Let's Try a Poll That the Media Isn't Covering

Poll: 75% of Americans Are Opposed to Shutting Down Government for Partisan Budget Priorities

And there it is, for all to see.  

If you can stomach the news about yet another poll, this one provides some very interesting information into what Americans are thinking.  It's a Marist poll, and one of the reasons we haven't really seen much from this particular polling group this fall is that their data and their numbers aren't matching the narrative that the media wants to create around Presidential politics, basically, that we have a neck and neck race, and that the problems and issues brought to the table by Trump, namely criminal indictments, totalitarian fascist rhetoric and the possibility of running from prison, along with the general incompetence he displayed when he was President, can be balanced out by President Biden's age, the economy, inflation, the price of gas and a host of other things over which he has little to no control. 

Marist polls, which have had the President's job approval ratings in the mid-40% range for most of the time that the others have claimed it is lower, and which continue to show the President in the lead nationally, and in all of the battleground states, have all but disappeared from the composite lists.  But there, in this piece from an interesting source, a hair style and beauty advice website called "Loved by Curls," is the poll data, an explanation from the executive of Marist polls, and some interesting social media comments which don't necessarily reflect the poll response, or have anything to do with it, really, except to serve as clickbait. One of the social media comments said,  "Republicans have no common sense," in reference to their attempts to shut the government down to get the budget spending cuts, and the tax cuts for the rich, that they want.  

I can go along with that, since it's exactly how I feel.  

Among the results, 75% said that it was "unacceptable" for Republicans to threaten to shut down the government during budget negotiations to achieve political goals, 49% said they would blame Republicans if the government shut down, as opposed to 43% who said they would blame Democrats.  Beyond that, other than the explanation from Marist, about their poll, which is not funded by partisan interests, there's not much other information.   

"Loved by Curls," is a website aimed at beauty advice and trends in hairstyles.  The information on the poll is buried in slides featuring all kinds of advertising, which is typical of online information sources, including some that claim to be news outlets.  Random political coverage can be found there, among the hairstyle and beauty ads, rounding up social media comments of all kinds, including a short bit noting that Marjorie Taylor Greene introduced a bill to reduce the salary of Lloyd Austin, the Secretary of Defense, and a rant about inflation, sans any polling data.  

But the Marist poll is real data. And I don't recall seeing it or hearing about it in any news coverage.  

What the Media Wants Us to Believe

They want us to believe that, somehow, there's been a shift in public perception of the Biden Presidency since the mid-term elections, which they very heavily labelled as a referendum on his administration.  That didn't quite go according to plan, since it turned out to be exactly that, with Democrats, supposedly "in disarray," we were told, and fragmented and divided, didn't lose control of the senate, as the pollsters and media pundits clearly predicted, using the phrase "red wave" to underline their predictions, and lost fewer house seats than the party in power in the White House has lost in a mid-term in almost two generations. 

They want us to believe that the polling data which gave Biden a comfortable lead in all of the battleground states, and in the national polling, as high as seven points across the data of at least two composite poll sites, during the summer has suddenly shifted, and turned toward the former incompetent, worldly failure who occupied the White House between January 2017, and January 2021.  That the GOP front runner, who is himself showing signs of aging, in both physical failure, needing assistance to climb stairs to get on stage,  and long, rambling, forgetful speeches, and who attacked American democracy and tried to shred the Constitution's provision for the peaceful transition of power, has somehow managed to gain enough support to be in a neck and neck competition with the President whose first two years in office were a model of success in terms of legislation, economic recovery and leadership in the world.  

They want us to believe that in just a few short months, basically August to October, there was a 10 point shift in the polls.  Well, I don't believe it.  

They have tried to bring it about, as much as they think they have the influence to do so.  The mainstream media has lost a share of its audience to extremists on the right, so it doesn't have as much influence over its audience as it once did.  But Biden is the first President in modern history who doesn't get nearly as much day to day news coverage of his administration as his predecessor gets for his re-election campaign.  I guess our FCC has, by now, lost its free and equal time provision, so suing the mainstream media for failure to provide equal coverage is probably futile.  But it's the truth and it doesn't take a professional evaluation to show that the amount of time given to anything Trump says or does is considerably more than the coverage of the President.  And even with that, they haven't really moved the needle as far as public opinion is concerned, so they use their network polling pundits to create this image.  It's a matter of changing a few numbers here and there and justifying it with some "factoring" based on the data that is collected.  

Even on a network like MSNBC, little was said about exit polling data which didn't support the "dismal news" narrative.  I emailed the network to ask when they were going to put that data up on their website, since what they posted wasn't nearly as detailed as we get during a mid-term or presidential election year.  Their response was that, since these were scattered, off year elections, they didn't actually publish that data.  

Nor has there been much criticism of the legislative and administrative moves of the Biden Administration.  It's hard to criticize.  He's been successful at just about everything.  I don't even buy the "Afghanistan was a failure" rhetoric, because he did what we should have done and what a clear majority of the American people wanted done, he got us out.  So where does that rhetoric go?  To criticizing his age.  That's it.  That's all they've got.  His potential GOP opponent, who is only three years younger, much fatter, and clearly having trouble recalling information and climbing steps to get on stage, and who won't allow himself to be examined by a reputable doctor, should be compared the same way.  So why isn't that happening? 

The media has spent very little time on what Trump is offering, which is basically nothing as far as the economy, foreign relations, or dealing with the problems of the nation is concerned.  It's all about him and getting even with those he thinks wronged him during his first term. It's about establishing the dictatorship he failed to establish the first time around.  If his name and face were not in news coverage every day, he'd have to focus his campaign on getting enough delegates to beat Nikki Haley and Ron Desantis, or Chris Christie.  They've made this into a sensationalistic personality contest, and that's the only reason it is close, if, indeed, it really is as close as they say it is.  I'm not buying that it is. 

So when a poll comes out that shows 75% of the respondents, 1,400 of them, which is twice as many as the recent infamous New York Times/Siena poll secured, are opposed to GOP plans to shut down the government, and they'd blame Republicans for it at a 49-43% rate, that tells me that the President's level of support is somewhere around the 50% mark, and that he's in good shape as far as the 2024 election is concerned.  People know what is at stake here, and they're not going to sit on their couch at home on election day and give up their freedom.  

 

American Conservative Evangelicals Are in an Existential Crisis

"But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first.  Remember then from what you have fallen; repent and do the works you did at first.  If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place unless you repent."  Revelation 2:4-5, NRSV 

Even during the first generation in the first century of its existence, Christian churches faced problems caused by deviation from the mission and purpose that had been established for them by the Christian gospel, preached by Christ.  The author of the book of Revelation, most likely the Apostle John, who had helped start and worked among the seven churches addressed by this vision of Jesus, delivers some dire warnings about practices that had crept into the churches, even at this early stage, in an effort to prevent their extinction, which was the prediction of the warning given by the Spirit of Christ in this vision.

The church at Ephesus, to which this first part of the message was directed, had "lost its first love."  They were in a prosperous community and as a result, the church also became comfortably connected to local governing authorities, to the point where the church became more dependent on its position and influence with them than they were on their spiritual connection and faith practice.  In the vision that John received from Jesus, the remedy was repentance, or turning away from this practice that was causing it to become separated from God, before the separation caused their existence to cease.  

A Modern-Day Comparison to Conservative, American Evangelicals

After growing up in a conservative, Evangelical church, spending four years at a university affiliated with the denomination, earning a minor in Biblical studies, and then two and a half years at an affiliated graduate institution, also with Biblical studies as part of the required coursework, I am absolutely appalled by the support that Trump finds for his candidacy among this particular religious constituency.  There's not a single point in the entire Christian gospel where the aims of Trumpism are consistent with any of its values or principles.  

I see an awful lot of attempts to distort the biblical narrative to make it fit this gross, misguided aberration of the Christian faith, none of which come close to any justification of support for Trump.  Even those Christians who concede that he's evil will resort to making exceptions, claiming that there are biblical examples of places in history where God used evil people to accomplish his purposes.  

Not exactly.  

There are some Old Testament historical accounts of where evil rulers were successful in war against Israel, as a consequence or judgment for some specific sin, most often rejecting their faith in God.  But God never requires his people to give loyalty to any wicked, conquering ruler, or to follow the leadership of some evil person he was using in this way.  In fact, the judgment that eventually came down on the Jewish nation in the Old Testament was for their rejection of righteous, Godly rulers and their acceptance and loyalty given to those that the Old Testament accounts in Kings and Chronicles say, "did evil in the sight of the Lord."  

And what we're seeing now, in this country, is an abandonment of the doctrine, theology and practice of biblical Christianity in exchange for loyalty to a deceiver, a pathological liar, a psychotic, power-hungry, would-be dictator who embodies the kind of evil from which Christians believe Jesus came to save us.  

A New Distinction Between the Fragmented Branches of American Christianity 

Christians like to claim that there is "unity" in Christ.  But in the United States, where the church was set completely free from any magisterial or government control by the first amendment to the Constitution, it has never been unified in any sense of the word.  Each denomination and division built their own fortifications and walls to protect themselves, and from which they could launch attacks upon the others.  And what were political and theological divisions between Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox, turned into denominational distinctives among Protestants who set themselves behind their own doctrinal walls in order to attack and vilify fellow Christians over nuances of belief.  

With the growth of fundamentalism, a movement born out of the ignorance that developed as a result of an anti-education bias and the separation of churches from educated pastors and ministers, a sharp gulf developed between "liberals," represented by mainline Protestant churches, and "conservatives," made up largely of the revivalist Evangelicals and later, the Pentecostal movement, both of which developed as a result of the anti-education bias. Claiming to be the exclusive people of God, as opposed to "godless liberalism," they drip with arrogant self-righteousness. 

Ironically, it's the flaming liberals who are becoming, in practice, the genuinely confessing Christian church, as opposed to conservatives who have lost their first love and replaced it with loyalty to an adulterer with three wives, children by all three of them, twice divorced, who is a pathological liar, insurrectionist and rebel against the governing authorities (a big no-no in the Christian gospel, found in the New Testament), whose worldly lifestyle fits the definition of anti-Christ found in 1 and 2 John.  

It's the conservatives who, characteristic of the description found in Revelation 2:4-5, have lost their first love. 

The falling away from the Christian gospel that has plagued conservative Evangelicals in the United States for quite some time did not originate with Trump.  It was Ronald Reagan, running against the openly born-again Jimmy Carter, who invited Evangelicals into the GOP, via several prominent leaders, including Evangelist James Robison, and the now infamous Jerry Falwell.  Evangelicals who went along with this traded their first love for worldly, political power which was an admission that they didn't really believe there was anything to the spiritual power upon which they once claimed to rely.  God wasn't going to answer their prayers to put Reagan, who had little to do with Christian faith and practice, in the White House over the faithful, born-again Southern Baptist Carter, so they decided to elect him themselves.  

The Rhetoric Has Shifted, and the Consequences Are Clear

There was never a doubt in my mind that Trump would be a complete disaster for this country if he ever got into the White House.  And he was.  Fortunately for us, it was his first time, and his lack of experience, coupled with the wisdom of many of those who wound up risking his wrath to derail his plans, prevented a major disaster.  This is a man who was not just corrupt, or of low character, but someone who reveled in worldliness, a term I use to characterize the exact opposite of the Christian gospel.  Worldliness is his brand, and his open denial of the need for repentance and forgiveness is defiance of Christ's salvation.  It is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.  

And we saw what he was capable of doing when the people fired him and sent him packing.  He refused to go.  And he used every possible hook and crook, including committing crimes, lying and attempting to subvert the constitutional authority of the United States Congress, to stay in power and become the first President to resist a peaceful transfer of power.  The depth of the crimes he has been willing to commit in order to benefit from his Presidency should have been the last straw for anyone who sincerely believes and practices the Christian gospel, and for any real American patriot.  That they came that far with him is an indication of the weakness of their faith.  But anyone who has stuck with him, after all he has done, has abandoned their first love.  They are as evil as he is, helping enable a battle against the will of the American people, and, according to what the Bible says, against the will of God.  

And it just keeps getting worse.  The agenda he has laid out is as anti-Christian as it is anti-Patriotic and anti-American.  It's fascist, no denying that.  And the bigotry that drips from the rhetoric is a denial of the very nature of God and of the gospel message of Jesus Christ.  As the Apostle Jude wrote, in his short but to-the-point epistle near the end of the New Testament, Trump is an intruder who has stolen in among the church, introducing licentiousness and perverting the grace of Jesus Christ.  

"But these people slander whatever they do not understand, and they are destroyed by those things that, like irrational animals, they know by instinct...These are blemishes on your love feasts, while they feast with you without fear, feeding themselves.  They are waterless clouds, carried along by the winds; autumn trees without fruit, twice dead, uprooted; wild waves of the sea, casting up the foam of their own shame; wandering stars for whom the deepest darkness has been reserved forever."  Jude 10, 12-13, NRSV 

Though these verses aren't a specific prophecy for our time, they are certainly prophetic in terms of being an accurate description of Trumpism, and of Trump, and should be heeded by any sincere Christian as a warning to stay away and not be associated with this apostasy in any way.  It's impossible to reconcile support and loyalty for Trump with the Christian gospel.  Voting for Trump is a betrayal of one's profession of faith in Jesus Christ.  

A Lampstand is Being Removed

It's fairly clear from the words used by the Apostle in Revelation, in spite of the apocalyptic nature of the literature, that the lampstand was a symbol of the church's existence, and the consequence for its failure to repent would be the loss of the spiritual power that sustains its existence.  A church that had its lampstand removed would cease to exist. 

Even a casual observer can see that the existence of churches dependent on the merger of right wing politics with their theology and doctrine is in danger.  Conservative Evangelicals have declared that the standard of measurement of the sincerity and commitment of a Christian congregation is its numerical growth, pointing to theirs as a sign of God's favor, and to the decline that started among Mainline Protestants in the 1960's as a sign of his withdrawal because of their liberal theology.  

But the decline in attendance and membership among conservative Evangelicals in this century has become so severe that they are inventing ways to deny that it is happening.  The largest Evangelical denomination in the United States, the Southern Baptist Convention, has reported a drop of nearly 4 million members since its peak in 2006, 20% of its total membership.  Across the whole spectrum of independent, non-denominational churches that make up the bulk of Evangelicalism in America, 16 million people who attended church in 2008 are no longer on the church rolls.  Some of that is just bad book keeping, but most of it is a shift in people looking for churches that are sincerely and distinctively Christian, and not politically distracted.  

The Trump agenda cannot be reconciled to the Christian gospel. It denies loyalty to Jesus and the principles and values he preached and lived by example. Leadership which fails to see that this incongruity is resulting in an exodus of people from the pews, and continue to publicly endorse Trump are splitting churches and causing this exodus of membership.  And the church that has lost its first love, and has adopted a message that is a different gospel than the one originally preached is, according to the Apostle Paul, anathema, or destroyed.  

Get off the bandwagon and repent, before it is too late.  

We Have History to Inform us of the Danger of This Rhetoric

Trump Crosses a Crucial Line 

Texas Baptist Standard: Trump Comments Cross Into Nazi Territory

Those That Fail to Learn From History are Doomed to Repeat It

From philosophers and politicians as diverse as Edmund Burke, George Santayana and Winston Churchill, these words, or something similar to them, serve as reminders to us of the importance of understanding history, not just learning about events and being able to recite some dates.  Santayana put himself on the front doorstep of the turbulent fascist development in Europe in the 1930's, leaving his post at Harvard and living in Italy under Mussolini's dictatorship.  Churchill, of course, had to deal with the reality of fascism as it threatened the very existence of Great Britain.  They lived in the history that was being made at the time.  

And so are we, in America, now.  

Explaining the danger sometimes seems like going back to a ninth grade history classroom, where I started my career, and laying out a course of objectives to students who have not much more than a perfunctory understanding of the past, something that they might have read in a textbook or heard from an elementary school teacher.  They know the names, and some of them can cite the dates.  But I fear that the lack of genuine understanding runs very deep in this country now, so deep that the rhetoric being spouted by a major party candidate, that is so familiar to those who do understand the turbulent European history between the two World Wars, is not ringing alarm bells in very many places.  

The aftermath of the Second World War did not bring about the world peace that it should have, as a result of the horrors experienced by millions of people as a result of the war.  It certainly changed Germany, for generations, as it did most of the rest of Europe.  It transformed imperialist, militaristic Japan.  Dare I say that it seems far less likely that a fascist figure, such as the one being created by Trump, would not be able to gain much of a following in either of those countries, even now, almost eighty years after the war ended?  

Why is this happening in the freedom and democracy under the Constitution of the United States?  

Because the horrors of World War 2 barely touched the territory of the United States.  And because, in spite of that experience, the shallowness and lack of seriousness with which most of us approach the education of our children and youth has led to a categorical failure to provide a national understanding of history that would ring alarm bells and crush this development before it ever came out in the open.  

Christianity Should Have Been Europe's Bulwark Against Fascism; Likewise it Should Also Be America's

Both Mussolini and Hitler exploited weaknesses in the established churches to neutralize what should have been the greatest opposition to their ideology.   German Protestants embraced the nationalism embodied in the National Socialist agenda, an ideology not unlike that of American Christian Nationalism, the idea that God has placed a special blessing upon people of a particular ethnic and racial identity for the purpose of bringing justice to the world.  Regardless of whatever means they chose to use to bring about this "will of God," including precipitating a bloody, destructive, inhumane war, they believed he would hold their coat-tails and cheer them on.  The Protestant state church actually dedicated church buildings in the name of the Fuhrer.  

The Catholic Church had billions of dollars in church property to protect inside Germany and Italy.  The Vatican was, of course, just down the street from the headquarters of Italian fascism.  In 1933, in a move aimed at its own self-preservation, abandoning the message of the Christian gospel, the Church negotiated the Reichskonkordat which required clergy who take office in the church to also take an oath of loyalty to the governor or president of the German Reich.  

Loyalty to a political figure, in any possible way, is an abandonment of the church's mission and purpose, and its loyalty to Christ, which is the cornerstone of its very existence.  There's a reason why that sounds so familiar among American conservative Evangelicals today.  It's happening here, informally, but effectively. 

There is nothing that Trump brings to the political table that Christians should be endorsing, or supporting with their votes.  This political campaign has taken a clear and dangerous turn, not only away from foundational American values and democratic principles, but in a direction that is antithetical to every principle and practice of the Christian gospel.  There's nothing there that bears any resemblance at all to the Christian gospel, not one thing, including the openly anti-Christian sentiments of the movements' leader, Trump.  

To be sure, there are Christians, mostly those who are called "liberal" with derision in the intended use of the term by conservative, Evangelicals, who see this for what it is.  Those Christians who have a deep knowledge and understanding of the historical and theological contexts of the Bible that Evangelicals claim is without error, and is infallible, are pointing to what has become one of the greatest departures from orthodoxy in Christian history, certainly in the United States, and showing what is a sharp contrast between true Christian faith and the anti-Christian practices and principles of Trumpism.  This includes some Evangelicals and even some Fundamentalists, who also see the contradictions.  

The recent rhetoric coming from Trump, resembling the Nazi party and Hitler, in the 1930's, There's no way to avoid making the comparison, even though we have some kind of accepted political correctness to avoid them.  I don't understand why that hasn't created a bigger reaction than it has, especially among Christians, who should be the first to see this as the exact opposite of what they believe and who they are.  But it seems that the more conservative they are, the more blind they are to what's being said and what's going on.   

It's not possible to reconcile the gospel of Jesus Christ, and a personal salvation or conversion experience as a Christian with any of the rhetoric that has become the central theme of Trump's campaign. Frankly, by his own words, he rejects a Christian conversion experience in favor of one he has created himself, along with his own definition of the identity of God, totally inconsistent with the Christian gospel.  That alone should have been enough to cause them to reject him, but the more conservative they are, the more blind they are to the inconsistency of what he says and does with theier biblical definition of the Christian gospel.  Now, with this turn toward identifying with Hitler by using his rhetoric, he's become as anti-Christian as any politician or political philisophy we've seen ever represented by an American running for the presidency.  

If those among American Evangelicals who continue to support him don't distance themselves from him and turn away from the direction he is leading them, it will not end well for their churches and denominations which are already seeing an increasing drain of membership, attendance and financial support.  They run the risk of being identified biblically as apostate.   

"But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first."  Revelation 2:4, NRSV

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world.  By this you know the Spirit of God:  Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God.  And this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming; and now it is already in the world.  I John 4:1-3, NRSV

How Much Ignorance of History Does it Take to be Doomed to Repeat It?

Lady Gaga's hit "Bad Romance," which debuted in November, 2009 and stayed on the charts for quite a while, including spending about eight weeks at the number 2 spot in the United States, popped into my mind today as I was listening to an afternoon talk show host chat with a guest about the state of politics and the ignorance of history in this country.  There are some lyrics in the song which would be fit descriptions of what we are seeing happen in front of our very eyes. 

"I want your horror, I want your design,

'Cause your a criminal as long as you're mine, 

I want your psycho, your vertigo shtick, 

Want you in my rear window, baby you're sick."  

"Caught in a bad romance." 

Follow My Line of Thinking Here 

We have a former President, running for the office again, who committed the biggest crimes against the Constitution of the United States, and against American representative democracy, that any politician has committed to date, and that's saying something.  If that weren't enough of a "world turned upside down" scenario, this candidate is currently the front-runner in the whole field of candidates in the Republican party.  

The rhetoric that comes out of his mouth has always been anti-patriotic, anti-democratic and anti-American, but in recent days, it has taken a turn for the worse.  As a candidate, he offers nothing of value from a political perspective.  Nothing.  What he is doing is playing on superstition, fear, conspiracy theories and an appalling and inexcusable ignorance of history.  Everything he promotes and says he is going to do is a plan for the dismantling of the Constitution, the elimination of its protections of individual freedom and attacking those people who he has singled out as enemies, basically, any person of color, including those Latinos, African Americans and Asians who are on his bandwagon at the moment, anyone his politics define as progressive or liberal, any Muslim, including those who are fussing with the President over his position on the Israel-Hamas war, and Jews.  Yes, Jews.  

He's referred to anyone who doesn't accept his way of thinking as "vermin," and has announced a plan to build concentration camps for those who he deems to be politically, socially and religiously out of line.  

"I want your horror, I want your design...I want your psycho, your vertigo shtick"  

Explain to me why it is that he can be so open in using that language, in describing his intentions, imitating the world's biggest horror show that led to its most destructive war, the deaths of tens of millions and the laying waste of a good portion of two continents, and it's just a matter of reporting in the news cycle.  How is it that the politicians of his own party yawn, dismissively, and continue to support him, and those of his opposition turn to their infighting over Israel-Hamas, the Ukraine War, and the President's age?  

"Caught in a bad romance..."  

Something is Really Wrong Here

The news media, long accused of rank liberalism by Republicans and extreme conservatives, seems bent on helping this abberration of American values get all the attention it needs to keep this destructive cancer, which is an accurate analogy as far as I am concerned, flourishing.  If the polling numbers that they are pushing and the pollsters they have picked to stand by are correct, then we have a much bigger problem in this country, and in the world by extension, than anyone ever imagined. 

A federal judge in Colorado, in order to avoid rendering a decision with long-reaching political consequences, ruled this week that the President is not an "officer" of the United States, and therefore, is not subject to the provisions of the Constitution, in the fourteenth amendment.  This, my friends, is what we are up against.  That's not just a "bad romance," that's a political nightmare.   

There are some voices that are providing assurance that this "bad romance" cannot be sustained for long, that it is already eroding, and when the election does come down to what may very well be a race between someone incarcerated in federal prison for crimes that fall just short of treason, and the sitting, eighty-one year old President of the United states, the President will win easily.  But it's hardly reassuring that the potentially incarcerated fascist would even be on the ballot.  That itself is a symptom of a much bigger cancer that is ravaging American democracy right now, as we speak.  

Even today, I heard comments from "experts" who are saying that the speculation being used by pollsters is misreading the electorate farther off the mark as it did in 2016, when it altered its polling samples favoring an over-estimate of Democrats', and particularly women's enthusiasm for Hillary Clinton's candidacy, and when it missed the mark again on Republican enthusiasm in the 2022 mid-terms.  I actually heard one comment today stating that one of the reasons the "red wave" that pollsters were absolutely positive was comming in 2022 didn't materialize was, in part, the fact that they kept pushing it and it got liberal voters out to the polls in bigger numbers than they predicted, and that their numbers look better than they really were, because of the massive adjustments they made during October, when the raw data just wasn't going where they thought it ought to go.  

Ok, so maybe there's some genuine reason to be reassured there.  But regardless, the fact that this insanity, and that's just exactly what it is, has been allowed to get to this point is a symptom of serious underlying problems that includes a colossal failure to educate several generations of Americans about our history and the values and principles on which the country was built.  Education has long been promoted as the remedy to the problems of humanity that lead to the kind of political and social collapse represented by Trumpism.  We're now going to see if our values, our Constitution and our government of, by and for the people will survive.  

Mike Johnson's Theology is Wrong

Mike Johnson on Morning Joe: "There's So Much Hypocrisy Here"  

As I look through my New Testament, a New Revised Standard Version translation, I find no place where God has made, or offered, a covenant relationship, during this new covenant with Jesus Christ, to any nation or country or specific ethnic or racial people group.  Johnson's use of the term "collective sin of America" is the biggest indication of his error.  Sin, in the Christian gospel, cannot be "collective."  

"For all have sinned," says the Apostle Paul, "and fall short of the glory of God."  And he goes on to point out where the accountability for that falls. 

"Why do you pass judgment on your brother or sister?  Or you, why do you despise your brother or sister?  For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.  For it is written, 'As I live,' says the Lord, 'every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall give praise to God.'  So then, each of us will be accountable to God."  Paul, the Apostle, to the Christians at Rome, 14:10-12, NRSV

The only covenant relationship, leading to the development of a theocratic monarchy, that God ever offered to any specific group was the one he offered to the children of Israel, the Abrahamic covenant of the Old Testament that designated the descendants of Abraham as God's chosen people.  He did that for the purpose of revealing himself, and for offering the same kind of redemption to the rest of the world.  In Christian theology, Jesus and the Christian gospel is the extension of that covenant, and it is based on individual conviction of sin, repentance and forgiveness, not the collective behavior of countries. 

God does not promise countries or nations that if a majority of their citizens practice Christianity, and if those Christians keep the whole country in line morally, he will find a way to bless them, blessing, in this particular context always meaning "financial prosperity."  The Old Testament does indeed teach this principle, applying it directly to the Abrahamic covenant, and there are multiple narratives about the nation of Israel, God's chosen people, the only nation with which this kind of theocratic covenant was ever made in the biblical narrative, experiencing peace and prosperity when their people were, collectively, believers in God, and experiencing judgment, at the hands of surrounding enemies, when their faithfulness waned. 

But Jesus made it clear that the new covenant, in his name, didn't work that way.  There's no place anywhere in the Bible that offers the kind of theocratic relationship that existed between the Jewish people and God to any other country, ethnicity, nationality, race, or citizens of a country.  And there is no biblical teaching that defines the term "Christian nation," or that even hints at some kind of blessing of God to be bestowed upon countries that have a high number of Christians among their population who are in charge of national morality.  

The Christian covenant is an individual one, based on individual conviction of sin, repentance and restoration, and has nothing to do with one's race, nationality or country of origin.  The church experimented with that through several centuries of state church history.  It didn't lead to conversion or conviction, only oppression and war.

Johnson's rhetoric is very common among Evangelicals who base their worldview on the assumption that the covenant relationship described in the Old Testament between God and Israel also applies to the United States.  It's also a way to indirectly blame their political opposition for the immorality and claim they're the ones dragging the country down, and to justify their desire to use the power of government to enforce a morality that they can't seem to maintain by depending on God's spiritual power alone.  

Supporting Donald Trump, even as a secular politician, would be a position that runs counter to everything Johnson is claiming.  He's lamenting the low moral state of America, and ignoring one of the causes of it.  It is completely inconsistent to claim that America is reaching new moral lows while ignoring one of its moral lows.  

If Speaker Johnson is looking for hypocrisy, he needs to face a mirror.  

  

Is Peace in the Middle East Beyond the Resolution Power of Human Intellect and Reason?

It would seem so.  

For all of the arrogance embedded in criticism of religion by humanist intellectuals who believe that the human intellect is the highest form of intelligence in the universe, and that humanity is capable, with educated reason, of resolving all of its own problems, it seems this problem, which I will generally identify as the continuous search for peace in the Middle East, is one that progressive intellectualism cannot solve.  What's been done is done.  

Since the First World War, Palestine has been embroiled in continuous violence that only gets worse.  There are those among both the Israeli population and the Arabic Palestinian population who believe that peace is possible, and that the problems caused by the presence of a Jewish political state in the Middle East can be resolved.  Understanding that it is a matter of Israeli security being tied to Palestinian justice, they are open minded when it comes to possible solutions, realizing the depth of the prejudice, bigotry and hatred that is involved.  

What a Solution Might Look Like

The United States is certainly not perfect when it comes to the strength in unity of its own population.  But, under our Constitutional democracy, there is a wide diversity among the population.  Even though there are those who think the white population is entitled, that's not the way it is.  Yes, we dispossessed the native population, and engaged in the slave trade.  We have not always been welcoming or inviting to many of those who saw our country as their only refuge from violence and death.  For better or for worse, we are what we are, history and all.  

But, we are one nation, under one government.  Within our boundaries, people who represent virtually every cultural, ethnic, racial and religious background live in relative peace, individual rights protected by the Constitution.  And despite the provincial bigotry that prevails, due mainly to ignorance, what we have works because as a people, a majority of Americans are interested in making it work.  It's who we are.  And we have it as long as we, the people, are willing to work for its preservation.  

So instead of trying, and continuously failing, to come to some kind of "two-state solution" to the violence in the Middle East, caused by the relatively rapid settlement of European Jews following the Holocaust, why not establish one state, in which all of the regions ethnic and religious groups could live peacefully, under democracy?  Maybe the time has passed for that, though the relationships that seem to be developing between Israel and other Middle Eastern countries were encouraging, up to the point of the Hamas attack and events in Gaza.  

The dispossessing of the population that lived in Palestine as the state of Israel was created is an ongoing problem, as is the religious bigotry that creates the hatred and keeps it going.  Would religious liberty fix that?  We've lived under it in this country for 247 years, not perfectly but as well as can be expected under the circumstances.  Eliminating the effect of religiously-inspired violence and bigotry is in the domain of progressive intellectualism, is it not?  A secular government, separated from religion and religious institutions, with the law equally and fairly applied, should have the means to keep the peace in a religiously and culturally diverse society.  

In the United States, Americans are now learning lessons about the weaknesses and the faults of a Constitutional Democracy that, when it was founded, leaned more on the fear of the founders that the nation would return to monarchy than on the fear of threats from internal ideology figuring out how to overthrow a government using its own powers of office.  The constitution of a single middle eastern state in which both the Jewish and Arabic populations could peacefully co-exist would have to be iron-clad, with plenty of willing defenders in the government as well as the military.  That would, indeed, be an idealistic accomplishment, since the security and safety of Jewish and Arabic Americans is somewhat in question now, in this country. In the tiny space between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean sea, and between Lebanon and the Negev Desert, it would be a monumental achievement.  

Wishful Thinking, but More Practical Solutions Are Necessary

Oppression breeds desperation leading to a sense of powerlessness which leads to violence.  It's hard to say whether groups like Hamas or Hezbollah would ever have formed if a free state democracy in the Middle East had simply included the Arab population already residing there, instead of dispossessing them and putting them into what amounts to closed off reservations with restricted access.  There's no place for terrorism, and it must be combatted and eliminated.  Removing what terrorists consider to be their mission and purpose is the easiest way to do this.  

Listening to, and empowering those who are there, who are Palestinian or Jewish, and who have the desire for peaceful co-existence and mutual respect, is necessary.  Determining what is just for Palestinians and what is security for Israelis is also necessary.  Can those things be accomplished, at least, sufficiently enough to make peace work?  Is there willingness, enough at least, to try?    

This Week in Politics: Polls, an Off-Year Election, and the GOP Doubles Down on Losing Strategy

As late as Thursday evening, on Alex Wagner's MSNBC time, conversation was still focusing on the New York Times-Siena College, CBS and CNN polls that came out over the previous weekend, suggesting, from however they decided to factor the data they collected, that Donald Trump might have a slight lead over Joe Biden in five of six battleground states.  Several other polls from that same period of time came up with a different conclusion from their factoring of the data, including one from a marketing and law firm in Arizona that suggested Biden might be ahead by as much as 10 points in that state, but the media, almost all of them, seemed determined to create a laser focus on these three polls.  

I'll give credit where credit is due.  Jen Psaki and Nicole Wallace, both of MSNBC, both with experience working inside a Presidential administration on, among other things, diseminating information from polling data, pointed out inconsistencies and flaws in the data that was reported, and noted that these polls in particular, especially the Times-Siena, have had a poor record of accuracy with their numbers this far ahead of an election.  Good for them, and for whoever was listening.  

Apparently, the Biden Administration was also annoyed by the incessant nattering of negativity, and issued their own statement, pointing out that the coverage seemed one sided, since the data wasn't conclusive.  But the fascination with these polls, and somehow getting some kind of jump on everyone else's reporting, led to some embarassing moments for those who kept harping on them. 

An Election is Actual Voter Data, but a Poll is Only Speculation  

Tuesday night rolled around, and some news outlets had been bold enough to cast doubt over potential election results in Virginia, Kentucky and Ohio, as a result of the data from these polls, hinting that a poor showing by Democrats would be a bad omen for Biden's campaign.  Conversely, if that were the case, it seems that a good night for Democrats would be good news for the strength of Biden's campaign, and of his position, since he is the undisputed leader of the Democratic party right now and that would be an accurate statement.  Only a couple of commentators, MSNBC again, seemed willing to take that step.  

Solid wins for Democrats materialized very early in the evening.  Before Lawrence O'Donnell had the opportunity to come on at 9:00 p.m. central time and do an excellent job of demonstrating how these wins were indicators of the strength of Biden's administration and its achievements, the results had already conformed it.  Even in Mississippi, where the Democratic candidate for governor lost, the vote totals he secured, compared to the previous Presidential races, were an impressive display of Democratic party advances and strength.  

So much for the polls, right?  Well, no.  A smashing humiliation of the Republican party aside, news commentators, who apparently didn't plan very well ahead, and didn't anticipate the impact of those election results, turned back for another go at the polls.  Alex Wagner even gave some time to trying to draw comparisons and contrasts between the data from the polls and the results of the election and left a lot of conclusions hanging, including the most obvious one, that these polls are outliers.   

A Real Conclusion

I'm only a journalism minor, and an amateur.  My observations don't follow the dictates of a commercial news outlet's sense of direction.  What I've noticed is that since Joe Biden won the Presidency in 2020, and the Democrats took full control of Congress at the same time, the Republicans have had some of the toughest election battles in, literally decades.  There are few bright spots that they can point to and say, "here's a sign we're on the rebound."  They eked out a narrow majority in the house, flipping fewer seats than the minority party has achieved in mid-term elections going back to even before the Reagan Adminisration.  And it isn't improving, it's getting worse, and eating into their majorities in states that have long been red.  

What can I conclude about this week?  The election results do not match the media's evaluation of the position of the Biden administration and his candidacy for President.  

Some pollsters probably need to revamp and re-evaluate their factoring methods, and their gathering of data.  Some news commentators and news outlets need to spend some time changing their narrative.  

The Republican Party needs to figure out what went wrong and make adjustments.  And that should leave us all rolling on the floor, laughing.  

Doubling Down on a Losing Agenda

It didn't take the GOP very long to go right back to the mess that cost them dearly in 2020, and again in 2022, and now in 2023.  One day.  On Wednesday, the Republican candidates for President, sans the alleged front-runner, doubled down on themes that voters have repeatedly told them, with their ballots, will not win elections.  Not only that, but voters also told them, through a series of local elections, that their attempts to suppress votes and subvert the will of the people will not be tolerated either.  

The Republican party is losing for several very clear reasons.  One, it is still dominated by Trump, and as long as that is the case, it will not win elections, no matter what the polls say.  The extremism, while appearing to have a following among hard core Trumpie supporters, doesn't appeal to anyone who isn't a hard core Trumpie, and that's a clear majority of the population and the electorate.  So no matter what the "factoring" issues might be, to get numbers to move in a particular direction, it is pretty obvious that a clear majority of those who go to the polls will not support anything associated with the Trump brand.  

At the ballot box, by the way, that involves the vast majority of Democrats, somewhere around 65% of Independent voters, and about 10% of Republicans.  Stick that in your poll data and smoke it 

The biggest mistake the current dysfunctional Supreme Court ever made was to wade into politics and overturn Roe v. Wade.  Regardless of which side of the issue one takes, messing with settled law, that has been established for 50 years, is not a good political move.  It has not achieved the purpose those conservatives who have advocated for its overturning envisioned, and it now, very clearly, will not achieve that goal.  I have little doubt that if the issue appeared on the ballot as an initiative in Florida or Texas, voters would put the right to choose right back into the law.  

And we haven't even come to the issue of the economy.  Yes, the Biden administration is having quite a time dealing with inflation, and perceptions of an economy that isn't working.  But inflation doesn't happen in a functioning economy, it's a symptom of prosperity and growth.  That's why raising interest rates, which slows the economy down, is one solution to slowing the inflation rate.  The Biden adminstration has succeeded in doing that, by the way, precariously but it's working.  

What is it that the Republicans have proposed to deal with the problem?  That is, if they have time and can get to it between their frivilous time wasting in Congress right now.  I haven't heard anything yet, so post a comment and let me know if they ever come up with something productive and useful.  Right now, they're mired in pointless minutia. 

Another Loser Joins the Presidential Race

And what a perfect week it was for Jill Stein to decide that she will accept the Green Party's nomination for President once again.  If there's a candidacy with less direction and purpose than Donald Trump's, it would be this one.  

The Green Party has some good ideas, but has no idea at all how to implement them.  It seems they exist for "getting their ideas out there," but fall very short of even that goal, much less actually achieving something.   Stein successfully helped Trump win the White House in 2016 by syphoning off enough votes that could have gone to Hillary Clinton in the three states she needed to win.  Now in all fairness, it's not a foregone conclusion that Green party voters would have picked Clinton.  Stein's fascination with and closeness to Putin casts some suspicion on her motives and those who are aware of this aren't likely to support a Democrat.  But what is clear is that a Clinton presidency would have been far more sympathetic to, and far more willing to listen to Green party issues, than Trump would be, and that makes them pretty darn stupid for running a candidate of their own.  

From Trump, the Green Party gets contempt and less than nothing, and so nominating Stein again is a demonstration of bithering ignorance and stupidity.  Albert Einstein said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.  Jill Stein will run again, will get fewer votes this time than she got last time, a prediction you can take to the bank without a single poll to support it, and she will lose again.  That's insane.  A vote for her is a vote for Trump and that theme needs to be at the core of the Democratic party's political campaign in 2024.  

And We Move Forward with Optimism

For Democrats, it was a great week.  It's time, as Paul Waldman of the Washington Post said on Wednesday, for Democrats to start trusting the courage of their convictions, and show some confidence in their strength.  For all of the hoopla surrounding Trump, and the media's fascination with how it is that people think that's something of value, the Democrats have had the most success against Republicans in politics since Trump has co-opted the party's politics.  

Is Media Suppression of Biden Achievements, and their "Doom and Gloom" Prognostications Deliberate?

We keep hearing about how terrible things are for Democrats: how they've alienated working class whites, how President Joe Biden is destined to lose and how they can't do anything right.  Yet in election after election, Democrats rack up victory after victory.  If they keep winning, it might just get even the most fainthearted Democrats to finally trust the courage of their convictions. --Paul Waldman, Author and Commentator for the Washington Post, MSNBC, November 8, 2023

Here's the full article, Virginia Just Showed Democrats the Way to Win

All day Tuesday, I had to avoid the temptation to click on news sites just to see if anyone had any predictions, news, or insights as to how key elections were going in the states that got a lot of publicity.  American politics is quite predictable, and in spite of polling data that is not very consistent, and reflects an "all over the place" kind of feeling, at least until election day, and accountability, draws close.  After the weekend news about the poll results that came out, I was anxious about what might transpire in the elections that Democrats were pointing to as indicators of where things are headed in 2024, and not wanting to engage with Republicans who would be gloating over wins.  

Jen Psaki and Nicole Wallace helped relieve a little of the tension I was feeling about the polls, by pointing out, among other things, similar polling data from a year prior to the mid-term elections during which, specifically, CNN and the New York Times polls used the phrase "red wave" that some Republican politicians were gloating about.  Psaki also had some insights with regards as to how the White House would take the information, and what they would be doing with it, and was clear that it really had no bearing, at this point, on real election results.  Wallace more or less said the same things, from her own experience in the Bush administration, noting that information about voter preferences goes far deeper than what any single poll that gets reported on television has to say.  

But whatever anxiety I might have had, it was relieved very quickly by yesterday's election results. 

A Great Night's Sleep

Long before bedtime, it became apparent that the news about the weekend polls would be covered up and largely discredited by some whopping Democratic party election wins.  Pollsters, and the news media, had cast a shadow of doubt over this off-year election, at least as far as Democrats are concerned, and made an effort to associate what they are claiming is the Biden Administration's unpopularity with potential Republican victories in key elections.  

In spite of their attempts, nothing resembling the gloom and doom they tried to spread over the weekend showed up in those election results.  In Kentucky and Ohio, red states in the last several elections, Democrats won big. I was concerned, again mainly from news reporting, that Virginia might not deliver.  And I wasn't expecting much from Mississippi, where we got better news than one might think in a Democratic candidate's loss.  

It was all over well before Lawrence O'Donnell came on at nine.  I slept soundly. 

Even Mississippi, where the Democratic candidate for governor, Brandon Presley, lost to Tate Reeves, there was good news.  Reeves barely won in a state Trump won by 12 points in 2020, and where hard line conservative, Evangelical whites are a dominant constituency.  It turns out that it wasn't as much of a long shot as some people thought, and it shows that Democrats can activate their constituents and get them to the polls. 

Everywhere else, it was just an overwhelming victory for Democrats and issues that the party and its candidates support, in mostly red territory.  Coupled with the Democratic victory this past summer that elected Janet Protasiewicz to Wisconsin's Supreme Court, a host of other special elections, the mid-terms in 2022, and the Presidential election in 2020, election results in favor of Democrats are dominant.  And that calls any polling data that doesn't match up with what's happening in the ballot box into question. 

Controlling the Narrative and Getting the Message Out

Joe Biden's predecessor gets far more media attention than he does.  He's the single most accomplished President in the White House going back to Lyndon Johnson, or at least to Barack Obama, but you'd never know it from news coverage.  When there is coverage, it's critical, it involves the question of his age, or it is bad news in the polls about his job approval, and it rarely focuses on the benefits of his legislative achievements as President.  After Tuesday, that almost looks deliberate.  

Tuesday was great news for Biden and for his chances of being re-elected.  Democrats won on the issues and they won with candidates who articulate their position strongly and clearly.  There's not any other message that can come from those results, except that Ohio is definitely in play and its electoral votes on Biden's behalf is not wishful speculation, but a very real possibility.  It's pretty clear that some media outlets were preparing to tie any Democratic failures directly to Biden.  After the fact, there are few of them who are tying Tuesday's success to Biden.  They don't like him and they're not cutting him any slack.  

It appears what people do in the voting booth isn't what they're telling pollsters they're going to do.  It also appears that when certain news media sources want to make a critical point about the President, they'll go looking for proof after they've drawn their conclusions.  Most of the mainstream media, it appears, wants to see the Democrats nominate someone other than Biden.  Public opinion can be manipulated, when news reporting becomes propaganda, and I have to wonder, out loud, whether that's not what's happening here.  

The reports regarding the New York Times-Sienna College poll, CNN and CBS news that came out last weekend actually got a rather terse response from the Biden Administration, which pointed to several other polls, six or seven altogether, that showed Biden with a lead, in most cases outside the margin of error.  There's an answer to a question in that response that I'd like to hear from the media:  Why cherry pick polls that have Trump in the lead instead of reporting that this is very early, and for various reasons, polls are all over the place.  Psaki and Wallace, from their experience inside Presidential administrations, were able to point out the flaws and inaccuracies in the details, so why couldn't other news sources do the same?  That's why I think this is starting to look deliberate.  

Democrats:  Trust the Courage of Your Convictions! 

Of all of the Democrats who ran for President in 2020, Joe Biden is the most representative of the party's values.  He's had the experience of making, and learning from, mistakes, of having to adjust personal feelings and preferences to serve the constituency, and is still enough of the old-fashioned politician to believe that negotiation and compromise is essential to effective government.  Anyone who thinks he's too old is not paying attention.  I can't think of a better image of this President than the walk he took with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy from the government buildings through the streets of Kyiv, after a ten hour train ride in a war zone.  Without hesitation, he flew to Israel for direct talks with Netanyahu after the Hamas attack.  Age is not an issue with Joe Biden.  

Even if it was, any worries about a transition have been dispelled by the competence of Vice President Harris.  This country is in good hands.  

I'd be willing to invest some cash on a bet that if the Presidential election had been held this past Tuesday, Joe Biden would have easily won a landslide on issues that are based on the convictions of the Democratic party.  And that's my emphasis, in agreement with Waldman's opinion piece.  If a Democrat can win re-election as governor of Kentucky, that tells me that a Democrat can carry the state and get its electoral votes.  Since it's one of the first states to be called on election night, it would be nice to see the shock waves that would be caused if its squiggly little shape was colored blue.  

As a party, it seems we still have issues with control of the narrative.  If this is a deliberate attempt by the media to smear the President and try to bring about some kind of change of candidate, then the DNC needs to confront that, and the Biden campaign, which has already responded, needs to figure out a way to get on top of it.  

I'm tremendously disappointed in the manner in which the justice system in this country is working, with regard to a former President who tried to subvert the Constitution, steal and election and stay in office after the will of the people voted him out.  I'm disappointed that we had enough people in the electorate who either couldn't see through his phony image, or wanted something that destructive in the presidency to vote for him and put him in office in the first place.  But this hasn't worked the way it should have, from the very beginning, and it remains to be seen if convictions can stop it before the Republican party destroys itself with another candidacy.  

Nevertheless, I think President Biden is the best choice for President, and I think he will win re-election, especially if the indicted, failed ex-president is the Republican nominee, because Biden is a Democrat who trusts the courage of his convictions.  

Some Initiative can end this Tragedy

It's not anti-Semitic to be opposed to further bombing of Gaza.  We've had more than enough bloodshed and violence.  It is time for both sides to stop.  

The Hamas attack on Israel was inexcusable terrorism, and everyone associated with it needs to be brought to justice.  However that is achieved, it should not be at the expense of what looks like a vengeful attack against civilians, just because they're not big supporters of Israel's right to exist.  Gaza is a relatively small area, and bombing civilian housing, hospitals, schools and places of worship is not acceptable practice for any reason. It was certainly not acceptable when Hamas crossed the border into Israel and perpetrated an act of terrorism against the Israelis in the various kibbutzim in its southern district.  It should not be acceptable going the other direction, either.  This has gone on long enough.  

Former President Obama gave a pretty good rundown of the historical circumstances that have been responsible for the violence and bloodshed that has taken place, basically since the region transferred from the imperial rule of the Ottoman Turks to the imperial rule of the British empire in 1917.  

"No one is blameless," was the key statement he made, among other comments from wisdom and experienced gained from eight years as President of the United States.  

Could We Not Have Known? 

There's no going back from here, that's obvious.  Whoever thought that it would be a good idea to open Palestine to almost unlimited Jewish immigration wasn't paying attention to the circumstances, or they thought that this could somehow be controlled in the way that things are always controlled by imperial power, by force.  The Arab Palestinians have more or less been treated the same way native Americans were treated over the course of our history, as inferior people predestined by God to be in the way of a favored, chosen people, worth less because of their ethnicity, color of skin, and culture, including religion.  

Ironically, for the most part, the Jewish population isn't monolithic in their feelings about this issue, and their own past experiences, especially those who are descendants of Holocaust survivors, don't always like the approach to this.  There's a wide variance of opinion among the Jewish population of Israel, including many who are willing to take the steps necessesary to bring about security and peace.  Some of that comes from religious tradition, though most Jewish people in Israel aren't necessarily religious.  A lot of it is from their own past experiences with anti-Semitism.  I like the optimism of those who, in the face of terrorism, think that a peaceful solution is possible.  

There are those among the Evangelical Christian community who go so far as to use modern day eschatology, from a futurist perspective, to justify their support for the violence and war that takes place in the middle east.  Taking prophetic portions of the Bible completely out of context, putting them in a modern historical setting for which they were not written and not meant to address, they've used this false prophecy to justify the dispossession of Arabs in Palestine from the homes and land their ancestors have lived on for 2,000 years.  That stands against every principle of the Christian gospel.  It is antichrist.

Any form of interpretation of Christianity that involves violence to achieve God's perceived will is heretical and anti-Christian.  And futurist eschatology falls in that category.  Jesus himself placed the context for interpretation of all the prophecy and law in the Old Testament and under the old covenant when he declared that he was the fulfillment of all of it, law and prophets, and that not one jot or tittle of it would pass away until all is accomplished.  His resurrection was the accomplishment of it, and the symbol of the old covenant, the Temple in Jerusalem, was levelled in 70 A.D. by the Romans.  

But, here we are, with the resources of the western World War 2 allies basically devoted to establishment of a Jewish political state in the middle east, on land occupied by Arabs whose ancestry also entitles them to the land, under the Abrahamic covenant.  Steps cannot be retraced, and the solution to the problem, which was to put the Palestinian population into small strips of land on the West Bank and in Gaza, has only created Palestinian misery, and a big security problem for Israel.  Like Bernie Sanders, and Santita Jackson, I believe Israel's security is married to justice for the Palestinians.  

That the resources and intelligence of two of the world's great powers--and the British should still be held accountable for creating this in the first place--cannot come up with a resolution, along with the leaders of the Palestinian people, not the terrorists, is not a reasonable expectation.  We can, and we must, find a workable solution acceptable as just to the Arabic Palestinians, and secure to the Jewish population of Israel.  

It's a key point of Christianity, a timeless principle without exception.  "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the Children of God."  Jesus Christ, recorded in Matthew 5:9.  So where are the politicians who claim that the Bible is their worldview?

We Can't Repeat Historical Mistakes

Hamas perpetrated terrorism, using Gaza as an operational base.  No doubt, there are many Palestinians in Gaza who see Hamas sympathetically, as a result of their own oppression.  That doesn't excuse the terrorist tactics.  Terrorism is a contributing factor to the problems and it must be brought to full and complete justice.  That's the first step toward resolution of this problem.  

There is no going back.  So, for the sake of peace, something we claim to value along with the sanctity of human life, there must be a reasonable way to stop these senseless attacks on Israel and on the Palestinians, and make peace.  Terrorism must be outlawed and brought to justice, and neutralized by taking away the conditions that have perpetuated it and led it to be welcomed as an ally and a rescue operation.  The rest of the world must be brought to an understanding of this.  

This will take a long, long time.  In the meantime, someone must broker a cease-fire and use the means available to preserve the peace.  The United States has that kind of power.  It is time to use it to save lives.  

A Word from one of the Christian Apostles

I'm just going to end with this.  These words, from the early church apostle, John, representing the core value of the Christian faith, may provide some hope and comfort, if properly applied. 

God is love and those who abide in love abide in God and God abides in them.  Love has been perfected among us in this: that we may have boldness on the day of judgment, because as he is, so are we in this world.  There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear; for fear has to do with punishment and whoever fears has not reached perfection in love.  We love because he first loved us.  Those who say, "I love God," and hate their brothers and sisters are liars; for those who do not love a brother or sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God whom they have not seen.  

The commandment we have from him is this:  those who love God must love their brothers and sisters also.  

Hatred is evil.  

 

Follow-up on the Weekend Polling Data: No Hand-Wringing Here, Just Caution

In yesterday's post, Weekend Polls are a Wake-Up Call for Democrats, the Signal Press acknowledged the inaccuracy of early polling data, compared with the prior record of pollsters.  It's a year away, all of the polls are within their margins of error, and it is too early to start wringing hands and conceding elections that are a long way off.  

But, given Trump's record, the prosecutions, his post-election behavior and his open attempts to steal a legitimate, fair election, combined with his continued harping about it as the only theme he has for a campaign for re-election, I think we should be disturbed by the fact that Biden is not 20 percentage points ahead at this point, and running away with it.  That is concerning, considering that the President has been among the most successful and accomplished in several decades, and Trump has been the most corrupt.  

I have confidence that the Biden campaign staff, the President himself, and the Democratic party, are looking at all of this, analyzing it and figuring out how to approach the data they consider credible.  Personally,  I will do everything I can do, from blogging and promoting the blog, to engaging on social media, to talking to people, to making phone calls, knocking on doors and committing a percentage of my income to campaign donations, to make sure that Biden gets a second term, and the Democrats get control of of both houses.  We can't let up and we have to make the right choices.  There's too much at stake. 

Part of that process means taking a look at what is happening, being realistic about it, and changing what needs to be changed.  

Perception can be Deceiving

Trying to figure out why the prosecutions and information about Trump's corruption, and there's a mountain of damning evidence, doesn't seem to contribute to peeling off any of his core support can be frustrating.  But it's pretty simple.  They see this as political revenge for his winning in 2016 and as an attempt to keep him off the ballot.  They've already looked past the fraud and corruption that is characteristic of his entire adult life and passed on all of that to make deals to get what they want in exchange for feeding his power hungry cravings.  The charges, upcoming trials and all of the information about his corruption have likely convinced everyone who see it for what it is.  

I've even heard some Democratic commentators say that maybe it is too much, and he should be let off the hook in order to focus more on defeating him based on his incompetence and inability to function as President.  I was horrified to hear this, which amounts to a complete abandonment of American justice.  I'm already disgusted with the games that have been played by this, the foot dragging and the slowness of the process that runs counter to effective justice.  But this is where we are.  And playing the persecuted victim of a witch hunt is among the things that he can actually do well.  

Covering up Everything in the News Cycle

Yesterday's post mentioned the fact that Joe Biden is very likely the first President in modern American history to serve three years in office and be in the complete shadow of his predecessor with regard to media coverage.  The fact that many conservatives consider the mainstream media controlled by far left wing liberals is a laughable joke.  They are controlled by commercial interests and money and dependent on ratings.  So the soap opera and drama surrounding this totally corrupt and worldly former President gets two thirds of the time devoted to political coverage on every major network, and it's a 24 hour a day rerun on the outlets controlled by far right wing extremist conservatives.  

This is where Democrats lose the ability to control the narrative.  Hard line conservatives aren't paying attention to mainstream media anyway, that's no longer the most effective way to carry a political message to the people.  And until Democrats figure out how to get control of this again, and reduce the Trump soap opera to its rightful place while getting the President double the face time, this will be a nagging problem.  It is one of the reasons I believe Trump is still considered a viable candidate. 

The Effect of Foreign Relations

Ukraine, and now Israel-Hamas, would be turning into unmitigated disasters for the United States, as well as for those involved, if Trump were President.  But both of them have been the victims of the propaganda war that Republicans are controlling.  The rally in Washington this weekend should also have been a huge wake-up call to Democrats, and to the President.  The irony of the situation is that the Republican Party and Donald Trump are the sworn enemies of every single protester who participated in that protest.  A Trump Presidency would be devastating to both the Americans in the protest, and to the people of Gaza and any hope Palestinians might have for reprieve.  

But there they are, and that's not a good look for unity within the Democratic party, nor for American idealism and humanitarianism.  And it has the potential to be explosive come election time. 

There is an Erosion of Support 

Biden has only temporarily been able to shake the effect of a job approval rating hovering in the low 40% range.  The consistency that is showing up in most polls is that his approval is sagging among constituencies that are more progressive and further left, but that are going to be essential to unite to win the election.  That would include younger voters, under 35, African Americans and Latinos.  He needs more than 58% of the Latino vote, 78% of the black vote and 65% of the younger vote, which is where those numbers run pretty consistently across the board now, in order to win.  

Trump has given working class Americans absolutely no reason at all to vote for him.  He won in 2016 on the strength of their vote, and then turned around and sold them out in the first year of his Presidency with a tax cut for the very rich, saddling most of the working class with tax increases, reduction in government benefits and dropping wages.  And they still supported him in 2020, out of a lack of awareness, and because Republicans controlled the narrative enough to shift the focus to conservative social issues.  

The temporary effect of the shock of overturning Roe v. Wade is wearing off.  It helped Democrats avoid a red wave during the mid-terms, and it has helped Democrats win the lion's share of elections since then.  But more is needed if the President is to be re-assured of his re-election.  And if this poll does nothing else, I hope that it gets the attention of every Democrat in the Biden White House and in his campaign and gets them working on building back a coalition that clearly needs shoring up.  

A Little Optimism Goes a Long Way

These are the kind of moments that turn things around.  The fact that everything going on around Trump should be giving Biden a 20 point lead means that the potential is still there for that to happen.  People need to find this out on their own terms.  Trump isn't gaining support, and his negative numbers don't get smaller.  But in the midst of inflation, expanding war and a lot of social confusion, the Democrats need to get their message out and demonstrate their commitment to democracy and to the people.  So here, in what's going on, is the motivation to get this moving, now.  

The Biden Campaign will apparently be very well funded and capable of a ground game, especially in battleground states, that are necessary to the electoral college win.  He's outraising Trump by a considerable amount, and right now, not spending it on a primary run.  That's how Obama won in 2012 over Romney, who had a five point lead in the polls and was in control of all of the "battleground" states in November of 2011.  

Inevitably, Trump will do or say something to alienate potential marginal voters.  With two major trials coming up in the spring, where the potential for sabotaging himself is unlimited, no doubt there will be a lot of votes lost by Trump as a result.  He can't help it.  

But I would like to see the Biden Administration, hard upon this news, become more pro-active in reaching out and resolving problems that are election sticking points.  That would give those of us who are big supporters a measure of much needed confidence right about now.  Trump has nothing to offer any of the constituencies where there is apparent erosion of support for Biden at the moment.  They're not turning to Trump, they're asking for another Democrat to be the candidate.  And the message I see in that is for Biden to become the other Democrat they're looking for.  

Weekend Polls are a Wake Up Call for Democrats

Gaps and errors in polling date are more commonplace as an increasing number of pollsters try to make room for themselves in a growing marketplace.  Hard upon the inaccuracies of polling data in both 2020 and 2022, that many pollsters either corrected after the fact, or saw a trend coming and made a quick adjustment just before an election and then afterward claimed accuracy, we have a set of polling data coming out this weekend that shows Biden trailing Trump in key battleground states  

I remain unconvinced that half of the voters in this country would really cast a ballot for Trump, after the shenanigans he pulled to try and overturn an election and stay in office when voters sent him packing.  I have a hard time seeing how segments of Democratic voters, most of whom fall to the left of center, and would be far worse off under a Trump administration, would stay home on election day, effectively letting Trump win and defeating everything they are fighting to establish.  I don't believe younger voters are as fickle as some of the pollsters make them out to be, and that they do not understand what is at stake.  Nor do I believe that African American and Latino voters are turning to a party that is increasingly more openly racist and specifically bigoted against their interests. 

A Major Shift in Public Opinion Doesn't Just Happen Overnight 

Trump didn't lead in any polls over Biden a month ago. Not one. Now, all of a sudden, in a couple of weekend polls, he's ahead by three points, and ahead in five of six battleground states where Democrats swept the mid-term elections except, ironically, the one that was actually the closest in the 2020 election and in the mid-terms. And Trump, with a disapproval rating of 57% to 63% in virtually every poll, is the choice of 51% of voters?  How does that happen?  

My personal speculation, and I'll make this clear, is that it doesn't happen.  Pollsters are collecting data on a daily basis, and getting raw numbers without any real context all the time.  They all have their "factors" that they use to calculate, "scientifically," of course, their polling data.  A year away from the election, they are safe reporting just about anything they want to report.  There's no election by which to measure their accuracy.  So they can claim a small "margin of error," but it doesn't really matter because they're a year away from accountability.  That's why the polls "tighten up" before an election.  

A lot of them got caught with their pants down, so to speak, following the mid-terms in 2022.  After the fact, they were claiming to be "within the margin of error."  But it turns out that there was evidence of a lot of phony data floating around that skewed the composites and caused them to have to make adjustments for it after the fact.  I read the narratives on three composite polling sites the night before the mid-terms, and while a lot of the language is vague and obfuscating, "the odds say," "it is a high probability that," "there's a possibility this could change," they all left the clear impression that we were going to see a red wave in Congress, and a Republican-controlled Senate.  But couched in terms so that they could come back a few days later and say that they didn't predict that at all.  Such is the nature of what we're looking at here.  

Fox News polling has consistently put Biden ahead of Trump in battleground states and across the board.  I believe their purpose in doing that is to frighten their viewers into making sure they go to the polls and vote.  And while it may seem cynical to assign the motive of manipulation to pollsters, almost all of whom are funded by one party or the other, or by television networks looking for ratings that boost revenue, I remain unconvinced that they are all just trying to report facts and let us decide.  

Democrats and the President Do Not Have Control of the Narrative 

When has it ever been the case that the sitting President of the United States has not received the majority of the time major news networks devote to political coverage?  Yet, that has been the case since the first day Joe Biden moved into the White House.  His predecessor has received the lion's share of news coverage in the time the media devotes to political reporting.  I haven't seen an analysis of it, but I'm willing to bet that Trump gets three times more minutes on a daily basis than Biden does.  And that puts Republicans in the spotlight more than Democrats.  

The candidacy of former Vice President Pence, who failed to attract a following of even 1% of GOP voters, gets more coverage than Vice President Kamala Harris, who has been actively engaging with voters.  In proportion to the time he gets in the media, Trump should be the clear front runner and ahead by 30 points.  That's exactly why he stays in the lead in the GOP field, the media doesn't talk about anyone else.  

So there's the first order of business for Democrats, and for those who are going to work for the President's re-election.  Get the media coverage the President deserves.  Surely, there are Democrats in positions of leadership who can figure out how to do this.  There aren't as many people who watch mainstream media any more, but still, if two thirds of the political coverage is going to a former president then some stragegy is needed to get that to change.  The President's achievements, and whatever else it takes to get in front of cameras and make news, should be high on the agenda now. 

When they shut the government down, Democrats need to control the news coverage and get ahead of the messaging, making sure Republicans, not Democrats or Biden, get the full blame.  That's the GOP goal, pretty clear from how direct they are about it, so will Democrats do anything to put the blame for that squarely where it belongs and work to make it stick?  Remember, these are the people who tried to blame Democrats for McCarthy's downfall and the inability to secure a speaker of the house for weeks.  When do they get pilloried for that?  They haven't been so far.  

What's the Alternative? 

Four years of a Trump Presidency would be a dictatorship of white supremacist Christian nationalism.  That's the only way to describe it.  The Constitution would be a worthless scrap of paper, as would be the individual rights of any American who was not white, rich and conservative.  Crime would be a matter of definition, and those who have committed crimes against humanity and against the Constitution would be in charge.  Convincing Americans this is where things were headed after Trump's first election, and where they would go if he ever gets back in the White House is the task at hand.  I hope there are people in the party who see this, are up for it, and are willing to make this an ongoing theme.  

All that Democrats identify as wrong with House Speaker Mike Johnson's ideology and approach to governing is exactly what we will get if Trump is elected.  

The strategy of the GOP following Trump's defeat was to figure out how to divide and conquer in order to win on the margins, using antiquated states' rights provisions and an outdated electoral college since they know they can't win elections at large.  They've done a fine job, getting Biden's age to the center of the divisiveness, turning the criminal proceedings against Trump into a political issue, rather than being about his crimes, and they've succeeded because they control the narrative, and they have media at their immediate disposal.  They are funding third-partiers, though up to this point, those they've found and are willing to help are fixated on Republican issues and would take more GOP voters away than Democrats.  

Case in point, RFK Junior has faded from coverage, once he decided to become independent.  He'd take more votes from the GOP and Trump than Democrats.  And all that "no-labels" talk about Manchin and Hunstman has also died down, at least for now, since they, too, would take more GOP voters.  

The alternative to a second Biden term is disaster for representative Democracy in America and for freedom and individual rights.  If these polls are even close to accurate, they signal a problem that we must begin to deal with right now.  This is a wake up call and we cannot waste any more time.  Public pressure needs to push for these trials to move forward and render verdicts.  But more than that, the pettiness and divisiveness that has crept in needs to stop, and we need to unite this country around a common enemy to its democracy and constitution.  Now is the time, Democrats, for all good men and women to come to the aid of their party.  

Israeli Security is Tied to Palestinian Justice

The credit for this statement can be given to several people who have been saying this for a long time.  I hear it from Santita Jackson, daughter of civil rights leader the Reverend Jesse Jackson, who points this out as something her father says frequently, and supports with Biblical principles that are part of the value system of the Christian gospel.  Last week, on her early morning talk show in Chicago, she had several guests, among them a professor from Ohio State University, who gave a crystal clear rundown of the history that led to the existence of the modern country of Israel. going back to its roots in British imperialism following the first world war.  

There are elements in the establishment of Israel that resemble most British imperialism.  Great Britain came to control the Middle East, from the Mediterranean to Iran, following the disastrous Treaty of Versailles that ended World War I.  It had been part of the Ottoman Empire, which sided with the Central Powers during the war against the interests of its enemy, Russia and the Czar.  To the victors go the spoils, and this oil and mineral rich territory, controlling trade routes between three continents, went to the British and French who then, in true imperialist fashion, proceeded to administer it in accordance with their own interests, and with little consideration of the interests of the inhabitants.  

The entire history of European imperialism, with the British Empire at the top of the list, is one of political upheaval for imperial interests, which includes treating native populations everywhere with a racism that brands them as uncivilized, uneducated and unworthy of any kind of life except one that works for the benefit of their "masters."  Much of the exploitation was done under the claim of "civilizing" the uncivilized and "Christianizing" the heathen.  It suited their interests to consider the growing Zionist movement among European Jews, with little to no consideration given to dispossessing the Arabic population of the region in order to facilitate the settlement of European Jews.  

That's a brief history of the region, not anywhere near doing it justice in terms of explaining all of the nuances of the wars, political maneuvers, outright destruction and the turning out of several million Palestinian Arabs from the homes and land their families and ancestors had occupied for two thousand years.  They had accepted the small Jewish community that already existed among them, and had generally accepted the small trickle of Jewish immigration that had occurred for centuries as Jews sought refuge from European pogroms aimed at keeping them segregated and limiting their economic influence.  But when this new development occurred, the only Arab leaders consulted were those who were backed by the financial benefits of being part of the empire.  

The Holocaust, of course, turned world attention, and sympathy, to Jewish survivors who decided to "return home" rather than continue to live in what appeared to be a very hostile, anti-Semitic environment in Europe.  Most westerners and Americans were completely ignorant of the fact that there had been no Jewish state in Palestine since the Hasmonean Dynasty fell around 37 B.C. and the events that transpired as a result of the establishment of the modern state of Israel, pushed and supported by world powers who had just won the Second World War, were the inevitable result.  Hence, the hostility and animosity of the surrounding Muslim populations toward Israel's presence.  They have a different perspective.  

Imperialism is difficult to resist, and impossible to undo.  The result of the powerlessness felt by those whose lives were discounted and disrespected in order to achieve the ends of foreign interests is that the oppressed eventually rise up and fight.  The last resort, when feelings of despair and futility blend with poverty and economic depravity is terrorism.  That's what we have seen in the development of militant groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, who only enjoy popular support because there appears to be no other way to get relief.  And as long as that futility, poverty and oppression exist, it will breed and produce terrorism that will always be a security threat to Israel.   

Bernie Sanders also puts this idea into understandable terms.  "For the sake of the Palestinian people, and for the people of Israel, we must create a process which ends the hatred, the cycle of violence, and allows all to live in peace and security," he said.  

There are some factors and influences in this that make finding any kind of solution an extremely difficult job.  

Christian Zionism

"Eschatology" is that part of Christian theology which deals with death, judgment, and the final destiny of the soul and of humankind.  Starting in the early 20th century, just before the First World War and the events leading to the emigration of European Jews to Palestine, a distinctive cluster of "end times" prophets began springing up, putting a futurist interpretation on the passages of the New Testament that they claim describe events leading to the second coming of Jesus Christ, and the end of the world.  Within this interpretation are various perspectives related to what I call an "Armageddon Calendar" which outlines specific events leading up to the second coming, including what some believe will be a disappearance of Christians from the earth known as the "rapture," and speculation about whether Jesus will come back before a seven year period known as "The Great Tribulation," in the middle of it, or after it is over.  

One of the key components of futurism, which is accepted by a majority of conservative Evangelicals, is that the political state of Israel, ruled over by Jews, within the historic boundaries of the tribal allocations of the Old Testament, must be in existence in order for the second coming to take place.  It must recognize Jerusalem as its capital, and there must be a restoration of the Jewish Temple at its original site.  

The problem with this view of eschatology, is that it is completely erroneous, contrary to even literal interpretations of the book of Revelation, from which most of it is drawn.  It ignores the author's clear contexts in setting the timetable for the prophecy in the book, and it ignores the words of Jesus himself, when it blends similar apocalyptically-worded passages from the Old Testament book of Daniel, incorrectly applying his prophetic words, which Jesus clearly says he fulfilled by his first coming, to the second coming and the end times of the world.  

What allows those who hold to this view to set aside the core values of the Christian gospel and lose their claim that all human life is sacred, and that all human beings are created by God in his image and are, therefore, the children of God, is a heresy known as "dispensationalism."  This compartmentalizes interpreting various parts of the book of Revelation, claiming that God put human history into specific periods with boundaries around them, known as "dispensations," and that the gospel of Jesus Christ is set aside in the last dispensation in order to bring about his second coming.  It provides justification for the destruction of the enemies of Israel, as being God's judgment.  So, in their mind, there's no need to consider the oppression of the Palestinians as anything but a necessity to usher in the return of Jesus.  

Not all Christians share that view of eschatology.  However, it does have an influence on American politics, with the United States being the primary world power supporting Israel, and that affects the ability to provide the kind of justice for Palestinians that would bring peace and security to Israel.  It's an influence on the root problem.  

No Justification for Terrorism

There's no justification whatsoever for the Hamas attack on Israeli civilians on October 7.  The attack achieved its purpose.  It created surprise, inflicted pain and suffering, it created a renewed sense of insecurity and fear across the whole country of Israel, and it got the attention of the world focused on Gaza.  Under Netanyahu, the planners expected a quick and violent retribution, missiles raining down on Gaza, and a military invasion at a high cost of civilian lives, and a hopeful turn of world opinion away from favoring Israel.  

It was an exhibition of complete evil through everything that it accomplished, including the brutal deaths of more than a thousand Israeli civilians, the capture of hostages for whatever purpose deemed necessary.  It was a demonstration of contempt for the people of Gaza, knowing the past history of such attacks, Hamas made absolutely no provision for the protection of the people, half of whom are children.  If they are the governing authority in Gaza, then their failure in all aspects of protection, provision and safety is as criminal as their attack on Israel.  They bear the responsibility for the killing of innocents on both sides.  

Hamas would have no base of operation, nor would Hezbollah, if there were, as Bernie Sanders says, a "process that would end the hatred, the cycle of violence, and allows all people to live in peace and harmony."  

So how does that happen?  

An Appeal to Higher Values 

"Violence is not the Answer," Says Group of Muslim Imams, Jewish Rabbis and Christian Pastors, Gathered Together

Earlier this week, Santita Jackson's early morning talk show featured an interview with a Jewish woman and a Palestinian Muslim man, both in Oregon, both part of a group that comes together for solidarity and encouragement.  Both were mourning the story of this man's family, many of them killed at once when a missile hit their home in Gaza.  That conversation exhibited a very high level of understanding on the part of both people, almost miraculous when the circumstances are considered.  

The group featured in the link above is in Oregon, too, not Israel or Gaza.  It's a long way away from the violence, physically, but there are connections there to people on both sides.  The fact that these people can exhibit that high level of understanding, come together, and have a civil discussion about what it will take to end the terror and violence is, in the political atmosphere we now live in, remarkable,  and if I may say so, miraculous.  

We have an imperial problem which cannot be undone.  So we must figure out how to live with it.  My responsibility, as an American, who doesn't experience the deprivation and despair of the Palestinians in Gaza or in the West Bank, and who doesn't experience the fear of an Israeli, is to support peace and contribute to security.  In the middle of this awful episode, there have been strong voices come out in favor, not of promoting things that lead to violence, but of promoting unity that neutralizes terror groups like Hamas and lets people live in peace.  If we're not willing to trust that's going to happen, instead of always believing the worst, then there is no hope for any of us.  

May the God of steadfastness and encouragement grant you to live in harmony with one another, in accordance with Jesus Christ, so that together with one voice you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.  Welcome one another, therefore, as Christ has welcomed you for the glory of God. May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace.  Apostle Paul, Romans 15, various verses. 

I don't believe God, as revealed by the writers of the Bible, is in or behind any theology that would lead to the kind of violence and terrorism we've seen.  Unfortunately, some people who claim to be his are behind it.  Most of us aren't in a place to have an effect on what's going on in the middle east, but we can affect what's going on here, and for us, this is where it starts.  Look what's happening in Oregon.  Three weeks ago, a young, six year old Palestinian boy was murdered in a Chicago suburb because of his race.  Jewish rabbis approached his family and asked to come to his funeral as a statement of solidarity with the family.  

It does, indeed, start with us.