A quick response to Pat Collins’ letter:
Hi Pat,
You seem to rejoice at discovering another “story…that tells us exactly who Donald Trump is.” You then reference a story
alleging Trump used 29-day deployment of National Guard and Army to avoid paying Guard members a stipend or pay for hotel
rooms”
This is just another example of liberal Democrat fake news. Since this is an intentional falsehood it must also be
identified as a lie. The following is what the Gazette found with a little research, which makes further response
unnecessary:
What We Found (and What We Didn’t)
• One social media claim on Fishbowl suggests Trump did “specifically call up the National Guard for 29 days instead of 30—
so that they won’t have to pay them a stipend or pay for their hotel rooms.” Fishbowl - Your Professional Community
• However, there are no reputable news reports or government documents confirming that this was an intentional strategy or
policy directive.
• It’s common in military practice to issue orders lasting fewer than 30 days simply because different pay and benefits
processes apply once a service member hits 30 days of active duty—not necessarily out of cost avoidance. Instagram
*****
Why the Claim Seems Suspect
Claim: Trump used 29-day deployment to avoid paying Guard members
Verified?: No reliable evidence
Notes: Only appears in unverified social/digital anecdotes
Claim: 29-day activations are standard military practice
Verified?: Yes
Notes: Widely used for administrative simplicity—not exclusive to any administration
Claim: Financial reasons alone motivated such scheduling
Verified?: Unproven
Notes: No documentation supports this claim as policy
Claim: Financial reasons alone motivated such scheduling
Verified?: Unproven
Notes: No documentation supports this claim as policy
*****
Bottom Line
The claim appears to be based on rumor or hearsay. While 29-day orders are indeed common in military logistics—primarily
for administrative convenience—it’s misleading to present that as a deliberate cost-saving tactic specific to one
president. There’s no credible evidence that Trump—or any administration—used this as a formal strategy to avoid pay or
benefits.
*****
A response to Kelly Scoles’ letter:
Hello again, Kelly,
I’ve harped a lot on the importance of logic in debate. Its absence or distortion can make accurate communication with
others impossible. Athenians and their neighbors around 400 B.C. understood this. They also clearly understood that
abortion was evil by demanding in their Hippocratic oath “First do no harm” and “I will not give to a woman a destructive
pessary [means of abortion]”. This was an ethical issue 2,500 years ago. This has been Judeo-Christian Gospel for more than
5,000 years. I guess even the pagan Greeks thought their unborn babies too “precious” to kill.
Kelly, you seem to be fixated on my alleged use of the word “precious”. I’m not aware of my frequent use of this word, but
it certainly is appropriate when referring to preborn human children. Why this preoccupation, I don’t know, especially
since you and I and the rest of humanity once lived in precisely the same stage of life.
But more to the point, our debate difficulty lies in the fact that we are using two different logics, different languages,
trying to reach a single truth. Over the years I have come to approach such debates beginning with a few red lines. First,
I draw the critical religious line – between atheists-agnostics and Christians. It’s difficult (as a Christian) to convince
anyone who rejects the Supreme Being Who made all things, most of which are spiritual, of eternal realities. Materialists’
beliefs are limited to things they can see, feel, or touch, or what imagination can provide, like aliens, transgender
beings, or Bigfoot. When I introduce God into the debate as the Supreme Being Who made all things they are stymied. In
Christian theology His (God’s) attributes being inherently, Infinite, Omnipotent (all-powerful), Omniscient (all-knowing),
Omnipresent (everywhere present), Omnibenevolent (all-good), and Omnificent (all-creating). “These attributes describe
God’s supreme, unchanging nature, which allows for all miracles, dominion, and strength in the world and in believers’
lives.” Leave God out of the discussion and reality disappears. Leave faulty logic in - and conclusions whimper to be
corrected.
So, where can we go from here? If atheists deny eternity, i.e. no afterlife, they remain ignorant of who they are, where
they came from, why they’re here, or where they’re going. But as Judeo-Christians we have 5,000 years-worth of answers. So,
before we can engage in meaningful debate here, something has to give. A fundamental understanding of these spiritual facts
will reveal just why the unborn child is immediately “precious and worthy of saving”; it’s because we humans are uniquely
made in the “image and likeness of God” (no aliens). Maybe the solution here is to limit the discussion to politics?
You ask about the problem of evil. You can’t understand this without understanding Biblical history, which includes angels,
rebellion, demons, creation, Adam and Eve, the Fall, Noah, the flood, Abraham, Jesus, redemption, and eternal aggressive
(fruitless) defiance against God. Whether or not you believe this longest of stories or not, you cannot comprehend the
answers without accepting this story which leads ultimately into Heaven or Hell.
As usual, Kelly, there’s neither time nor space to get into firearms issues, etc. However, the problem of evil should keep
you busy enough.
Lastly, you seem to disparage “Originalist doctrine” which belittles one of my heroes, the late, great Justice Antonin
Scalia. Let me just recommend a great book, The Essential Scalia – foreword by none other than supreme Court Justice Elena
Kagan.
I’m praying for you, Kelly, whether you like it or not!
