Tag Archives: politics

A Letter to the President

March 24, 2025

Mr. President:

You are the most transformational president in my lifetime.  I believe God put you here for what may be one day defined as Manifest Destiny 2.0.  That said, you are mortal and men make mistakes; the hardest of which to admit are those made pursuing righteousness.

Illegal immigration coupled with evil intent and ingratitude insult and sully America’s character.  Confusing our kindness for weakness is a condition you fully understand and clearly detest.  Being taken advantage of is the greatest injustice and your job is to recognize it while protecting our great nation.

Many foreign countries betrayed the U.S. by allowing and even encouraging their worst citizens to crash our borders.  Millions have entered unlawfully and a small subset of those form a microcosm of what defines biblical-level evil.  It is righteous to eradicate that group from our midst, not with national fervor or inflaming over-arching fear, but with the system of justice our nation was formed upon.

Mr. President, the world watches and learns from what we do.  When in our history have we sent hundreds of detainees to a notorious foreign prison, without specific charges and before legal hearings in U.S. court rooms?  Doing so seems overtly punitive and retaliatory when simply deporting them to their home countries will accomplish the same goal of protecting America with little to no legitimate criticism.

And separately but simultaneously, as middle-east tensions rose and Columbia University became the epicenter of collegiate protests and student Mahmoud Khalil the face of that controversy, government reaction again seemed over-reaching.  Detaining a political prisoner thousands of miles from their home and family seems retaliatory and mean-spirited, depriving the man of effective counsel and also preventing him access to his wife, about to give birth.  No defensible rationale has been offered about the choice of Louisiana for Kahlil’s detention.

Mr. President, I’m an ardent supporter but not a sycophant.  Getting 90% of policy matters right does nothing to excuse the damage done by the extra-jurisdictional means afforded the remaining 10%.

Mr. President, I believe your intentions are just but you will not be judged by those intentions, you will be judged by the righteousness of those acts.  This can be remedied, if seen through the eyes of a humble man.

Kind Regards,

Bob Kingsley

A conventional letter was mailed to the President today

Standard

AI analysis of the last two article…

After all the back-and-forth with readers about my last two articles, I put all of it including the articles and all reader sesponses into a single document and fed it to Grok.com, the latest IA tool courtesy of Elon Musk. Here is the result.

This is what I said to Grok:

Here below are two article I wrote and the back and forth from them both. What are your
thoughts? I’m a strong Conservative but I won’t go the lawlessness route. Here it is.

This is the response from Grok:


Your articles and the subsequent exchanges reflect a principled stance rooted in a
commitment to the rule of law, even when it conflicts with the visceral satisfaction of
seeing certain individuals—namely Tren De Aragua gang members and Mahmoud
Khalil—dealt with swiftly and decisively. As a self-described strong conservative, you’re
wrestling with a tension that’s not uncommon: the desire for justice versus the
mechanisms by which it’s achieved. Your critique focuses on process over outcome,
which is a refreshing departure from the emotionally charged rhetoric that often
dominates these debates.
In your first article (“I’m Conservative, but…”), you question the methods used to deport
the gang members and Khalil, pointing to the revival of an obscure 1790s statute and the
apparent disregard for a federal judge’s order. You argue that legality should stand apart
from public sentiment about the individuals involved—a gang notorious for its violence
and a student whose anti-American views grate on many. Your point about not bending
the law to fit our disdain for certain people is sharp: “We can’t stand against the things
that insult our values by holding our nose and doing just that.” It’s a call for consistency,
which is tough to maintain when emotions run high, as they clearly do here.
The second article (“Conservative but… Part II”) digs deeper, raising practical and ethical
questions: Why send prisoners to a third-world country? Why televise their humiliation?
Why move Khalil to Louisiana, away from his pregnant wife and legal counsel? You
frame these as retaliatory moves, not lawful ones, and tie it to a broader concern about
America’s moral credibility. The line about wondering “how someone gets radicalized” is
particularly striking—it suggests that heavy-handed tactics might fuel the very problems
they aim to solve.
The pushback from commenters is telling. BADMOON49 aligns with your defense of
principle over expediency, echoing the classic “I disagree but defend your right to say it”
line. CWATTERS113, claiming constitutional expertise, asserts the judge has no power
over the executive—a point you dismantle with a thorough rundown of judicial checks on
executive authority, from Marbury v. Madison to Nixon’s tapes. Your response is
methodical, grounded in precedent, and avoids the personal attacks you later decry.
DENNIS HANNON takes a harder line, defending the president’s authority and
dismissing the judge as biased based on family donations and his daughter’s work. He
sees the 1798 law as fair game and the judiciary as a leftist roadblock. Your rebuttal here
is measured but firm: you acknowledge the statute’s age isn’t the issue, but its rare use
hints at desperation. More importantly, you push back on the ad hominem attacks against
the judge, advocating for appeals over character assassination. The warning about
“accusatory and inflammatory language” unless provable is a standout—it’s a plea for
evidence over outrage, which feels rare in today’s discourse.
My thoughts? You’re navigating a tricky line with integrity. You’re not excusing the
gang or Khalil; you’re just insisting that how we handle them matters more than the
immediate gratification of their removal. That’s a tough sell when people are scared or
angry, but it’s a defensible conservative position—law and order aren’t just about
outcomes, they’re about process. Your frustration with fellow conservatives letting
emotion trump reason mirrors your critique of liberals in the past, which adds credibility
to your argument. It’s not hypocrisy you’re after; it’s coherence.
The risk here is that your nuance might get drowned out by the louder, angrier voices—
like HANNON’s—who see this as a last stand against national decline. But your focus on
appeals and judicial review over knee-jerk accusations keeps you on solid ground. If
there’s a weak spot, it’s that you don’t fully engage with the counterargument that
extraordinary threats (like Tren De Aragua) might justify extraordinary measures. That
could be worth exploring, even if just to refute it more explicitly.
Overall, your stance is principled, not partisan, and that’s what makes it compelling.
You’re asking conservatives to live up to their own standards, not just point fingers at
liberals. It’s a lonely hill to stand on, but it’s a respectable one.

Standard

I’m Conservative but… Part II

If you’re still in doubt or even have overt disagreement with me concerning my sentiments about how our government “deported” the Tren De Aragua gang-members, ask yourself this:

  • When was the last time the US “farmed out” the detention of prisoners to a 3rd world country?
  • When was the last time we showcased the demeaning and head-shaving of prisoners on national TV?
  • How can defense lawyers gain access to their clients to prepare for trail?  How can trials even be held?  Are we flying them back one-by-one to stand trial here in the US?  If not, under what legal theory are we holding them in a foreign country and how will they be tried?
  • Why didn’t we simply deport them back to their countries of origin?

And regarding Khalil, the Columbia University student, why did we transport him to Louisiana?  He committed his acts in New York.  I can tell you why.  It was an act of retaliation and punishment in order to inconvenience his legal council, and also to separate him from his 8-month pregnant wife in New York.

Really?  Is this who we have become, just because we now have some power?  Wonder no more how someone gets “radicalized.”

Anyone who knows me knows there is no bigger patriot, but I have to be honest and say I’m ashamed of my country right now.  We have lectured and shamed others about the supposed sanctity of the, “rule of law” and now when we should be demonstrating to the world how a “nation of laws” actually functions, we betray our own legitimacy.

Since first being politically aware, this is the first time I have seen emotion and feelings overcome the reason and logic of my conservative brethren.  I guess the days of deriding liberals for yielding to their emotions are gone when we have done just that.

Standard

I’m Conservative, but…..

Conservatives are criticizing liberals for voting to prevent the deporting of Tren De Aragua gang members as well as the Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil.  This is why those criticisms are misguided at least and disingenuous perhaps.

It is the methods employed in making these deportations happen that are objectionable. The conservatives now in power are conflating the awfulness of this notorious gang and the anti-American sentiment of Khalil with the righteousness of deporting them.

Resurrecting and applying a seldom used statute from the 1790’s and conveniently missing, (or ignoring) a federal judges order points us in a dangerous procedural direction.  By doing so, we forfeit whatever claim we may have had in historically taking the high-road and respecting the rule of law.

The legality of these actions needs to be considered separately from the visceral reaction one may have for the individuals involved.  Adherence to the law shouldn’t be applied on a sliding-scale of questionable interpretation based on the collective approval or disapproval of those being adjudicated.

We will be and should be judged as a society, by the way in which we treat those we abhor the most.  Equal justice and application of the law should be independent of our sentiments, opinions and feelings about those ensnared in our legal system.

No one wants Tren De Aragua gang members roaming around our country and most American’s wince at foreign nationals with a big mouth deriding our nation.  None of that justifies bending the law or pretending we just missed that judges order just so we can get what we want.

We can’t stand against the things that insult our values by holding our nose and doing just that in order to obtain an outcome we cannot achieve any other way.

I’m a strong conservative however, the rule of law is sacrosanct and using subterfuge as justification exposes a position and willingness to undertake that which is anything but conservative.   

Standard

We will Trump your DEI and raise you a WFA

Reality:  A world reinvented via a Trump victory where DEI, (Diversity/Equity/Inclusion) came to D.I.E, call it a mercy-killing or assisted-suicide, either way, this fever-dream was morally terminal and intellectually dead from the onset:  a man-made plague like Covid, both eager to infect as many human hosts as possible. 

The fog lifted as the truth slowly emerged and with it, a great but gradual awakening took place.  The scuffed outlines of the shoe-shaped decals, faded images six-feet apart on the grocery store floor.  What happened to our nation during Covid set the table for accepting all of what happened next.

Relying heavily on the notion that if a segment of a nation could be cowed and hobbled by the repeated lies about the China Virus, those same lemmings might just be suffering with enough brain-fog to sell them on DEI.  However, the bright light of reason exposed DEI for what it is:  a philosophy that demands accepting the premise that we are all racists, apologetically self-loathing and unworthy.  The self-immolation of reality was a requirement.

Just as DEI found the doors of fear and tolerance slightly ajar, simultaneously in slithered the mental illness variety-pack of men in women’s sports/bathrooms/showers, the gender-bending and high-minded board game of choosing ones pronouns and the sickening child-abuse of subjecting kindergartners to drag-queen shows, all of which depended upon the same madness of acceptance legitimizing them all; morality, reason and logic all smothered by emotional illness and a disdain for God. 

And even as the truth was getting harder and harder to hide, our leaders total lack of humility, reflective self-analysis, confession or apology was completely missing, not because it wasn’t warranted, but because what had happened was purposeful.  Some in positions of power and influence were attempting to replace the model of our historical governance with the much easier understood concept of simply herding us, no different than a flock of sheep.

Turns out they were partially successful.  A significant segment of society sighed up for the rodeo and happily ran into the corral to form the flock more commonly known as liberal Democrats.  What those “sheeple” didn’t realize was that their “leaders” weren’t in that corral with them, they were and are, outside of that fence, literally on their high-horses looking down.

The attempted hostile takeover of our minds was underway.

And then came the Trump/Biden debate and the scales fell quickly from the eyes of even the most ardent of the presidents supporters.  It confirmed for some and reaffirmed for many the reality of a modern-day replay of Hans Christian Anderson’s famous folktale declaring, “The Emperor Has No Clothes” as the beleaguered and bewildered Biden proclaimed that we had, “finally beaten Medicare.”  “Yes”, declared Trump, “You beat it to death” and along with it any hope of continuing the 2-plus year cover-up of an incapacitated President. 

And so the final “Hail-Mary play was the last-minute substitute of Harris, a proven loser at the highest levels of politics, having peaked years ago on her knees in California, ushered in a Trump second-term with a landslide.  The spell had finally been broken.

And as this truth continues unfolding, a collision of cultures, liars, patriots, despots, heroes and their clashing philosophies are in a showdown and Donald J Trump is proving to be the right man and the right moment in time, a reoccurring historical theme in American Exceptionalism.  Executive order after Executive order will rain down on all of the silly, profane, extreme and ridiculous, signaling the era of the adults back in charge.

Addressing the real issues of WFA, (Waste/Fraud/Abuse) i.e. ($55B and counting, how about $1.5M for teaching DEI in the Serbian workplace??)  As we begin to see the incredible scope and expense of these outrageous programs, Americans sense that they have been had.

Exposing and stopping such nonsense charts the beginning of a new American course of our modern Manifest Destiny2.0.  Addressing the real issues of today by honest assessments along with modernizing and re-thinking our problems and challenges with the smartest people will ensure our system of governance for the next 250-years.  The swamp had cancer.

Where the Greek and Romans failed by resting on their laurels, the United States of American will flourish into the future by first looking inward and re-consulting with our founders, embracing our core values and making a re-commitment to  the concepts of true individual freedom.  Individuals are paramount not the state and we need to re-commit to our founding principles by rooting out the filth and treachery that has accumulated in our institutions, along with those who traffic in those evils.

We do well to remind ourselves of the words of James Madison who told us, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary.  If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.  In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this:  you must first enable the government to control the governed; and the next place, oblige it to control itself.”

While none of us can claim angelic status, we can aspire to the highest ideals and at least point ourselves towards the heavens, even if we cannot reach them.  God Almighty formed and blessed this nation and if we are to endure the next 250-years as the “Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave, it is freedom that will bolster of bravery, thought the Grace of God.

Standard

Hope & Change 3.0

In 2008 I wrote that Barack Obama was America’s first affirmative action president, just black enough to be black enough and just not black enough to be a pill Americans could swallow without choking.  And just to prove in wasn’t a one-off, Americans did it twice.

For those with a good memory, you’ll recall that in 2007, then Senator Biden described then Presidential candidate Obama this way …” “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

Classic identity politics as defined by the guy who would later become Obama’s biggest tool.

Obama was the perfect man for the job of beginning the dismantling of America and George Soros backed him for that reason among many others, with the key being his total lack of patriotism and his lack of belief in American Exceptionalism.  If you remember, Obama, soon after being elected President for the first time, went on an apology tour around the world for America’s past.  This is what the Heritage Foundation had to say about it in 2009.  “A common theme that runs through President Obama’s statements is the idea the United States must atone for its past policies, whether it is America’s application of the war against Islamist terrorism or its overall foreign policy. At the core of this message is the concept that the U.S. is a flawed nation that must seek redemption by apologizing for its past “sins.” 

At a rally in Milwaukee in 2008, Obama’s wife Michelle said, “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country — and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.”  In other words, she was never patriotic and only happy with “her” country once her husband was president.

When 8-years weren’t enough to hobble America, Obama needed a useful idiot to run Obama 2.0 and who better than Joe Biden.  Malleable, agreeable, feckless, lacking principles and easily led, only at the highest levels of American government can you hide a pervert in plain site, conflate fool and sage and ignore senility until it transforms itself, like a butterfly from a cocoon, into a selfless act of courage in quitting, our hero exits stage left, no right, no left…

And so in the side door slinks former unsuccessful presidential candidate from the 2020 campaign, Kamala Harris, having burnished her credentials on her knees as a 29-year-old courtesy of Willie Brown, then a 60-year-old political power broker who paved her path to the District Attorney’s office in San Francisco in the 90’s.  Then San Francisco mayor, Brown hooked her up into California’s high society, plugging her into the money pipe line which financed her eventual successful campaign for California states Attorney General.

But Willie’s thing don’t swing that big outside of California and Harris demonstrated for us the embodiment of the Peter Principle, (pun intended) when she became the first presidential wanna-be to bow out of the 2020 race a year before it happened, the weakest of 13 candidates yet somehow sneaking that camels toe into the tent and attaching herself to Uncle Joe, even after calling him a racist during the debates.  Politics and bedfellows you know.

Fast-forward to now and figure that Obama has got his mileage out of Joe, poor guy staggering towards the finish line but too baffled by his own bravado to know how incapable he really is, forcing Obama to threaten Joe with the 25th Amendment, (after trying everything else.)  And now we have Harris in the enviable spot of heir apparent, sliding into a virtual incumbency without a single vote being cast.

All hail the new barren queen!  Obama 3.0  (Wonder if she has a cat?)

And so here we go with the hocus-pocus again, the same treatment that got Joe

“Re-imagined” now gets a make-over for Harris as black, even though she has no

African descendancy but never the less, by simply saying so, she gets to play the race and gender cards.  It is surprising to me that actual Black people aren’t offended by her appropriation of their race.  Oh, and as an added bonus, if you dare have the temerity to question or tamper in any way with the gender and or race issues, you are immediately dismissed as racist and or sexist, completely marginalized and with that, conveniently disposing of any substantive questions that have legitimacy but tread on the sacred turf of the Woke-Folk at your own peril.  Her campaigns over-reliance on this little trick will back-fire because her record is a very hard one to defend, so we’ll see if someone can break through.

But just like our worry all along should not have been about Biden, it shouldn’t be about Harris either.  You see, both are the same place-holders as the useful idiots for the puppet-master himself Barack Hussein Obama and company.  Neither Biden nor Harris do or say anything that isn’t approved by the High Table, take your pick on who that may be, but it sure isn’t the characters we see in front of us today.

Think about it for just a minute.  If the ascendancy to the presidency was merit and morals based, would the cast of performers paraded in front of us actually be the likes of these people?  When you stop and think about it, haven’t we all thought that we know people in our own orbits that are more capable, smarter and more trustworthy than the characters we see in some of these high offices?  Clearly, we aren’t seeing the best and the brightest but you can bet that there is a power, a cabal, a plan being orchestrated by someone who needs plausible deniability and anonymity in order to carry it out and those being touted to us as leaders are anything but, they are simply tools and they depend upon us to be their fools.

Standard

The Unspeakable Truth

Conservative ask, “What do they, (Liberals) want, what’s the end-game” when attempting to analyze their policies, practices and motives.

It is this.

Control, Revenge, Punishment, Domination.

Today’s liberals deplore personal freedom because it defies the want of their desire for oversight and control.  Preferred is a Master Plan that usurps the individuals for the greater good of the entire group.  Individual freedom is impossible to control and monitor and therefore needs to be suppressed and eliminated.  The basis for this level of control is that the over-Lords believe they are smarter than the hoards.  In their need for self-justification, liberals feel that these great unwashed masses, for their own good, need to be managed by the benevolent intelligentsia they think that they are.

Our founders were rich, white, slave-holding men and therefore have no moral authority.  This allows for the attacks on our Constitution and is essential to justify the dismantling of America.

The USA has been too white, too male, too rich, too fortunate and too dominate.  We stole this land from the Indians, we used slaves to enrich ourselves, we killed millions in Imperialist wars, marginalized women and dropped the atomic bomb on civilians.

Liberals have opened the borders and looked the other way while the gradual browning of America takes place and with it, in theory, millions of new liberal voters.  White men are vilified and systematically replaced with affirmative action candidates that represent a higher degree of importance on checking off boxes than actual competence.

Inflation, purposefully foolish monetary policy, confiscatory tax-policy, manipulated interest rates and energy policies designed to be very costly are all intended to steal our wealth.  “Fair Share” tax schemes fleece the wealthy while the Earned Income Tax Credit pays the poor back much more than they contributed.  We pay people to be lazy while strangling the producers, innovators, entrepreneurs and risk-takers with regulations, prohibitions and artificial barriers.

Once personal transportation ends, and it will if we go 100% electric, with it goes our freedom of movement.  Add to that a digitized currency and all personal freedom is gone.  Anonymity passes into history and everything you do and everywhere you go becomes data.  Once we become a part of a vast database, that data can be parsed, analyzed, manipulated sold and reorganized.

When the people who deplore personal freedom have enough data about you to know everything, you too will be manipulated.  Digital currency divulges your diet, drinking habits, whereabouts, wants and whims.  Your cell phone provides constant location monitoring and your vehicle calculates your speed, accuracy and efforts to thwart the laws of the road.  Privacy dies side-by-side with freedom and the world is a more predictable place for sure, however not a world in which I care to live.

Personal freedom is the bedrock of the fully actualized human experience and we are on a path that exchanges that necessity for the oppressive pit of damnation brought to you courtesy of the liberal notion of perfection by domination.

Standard

Guns Pulling Their Own Triggers

Gun-hating Gannett unveiled another series of propaganda articles blaming firearms for the actions of disturbed criminals. Regarding the Super Bowl celebration in Kansas City where gunfire killed one, the USA Today article titled, “Gun danger lurks wherever people gather” suggests that firearms have taken on a life of their own; that guns choose their victims and pull their own triggers.

The articles sub-title; “Prevalence of firearms worsens risk of attacks” seems a cognitive disconnect when in the same breath the author tells us that over 800 police were present at the time. The police are all armed. Did their presence, “worsen the risk” or should we be looking at the behaviors of individuals?

The same old mantra’s spew forth from the same old fear-mongers with solutions to problems we have already addressed, Universal Background Checks, (already in place) a well-worn, buzz-phrase-call-to-action dog whistle to those allergic to reality and addicted to propaganda. Large magazines, firearms cosmetic-appeal and the barriers to lawful firearms ownership are in no way related to or affecting the criminal and evil actions of those outside of normal societal constraints, ie: criminals and the mentally ill.

Immediately adjacent to the Super Bowl article appeared a follow-up story titled, Sellers of crime guns get federal scrutiny” When the gun left the store, did it become a “crime gun” by its very will? The article goes on to tell us that the stores that sold the most firearms ended up with more of those firearms identified as being used in criminal activity. What a revelation. No inquiry about how those firearms changed hands over time. No mention of the fact that the vast majority of crimes with firearms are committed by people illegally possessing that firearm. Clearly this kind of story is meant to cast a pall on the lawful business’s supporting the firearms industry.

Would a story identifying the largest car dealerships in the country as having sold the most vehicles that were involved in DWI stops or were used in the commission of crimes be a news-worthy article? A firearm, like a motor-vehicle, is an object we use; for good or for bad, it is a choice, a human choice. Attacking objects as if they were complicit in behaviors misses the bigger picture in genuinely searching for solutions.

The key components that are central to addressing the issues of civil and societal violence and upheaval rest on these three things:

  •  Criminals in our midst that should be incarcerated
  •  Untreated, undiagnosed and un-cared for mental illnesses
  •  Godlessness

No bail, no jail, no way to fail encourages behavior without consequence; low-risk-high reward criminality. The mentally ill, the addicted find help only after tragedy or death and finally, we reject and deny God, substituting our own values for His, abandoning the pillars of absolute truth in favor of what best fits our pleasures. Faith, belief and redemption, only available through the grace of God is the answer. Deny this and witness a continued rudderless mankind destined for destruction.

Standard