To The Daily Sun,
After reading some disparaging letters concerning our president from Alan Vervaeke and James Veverka I'd like to write some words in defense of our president. Before I do, I'd like to point out some different reasons for writing. You can write just to reveal your mind. For this, study is not really necessary you just write what you think about a thing or thoughts that come to you. If you're a talented writer this can even prove to be interesting, but what is reported does not necessarily comport with reality. This seems to largely be Alan Vervaeke's style. You can write to persuade. This type of writer will look for things that would seem to support his view. He doesn't care if what he presents is in context or not. He doesn't care if his statistics actually support his conclusions, or if what he is writing is true. He just wants to persuade you to see a thing in a particular way. This seems to be James Veverka's style. Both incorporate various ways to demean people that they disagree with. It's their stock and trade.Then there's the writer who is seeking the truth and endeavors to report on it, in words as clearly as he knows how.
If someone is seeking the truth, God will lead them to Jesus, for He is the Truth.
Now, there are different underlying views that most don't want to talk about, that shape our world views and lead to drastically different conclusions. If the truth be told, these views are not provable in the sense that we would consider scientific, yet one side will swear up and down there views are based on science. What underlies both views, the secular and the Christian is intuited and based on faith. If that faith is reasonable or not is what each holder must determine. One view is true, one is not. This I will get back to, if God is willing, in future submissions concerning history. What you believe about these leads people to diametrically apposing views that cannot be reconciled. Yet, I will say again this is not science against faith, as secularist would have you believe. It is really faith in a concept against faith in the living God.
Back to defending President Trump. To Alan Vervaeke. I'll grant you that president Trump is pugnacious. Yet he is an equal opportunity counter puncher. If you attack him it doesn't matter who you are he'll attack you. He will use any apparent weakness it seems. But he doesn't single out people by sex or race or religion to attack, but those who attack him. But don't judge what is in his heart because of this. If he does this up front where you can see it so that he can protect his heart where you cannot; perhaps on the inside he is better than you who outwardly appear righteous. Then Alan says, Bill Clinton was held to a higher standard. I have to laugh. One biographer of Clinton says, of him: he wasn't limited by morality. While he was governor of Arkansas it seems he was involved with drug trafficking. Mysterious deaths follow him and his wife like a plague and they still do. Ken Starr, while investigating the White Water scandal, explained that while investigating, he found the closer he got to the Clintons the shorter memories got. Forgive me if I go too far to assume that their memories were short because they feared for their lives if they spoke. His shenanigans with women read like Errol Flynn's autobiography, "My Wicked, Wicked Ways." Tell me about that higher standard Alan.
It seems James Veverka does not have enough respect for our president to call him by his right name. I suggest that this sets the stage for the rest of his letter. Jim disparages our president in his own words by a diagnosis from a "third-rate amateur psychologist." Which it think is really code for Jim's angst against our president. Lets get some perspective heere, Jim complains about President Trumps escalation of words for words. He calls them, "special punishment beyond the civilized norms." We have had past presidents and leaders around whom murders and mysterious deaths, of those who would threaten them, seemed to follow; which if the press had followed after half as tenaciously as they did with Nixon and Watergate, would surely have ended in conviction. Yet they showed an amazing lack of curiosity. Who's kidding who? "Special punishment beyond the civilized norms" indeed.
Concerning Obama: there was much damning information about him available on the internet. Much of it well researched, that most writers to this paper did not use out of respect for him as president. I don't see that type of restraint from the left concerning President Trump.
The left it seems is willing let huge amounts of corruption go unchallenged if it comes from their side, but will obsess about micro-aggressions from the right. It's delusion plain and simple. It is one of the costs of holding a world view that does not comport to reality.
- Written by Edward Engler
- Category: Letters
- Hits: 407