Just the truth; no facts, please

By Ken Frederic | Oct 31, 2019

Joe DiGenova probably coined a new expression, “Incandescent Ignoramus,” to describe one of today’s witless, pop-star politicians. That remarkably compact description befits his legal training and point of view.

One evening earlier this month radio host Howie Carr took a listener’s call. It was also brief and to the point: “Trump is a scumbag.” This scholarly analysis surely reflects another remarkable intellect and doubtless, decades of study at some prestigious institute of Malted Arts.

It may be a bit unfair to mock this hapless, anonymous, incandescent ignoramus, but it is not unfair to deplore political and media dunces using far more words to deliver no substance, sense, or supporting facts in their unrestrained partisan advocacy.

Joe Biden said that we (Democrats) prefer “…truth to facts….” That is a snippet without context and fairness demands saying he badly fumbled whatever point he meant to make. That he did not hear himself and immediately correct the mistake is telling for those of us who already have a dim view of his intelligence and integrity. What we heard is, “We prefer telling you what to believe to giving you facts and letting you decide what is true.”

Incessantly, lately, we read and hear the same in major metropolitan daily papers and major network media outlets: “We won’t clutter your feeble little mind with pesky, disputable and complicated facts; ‘Here is the truth you must believe.’”

Consider these recent examples:

Within 19 minutes of Donald Trump taking the oath of office, The Washington Post published an article admiring the emergence of an effort to impeach him. Books written by Dan Bongino, Alan Dershowitz and Gregg Jarrett, along with reporting by John Solomon and Sarah Carter, and the two-hour YouTube documentary “Ukraine, The Democrats’ Russia” by Glenn Beck scrupulously document the treachery that began in 2015, became widespread abuses within the DNI and the DOJ in 2017, was thoroughly refuted by the Mueller Report in April 2019, and is still defiantly being called the truth by partisans like Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, CNN, MSNBC, The Washington Post, and The New York Times. YouTube shadow bans the documentary, by the way: You must know the title to find it.

Having wrung the last bit of use from the collusion ruse, Democrats and their media collaborators created a new fiction that, in a July phone call, President Trump pressured Ukraine President Zelensky to “dig up dirt” on Joe and Hunter Biden. Unexpectedly and unfortunately for them, the president released the transcript of that conversation and the chronology of Schiff’s conspiring with the “whistle blower” has been published. Everyone who cares to know has the facts of what was said and of how the ruse was created.

But, despite the facts being known, Adam Schiff presented an account of the call as unspeakably offensive as it was fictitious, and Nancy Pelosi humiliated herself by asserting Schiff’s fictional account was the “truth.”

Fox News put out a poll saying that 51% of voters favored impeachment and removal of the president. Later, it was learned that the poll sample included 50% more Democrats and 70% fewer independents than the population. Why FNC would engage in anything so dishonest has not been revealed but nobody can (honestly) conclude that the poll was anything but deliberate, malicious deception. Thankfully, Fox has not rationalized or denied that deception.

But there is more. Voters interested in facts, not “truth,” might research what the uber-rich really pay in taxes; how government subsidies and regulation have affected the cost of education, housing and medical care; or, after hearing Ronald Reagan Jr., what practicing Christians actually do believe and how they live their faith.

Anyone who has read this far has long been troubled by and angry at the purveyors of fact-free truth and has previously resolved to no longer consume their rubbish. Beyond destroying their credibility, these outlets apparently have no concern for the tsunami of contempt they have created for themselves and all they advocate.

Alarmingly, though, we are daily reminded there remain hordes whose knowledge of facts may be even less than that of Howie’s caller. They hold views ingested as truth, not formed from facts. Being a responsible and informed voter takes time and hard work but, by failing to do it, we risk our fate being determined by incandescent ignoramuses with advanced degrees in Malted Arts.

Another View is a Maine Press Association award-winning column written by Midcoast conservative citizens/writers Jan Dolcater, Ken Frederic, Paul Ackerman, Ralph “Doc” Wallace and Dale Landrith Sr.


If you appreciated reading this news story and want to support local journalism, consider subscribing today.
Call (207) 594-4401 or join online at knox.villagesoup.com/join.
Donate directly to keeping quality journalism alive at knox.villagesoup.com/donate.
Comments (1)
Posted by: Karla Schwarze | Oct 31, 2019 09:55

If we wanted to have an intelligent debate or discussion, we'd first have to be able to agree on what the facts surrounding the topic were.  This is increasingly hard to do in today's partisan environment, and many people are disturbed by that.

But it's even worse than we thought.  Not only can we not agree on the facts about an issue, we don't seem to agree on what a fact is and what it is not.  Conclusions aren't facts.  Opinion isn't fact.

In an article about wanting everyone to stick to facts and not their own conclusions, or "truths" as the author calls them, Ken Frederic does exactly what he's telling everyone else to stop doing, and throws out his own conclusions, unsupported accusations, half-truths, and wildly slanted conspiracy-laden suppositions.

Democrats and their media collaborators created a new fiction that, in a July phone call, President Trump pressured Ukraine President Zelensky to “dig up dirt” on Joe and Hunter Biden. Unexpectedly and unfortunately for them, the president released the transcript of that conversation and the chronology of Schiff’s conspiring with the “whistle blower” has been published. Everyone who cares to know has the facts of what was said and of how the ruse was created.

 

"Unexpected and Unfortunate" - not facts, slanted viewpoint

"a new fiction that, in a July phone call, President Trump pressured Ukraine President Zelensky to “dig up dirt” on Joe and Hunter Biden" -  not a fact that this is a fiction.  The president's own summary showed he asked for a "favor", wanting Crowdstrike investigated as well as the Bidens.  That is a fact.  The author may believe that his asking for this is not equivalent to "digging up dirt", but that's his opinion and his conclusion.  Not a fact.

"Schiff’s conspiring with the “whistle blower”  - Not a fact.  Providing proven data on what the people involved said and did...that might be fact, but the author has concluded some conspiracy existed and presented that as fact without allowing anyone to make up their own minds about what happened.

After reading months of editorials and comments where people have jumped straight into debate without first doing the work of listing, discussing, and agreeing to the facts surrounding a topic, it seems like that would be an interesting exercise.  It might also be necessary to review exactly what "a fact" is.  Seems a better idea than our current model of living in two separate alternate realities, one where the sky is blue, and one where it's purple, and those are both "facts".

 

 



If you wish to comment, please login.