Pro-Life Democrat wins in Louisiana

Yesterday Jon Bell Edwards managed to do something a lot of people didn’t expect, he won re-election to the Governorship of Louisiana even after president Trump came down to support his opponent.

A lot of people on the left and in the media are publicly spinning this as a rejection of the president but there is one simple reason why Edwards was able to win, and it had nothing to do with Donald Trump, impeachment or anything else. Edwards won re-election because he is a creature even more rare than an honest journalist…a pro-life democrat who doesn’t equivocate when it comes to supporting life:

Edwards signed into law one of the most restrictive anti-abortion laws in the country, earning praise from groups like the Susan B. Anthony List, which applauded him for “leading the way in the bipartisan effort to bring our nation’s laws into line with basic human decency.”Edwards said, “The pro-life ethos has to mean more than just the abortion issue. It’s got to go beyond that. The job isn’t over when the baby’s born if you’ve got poor people who need access to health care.”
Source: America Magazine on 2019 Louisiana gubernatorial race , Dec 14, 2018

Unblemished anti-abortion voting record
John Bel Edwards says, “We need the exact opposite of what we’ve gotten from Bobby Jindal; he has sacrificed the state’s well-being to further his own self-ambition.” But in some ways, Edwards is more like Jindal than many might think. Like the governor, he is an anti-abortion, pro-gun rights Catholic; his voting record is unblemished on both issues.

It’s worth noting that the left hasn’t been shy about attacking him for it either:

A rarity in his party, Edwards’ anti-abortion stance provokes angry outcries on social media from Democratic voters and disappointment within the party’s broader ranks across the country.
“When Republicans are taking away women’s rights at every step, it’s on the Democrats to show that we are the party that will protect women. When we fail to do that, we make it absolutely hopeless for women around the country,” said Rebecca Katz, a progressive Democratic consultant.

Many Democrat candidates for president and national leaders hit him for the heartbeat bill, NARAL hit him particularly hard:

“Women are the base of the Democratic Party, leading the charge for equality by fighting for reproductive freedom,” NARAL Pro-Choice America Political Director Nicole Brener-Schmitz said in a statement. “Governor Edwards, and any other elected official attempting to use political overreach to roll back our rights, is mistaken to think our fundamental freedoms are up for debate….He won’t get a pass just because he is a Democrat.”

But in the end Edwards didn’t flinch from his position and as a result Democrats kept the governor’s mansion in a race where they lost the secretary of state candidate lost by almost 20 points.

Now the reality is that both candidates in the race were very pro-life and there are plenty of other reasons why a Republican victory in Louisiana would have been a better thing for the state, but I also think that if Edwards’ victory gives Democrats both in the south and elsewhere the courage to stand up for life when the national party and the left demand they abandon it if they want statewide or national office it is a fine thing.

the Democrats / left / media can spin this anyway they want, but today was a victory for life and I suspect the knowledge that they owe that victory to Edwards’ stance against them galls them almost as much as a GOP victory would have.

Closing thought: Abortion is a sine non qua for me. If I have the choice between a pro-life democrat like Edwards and a pro-abortion republican like Brown or Baker or even one who was with me on any other issue, the pro-life Democrat would get my vote every single time.

Nothing trumps life at the ballot box for me, NOTHING.

Fr Robert Morey Must Really Love Joe Biden & Himself

If the world hates you, realize that it hated me first.

If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own; but because you do not belong to the world, and I have chosen you out of the world, the world hates you.

Remember the word I spoke to you,  ‘No slave is greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours.

And they will do all these things to you on account of my name,  because they do not know the one who sent me.

If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin; but as it is they have no excuse for their sin.

Whoever hates me also hates my Father.

John 15:18-23


There’s an old saying that you don’t hear much anymore “Your best friend should tell you.” It refers to when you might have bad breath or are in the process of doing something really destructive. Most people will say nothing and you might ignore your family, that’s when a best friend, a person who really loves you steps up and tells you what you need to know.

Fr. Robert Morey is acting like Joe Biden’s best friend.

The job of a priest is tough, it’s one of the toughest jobs in the world, you are really on 24/7, you forgo many of the pleasures of life, you have to serve those around you ,obey those above you, spend time constantly in prayer and while doing all those thing fight all the temptations and efforts of the other side attempting to draw you to sin that every human being has to deal with knowing that if you fall you can take a lot of folks, particularly those weak in the faith with you.

But boiled down to the most basic task a priest is a doctor for a human soul and like a medical doctor there are time he has to deliver a message that people don’t want to hear. As the Lord said to Ezekiel (Emphasis mine)

Thus the word of the LORD came to me: Son of man, I have appointed you a watchman for the house of Israel. When you hear a word from my mouth, you shall warn them for me.

If I say to the wicked man, You shall surely die; and you do not warn him or speak out to dissuade him from his wicked conduct so that he may live: that wicked man shall die for his sin, but I will hold you responsible for his death.

If, on the other hand, you have warned the wicked man, yet he has not turned away from his evil nor from his wicked conduct, then he shall die for his sin, but you shall save your life.

If a virtuous man turns away from virtue and does wrong when I place a stumbling block before him, he shall die. He shall die for his sin, and his virtuous deeds shall not be remembered; but I will hold you responsible for his death if you did not warn him.

When, on the other hand, you have warned a virtuous man not to sin, and he has in fact not sinned, he shall surely live because of the warning, and you shall save your own life.

Ezekiel 3:17-21


Thus if a priest fails to warn a member of the flock about to commit mortal sin or consistently commuting mortal sin publicly he is failing his flock.

And that brings us to Joe Biden and Fr. Morey

In holy scripture St. Paul explicitly states the price of receiving the Eucharist in an unworthy fashion (emphasis mine)

For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”  In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.  “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.

Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. 

A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup.  For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.

St Paul’s 1st Letter to the Corinthians Cor 11 23-29


(That last sentence btw is why non-Catholic can’t receive as they think the Eucharist is “symbolic” rather than the actual body & blood of Christ). So we are dealing with Mortal Sin, and not just mortal sin but PUBLIC mortal sin and Church law is rather explicit on the subject:

He told LifeSiteNews.com, “I don’t understand the continual debate that goes on about it. There’s not a question that a Catholic who publicly, and after admonition, supports pro-abortion legislation is not to receive Holy Communion and is not to be given Holy Communion.”


The Church’s law is very clear,” said Archbishop Burke, who was appointed last year by Pope Benedict XVI as the head of the Church’s highest court, the Apostolic Signatura. “The person who persists publicly in grave sin is to be denied Holy Communion, and it [Canon Law] doesn’t say that the bishop shall decide this. It’s an absolute.”

via Fr. Z

So when Joe Biden presents himself for holy communion when proudly persisting in a state of mortal sin, what is the duty of a priest? Well Christ answered that in the final question that was put to him:

One of the scribes, when he came forward and heard them disputing and saw how well he had answered them, asked him, “Which is the first of all the commandments?”

Jesus replied, “The first is this: ‘Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is Lord alone!  You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’

The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

The scribe said to him, “Well said, teacher. You are right in saying, ‘He is One and there is no other than he.’  And ‘to love him with all your heart, with all your understanding, with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself’ is worth more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”

And when Jesus saw that (he) answered with understanding, he said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” And no one dared to ask him any more questions.

Mark 12:28-34


Fr. Morey by his actions obeyed both commandments.

Admonishing the sinner is a spiritual work of mercy and to do any less would be like a doctor refusing to tell a patient in his care that his actions put his life in danger. Thus he showed love of neighbor by not giving Joe Biden Holy Communion in a public state of mortal sin and thus not letting him bring condemnation on himself, at least for that moment.

Furthermore Fr. Morey showed love of God by remembering the Lord’s words to Ezekiel and saved himself by being the watchman and obeying the laws of the church when it would have been a whole lot easier to do otherwise. He is going to get a lot of grief and notoriety over this. The national press will go after him, some in his parish will go after him and there will be those in the church who do so as well. Yet he was more interested in the love of God than the love of man.

But DaTechGuy you ask how can he assume that Mr. Biden was in a state of mortal sin? Doesn’t he have to give him the benefit of the doubt? Now it’s true, many of us including me, struggle with sin, even mortal sin and sacramental confession is available for those who do. Shouldn’t a priest allow for that? Fr. Z has a great post on the subject using the example of a couple in a 2nd marriage who stay together for the kids and agree to live as brother and sister:

Now I will track back to what I asked about Communion at the top.
What is it that they want?


Communion with its holy effects? Or do they want to be seen receiving Communion?
Do they want the Eucharist or the “white thing” that symbolizes affirmation?


If they really get the Eucharist, with the full implications of receiving as Paul describes in 1 Cor 11:27 (“Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord.”), and if they really get the Four Last Things, then … would they really want to put at risk their eternal salvation by sacrilegious reception?


If they have been working with a sound priest who helps them to understand what mortal sin is and what matrimony is according to the Church’s teachings – BECAUSE THAT’S HIS JOB! – would they really want to receive Communion in their irregular state?

Or course there may be times when they fail in their determination to live in continence and they have sexual relations. What then?
Simple.  They go to confession and start over 
with a firm purpose of amendment.
That’s what we all do when we sin in any way.  We go to confession with a firm purpose of amendment and start over with God’s help. 

In some Amoris scenario, they might have to live in a near occasion of sin, but for the sake of care of children, etc., they have to bear their Cross.
However, there is a rock solid principle that cannot be set aside:

No firm purpose of amendment, no Communion.
My solution, given the aforementioned conditions are met: occasional Holy Communion in private, outside of public Mass, away from observing eyes.

Now it’s certainly possible, though highly improbable, that Joe Biden had just before mass, confessed his sins before the mass and the expressed a firm purpose to amend his life and stop publicly advancing mortal sin as a virtue. Furthermore given the poor job of catechists that the church has done since the 60’s it’s even possible, or in my mind even probable that one or more Bishop(s) has told old Joe (and Pelosi & Cuomo etc/al) over the years that what’s he’s doing is OK and the Biden and others like him really believes they can push and promote mortal sin and still receive communion with no danger to his soul

But Fr. Morey’s job is to shepherd the souls in his care and by presenting himself for communion old Joe by definition became one of those souls Fr. Morey didn’t look for an improbable out for himself. Instead for the sake of his own soul and the sake of all the souls in his care, including at that time Joe Biden caring more about his soul than about any blowback he might get he did his job.

In other words: love wins!

The Two Real stories in this piece about Biologists and life

It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.

Richard Feynman

At Quillette Steve Jacobs has a post about a survey he did of thousands of biologists when doing a paper on balancing fetal and abortion rights. To the press this was the most newsworthy result from that paper

members of the media were mostly interested in my finding that 96% of the 5,577 biologists who responded to me affirmed the view that a human life begins at fertilization.


It was the reporting of this view—that human zygotes, embryos, and fetuses are biological humans—that created such a strong backlash. 

You can argue that this is a pretty good headline but I think the bigger headline is the following cross reference:

As the usable responses began to come in, I found that 5,337 biologists (96%) affirmed that a human’s life begins at fertilization, with 240 (4%) rejecting that view. The majority of the sample identified as liberal (89%), pro-choice (85%) and non-religious (63%). In the case of Americans who expressed party preference, the majority identified as Democrats (92%).

Now frankly the idea that Human, zygotes, embryos and fetues or as I would call them “unborn children” are well HUMAN is so obvious that the concept that 4% of trained biologists, even from a group that is 92% democrat, 89% liberal and 85% pro-abortion and 63% non religious wouldn’t say they are speaks volumes about that 4% but the bigger story is the responses he got from those who objected to the question. They sounded like this:

“Is this a studied fund by Trump and ku klux klan?”
“Sure hope YOU aren’t a f^%$#ing christian!!”
“This is some stupid right to life thing…YUCK I believe in RIGHT TO CHOICE!!!!!!!”
“The actual purpose of this ‘survey’ became very clear. I will do my best to disseminate this info to make sure that none of my naïve colleagues fall into this trap.”
“Sorry this looks like its more a religious survey to be used to misinterpret by radicals to advertise about the beginning of life and not a survey about what faculty know about biology. Your advisor can contact me.”

“I did respond to and fill in the survey, but am concerned about the tenor of the questions. It seemed like a thinly-disguised effort to make biologists take a stand on issues that could be used to advocate for or against abortion.”
“The relevant biological issues are obvious and have nothing to do with when life begins. That is a nonsense position created by the antiabortion fanatics. You have accepted the premise of a fanatic group of lunatics. The relevant issues are the health cost carrying an embryo to term can impose on a woman’s body, the cost they impose on having future children, and the cost that raising a child imposes on a woman’s financial status.”

Remember the people he surveyed were trained scientists, biologists, who are supposedly taught to go where the data takes them rather than where their political opinions do, and he’s getting responses like this?

This leads of some obvious and disturbing questions:

  • Would you hire such people to do any work on any scientific item that requires objective fact or actual data that might contradict with this personal opinions?
  • Would you trust any study which is supposed to present objective fact or data to make decisions on?
  • Would you want your city, county state or federal government to fund any research by such people or made any decision based on the input of such folks?

I wouldn’t.

Now you might say that this is only a small percentage of the number of people who are in this position but remember this isn’t a sample of the general population, this is a sample of biologists, people who have been highly educated and supposedly trained in the scientific method. These are people to whom facts and data are supposed to be sacrosanct.

Or to put it another way, imagine if you knew that same percentage of a football team’s offensive was willing to blow the play for political or personal gain. Would you still bet on that team?

That’s the real news out of this study and if you are getting such results on abortion there is no reason to believe that you wouldn’t get such results on any other subject that such people’s politics are dear to them.

Battles Seen and Unseen

by baldilocks

As has become apparent, the Democratic Party will do anything to keep from losing even after they have already lost.

The latest preventative method: an impeachment probe.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi launched a formal impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump on Tuesday, acquiescing to mounting pressure from fellow Democrats and plunging a deeply divided nation into an election year clash between Congress and the commander in chief.

The probe centers on whether Trump abused his presidential powers and sought help from a foreign government for his reelection. Pelosi said such actions would mark a “betrayal of his oath of office” and declared: “No one is above the law.”

At issue are Trump’s actions with Ukraine. In a summer phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, he is said to have asked for help investigating Democrat Joe Biden and his son Hunter. In the days before the call, Trump ordered advisers to freeze $400 million in military aid for Ukraine — prompting speculation that he was holding out the money as leverage for information on the Bidens. Trump has denied that charge, but acknowledged he blocked the funds. (…)

Trump advisers say they are confident that an impeachment process led by the opposition party will bolster his political support heading into his reelection campaign.

This morning, before the probe announcement, the president tweeted that he’ll release the transcript of the phone call.

I suspect that this will bite the Democrat Party on the backside. Or probe said backside. The president has a preternatural way of causing his enemies to fall into their own self-dug pits.

Meanwhile, if you want confirmation of the fact that other forces are at work, look no further than President Trump’s words at the UN summit days ago. Look to who he defends.

President Trump told all gathered at this year’s UN Summit:  “Today, with one clear voice, the United States of America calls upon the nations of the world to end religious persecution.”  

“We’re standing up for almost 250 million Christians around the world who are persecuted for their faith.  It is estimated that 11 Christians are killed every day for the following — I mean, just think of this: Eleven Christians a day, for following the teachings of Christ.  Who would even think that’s possible in this day and age?  Who would think it’s possible?”

“The United States is founded on the principle that our rights do not come from government; they come from God, Trump reminded the assembly.   “This immortal truth is proclaimed in our Declaration of Independence and enshrined in the First Amendment to our Constitution’s Bill of Rights.  Our Founders understood that no right is more fundamental to a peaceful, prosperous, and virtuous society than the right to follow one’s religious convictions.

“Regrettably, the religious freedom enjoyed by American citizens is rare in the world.

“Approximately 80 percent of the world’s population live in countries where religious liberty is threatened, restricted, or even banned.  And when I heard that number, I said, ‘Please go back and check it because it can’t possibly be correct.’ And, sadly, it was.  Eighty percent.

“As we speak, Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, Yazidis, and many other people of faith are being jailed, sanctioned, tortured, and even murdered, often at the hands of their own government, simply for expressing their deeply held religious beliefs.  So hard to believe.”

And there was this on abortion.

The Trump administration Monday declared to U.N member nations that there is no “international right” to abortion, and called on other countries to fight efforts promoting abortions, drawing criticism from reproductive rights groups and other world nations.

President Trump has the unique distinction among pro-life presidents of actually doing something to keep the money of American citizens out of Planned Parenthood’s coffers. So this is more that mere words.

I don’t claim to know anything about the president’s relationship with God. I do know, however, that the president is standing up for most of the things that God cares about and that many of those who seek his removal from office also seek more death. And, just to top things off, they want us to fund the destruction.

So I think that the battle we cannot see is the one that fuels the one we can.

Remember, this isn’t about Donald Trump, it’s about us — the people of the United States.  It’s about what kind of country we want this nation to be.

Next year, we’ll see the results of these battles, both political and spiritual.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

Abortion: It’s a Matter of Ownership

See the source image

Hell No, We Won’t Repent

by baldilocks

My friend, Dave Perkins, gets to the heart of the matter when it comes to the attitudes of women who have had an abortion.

I’ve known several women who have told me they’ve had abortions. There are two life responses I’ve observed.

One is an abiding sense of guilt and shame […] at least until they found God and Christ and forgiveness (that is the context in which I have had these discussions with them). Somewhere in their souls they know they are objectively guilty in this, and only God can forgive such acts. So, they seek Him and find Him and find forgiveness.

The other is a FURIOUS ANGER at anyone they believe might possibly be entertaining a tiny bit of anything like judgmentalism against them for having done that. (…)

They don’t seek forgiveness; they want JUSTIFICATION and will punch in the face anyone who won’t acknowledge their act was not unjust.

(…) Not wanting to face something so horrible about yourself is a very strong motive for activism and high loud moral outrage, folks. Don’t undervalue that.

This second kind of person pops up all over the Kavanaugh travesty.

It’s difficult to face the fact that you have murdered, and that the victim is the one person over whom you have total control. If you refuse to face it, that person loses sentience in your mind and becomes just a clump of cells, like your fingernails or your hair.

But there’s more to this phenomenon than the non-personing of unborn babies. The refusal to see the reality of one’s iniquities leads to blindness of the spiritual variety. This blindness seems to turn what is obviously murder into an issue of power.

For women who justify abortion, the notion that her body is not her own is infuriating. “My body, my choice” is more than just a statement of personal sovereignty; it’s a statement which refutes God’s ownership of each individual.

It’s not a coincidence that many abortion activists are atheists, or they subscribe to a caricature of “God” – a god who let’s them do whatever they want. I think that latter god is real. Some call him Lucifer.

And whoever may act to not allow them to do whatever they want – or even those whose speak out against what they want – is deemed as evil. So it is that, any tactic used against this enemy is fair game.

The repeated attacks on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh sit atop this twisted spiritual foundation, a foundation made of death to the innocent. Christine Blasey-Ford even admitted this.

Thus is the fruit of the refusal to repent.

One more thing. Here’s how I know that this spirit is from the Adversary — besides the fact that it involves murder. The activists want every level of society to be complicit in the abortion industry, starting at the level of the money in your pocket.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

Abortion is anti-life, anti-liberty, and anti pursuit of happiness

Abortion violates every component of the most often quoted sentence from the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness

Abortion is anti-life because abortion is murder.  It is a particularly heinous form of murder because the unborn child is the most innocent example of life you could possibly ever encounter.   Every individual is endowed by their creator with unalienable rights because all are endowed by God with a soul at conception.  Most genocides have occurred after a government has denied that certain individuals do possess a soul, abortion is another one of those genocides. 

I’ve been told by many self-identified libertarians that true libertarians must support the right of everyone to choose an abortion.  This is the position maintained by more than a few libertarian websites and organizations.  Many individuals have told me that I am not a libertarian because I believe abortion is murder, therefore, no one has a right to an abortion.  This happens even though I agree with those libertarians on every other key philosophical point.  If all libertarians had a proper understanding of the terms libertarian and liberty they would see that there is one correct philosophical side to the abortion debate, and that is the side I occupy.

A libertarian is someone who believes that the ideal of liberty should be their guiding principle, and the guiding principle at all levels of government in the United States.  That was precisely the guiding principle of the founding fathers of this nation. 

A great many believe that liberty is the freedom to do as you please.  They are mistaken.  Liberty is the freedom to do as you want as long as you do not hurt others or interfere with the rights of others.   Liberty is freedom with the responsibility to do no harm to others.  The responsibility portion of liberty was stressed by the founding fathers of the United States.  Because the fetus is murdered it is greatly harmed during the abortion. 

The fact the fetus is harmed during the abortion is a violation of the entire concept of liberty.   As a result of the abortion the rights of the fetus are destroyed which is also a violation of liberty.  Because all of the concepts of liberty are violated, abortion violates the entirety of the libertarian philosophy.

When it comes to libertarians who are strongly pro-life I’m in good company.  Here are two quotes from Dr. Ron Paul:

Abortion on demand is the ultimate State tyranny; the State simply declares that certain classes of human beings are not persons, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the law. The State protects the “right” of some people to kill others, just as the courts protected the “property rights” of slave masters in their slaves. Moreover, by this method the State achieves a goal common to all totalitarian regimes: it sets us against each other, so that our energies are spent in the struggle between State-created classes, rather than in freeing all individuals from the State. Unlike Nazi Germany, which forcibly sent millions to the gas chambers (as well as forcing abortion and sterilization upon many more), the new regime has enlisted the assistance of millions of people to act as its agents in carrying out a program of mass murder.

As an O.B. doctor of thirty years, and having delivered 4,000 babies, I can assure you life begins at conception. I am legally responsible for the unborn, no matter what I do, so there’s a legal life there. The unborn has inheritance rights, and if there’s an injury or a killing, there is a legal entity. There is no doubt about it.

Abortion being anti pursuit of happiness is obvious, an aborted unborn child will never be able to pursue any form of happiness.

The Irrelevance of Presidential Likability

by baldilocks

From a recent conversation:

Them: “I didn’t vote for President Obama either time. You know that. But I like him.”

Me: “Really?”

Them: “I can’t stand Trump! I know you’re on the Trump Team.”

The Trump Team? We’re on teams now?

Me: “I’m not on the ‘Trump Team.’ I’m on the side of our country. And President Trump has done many good things for it.”

Them (scoffs): “What has he done?”

Me: His policies have brought about lower unemployment. Black unemployment is at its lowest since …”

Them (interrupts): “NO, IT’S NOT! IT’S THE SAME AS IT WAS WHEN OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT!”

That’s when I knew I had to compose this post. But before I did, I created a page containing links to my many posts during the 2016 presidential campaign in which I expressed skepticism about Donald Trump’s intentions. In short, I thought he was playing conservatives and was in cahoots with Hillary Clinton to get her into the White House.

There are a lot of links on that page, so if you don’t have time to read them, don’t worry. But, I don’t believe in hiding my errors.

Also on that page are indications of my evolution into becoming a supporter of now President Trump.

Do I like him? It’s a question that does not matter. He’s not my friend or my boss. He’s not going to marry into my family nor will anyone in my family marry into his. I like that he is mostly good for our country, I like that he wants that which is good for it, and I like that he isn’t all talk.

I could post the many forms of beneficial action which President Trump has taken, but I want to focus on the most recent topic since the majority of my American family lives in the South and Southwest: Illegal immigration.

Yes, I’ve ranted about it before but, as I type this, we are seeing the beginning of results of this president putting Mexico’s feet to the fire.

Mexico has long been allowing MILLIONS of citizens of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras to walk through its southern border and sojourn through its land en route to the United States.

And why wouldn’t Mexico allow this? Why the flock not? Hey, it’s a chance to shake down these people, rape them, rape their children and turn them into drug mules. And, just spit-balling here, it’s also a chance for Mexican banks to get their hands on monies belonging to international organizations like Pueblo Sin Fronteras (PSF). The Chicago-based PSF has been at the forefront of bringing Central Americans through Mexico to the United States since 2008.

One thing: this flood of illegal aliens has been nothing but a hindrance to the well-being of Americans who are black.  Did I mention that the person I was talking to is black?

But what really got to me was the notion of Barack Obama’s “likability.”

I didn’t want to ask why this person likes the former president because we were already past the point of reasoning together. But I tried to think of what was likable about Former President Obama versus the things that would cause a person to dislike President Trump. Of course, that didn’t take long.

One president talks in a calm, even manner. He’s youthful, slim and has close-cropped salt-and-pepper hair. He will compliment you and try to assuage your doubts.

The other president is old, a little overweight, and funny-looking; that hair, though. And he speaks bluntly and will hurt your feelings.

It would be easy to like the “likable” one, if we didn’t also know that, as a state senator, he voted against saving babies who are born following botched abortions.

… if he hadn’t said that wouldn’t “punish” one of his own daughters with a baby, if one of them had become pregnant before age 18.

… if we didn’t know about Benghazi

… if we didn’t know about Operation Fast and Furious.

… if we didn’t know what he did for Iran.

(If I listed everything that President Likable did to harm this country and its people, this post would be endless.)

But, because he fornicated us with a smile, he’s likable.

Conversely, it’s okay to dislike the one who does almost everything alleged conservatives say they want and who, among many other things, is executing effective action to secure this nation’s borders and strengthen its economy.

Fact is, most people will accept tyranny if the tyrant blows smoke up their a**es.

And will hate the harsh one with the old man hair;  the one who tries to fix things.

Even the things they care about.

Even while they are prospering.

Thinking about this, I’m glad that Jesus never told His followers to like their neighbor as themselves, since I spend a lot of time disliking my neighbors — even the ones that I love.

Even the ones who are unable to discern friend from foe or good from evil.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow her on FacebookTwitterMeWeand Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar or hit Juliette’s!