Really America! -- Which candidate is most likely to stop more jihadist attacks?

By Michael Bresciani

Let's not waste too much time on Hillary Clinton. With firepower minutes away and the clout of the entire State Department behind her, Hillary was unable to save even one of her key subordinates in Benghazi. Let's move on – nothing to see here.

It is not just Benghazi. Hillary's State Department blocked an investigation of the Orlando killer Omar Mateen's mosque for fear of offending Muslims.

Hillary now has the distinction of being the only presidential candidate in history who, while promising to defend America from Jihadists – may have already helped to bring on the worst act of Jihad so far on American soil.

Her record follows her and that alone should produce fear in most Americans.

Hillary accuses Trump of fostering fear and hatred, terms she has little right to use unless you have the wit to see it is only her fear and hatred of Trump that is speaking.

It's not the favorability poll, but the death toll we should be considering for our candidates. It is doubtful that attacks will stop under Hillary Clinton, but radical Jihadist will be put on the defensive from the first minute Donald Trump becomes president.

Deer in the deepest forest fear hunters and no doubt hate to see them in the thickets and in the tree stands every hunting season. Nature doesn't yield to the social meanderings, folkways mores or the sudden paroxysm that any one social group may feel when they think they are an ignored minority. Usually that makes them fearful that they are hated and in some kind of danger.

In the case of the deer it may now be safer for them to all migrate out of Canada to the U.S. since the Canadian Supreme Court just legalized sex acts with animals. Fear of hunters and now, perverts, may be more than Bambi can endure.

But maybe there is no safe place after all. Here in the U.S. we have NAMBLA an activist group that is laboring to abolish the age of consent so they can have sexual relationships with underage boys.

Little girls are not safe in public bathrooms under the edicts of one Barack Obama who liberals gleefully elected to lead them into the morality of the last days. But that would be an allusion to the Bible which makes just about all sinners feel a little unsafe.

Two ways the sexually deviant crowds deal with feeling unsafe are becoming readily apparent. One is to call upon pride the other is to claim fear. Gay pride is the impetus for parades, gatherings of like minds in public places, southern decadence organizations, rainbow lighting atop New York's Freedom Tower and the White House, to name a few.

They may be a minority and if they are proud of themselves, what is there to be afraid of? Perhaps they have never heard of the slogan of the U.S. Marines – "The Few the Proud, the Marines," and that Marines are afraid of no one.

Feigned feelings of fear are frivolous attempts to gain traction in a world where the majority still doesn't accept a particular lifestyle and moral choices with open arms.

Feelings of fear feigned or not, are what causes lawsuits against bakers and the condemnation of those who yet adhere to Bible truths about the abomination of homosexuality. It is OK to fear people with such beliefs, so far they, the biblically based, can just be ignored, but there will be a day when they will be attacked, detained and worse. Too late, already begun!

The semantics of today's social engineering and PC postulating is subterfuge, even at its best; it is spawned by liberal minds and presently has only the Obama influence and eight years of fast tracking to its credit. In substance – it is a disaster.

Labeling those who worry about radical Muslim terrorists as "Islamophobic" and those who are watching immorality swallow an entire nation as "haters" is a twisted way of just getting your way at a great nation's expense.

Some 49 gays were slaughtered in Orlando this week by a radical Muslim terrorist. This represents the confluence of two opposing terms in the PC admixture of words that are used as cover for both kinds of bad behavior. It is semantics that cancels reason and mocks those who have hidden behind these terms.

Could a few Islamophobics have stopped the shooter at the door of the bar and saved the 49. After that would the term Islamophobe be accepted among the Sodomites?

Another scenario emerges after learning that the shooter was a homosexual himself, as revealed by the media. Finding the right PC word to cover this rare combination is almost impossible.

Using words to cover for bad behavior is a kind of sedative for the reprobate. PC engineered words will always create nothing, but confusion. They are the morphine of a dying collective conscience.

So what has all this to do with Donald Trump, phobia and hate?

This writer was a strong supporter of Ted Cruz, but I also understand that even with his foibles and flaws Mr. Trump is no fool. He is wearing the conservative label and we have only to check his stand to see that he intends to do his best for our nation.

In spite of anti-Trump rallies where protestors rage and scream about Trump being a hater, it turns out that what Mr. Trump hates and what he fears, could actually have stopped what happened in Orlando and any similar attacks in the U.S.

You see, Mr. Trump fears that more Muslims who will kill U.S. citizens may be in the mix of immigrants allowed into the nation, add that to the fact that he hates the idea of more Americans dying, including homosexuals, and you have your answer. No semantics here.

Want to stop PC semantics from making fools of an entire nation? Start by going down to the polls in November and pressing the button with Trump's name on it.

© Michael Bresciani