August 5, 2016 --

President Barack Obama, addressing the Democratic National Convention, July 27, asserted: “Democracy doesn’t work if we constantly demonize each other.”

Hillary Clinton, accepting the Democrats’ nomination for president, declared: “We will stand up against mean and divisive rhetoric…. “ Elsewhere in her acceptance speech, Ms. Clinton accused Donald J. Trump of demonstrating his unfitness to be president because he can’t handle being baited.

Apparently, then, Hillary Clinton considers the very negative comments that she and the left are directing at Mr. Trump as not demonizing, mean-spirited attacks, but merely as a kind of psychological testing as to his fitness for office. Political psy-ops, you might call it.

A very strange column by John Podhoretz, in The Jewish Press, July 29 attacked Donald J. Trump’s acceptance of the GOP presidential nomination for “anti-American sentiment.” Podhoretz, a New York Post columnist, claimed: “Trump spent nearly 77 minutes running down my beloved country, and I don’t take kindly to it.” Has the psy-ops campaign against Trump somehow ensnared Podhoretz? The column ended by describing the Trump acceptance speech as “a deeply unpatriotic act of rhetorical infamy. LPR wonders: If a video had been made of Podhoretz reading this column, would we have seen his eyes blinking out an SOS?

The leftist uproar over Trump’s sarcastic invitation to the Russians to release Hillary Clinton’s missing emails did not need proof of Russian involvement top accuse Vladimir Putin of interfering in the U.S. presidential election.

There is no such proof. Instead we have been given the conclusions of “experts” that the Russians are behind the hacking of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) that made public emails showing how the DNC favored Clinton over Sen. Bernie Sanders, that were embarrassing to the committee and forced the immediate resignation of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, DNC chair.

Even before Trump made his sarcastic invitation to the Russians to release Clinton emails, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman began his July 22 column, “The Siberian Candidate,” by asking: “If elected, would Donald Trump be Vladimir Putin’s man in the White House?”

How devious has The New York Times become in its advocacy for Hillary Clinton? A news story, July 26, reported “accusations from Democrats and some Republicans that Mr. Trump was a kind of ‘Siberian candidate,’ bolstered from abroad to undermine the nation.”

Apparently, the left in its zeal to put Hillary Clinton in the White House, has determined that criticism of their candidate is “mean and divisive rhetoric.” Anti-American and un-American rhetoric, to boot.

Who would have thought that the presidential election of 2016 will test of the commitment of the American people to freedom’s spirit?

Who would have thought that the media would align itself with freedom’s foes? May God protect and preserve the American spirit of freedom in this election.