You may have noticed this is the first post in a new category called, “Random Thoughts.”  I had originally considered calling it, “Just Me,” but appreciate the fact America can only handle one raging narcissist at a time.  The purpose of this new grouping is to share some personal observations about creativity, how I use this blog to improve my own creative process and generic topics which do not necessarily fit into one or more of the topical categories.  Thank you in advance for this egocentric indulgence.

Also, thank you for all of your kind comments and support over the past 18 months.  This blog first appeared on-line on October 10, 2015.  At the time, one of my motivations was “learning by doing.”  If I wanted to now know more about blogs, why not start one.  I had originally planned to publish entries once or twice a month.  But as they say, “The best laid plans…”  Today’s entry is the 161st post.  Who knew?

Second, I have been receiving more and more suggestions about potential topics.  While these recommendations are very helpful in terms of understanding what is on your mind, I’m afraid it’s not how it works.  As I hope you realize, almost every post includes a phrase like, “I started to think about this when…”  In other words, I do not consciously pick the topics.  Something, usually a totally unrelated event or memory, becomes the kernel for a new post.  How do I know this?  Because, while I have now published 161 posts to this site, there are dozens in draft form which I have never completed.  When I go back to them from time to time, I immediately realize they were forced.  I had nothing unique or insightful to add to the conversation.  They were just my personal opinion.  As Kenny Rogers reminds us, “You need to know when to fold ’em.”

Consider the following example.  A lot of people have shared their opinion about the series of interviews Comrade Trump has given recently.  On his Monday night broadcast, Steve Colbert’s defense of his CBS colleague Face the Nation host John Dickerson was both brilliant and brutal.  That’s why I leave opining to the professionals. Remember, creativity is about great questions; get the question right and the answers will come.  The question I kept asking myself about the Trump interviews?  What did they miss?

Which brings us to Judge Judy, my one guilty pleasure. (In the interest of honesty, I probably have more than one.) Among her platitudes, my favorite is, “If it doesn’t make sense, it probably isn’t true.”  I know.  His Orangeness says a lot of things that do not make sense.  Most recently, Andrew Jackson could not understand why there had to be a Civil War?  Chalk that one up to ignorance.  And there is a YUGE difference between lying and mental incapacity.  This is where Judge Judy comes in.  By honing in on a minor detail, she is often able to unravel a plaintiff’s or defendant’s false testimony.

Much was made of Trump gaffe during his April 11 interview with Fox Business News host Maria Bartiromo during which he said the target of the April 6 Tomahawk Missile strike was “Iraq.”

TRUMP: So what happens is I said we’ve just launched 59 missiles heading to Iraq and I wanted you to know this. And he was eating his cake. And he was silent.

BARTIROMO:  (INAUDIBLE) to Syria?

TRUMP:  Yes. Heading toward Syria. In other words, we’ve just launched 59 missiles heading toward Syria.  And I want you to know that, because I didn’t want him to go home.  We were almost finished.  It was a full day in Palm Beach.  We’re almost finished and I — what does he do, finish his dessert and go home and then they say, you know, the guy you just had dinner with just attacked a country?

BARTIROMO:  How did he react?

TRUMP:  So he paused for 10 seconds and then he asked the interpreter to please say it again.  I didn’t think that was a good sign.

But the real “tell” was his assertion the generals told him they had just launched 59 missiles.  The night of the attack, it was reported there were 60 missiles launched of which 59 hit their intended targets.  First, it’s difficult to believe the generals would want their commander-in-chief to give such specific information to the Chinese president.  Second, before the damage assessment, why would the generals tell Trump there were 59 missiles launched?  This is what I call an “Occam’s Razor” moment.  The simplest explanation?  If Trump made up the detail about the number of missiles, everything else is suspect.  Except the dessert.

Judge Judy, thank you for helping me expose Trump as fabricator-in-chief.  In gratitude, I’ve just sent you the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake you’ve ever seen.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP