Here is something to think about: The Republican presidential candidate, whose name I will not name because he already gets enough free print, says he will be tough on terrorism.
He says he will make sure those who come from places where terror is a problem receive “extreme vetting” before these immigrants are allowed to enter the United States. Whatever the term “extreme vetting” might mean. The term sounds like “extreme colonoscopy.” I mean, how extreme can a colonoscopy be. I am just being rhetorical here. Please don’t tell me.
The GOP candidate had, during his primary campaign, said that he would ban all Muslims from entering the U.S. “until our country’s representatives can find out what the hell is going on.”
But the latest terror attacks, I suppose that is what they are, seem to have been committed by American citizens. So how will this orange-colored fool tackle these problems, meaning how would vetting of citizens — presumably Muslim but people of other hues than white — not orange — be handled under this maniac?
Given the off-the-chart radical right-wing crap the Republican nominee said to beat his primary foes, his earlier statements should be as examined as closely as his recent one. What a piece of work this candidate is, this nominee from the “Party of Lincoln.”
Although I have grown way too tired during this campaign, it will be interesting to watch the first Presidential Debate next week. That is, whatever incarnation of this Republican candidate will we see, maniacal bully or toned-down demagogue?. In fact, whether the GOP candidate even shows up at all will be worth watching.
Spelling error report
The following text will be sent to our editors: