is reported? Who collected the facts/evidence and what is their reputation/credibility? What is their motive in collecting the facts/evidence and in the subsequent reporting? If the person presenting the information has extreme biases about what they're presenting, can they really be objective in their perception of how the consumer will either receive or reject what they say?
Then, we have to take into account the "place" where the consumer of information is when they either hear or see certain types of information. On a good day, when everything is going our way, we can be a bit cynical about some of what we hear, but on the other hand, if we're already soured about events surrounding us, we tend to only want to hear those things that encourage our being sour on everything. It's human nature! It's what we do!
Right now, many (not all) of us only want to hear the very worst about trump because it serves our purposes in knowing we were right about him all along. But are we right? Did we miss something in the process of wanting to be right? It's possible, but that's not the purpose of this article. I'm simply pointing out the fallibility of human nature and the fact that none of us are always right or always wrong. We're simply human beings with biases developed over the course of lives. Sometimes, we're wise enough to look deeper--see the details and change our perspectives, but that doesn't happen too often. When we have hardened views on almost any subject, we're only inclined to listen to those people who build pillars to support our views, rather than listen to those who deliberately challenge us to widen our horizons and hone our views based upon the facts/evidence we discover.
Today, we live in such a divided society that no matter what one person says (Democrat or Republican) they are judged because of stances they've taken with or without justification. We can move our society to a better place if all--everyone--regardless of party affiliation would simply take the time to *research* information, determining whether it is credible or not, analyzing the motivation behind what we use, before drawing any conclusions about any presented information.
Now, I'll admit--I have some favorite news outlets and most of them will actually support my biases. However, when I hear things that don't sound credible--I research--and I don't care who said what. I'd rather take the time to research the information before spreading lies, creating undue animosity--which is what many people do. I know trump supporters don't like the fact that *he lies* consistently, with no purpose at this point because we all know, he lies. The problem is--one day--he just might tell us the truth (though he and truth have no relationship) and no one will believe it because he lies. I encouraged him over two years to have someone read to him, "The Boy Who Cried Wolf." I don't think he ever read that or had anyone read it to him.
The really sad part is, he never read about Pinocchio either. His comprehension skills, to say the least, are negligible. The proof of that statement is available in a video clip of him, "tossing a coin" to determine which team did what (Army vs Navy last weekend), but he took that literally. The "coin toss" is actually, flipping the coin, but he didn't understand that and made a fool of himself and as a result, social media lambasted him. But I digress. The point of this is to encourage others to understand the need to research information from a variety of sources before we decide how we feel about it or spread it to others. If we're going to read or listen to *conservative* views, we might want to sprinkle enough information from the other side to come to a logical, rational conclusion. I'm reminded of the nonsense that was spread by conservative outlets about Hillary and the Parkland Students--created because of conspiracy theorists who had no evidence on which to base or promote their fraudulent theories, but they promoted them anyway and many gullible people, swallowed them whole.
Non-credible sources include: Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Tomi Lahren, Tucker Carlson, Jeanine Pirro, The Daily Caller, Breitbart, Common Dreams, New York Post, Fox News (Entertainment) Network, or anyone who cannot or will not provide facts/evidence to support what they say and that includes Jerry Falwell, Jr. Franklin Graham, Pat Robertson, Jim Bakker, or Paula White or a multitude of other Evangelicals who lied to their congregations when they told them, "God chose trump to be president." Where's the evidence? Are they operating on feelings? Is it based upon The Word of God? The Character of God? Do trump's actions align with the Word of God?
What the Evangelicals won't tell people is how they have contrived for years to find someone who will do whatever they want done--under cover of the White House--for an exchange of money--the almighty dollar that speaks volumes for those who are greedy and corrupt. And yes, I'm calling out the Evangelical Community that lied to people and is still lying to people. They do not know God, or His Word, or His Character. If they did, they would not have told people God chose trump. It's just that simple and that can be researched and proven by trying to align trump's character and behavior with The Word of God.
But we know, the lying Evangelicals won't tell people the truth, because they don't want to admit their fallibility as human beings because to them, being a Christian means you can never be wrong. The reality is, being a Christian really means--we try to live like Christ--admitting our shortcomings, recognizing we'll never be perfect and always seeking Him to guide us in all things. And when we "think" we've heard Him speak to us, we can prove it by aligning what He says to us with what He's already said in His Word. God is not a man that He should lie or change His mind about What He's said or the Purpose for which He said, anything.
God knows just how imperfect we are and the fact that we'll never reach perfection as long as we are in a position to "choose" what we say or do. When we fall short, we acknowledge it, seek forgiveness and guidance and keep it moving, until the next time and there will be a next time. It's what happens to fallible human beings--we are true to our nature.
No comments:
Post a Comment