Loving The Donald, Hating The Sin

Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go?"  (John 6:68)

At least you can't say The Trump Administration hasn't been interesting.

The latest story in Trump World is about Trump's relationship with a "porn" star, a Miss Stephanie Gregory Clifford of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, also known as Stormy Daniels.

To be honest, I have never heard of Ms  Daniels (honest!) until the news reports of her relationship with the President and that she had signed a Non-Disclosure Agreement with Trump.  In true Trump fashion, the President claims "nothing happened" (that's what she said). It is kind of odd that Trump would require a Non-Disclosure Agreement for a relationship in which "nothing happened".

Ms. Daniels has some, er, interesting "films"in her past.  According to IMDb she has been in "The Witches of Breastwick", "What's A Girl Gotta Do?", and "Operation Desert Stormy". Some of the other titles are not very polite, if you catch my drift.

The big question now is why haven't Evangelical Christians abandoned Trump in lieu of these allegations of The President and The Porn Star, which will probably be a movie in a few months.

One of the few whipping posts now in politics are Evangelical Christians, who voted almost 80% for Trump in 2016.

Let's be clear. When the mainstream news media uses the term "Evangelical Christians", they mean it to refer to snake handlers and men who still use Vitalis hair tonic. They are all Southern, white, mouth-breathing knuckle draggers that don't read "books" and order a "medium coffee" at Starbucks.

Actually, Evangelical Christians are all over the country and in a lot of denonimations. There are even, gasp, Evangelical Episcopalians. They have college degrees and they have a wide range of opinions besides what place serves the best fried chicken after church.

Since we are all tribal now and since this is my tribe, I think I can say that a lot of Evangelicals are appalled (and have been appalled) at Trump's behavior in life and in office. We shake our heads at some of his comments and wish, for all that is good and holy, that somebody would take away his blessed phone so he wouldn't make so many embarassing Twitter comments. 

People are noting the hypocrisy of Evangelicals supporting Trump so much when they turned  on Bill Clinton, and Bill Clinton knew it was "Second Corinthians" instead of "Two Corinthians".

Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky was an affair between a superior and a subordinate.  The Trump/Daniels affair was a consensual sexual relationship between two gross individuals. Besides, Trump wasn't President then, he was just another jerk with a TV show.

It doesn't make the affair right or excusable. It is just makes it irrelevant.

Look, everybody, even squirrelly little Robert Jeffress pastor of The First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas, knows, Trump is a major leauge sinner, bigly.  It is all part of the Trump experience, like the granite marble tops in the bathrooms of his hotels.

During oral arugments of Obergefell vs Hodges, Donald B. Verrill, Jr, The Solicitor General said that churches and religious affliated universities would lose their tax-exempt status if they opposed same-sex marriage.  Hillary Clinton declared "religious beliefs have to be changed". Guess whose religious beliefs would have to change?

With a choice between Clinton and Trump, Evangelicals held their nose and voted for Trump. Marc Theissen of The Washington Post says, "No one upholds Trump as moral exemplar. He is not the most religious president we have ever had, but he may be the most pro-religion president. Christian conservatives are judging Trump not by his faith, but by his works. And when it comes to life and liberty, his works are good."

I don't see a split between Evangelicals and Donald Trump. Unless, of course, he signs an Executive Order outlawing Hobby Lobby and Chick-Fil-A.   He would have some problems then.

I Know One

Poor widdle Hillary.

Former Senator Secretary of State Should Have Been President Hillary Clinton has taken her "What Happen" show on the road. All the way to India no less, because the people of India need to hear why she lost the Presidency to that thing. 

And she proved that in 2016 both candidates were emotionally stunted people.


She said the following and I have added helpful notes in parentheses to aid in understanding.

"If you look at the map of the United States, there is all that red in the middle (ick), places where Trump won(double ick). What that map doesn’t show you is that I won the places that own two thirds of America’s Gross Domestic product (the places that don't suck). I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward (In other words, the cool people). And his whole campaign, Make America Great Again, was looking backwards. You don’t like black people getting rights, you don’t like women getting jobs, you don’t want to see that Indian American succeeding more than you are (And what do you know, there's a lot of Indian people here tonight-maybe I can convince them that Bubba don't like anybody except Meemaw, Deddey, and Nick Saban), whatever that problem is, I am going to solve it.". (As if, that's what we were supposed to do)

Just as President Trumpy is giving everybody a look at an, er, unique Presidency, Clinton is giving everybody a look at a grumpy sore loser.


I went back and tried to find any losing candidate in the last 100 years that has acted as sour as Clinton. I can't find it. Romney, McCain, Kerry, Gore, Dole,DadBush, Dukakis, Mondale, Carter, Ford, McGovern, Humphrey, Goldwater, Nixon, Stevenson, Dewey, Willkie,Landon, Hoover, Smith, Davis, Cox, and Hughes all carried themselves with grace and didn't seek to disparage the voters like Clinton has.

But the stinger was this, and this is amazing, even for a Clinton.

"We do not do well with white men and we don’t do well with married, white women. And part of that is an identification with the Republican Party, and a sort of ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should."

Allow me to comment. I have been a white man all of my life. Yes, really.  I have been married to a white woman for almost 32 years.  The idea I could "pressure"my wife to vote someway she didn't want to vote is laughable.

There's a prevailing template from the Left that if you are not a part of this academic/trial lawyer/entertainment complex, you are a knuckle dragging mouth breather that wants to put various minorites in chains. However, you first must subjucate your wife so you can breed other knuckle dragging mouth breathers.  How else can you explain The Handmaid's Tale that has been made twice in the past 28 years (the first as a movie and the second as a Netflix series)?

But I have been wondering where are all of these supposed Stepford Wives anyway? I don't see them. Everybody I know isn't some subservient damsel that is waiting for some man to tell them what to do or what to think.  In fact, I don't know a soul who would put up with a lyin' cheatin' husband. Wait, I know one: Hillary.

Anyway, my white woman wife was talking to me the other day about the 2016 election. She said she didn't vote for Hillary Clinton because, and I quote, "I didn't like her".

Hillary Clinton had been a major force on the national scene for 24 years by the time the 2016 election arrived. Richard Nixon was already an ex-President by time his twenty-fourth year hit on the national stage.

People were just tired of her and Bill and Chelsea and Huma. Nothing more and nothing less. The same thing happend to Jeb Bush in the Republican primaries.

True, you kind of knew what you were getting with Clinton. Pandering. Lying. You know, the 90's redux. But at least we'd have the same Secretary of State for a week.

But, it just wasn't meant to be and this wallowing in the past is sort of ironic given theme song of her husband's campaign in 1992:  "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow".

Ban The Backpack!

Of course, what happened at the high school in Parkland, Florida was horrific.

It was a systemic failure in culture (fatherless boys, violent movies and video games), common sense (an 18-year-old can waltz in and buy a powerful weapon), Federal law enforcement  ("So, you want to make us aware of this kid. Let me get a pen. Wait a second, this one doesn't work. Bob, you got a pen that works?") and  local law enforcement ("I'm not going in there...You go in there...").

The aftermath has been one gigantic cluster mess.

A few of the surviving students have hooked up with The Democratic Party and decided to blame Marco Rubio (mainly because there is an R after his name) and The National Rifle Association (NRA)  They have been successful in vilifying The NRA that around 15 companies have cut ties or distanced themselves from the group.  One company, Delta Airlines, dropped the NRA discount for their members. A grand total of 13 people used the discount last year.

So, the answer to gun violence is taking away airline discounts.  Great job, kids!

There is an answer and it is not blowing in the wind.

Make the schools harder to get into.

The students should be only able to enter the school from one direction and go through a metal detector, much like an airport. Every day.

The students will be issued a key card, like what their parents have to get into their office. If a kid "loses" their card, they will be detained by security and they will have to call their parents. They will not be able to enter the school and will not be given an excused absence until they obtain their replacement card.

Backpacks will be banned and the students will be issued a locker to store their books.  If you have raised a high schooler within the past twenty years, you know they have used backpacks to carry every single stupid book around. Trust me, these things weigh a ton and half the time the boy students never look in the backpack once the book is placed in there.

There will be armed personnel on campus. It doesn't have to be teachers. However, if a teacher can use a gun and is  NOT A TOTAL NUT JOB, then he can be part of the force.  However, there are some logistical things that would have to be worked out. I don't think it is a good idea for Coach Joe Bagofdonuts to be packing heat during a Geography class.

These things can be done and quickly. There are problems with some other answers.

One, you are not going to "get rid of guns". It simply isn't going to happen.  If you want to get rid of guns, repeal The Second Amendment. Good luck with trying to repeal an amendment that is so high on the amendment chain.

Here was an example of a meme that was flying around.

True, as far it goes. The problem is the next step: taking away other people's sticks so we have a stick-free society because sticks are used to hit people.

Two, background checks, while necessary are iffy at best.  The church shooter in Texas "passed" a background check due to a bureaucratic error.  Additionally, there is this little thing called HIPAA which protects an individual's (mental) health information and cannot be shared without the patient's written consent.

Three, and this has almost a zero chance, but we do need more responsibility from the news media. One thing to keep in mind about events like this: most of the early reports are wrong

 Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed 13 kids on April 20, 1999, which began this era of school shootings. They were portrayed as "outcasts" (which has been debunked) and members of a school clique called "The Trenchcoat Mafia" (which they were not). They were also "bullied" as if being bullied in high school is a good explanation for why someone would kill thirteen people.

Jared Lee Loughner shot Congresswoman Gabby Giffords and early reports said he was influenced by Sarah Palin. It wasn't close to the truth. James Holmes killed 12 people in an Aurora, Colorado movie theatre. Brian Ross of ABC announced there was a James Holmes in the area and he was a member of the TEA PARTY.  Wrong guy.

The other thing to remember is people will use the events to push a political agenda.

History tells us that a young man who had just immigrated back from Russia and was an avowed Communist shot the President of The United States thirteen months after The Cuban Missile Crisis.  On YouTube, you can watch the news reports from the time and you will hear a lot about "hate" and civil rights. Which, as history tells us, had nothing to do with The Kennedy Assassination.

CNN has made stars out of the protesting students. "Hey Kids, let's have a protest!"  Two weeks after the massacre Buzzfeed (that's right-Buzzfeed) reported "Rep. Debbie Wassermann Schultz aiding in the lobbying in Tallahassee, a teacher’s union organizing the buses that got the kids there, Michael Bloomberg’s groups and the Women’s March working on the upcoming March For Our Lives, MoveOn.org doing social media promotion and (potentially) march logistics, and training for student activists provided by federally funded Planned Parenthood." (David Hines, The Federalist)

Additionally, the President of the American Federation of Teachers told Buzzfeed they were behind the national school walkout which our fourth estate assured us was the idea of one plucky teenager.

Sheesh.

It is just common sense. Make schools a difficult target. That way kids don't die.