"The Trump movement often is described as a 'personality cult,' which it is, in no small part." – National Review, 11/02/20, Kevin Williamson (also posted on Facebook)

IT DOESN'T DO MUCH GOOD to preach to the choir unless the choir "shares" with their uninformed friends and relatives. So, to Biden voters I say, "You aren't really thinking things THRU unless you look at both sides of the choice. You may say you're for 'choice.' but do you really look at both sides of the coin? "

Thank God for Tucker Carlson, because parts of Fox News are going wobbly. Even National Review is a bit wobbly. My Nov. 2 issue came and it contains pieces by 3 writers: one for Biden, one "maybe" for Trump, and one for Trump. But even the latter, Andy McCarthy, uses the "but" word:

"But to make the election all about Trump is to ape the president's signature self-absorption," etc. [a back-handed endorsement?]. The NEVER-Trumper, Ramesh Ponnuru, says:

"All presidents have lapses in judgment, honesty . . [but] Trump is alarmingly deficient in all of these qualities at once, and their lack has marked every day of his presidency[!]" The "maybe Trumper" says:

" . . he's a shallow, ignorant, capricious, incorrigible self-destructive fool. For a while, I was convinced that he would change . . But he didn't . . " You have to consider the sources.

These are so-called "bright" people from Academania with degrees in poly-sci and so on (like Bill Kristol and Charlie Sykes). People from the upper Midwest who get their hands dirty just "wouldn't understand"! The opening line in this mag is:

"We would tell you the joke, but then it would become an issue, so we'll wait until after the election." Wonder if they have a Trump joke; NR says Democrats are favored to take the Senate AND the White House. Just for giggles, I tried to count the number of "buts" in this issue "but" stopped at 76. For example:, regarding orthodox Jews in NYC:

"Believers rightly protest regulations that are enforced more stringently against worship services than liquor stores. BUT faith-blind health regulations must be obeyed by all . . "

"[Trump's habits} sometimes served him and the country well, as when he moved our embassy in Israel to Jerusalem over the hysterical objections of alleged experts . . But they also made him a consistently unpopular figure . . " (in whose minds, I wonder?).

I hate to have to be the one to point out the obvious, but you do have a CHOICE, popularity or no popularity. Are the "pro-choice" people able to admit the weaknesses in their talking points finally? The anagram for "talking points" is TP. But they are no more useful than used toilet paper.

P..S. The best part of the current NR is a book review of "Breaking Bread with the Dead" by Alan Jacobs. It takes the smarty-pants generation to task for ignoring their own national and historic identities. The reviewer Tracy Simmons says the author believes in intelligent judgments about the past, not just negative ones:

" . . while recognizing the easily overlooked fact that we too inhabit a place along the timeline of history, and that our descendants may not come to share our high opinions of ourselves . . . If fortunate, after much reading and reflecting, we land with the virtue of humility, without which intelligence is simply a loaded gun in reckless hands."

PPS: Paraphrasing Jacobs, the reviewer says:

"The faith invested in education has always overshot its capacity to deliver."

Ponder THAT ONE !!