It’s ‘High Noon’ in America: Just like the movie, Trump makes the last stand against violent outlaws; Biden, Never

It’s ‘High Noon’ in America:

Just like the movie, Trump makes the last stand against violent outlaws.

One of Hollywood’s greatest westerns provides a powerful metaphor for both the November election and the state of the nation.

Nearly seven decades after “High Noon” was released, the United States confronts the same kind of existential decision that Hadleyville, the movie’s fictional town, faced: Will the good citizens allow a band of violent outlaws seeking revenge to intimidate and dominate them, or will they support their marshal and fight?

The band of outlaws, in this case, is not Frank Miller’s celluloid gang. It’s the Left and its “progressive” ideology that permeates education, government, the arts, the church and much of the media. That ideology — which the Democratic Party proudly embodies — seeks to destroy the fundamental values providing the nation’s foundation.

Opposing the outlaws is President Donald Trump, who faces the same problem that challenged Marshal Will Kane (played by Gary Cooper): no support from the powers-that-be.

Kane’s commitment to stay and fight was rejected by Hadleyville’s mayor, judge, practically all the townsfolk and even his own wife. Trump’s commitment was rejected by his own party’s Establishment — the Bushes, Kristols, Kasichs, McCains and Romneys.

Yet unlike the movie, in which the townsfolk abandon Kane, Trump receives enthusiastic support from all demographic categories. That support represents contempt for a movement that wraps itself in the cloaks of “peace,” “social justice” and “tolerance” while subverting those values.
—>READ MORE HERE

Biden, Never:

On Election Day, this #NeverBiden voter will vote.

In my 34th year of “Never Biden,” exhausted by the political commentariat’s Trump myopia, I offer some reasons, selective, that explain a complete, personal disdain for the idea of a President Biden. These reasons for opposing this vanguard of Warren/Sanders/Harris socialism, for objecting to this doddering culmination of a half-century of hackery and blarney, elicit varying degrees of disqualification and rage-inducement. The handful of reasons (there are many more) are disqualifying. They are presented without the obsession of “But Trump . . .” rhetoric — look elsewhere (the places are plenty) if that is what floats your boat. This is done with an understanding, maybe delusional but likely not, that #NeverBiden is a status that applies to many Americans.

The true game-changer to this pandemic should be a successful vaccine (or, vaccines) that, if taken, would restore normalcy of work, travel, commuting, socializing, weddings, worship, vacations, camaraderie, and so much more (consumer spending) that has been curtailed and suppressed by lockdowns and other measures. Or at least, with vaccines, much would be met with far less fear. Vaccines will be empowering and restorative agents. They are deserving of overwhelming support. This summer, as Operation Warp Speed’s pedal hit the metal, Gallup reported that two-thirds of Americans were willing to be vaccinated. But then came the disingenuous and disparaging political rhetoric of the Biden-Harris ticket, which has severely harmed public support for the de facto cure: that number has dropped to 50 percent. In August, 83 percent of Democrats polled were willing to take the vaccine — as of late September that number plunged to 53 percent.

On his largely virtual hustings, the former vice president has repeated COVID anti-vaxxing rhetoric. “I trust vaccines. I trust scientists. But I don’t trust Donald Trump,” Biden said in a September 16 speech in Delaware, which followed a meeting with scientists to discuss coronavirus policy. “And at this moment, the American people can’t either.” Infecting America’s receptiveness to an anticipated COVID counterattack was on display at the first presidential debate, when Biden disparaged the efficacy of vaccines being tested by pharmaceutical giants: “And by the way, in terms of the, the whole notion of a vaccine. We prefer a a [sic] vaccine, but I don’t trust him at all, and neither do you, I know you don’t. What we trust is a scientist.” —>READ MORE HERE

Source