A response to Kelly Scoles’ letter:

Hi Kelly,

Why do Democrats keep bringing up ancient allegations of Trump sexual crimes? Luke 6:41-46 asks, “Why do you notice the splinter in your brother's eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own? How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me remove that splinter in your eye,' when you do not even notice the wooden beam in your own eye?” When I survey Democratic Party leadership from the past 50 years or so, Trump’s singular condemnation appears wildly hypocritical. From Democrat varsity players down to the Democrat Little Leaguers, the bench is scabrously deep with serial sinners. Start, if you dare, with the infamous Biden extended presidential crime family – with laptop ties to all manner of crime, foreign and domestic. Moral turpitude aplenty.

Why is it that every Trump expression (“bloodbath” for example) is always taken literally by the media, while in different environments, the stock market for example, it’s commonly understood as normal metaphorical speech for “turmoil”. This method of turning normal figures of speech into allegedly dangerous ideas is now a signature practice of American Never-Trump media propaganda. This is an attempt to make Trump appear dangerous, like a wannabe “dictator.”

I watched the Trump-Kamala debate. Expecting the usual liberal media bias, I wasn’t disappointed. Vice President Kamala failed to answer the first question (are you better off today than four years ago?). Failing to answer, she was not pressed on the matter. CBS monitors avoided asking Kamala the most important questions and didn’t fact-check numerous false answers (sometimes known as lies). Very little substance on important policy issues. On the other hand, President Trump was often pressed on the accuracy of his answers and faulted for allegedly inaccurate statements.

My disappointment overall had to do with the fact that Kamala was not asked about her most controversial positions (energy, Ukraine War, Israel War, open border, sex changes for illegal immigrants, etc.). I came away knowing little more about Kamala and her secret policies. The debate was not a complete waste of time, but, as it was designed to help Kamala, I found it boring.

I hear complaints from some women believing Trump acts like a bully. Those women should ask themselves whether Kamala or Trump is best suited to stand face to face with berserkers like Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong Un, or Ali Hosseini Khamenei. None of these gangsters are gentlemen. None respects female sensitivity, known to be downright rude at times. Also, none of these killers will tolerate scolding, giggling, or demands from an American female president. The challenge here derives from communistic-atheistic-Muslim cultural norms. So, to confront our enemies, Kamala would have to kowtow to China, salute Russia, bow to North Korea, and don her burka to meet Iranian leaders. Somehow, I can’t see Trump peeking through the face grill of a burka to approach an Iranian Jihadist or bowing to an enemy. I’m sure that our adventurous enemy leaders are familiar with Kamala’s professional biography. They know of her professional incompetence, combined with the squealing under-cover sessions with married Mayor Willie Brown, which succeeded in her securing California leadership positions. They know of her weakness, naivete, and vulnerability, that she’s easily bought.
At a deeper level I am simply awestruck at the prospect of my country disintegrating ignominiously into the hands of Kamala Harris, after two and a half centuries of extraordinary accomplishment. I’m put in a frame of mind best described by Irish poet William Butler Yeats in his masterpiece “The Second Coming.”

“Turning and turning in the widening gyre, the falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere the ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity. Surely some revelation is at hand; ….”
What we need is the “passionate intensity” of prayer.