The debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump revealed four main takeaways:

1) Harris showed better than anyone expected.

2) Trump spent most of the night countering Harris lies about him.

3) The moderators “fact-checked” Trump and helped Harris by not pressing her on her lack of substance and lies.

4) The candidates clearly have two distinct and opposite visions of America. One has a vision of government subsidies (tax money) solving all the problems that government policy has created. The other’s vision is of a nation in great decline because of failed government policies that must be corrected. Overall, Americans lost out because the moderators made the debate a sham.

The expectations were so low for Kamala Harris that all she had to really do was show up and not cackle after every statement, and she would be hailed by the pundits as the winner of the debate. That she accomplished. The media is fawning over her in the aftermath. She came across as well-rehearsed, stayed on point, and was articulate, but lied and twisted the truth about herself and her opponent throughout the debate. She dodged questions on her record, conjured up false narratives, and mocked Trump through both her words and facial expressions. She claimed that Trump was the candidate of division and she was the candidate of vision. Hers was a tremendous showing of projection—accusing others of exactly what she was doing.

Trump, on the other hand, spoke directly about the negative impact the Biden-Harris Administration has had on America. His driving theme was that America is in trouble and Harris and her Marxist policies were to blame. He often spoke in hyperbole, which sparked correction from the moderators. The issues, however, that Trump raised—immigration, crime, inflation, cost of energy, food, and housing are among those that Americans are dealing with every day. Trump’s anger at what the Biden-Harris Administration has done to this country was clearly evident. He exposed several times the weaponization of government by Biden-Harris against him and citizens, the incompetence of Harris, and the danger ahead because of her weaknesses.

The moderators were clearly biased. They fact-checked Trump no less than seven times and allowed Harris to lie at will. They let Harris off the hook on debunked hoaxes about Trump’s statements on race, very fine people, bloodbath, disparaging the military, etc. They allowed the debate to focus on the scandals conjured up by the Democratic Party against Trump rather than holding Harris accountable for her waffling and lying about abortion, the military, Israel, and a multitude of false narratives about Trump.

Harris was clearly aided by the moderators. Who won? The Marxists. Who lost? The American voters. Once again the media could not be trusted to impartiality. They skewed the debate in favor of Harris.

Proverbs 11:1 says, “A false balance is abomination to the Lord.”

It should be detestable to the rest of us, too.

Posted in The Daily Jot

Hamas executes six Israeli hostages, and the world explodes. But not in the way that one of a righteous mindset would expect.

There were protests in Israel demanding the government end the hostilities with Hamas and appease them. There were world leaders, including those in Britain, the US, and the United Nations, challenging the Israeli government to give in to Hamas. There were protests in places like New York City where pro-terrorist demonstrators demanded an end to American aid to Israel, and even worse, the annihilation of Israel and all Jews.

So, what is going on? People are murdered by an organized bunch of inhuman thugs, and the world wants to encourage more of the same through appeasement?

Israelis want the hostages returned. The families of the hostages want them returned. This is totally understandable. However, returned at what cost? And what guarantee does anyone have that the hostages are still alive?

The truth is that Israel has agreed to a ceasefire. Hamas refuses to agree. At the crux of the matter is Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s insistence that the Israeli army maintains a substantive presence on the Egypt-Gaza border in an area known as the Philadelphi corridor. Hamas has frustrated the deal with shifting demands and wants the Israeli troops removed. The corridor is the strategic area Hamas uses to smuggle weapons into Gaza. Netanyahu wants it cut off permanently.

Remember that Hamas wants Jews and Israel exterminated, and people think that giving in to Hamas will end its quest?

This is where politics, human emotion, and practicality collide. Politically speaking, Israelis just want peace. They want their loved ones returned. The human emotion side of things comes into play that Israelis are tired of the situation and angry. The anger is aimed at both Hamas and the Israeli government, primarily Netanyahu. They believe, as Joe Biden does, that Netanyahu should do more to end the conflict. Netanyahu is holding onto the idea that if he gives in to Hamas, the well-funded terrorist group will reestablish its strategic positions and relentlessly come after Israeli citizens again.

The practicality is that Hamas must be eliminated. Otherwise, the terror will continue in perpetuity. Netanyahu is looking at this from the perspective that he wants to do what is right for Israel and its citizens in the long term.

Appeasement never works. Netanyahu knows this. Deep down, the Israeli people know it, but they are tired of the fight. Every time in history, when Israel gives in to politics or emotion rather than the practicality of standing against its enemies, the outcome is bad.

Case in point: George Bush pressured Ariel Sharon into giving up Gaza in 2005. There was no peace then. There was never any peace as rocket fire on Israeli civilians continued most every day from Gaza.

While the families of the hostages deserve infinite respect, sympathy, and empathy—no one can fathom the depth of hurt they are experiencing—appeasing these “elected” Hamas barbarians is the worst thing to do.

As is written in Jeremiah 6:14, “They dress the wound of My people with very little care, saying, ‘Peace, peace,’ when there is no peace at all.”

Posted in The Daily Jot