MAGA Ideology and Political Beliefs Are Completely Incompatible With Christianity

 Baptist News Global: America's Biggest Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

Franklin Graham, executive director of Samaritan's Purse, and son of the late evangelist Billy Graham, is planning on delivering an Easter address from Jerusalem.  His presence there, along with the statements he is likely planning to make, are completely inappropriate for someone claiming to be a follower of Jesus Christ, as well as a minister of the Christian gospel.  

Israel is engaged in a vicious, bloody war with Hamas, an Islamic militant, terrorist group, a war which is now clearly disproportionate in its brutality and the murder of innocent civilians, to the October 7th attack that prompted it, and is now increasingly being seen as retaliatory revenge, rather than self-defense, against Hamas. Taking sides is a matter of politicial opinion, obviously.  There's no justification for what Hamas did in crossing into Israel and committing heinous acts of murder, assault, including sexual assault, and torture, against Israeli civilians.  But the magnitude of the murder of innocent civilians in Gaza, and the destructiveness of the attack, is also increasingly being seen around the world as unjustified, vengeful retaliation.  

Any Christian leader, following the principles of the Christian gospel, especially the direct revelation of Jesus himself, should take the side of a just peace.  

"Blessed are the peacemakers," Jesus is quoted as saying, in Matthew's gospel, 5:9, "for they shall be called the children of God." 

Graham takes Israel's side, based on his own particular interpretation of biblical eschatology, the study of what the Bible's writers had to say about "end times" events.  In a doctrinal perspective known as "dispensationalism," which is not a historical interpretation of what Jesus or the apostles had to say about end times events, there are periods of history in which the core principles and values of the Christian gospel can be set aside, and a different approach taken to justify things that are otherwise diametrically the opposite of any Christian practice or value.  Violence and hatred, condemned by Jesus to the point that the Apostle John calls those things "antichrist," become permissible in dispensationalism if they are used to accomplish the will of God.  And of course, it is those who believe in dispensationalism who also interpret, for everyone else, what is the "will of God." 

Graham's High Profile Amplifies His Error When it Comes to Israel 

Graham's eschatology, known as premillennial dispensationalism, a commonly held misinterpretation of the Bible among conservative Evangelicals, is in error.  But it's more than just holding a mistaken interpretation of Bible prophecy, something most Christians do.  It takes the position that the ancient Israel of the Old Testament will have a future place in events preceding the second coming of Christ, contradicting the very words of Christ himself when it comes to his establishment of a salvation covenant. It treats the people who have occupied the Holy Land for over 2,000 years as outsiders and enemies of God.  It neutralizes the influence that Christian leaders who have the kind of high profile platform that Graham does, in helping to actually resolve situations like the one now happening in Gaza.  

Former President Jimmy Carter, whose conservative, Evangelical, Baptist faith was a clear part of his personal identity, took his role as a peacemaker seriously when he was President, and used his influence, his "bully pulpit" as it is often called, to bring Israel and Egypt to the table to talk peace, and then brokered the peace deal which ended decades of warfare and violence, and which still stands today.  I consider that President Carter's greatest foreign policy achievement.  It was an act completely consistent with a historical interpretation of the Bible in its original context.  

And while I realize that Graham is not in political office, he does have a high profile because of his name, who his father was, and has used that to carve out a niche for himself in the American para-church industry through his "Samaritan's Purse" ministry.  He could certainly use his influence to call for peace.  At the very least, he could condemn all war and violence, as Christ did, putting pressure on American politicians who see this particular war as a means of either profiteering, or advancing a political agenda.  

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, and wait to see what he says in Jerusalem on Easter.  But, knowing his position in advance, and seeing some of the more despicable things he has endorsed and promoted with his support, I don't have much hope that he'll take the role of peacemaker.  His prior actions and words have removed that as a possibility.  The primary Christian peacemaker, with regard to the war in Gaza, has been a Catholic, not an Evangelical.  Pope Francis has left no room for doubting where he stands. 

"Do we really think we are building a better world in this way?" he said, during the Angelus in St. Peter's Square, adding, "Don't forget tormented Ukraine, where many peoplle die every day.  It's a place of great sorrow."  

The Pope sounds like he's articulating the Christian perspective that Jesus established when he gave the honor of being the children of God to peacemakers.  No other virtue of the Christian faith assigns that kind of honor. 

Graham is Helping Lead Evangelicals Over a Spiritual Cliff Into Apostasy

It's not just standing in support of a nation at war, using its military might to indiscriminately kill civilians by bombing and destroying their homes and their lives, well beyond any reasonable, expected boundary of response to the October 7th attack that most of them had nothing to do with, nor approved of happening.  We can recognize the illegitimacy of Hamas and condemn their actions, and their existence, without the kind of destruction and death occurring in Gaza, and Graham, as a Christian leader, should know better, and say so.  

But, as the article linked above, in Baptist News Global, by Nathan Empsall, an Episcopalian priest and executive director of Faithful America, points out, Graham's blend of theology and politics is "an odious interpretation of Christianity, and the threat it poses to religious liberty on which we depend."  

Graham's open endorsement of Trump is an embrace of all of the worldliness and corruption that comes with being a MAGA follower, and that is a polar opposite position to the Christian gospel, in every possible way.  Trump has openly denied the spiritual conviction and the need for repentance that is at the very center of Christian conversion in an Evangelical interpretation of it, and for Graham to support Trump in this open denial legitimately calls into question his motives, and the veracity of his doctrine and theology.

While Empsall lists a litany of Trump's anti-Biblical positions, and Graham's excuses for them, and endorsements of them, he also points out that Graham has abandoned even some of the more conservative points of his right-wing Evangelicalism to become nothing more than another droning Trump sycophant.  Evidence of this can be found in Graham's despicable statements he made during his recent trip to the border, coordinated to be there when Trump also showed up.  Graham dishonestly declared that immigration "is not a Bible issue," and erased the entire epistle of I John from the canon of scripture. 

Election Denial is a Main MAGA Theme, and a Denial of Truth, A Central Christian Theme

Aside from Trump's personal denial of having done anything requiring God's forgiveness, which is an open denial of the basis for Christian conversion, his election denial, and his subsequent orchestration of an attempt to overthrow the government and disrupt the peaceful transfer of power provided for in the Constitution, is a political position that no Christian can legitimately accept, and claim to be true to their faith.  

Not only is the claim that the election was stolen from him a very provable lie, the moral implications of believing this, and continuing to promote it, require complete abandonment of the very core principles in those verses in Matthew's gospel, in the 5th through 7th chapters, that form the foundation of Christian doctrine and theology and are the interpretive criteria for all of the rest of the Bible.  

This is a big lie, a national lie, a deception aimed at the destruction of American democracy.  It means the perpetrator of it is a liar, not to be trusted, with his own self interest involved. It has separated patriotic Americans, who know it is a lie, from insurrectionists and malcontents, who believe it. Those who continue to support Trump have to carry that baggage too, and they also become liars.  That includes every Evangelical Christian church leader, pastor, minister, preacher or evangelist who not only uses their pulpit to support Trump, but who also plan to vote for him secretly, even though they won't tell their congregation.  Voting for Trump is a compromise of Christian faith. whether it is out of conviction or ignorance.  Open support for him is open denial of Christian faith and practice.  

It's not possible to support, as a politician, a man who is a deceitful liar, especially using it to his own benefit, an openly admitted adulterer, a practice he not only celebrated and bragged about committing, but delighted in publicly humiliating all three of his wives.   He disrespects women, he is openly racist, the evidence of which continuously pops up in every speech he makes, carefully edited out by both Christian media and conservative, right wing propagandists.  He has consipired against the United States with foreign powers, openly violating the law in business dealings and as President, in attempted bribery of a sovereign state to elicit lies about his political opponent from them.  He organized and conducted an attempted overthrow of the government, based on his big lie, causing at least five deaths for which he is responsible as a murderer.  But the bottom line is not that he's done all of this, it is that he is openly and vocally unrepentant. 

His attack on American democracy was an insurrection against the government, a violation of two apostolic-authored passages in the New Testament,  the very same American democracy that has given Christians freedom in a way that never existed anywhere else in the history of the church, even in America prior to 1789.  And if America has become morally degenerate and spiritually bankrupt, as some right wing Evangelicals, including Franklin Graham, claim, they need to point the finger at their own ineffectiveness, including their pursuit of money and political power over the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ, as the reason for it. Their support for an evil, worldly man like Trump is evidence of their error and their spiritual blindness.  They persist in sin after having received the knowledge of the truth, as the unknown author of the book of Hebrews says.  In biblical terms, the MAGA cult has "spurned the Son of God, profaned the blood of the covenant by which they were sanctified and outraged the spirit of grace."  

Wake up, or lose it all.  

 

Justice Will Never be Served in America

When a judge won't stick to the rules that were highly publicized and which actually had Donald Trump scrambling, probably for the first time in his whole, corrupt life, ever, it's a clear indication that justice will never be served in the United States.  Is that too cynical?  Sorry.  It's the way I see things right now.  

People like Trump always get advantages, always beat the rules, always.  It's a fixed system.  I call it two Americas.  There's ordinary America, the one in which we live, the majority of the population that works for a living, doesn't have the luxury of living without being in debt, and either follows the rule of law, or faces the consequences immediately.  We have no influence, no power to direct actions on our own behalf, and suffer the consequences if we step out of line.  Our possessions are repossessed when we don't pay our bills, if the bank raises interest rates on our loans, we pay, and a whopping percentage of Americans suffer having their credit rating under the control of an unknown, faceless entity which exercises full control over their financial life.  We are powerless to change it, even if a mistake is made.  Too bad. 

Ironically, most Trump supporters live in ordinary America, which is one of the reasons why they have idolized Trump, turning him into a character that doesn't exist, and don't seem to mind when he gets away with breaking the law and cheating the rules.  They only wish they could do the same, and since he does, and gets away with it, they live vicariously through him.  Hillary Clinton referred to most of them as "deplorables," and many of them really do fit that description.  After watching them spew their blithering ignorance of politics, the world, history and just about everything else in interviews on social media, prior to entering one of his rallies, or voting for him in a primary or general election, I prefer the term "pathetic."  

A lot of us also fall in the same category, however, because we demonstrate implicit trust in a system over which we have almost no control, but which we keep insisting we can change.  We find political candidates who tell us they'll make a difference, We watch, in frustration, and get angry with our fellow ordinary Americans who have given up, and who are difficult, if not impossible, to convince that they need to do what we do, register, and go vote, because they have done it, and they have seen nothing change.  

I must admit, after seeing the disastrous, anti-patriotic, anti-democratic, anti-American attack on the Capitol, after four years of what was the worst Presidency in American history, provable by more than just the opinions of the eighty million Americans who voted the idiot out of office, I thought that justice would prevail, protect us from the imminent danger of an overthrow, and restore what has been undermined and destroyed since Rush Limbaugh started encouraging his audience to destroy America and make it over in his fascist dreams.  

What was I thinking?  

The ordinary Americans who participated in that insurrection and rebellion against American values and democratic government are, indeed, paying for their crimes.  At least, some of them are.  The system is not large enough to catch, and prosecute, them all.  So much for the rule of law.  But the fact of the matter is that there were perpetrators who were caught, including those who were in on the planning and conducting of the insurrection.  Most of them are ordinary Americans, so they have been through a trial, sentenced and are now in prison.  But the man who incited them, who sent the emails inviting them to Washington, who encouraged, supported and helped plan the whole thing, and then sent them marching down to the Capitol, he lives in the other America, and even though it has been more than three years, he has barely been indicted, and is using his influence to delay his trial, while running for President again, for the purpose of using those powers to get himself off for the crimes he committed.  

By now, if America worked the same for everybody, Trump, the organizer and traitorous perpetrator of the insurrection, should also be in prison, permanently disqualified from ever running for public office, stripped of all of his wealth necessary to pay for the damage he caused, and preparing to transition from prison into hell, where he belongs.  But unfortunately, many of those who I believed shared the same vision and trust in America that they had, have been his benefactors, backing away from any meaningful application of the rule of law in his case, granting the delays, obfuscating, dawdling, and doing everything they can to make sure the system doesn't bring justice.  

Something is wrong when we are able to know everything there is to know about the complete and utter bribery of one of our Supreme Court justices, and the reaction is simply some tongue-clicking, head shaking and doing absolutely zero about it. The justice system faced by the wealthy and powerful in this country is in a different America than the one the rest of us must face.  We can talk about the values of our nation, written in the Declaration of Independence and subsequently into the Constitution by our founding fathers, but the only value in America, for those who have plenty of it, is money.  On that side of this national divide, power is purchased and justice can be bought.  There are no democratic values, and there is no democracy.  Everyone who has it is equal, and the rest of us don't matter.  

We've been ideologically and politically hijacked.  The fact that a criminal can go without consequences, and can, in fact, be considered the presumptive nominee of one of our major political parties is a sign of just how hijacked America actually is, and it's because money is the currency that determines the values of the nation.  In the places where political power exists, it runs things.  It has created two Americas, and what happened in that New York courtroom today is an egregious example of exactly what the other America looks like.  

Now we're left with the increasingly more difficult task of convincing ourselves that when we go cast our ballots in November, it will make a difference.  Between now and then, will we see more egregious examples of a justice system that is powerless in the face of wealth and power, as we watch court cases against Trump fall by the wayside, or get delayed into the next century as those behind the scenes move heaven and earth to stop justice from happening to him or will someone, somewhere, actually have the courage and fortitude, and the love and respect for this country, its values and we, its people, to stand up, do the right thing, and send this antichrist fascist to prison where he belongs?  

Abuse Victims Still Persist in Spite of Opposition, Harassment Within a Christian Denomination

Baptist Standard: Why would survivors attend SBC meetings?

The false narratives of right wing politics that are aimed at the destruction of constitutional democracy have also brought conflict and controversy to a Christian denomination at the heart of American Evangelicalism, exposing an ugliness that is evidence of growing apostasy and the increasing influence of heresy.  The Southern Baptist Convention has had to deal with a sexual abuse scandal, and some gross incompetence in handling revelations of abuse as they were reported to its Executive Committee, revealed by an investigation published by the Houston Chronicle and the San Antonio Express-News in February of 2019. 

The investigation, Abuse of Faith, was limited only to sexual abuse cases among Southern Baptist church leaders in 20 states that had already been convicted, or had confessed, to the abuse.  The invsetigation only included those who had been convicted, or confessed to their abuse crimes, over 380 church leaders, mostly pastors and church staff, and involved over 700 victims.  There are many more cases which have been reported, but in which the perpetrators have not been charged.  

The tragedy of the abuse, occuring inside the largest conservative, Evangelical denomination in the United States, one which often arrogantly touts its own claims of Biblical fidelity in smug, self-righteousness over other Christians, is that many of the abusers were allowed to operate under the protection of secrecy, moving from one church to another without the second congregation knowing any of their past history as an abuser.  Cases reported to the denomination's executive committee went unheeded, as leaders claimed they had no authority to report anything because, in a Baptist denomination, local churches are "independent and autonomous."  

Resistance to Reform is Rooted in Right-Wing Political Rhetoric

The very structure of the Southern Baptist Convention has allowed the denomination to resist any possible solution to the problem.  As the evidence was exposed, and the scope of the abuse became clear, messengers from the churches to the denomination's annual meeting were horrified, not only with the scandal itself, but with the growing realization that much of the denomination's leadership knew about the abuse, and were acting out of self-preservation, rather than in any meaningful or effective way to deal with the problem.  

They voted, overwhelmingly, to take action that would help deal with the crisis, including establishing the means for local churches to access information to prevent abusers from moving undetected from church to church.  They set up training programs to help churches minister to those among their congregations who were victims.  They added the ability of the convention itself to remove churches from affiliation that refused to follow the guidelines for removing abusers from their congregations.  Then they put responsibility for carrying their wishes out in the hands of their traditional, and very backward, denominational bureaucracy.  That bureaucracy, made up of some of Southern Baptists' finest bureaucrats, many of them who serve on multiple committees and boards at the different levels of Baptist bureaucracy, achieved absolutely nothing effective over a three-year period of time, at a staggering cost to the denomination's reserve capital funds.  

What has developed is an ugliness that exposes a lack of any spiritual presence, guidance or depth among the leadership of the nation's largest Protestant denomination.  

The biggest concern is not for victims of abuse, not by a long shot.  The biggest concern that has developed is that by taking on the rampant problem of sexual abuse in its churches, the SBC is exposing its precious financial resources, it's money and assets, to lawsuits.  The sympathy and concern for the victims is miniscule in comparison to the caterwauling and hollering about legal exposure.  How Christlike is that spirit?  

Some of the more prominent voices within the denomination, which was already embroiled in a conflict between various theological factions over its control, threw a hissy-fit over the fact that the secular law firm they had hired to conduct a full investigation and make recommendations for a resolution, was secular, and also represented LGBTQ clients.  That allowed them to claim that the entire investigation, which named some prominent, powerful Southern Baptist leaders with clout and influence as abusers, was invalid and ineffective.  

The biggest obstacle to any real, serious consideration or resolution of this issue, though, is that much of the opposition to any resolution at all is based on the belief, by many Southern Baptists, that the victims of abuse are woke liberals bent on using #metoo as a means of attacking the godly, righteous work of the Southern Baptist Convention, and as a way of undermining conservative politics.  There are deep seated religious prejudices at work here, among those who see women as subservient, not equal, and concluding that they can't be victims of abuse, because it's not abuse, it's just the natural order of things.  

The article that is linked at the top gives a full picture of exactly how this denomination that portrays itself in pious, self-righteous, arrogance, believes women should be treated.  And they claim support from a mis-interpreted Bible.  

The Southern Baptist Convention drips with hypocrisy when it comes to this issue.  Those who are active in the denominational political drama, those who seek after denominational committee seats or board seats because of the power and influence they provide, for the most part, demonstrate some of the most characteristically un-Christlike behavior in their attitudes and words toward the women who are victims of sexual abuse within their churches and denominational entities.  They can't shake their bigotry and they ignore the characteristics Christ placed at the core of Christian practice and faith.  They claim to believe in a Bible that is "inerrant and infallible," but their behavior indicates they believe none of it. 

There are many things that provide ample evidence of the apostasy of the Southern Baptist Convention, including the affinity many of its leaders have for the MAGA cult and Trump.  But the sexual abuse scandal they are now dealing with is proving to be the issue that brings down the house and exposes the ungodly hypocrisy for what it is.  I do not believe the Southern Baptist Convention will survive either its infiltration by MAGA cultists, or its handling of a major sexual abuse scandal by its pastors and church leaders.  

Give Credit Where Credit is Due

There are a few people in the Southern Baptist Convention who see this for exactly what it is, and are working to try and salvage the denomination's reputation, as well as put it in position to provide resources for ministry to the victims of sexual abuse and who will press for reform in the way in which the denomination deals with pastors who are sexual abusers.  What is unfortunate is that none of them are prominent power brokers who are in a position to get much done.  In spite of the overwhelming reaction of messengers to a convention meeting in Nashville two years back, when the anger over the scandal reached its peak, the gatekeepers and influence peddlers have moved on. The focus of ths upcoming annual meeting is turning away from the sexual abuse scandal, and on to passage of an amendment that will allow the denomination to violate the independence and autonomy of its local churches, and kick out those who dare to have women serving as pastors in any capacity.  

Distraction and disversion is always the name of the game.  This will help keep people focused on other issues while denominational leadership handles sexual abuse within its ranks from Donald Trump's playbook, shirking responsibility, blaming victims and protecting their assets from lawsuits.   

The manner in which these victims of sexual abuse within Southern Baptist churches are treated when they show up to the annual convention meeting to be advocates for other victims is inexcuseable from any Christian perspective.   It is evidence that the Southern Baptist Convention, as a denominational body, is spiritually bankrupt, apostate and dead.  The manner in which some of its leaders heap abuse and derision upon victims of sexual abuse and assault at the hands of fellow pastors and church leaders fits the Biblical definition of antichrist.  It's not surprising that a denomination founded on one of the most grievous theological and doctrinal errors of Christian history, the belief that black people are inferior to white people and are therefore destined to be slaves, is capable of vicious cruelty prompted by bigotry based on false teaching about women.  

Evangelical Christians Claim They Are 'Under Attack from the Left.' But They Are Being Subverted by the Right

We're Always Under Attack!

Growing up in an Evangelical church, I learned pretty quickly that most of the church members had a very distinctive "us versus them" way of looking at the world around them.  The church had a seige mentality.  The leadership and membership saw itself as being the victims of all kinds of worldly plots, from the nebulous part of society known as "the liberals" or simply, "the left."  Of course, all of the enemies of the church were guided by demonic forces, and any time a pastor needed to get church members up off their rear ends and engaged in some kind of activity, a straw man enemy would pop up to motivate the membership.  

The well-known atheist activist, Madalyn Murray O'Hair, was always good to bring up when there was fighting or bickering in the church over some issue or another.  For many years, in one form or another, there were allegations of a "petition" that she was circulating aimed at removing all religious broadcasting from the airwaves.  That one made the rounds of churches several times, and no matter how hard they tried, the F.C.C. could not dispel the rumors that led to tens of thousands of phone calls and letters being sent in.  The volume of calls and mail was such that extra staff had to be hired just to deal with it. The ignorance that was displayed in the sheer volume of response to nothing more than a rumor was a huge embarrassment to the churches of this country, though few of them ever recanted their error.  

When that rumor was first promoted in my home church, I was in high school.  It just didn't sound right.  Religious broadcasting is constitutionally protected by the first amendment.  No federal agency has the power to remove religious broadcasting from the airwaves.  My Sunday School teacher did not take kindly to me pointing this out, since the pastor had been the one who provided the information and of course, he could not be mistaken.  My information came from what I had learned in "that public school," so of course that just added one more liberal institution to her agenda.  The truth didn't matter.  

As white, Evangelical Christians have wound themselves up tightly in far right wing GOP politics, the "attack" rhetoric has ramped up significantly.  The election of Barack Obama to the Presidency brought a serious ramp-up of the "us vs. them" rhetoric, characterizing the President and a Democratic party controlled Congress as the "evil" in the world.  Everything was put in religious terms, any initiative of the Obama Administration was a product of the evil worldliness that had taken over the country.  

Abandoning Faith to Embrace Right Wing Politics and Politicians

And that's more or less the point at which I became convinced that what's sucked many white Evangelicals into the political right is not the Roe v. Wade decision making abortion a constitutional right, but the racism that has always been lying below the surface.  A black, democrat gets elected President and suddenly, the rhetoric of an evil empire having taken over comes to the surface.  They never liked Clinton, who was, like themselves, a white Evangelical.  But there was a real shift in both the attitude and the language when Obama was elected.

The more they have wound themselves up in right wing politics, the more they have lost of their own identity, including their religious structures and beliefs, and the basic values of a faith they proclaim is found in the sixty-six books of the Protestant Canon they claim as being both inerrant and infallible.  Their willingness to systematically abandon their core beliefs and principles to align with the far right, and now, with Trump, has done far more damage to their reputation, and to their ability to be the evangelistic church that is their identity and their mission and purpose.  

This subversion from the right has irreparably damaged American Evangelical Christianity, far more than any alleged frontal assault from the left.  

How Right Wing Politics Leads to the Abandonment of the Christian Gospel

Dr. Russell Moore, formerly the executive director of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) and currently editor of Christianity Today has made some interesting observations about the shocking, but clearly heretical departure some white Evangelicals are making from the core doctrines and theology of the Christian gospel.  These departures are not just from commonly accepted doctrine related to commonly held beliefs among the broader Christian community, but are also denials and departures from the unique, literal interpretation approach of their own brand of Christian faith.  

"When we get to the point where the teachings of Jesus are seen as subversive to us, we're in a crisis," said Moore, after hearing reports from pastors who, after preaching on themes from the Sermon on the Mount, would have members of the church come up to them afterward and ask, "Where did you get those liberal talking points?"  

Those specific points, according to Moore, specifically included the passage where Jesus preaches to those gathered, the core Christian principle of "turning the other cheek."  

"You have heard that it was said, 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth'.  But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer.  But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from  you." Matthew 5:38-42NRSV 

The conservative interpretation of this passage has always been literal.  It's not a context that stands by itself, either, because the very next point that Jesus makes is "love your enemies."  

"But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven."  Matthew 5:44, NRSV

Using that last phrase makes it pretty clear, in looking at the context, and the manner in which this text is rendered from its original languages, that Jesus was making the point that this was a practice of faith which would directly identify Christians.  Earlier, in the same narrative, which is likely a collection of all of the things Jesus preached and taught, rather than a single "sermon" delivered at one location, he applies this same phrase to the peacemakers.  "They shall be called Children of God," he says, recorded in Matthew 5:9.  

For someone in a white, conservative, Evangelical congregation to label this particular part of Jesus' teaching as a "liberal talking point" is an admission, on their part, of unfathomable ignorance of the contents of the Bible, and especially of the New Testament.  One of the interpretive principles emphasized by conservative Evangelical doctrine is the acknowledgement that Jesus was the Messiah, the long-promised and prophesied Savior, and as such, he was the Son, one of the three persons of a truine God.  His presence, and the years of his public ministry are considered direct revelation from God himself, a divine presence speaking divine words, leading by divine example.  

So the Sermon on the Mount, along with the other narratives of the New Testament about Christ, become the interpretive criteria for all of the rest of scripture.  To be unaware of the origin of statements like "turn the other cheek," or concepts centered on values like being a peacemaker, which Jesus clearly elevated to the highest degree among the values of the gospel he preached, and relegate them to the level of "liberal talking points", in today's political jargon, is a denial of Jesus' divine nature.  

Infiltrated by MAGA Trumpism 

Donald Trump Jr. is one of his father's leading emissaries to the MAGA crowd.  Atlantic Monthly describes him as "intensely unappealing and uninteresting, combining ineptitude, banality and corruption in his personality."  So it's not surprising that he would be a speaker on the Turning Point USA circuit, another Trump rally organization, given the crude, disinteresting, one dimensional personality he exhibits.  He shouldn't flatter himself, it's his name they want.  

In one particularly forgettable rally in Phoenix, Trump Jr., in one sentence, denied one of the core teachings of Jesus, one that Christians interpret as divinely inspired, characterizing for anyone who is paying attention to this, the whole anti-Christian nature of MAGA and Trumpism.  Without any clear understanding of what it was that he was talking about, he basically told an audience that their Evangelical faith wasn't worth anything in this world.  

"We've turned the other cheek, and I understand, sort of, the biblical reference--I understand the mentality--but it's gotten us nothing, OK?  It's gotten us nothing while we've ceded ground in every major institution in our country."  

So, according to Don Jr., this particular principle, at the very core of foundational Christian doctrine, the words of Christ himself, has gotten his followers nowhere in this world.  

Aside from the obvious inaccuracy of that statement, his expectation is that Christians who support his father can simply set that principle aside now, because Don and MAGA say it's OK to do so.  There are already plenty of prominent Evangelicals who have set aside everything they ever preached or taught to be on his side.  It's like claiming the statement "an eye for an eye" is the way to go because it's in the Bible, one of Trump Sr.'s favorite, and almost only, Bible quotations.  He sure missed that point. 

It's the Nature of the Beast

In spite of what the pastors, preachers and evangelists say from the pulpit, a majority of Evangelical church members are not grounded in the doctrine and theology that is preached.  They know the high points, the prooftexts they use to convince others of their rightness and righteousness, what they are allowed and not allowed to do.  Ask them the pertinent questions, like "What are the primary, essential values demonstrated in Christian faith practice? or "Explain a true Christian conversion experience and contrast it with a phony or false one," and most of them can't answer either question.  That's why Donald Trump can use them in his politics without ever having to acknowledge having had a genuine conversion experience.  

In fact, if you take Trump at his word, his "Christian" experience is actually a direct denial of the very first step in the conversion process, at least as far as Evangelicals describe it.  They insist that the Bible teaches that God's spirit must bring about conviction of sin before anyone can start to move toward Christian conversion.  And they also teach the one unforgivable sin is the rejection of that conviction, a practice known as "blasphemy of the Holy Spirit."  That amounts to denying that one is a sinner, and must be forgiven by God for his sins.  

Let Trump's own words testify to what he believes, and he'll tell you himself, he has no need for forgiveness.  And while that puts him completely at odds with Evangelical doctrine, they'll never acknowledge that information or let the word get out on their watch, lest they be guilty of hypocrisy.  

  

 

Hey, Evangelical "Leaders"! Are You on Board With Trump's "Bloodbath" Talk?

At this point, after the news of Trump's "bloodbath" remarks have had a chance to sink in, I can imagine evangelical church leaders who have sold out to him frantically searching their Old Testament for historical passages to twist into some kind of justification of what he has said.  That's been the pattern for his conservative Christian supporters ever since he sucked them in and took over their churches and denominations, replacing the Christian gospel with political rhetoric.  

As Trump sinks further into a miasma of mental decline and personal hysterics, and his remarks become more and more extreme, and he loses support by the day, the response of his far right Evangelical supporters is silence.  No comment.  Tacit justification and occasional prooftexting old historical accounts from Jewish history that bear no relevance at all on what the response should be from those who claim to believe in, and follow the Christian gospel.  

If they're with him, and many of them are, because they do not pay any heed at all to the principles of the Christian gospel, or to Christ's teaching, but they go back to a historical period of time, long before the Christian covenant was established by Jesus, and try to justify violence because it's "in the Bible."  Some of them know better.  Others, in their Biblical "literalism" and fundamentalism, take each section of the Bible literally without applying any historical context to it.  So they'll cite King David triumphing over the Philistines, or the thwarting of attacks by the Assyrians as justification for their desire to enforce their way of thinking on everyone else, violently if they think it is necessary.  

And while that is completely contradictory to anything Jesus said or taught, they get away with it because most of their followers are dependent on their leaders to interpret the Bible for them.  They're not interested, or committed, or care enough about it to do it on their own.  

Taking the Christian gospel seriously makes one a pacifist.  

Explaining it away, justifying it, saying it's all in God's plan that is predestined and preordained, all of the excuses will be made in order to avoid actually seeing this for what it is.  It is discrediting what little credibility American Evangelicals had left, if there still was any.  Their numbers are dwindling because of this, and there are leaders who have noticed.  The Christian gospel is no longer recognizeable among its conservative, Evangelical proponents in America.  It's been replaced by MAGA Trumpism.  And it will suffer the consequences of that choices.  

What's the Matter With the Progressive Left?

The progressive talk station in Chicago, WCPT, recently replaced Santita Jackson as their morning host, from 6:00 to 8:00 a.m. with a program called Chews Views, with Richard Chew, which has taken a far different approach than the previous show.  Jackson, unfortunately, didn't seem to grasp that working to fragment the Democratic party for the benefit of her own narrow interests and views, would simply be the means by which Trump returns to the White House.  I didn't notice the change right away, because I quit listening to Jackson when she took the position of opening the door to third party fragmentation almost a year ago.  So this was a welcome change.  

And the discussions have trended in the direction of the self-inflicted wounding that progressives seem to be committed to promoting.  I've always tended to think of liberal progressives as open minded realists.  But some of what I'm observing, especially around the issue of the Israel-Gaza war, is causing me to think twice, and wonder whether they're just too ingrained in their own causes to think clearly and realistically, or whether the level of intelligence and reason with which they are equipped is not adequate to convince them they are being duped, and used by Trump to help him regain the White House and the Presidency.  

Progressives, by the very nature of their position, should have been horrified and sickened by the ruthless, cruelty and destruction of lives deliberately visited upon Israeli citizens in the areas of the country that were attacked on October 7th.  I don't care what's transpired over the past 80 years or so in Palestine, there's nothing that ever justifies that kind of violence and cruelty.  Be clear about that.  It does not help Hamas' cause, or that of the Palestinian people, to commit that kind of violence as a means of forcing some kind of political solution to what has been an insoluble problem up to this point.  

Ignoring, or somehow considering October 7th as justified, completely undermines any argument about the attacks on Gaza being "genocide," or over the edge as a means of defense against any future terrorist incursions into Israel.  Put this in perspective, if you're against violence, you're against all kinds of violence, and you believe that no violence is ever justified.  That's called "pacifism," and you're reading the words of a committed pacifist.  Don't waste time trying to find an argument around October 7th, there isn't a justifiable one from this perspective.  

But as far as Israel's attack on Gaza, well, if there's no justification for violence, then the brutal, destructive, deadly attacks raining down on Gaza are also not justified.  They are causing the death of innocent people on a scale that is so far thirty times greater than the October 7th attack caused.  It is creating a humanitarian crisis of huge proportions.  Those who have the power to influence what is happening should be using it, to the best of their ability, to put a stop to it and figure out a way to resolve these ongoing problems once and for all, not treating Palestinians as inferior people, or as displaced people not entitled to live in a land their ancestors have occupied for centuries.  

The United States has been involved in influence and pressure, direct and indirect, in affairs surrounding the establishment of an independent state of Israel since the British got possession of the Middle East after the first World War.  And the United States must be involved in finding a workable solution.  

How's that for a progressive perspective?  

The ONLY Chance for a Resolution That is Fair to the Palestinians is a Biden Presidency

Pushing a third-party candidacy, or staying home and refusing to vote for Biden in the upcoming election is a self-defeating strategy for progressives wanting to do something to stop the war and help the Palestinians in Gaza.  In our quirky electoral college system, syphoning votes off from Biden to third party candidates will help Trump get elected.  And let's be realistic about what will happen to the Palestinians in Gaza if that happens.  

There will be no Gaza when Netanyahu is done.  Trump has already said that Putin and Russia can "do whatever the hell they want."  Not only would he not try to stop Netanyahu, he would flood Israel with the bombs, missiles and weapons they need to wipe Gaza off the map.  Israel would be in full control of the Gaza Strip within weeks of a Trump inauguration.  The goal isn't a two state solution, something Netanyahu vehemently opposes.  It's to force emigration, scatter the population.  

No third party candidate will ever get close to the kind of voter support they will need to be elected, and there's not any third party candidate who is concerned about the real issues facing the United States in the 21st century, especially something like this.  Jill Stein and the Green Party are offering nothing that the Biden Administration hasn't already delivered, in their pro-worker, pro-climate change agenda.  Biden's already done more on that front than they are proposing.  I don't trust her judgement, or her true motives as a progressive, especially putting herself back on the ballot after what she did to Hillary Clinton in 2016.  

RFK Jr., aside from not having a snowball's chance on a hot stove of winning, has nothing to offer on this issue.  Of course, he still has to find the right words to define his campaign, for which a lot of people are waiting.  Aside from running on his late father's name and reputation of his family, I have not seen or heard anything from him to define him as a candidate, except that he keeps having to explain gaffes.  He will offer those who want to see an end to the violence in Gaza absolutely nothing. 

So let's be realistic, instead of following all the trendy social media chat, blaming Biden and ignoring the real issues.  If justice for Palestinians is at the top of your political agenda, President Biden is your candidate.  I know, with social media, and its plethora of misinformation being the primary source of information for the millennial generation, it's hard for them to understand politics that moves with experience.  Biden's original reactions were based on the horrific October 7th attacks.  I wonder how many people really got just how horrific and awful, and un-progressive that terrorist violence was.  But he's clearly been affected by the reaction from Israel, which now looks a lot more like retaliation, and a blatant disregard of Palestinian lives.  

Let's be more realistic.  The President cannot just stop sending military aid to Israel.  That money, appropriated by Congress, can only be rescinded by Congress, not the President.  And another realistic political perspective that needs to be understood is that nothing ever gets done without compromise and the gridlock we've seen in government when Republicans are in charge is the best example we have of that.  One of the reasons for the huge level of success of the Biden presidency on the pro-worker agenda he's built is that he knows how to make government work.  

Noting that historically, any time Jews have stood up to defend themselves against agression, the anti-semitic rhetoric ramps up significantly, it is becoming clear that what is happening to Gaza is far more than what is justified in what Netanyahu defined as a mission to rid Gaza of the presence of Hamas.  And the current President of the United States, who has exhibited the wisdom, judgment, discernment and experience in foreign policy that re-energized the NATO alliance and brought stability after the uncertainty caused by the wavering and dictator recognition of Trump, is the man who will bring about a resolution to the Gaza situation.  Unlike Trump, he's going to do the right thing, not use this for his own political gain.  

Learn Some Political Lessons 

Trump managed to win a very narrow victory in 2016, precisely because the infighting and bickering over "this and that" kind of issues among Progressives led to a lower voter turnout, and to votes going to third party candidates that were, frankly, a waste of time and effort.  A second Trump presidency would kill whatever progress the Green Party thinks they have made by running Stein and "getting their issues out there."  He was opposed to everything they stood for.  The best thing Jill Stein could do now is come out with a public statement recognizing the danger to democracy of a second Trump presidency, dropping out of the race and endorsing Joe Biden's candidacy.  That will do more for their pro-worker, anti-war, climate action agenda than her run for the White House again could ever achieve.  

The results of a second Trump Presidency are easy to see, since he's filling us in and gets whatever time in the news media he wants to tell everyone exactly what he would do.  Progressives like Santita Jackson and Rainbow Push, who is pushing the candidacy of Cornell West are the first targets on Trump's list, and whatever political progress they've made, which has been hard fought and hard earned, will be ended.  This man is a white supremacist bigot, and if groups like Rainbow Push stand alone, they have no power at all to stop him.  

I actually agree with Stein, that the two-party system is broken.  But her efforts to fix it have not only failed miserably, but they've actually caused further regression because they give control to far right elements who don't believe government works, and who deliberately sabotage its efforts.  On the other hand, President Joe Biden, with marginal, but with Democratic control of Congress, got more done in two years than any other President since the Johnson administration.  And that success was built on an alliance that came together against a common enemy, and defeated him.  

A second Biden Presidency will be the foundation of progressive political success.  

Secret Society Pushes Right Wing Christian Nationalist Agenda

Inside a Secret Society of Prominent, Right Wing Christian Men Prepping for a National Divorce

Can this really be a surprise?  Is it possible to keep something like this a secret?  

Josh Kovensky, a staff writer for TPM, has posted an article about "The Society for American Civic Renewal", a men-only, right wing, secret group, with secret being one of the key descriptive terms here, with the goal of recruiting a "Christian government" that can be put in place after the far right achieves regime change in the United States.  

"It sounds like the stuff of fantasy," says Kovensky, "But it's real."  

"It is open to new recruits, provided you meet a few criteria:  you are male, a "Trinitarian' Christian, heterosexual, an "un-hyphenated American", and can answer questions about Trump, the Republican Party and Christian Nationalism in the right way," says Kovensky, describes this group as "a shadowy network occupying the commanding heights of business, politics, and culture, open to only a select, elite few, committed to reshaping the United States to align it with the group's radical values."  

That should scare the hell out of us.  

Subversives Have Been At Work Preparing to Bring Trump Back to Power

Trump lost the 2020 election.  He knows it, and so does anyone with viable brain cells who is still breathing air and drinking water.  But his defeat didn't stop the undermining of American democracy, or give anyone any breathing room before the next onslaught.  Saving American democracy is going to be an uphill battle for some time to come.  Trump, the MAGA movement, the Republican party that has sold out to it, are all aiming to tear apart the Constitution and put it back together in a form that supports the idea that America is a country belonging to white people who were given it as a gift from God in order to bring about a Christian nation on the face of the earth.  Most believe that is for the purpose of ushering in the second coming of Christ, and they mistakenly believe it was the original vision of America's founding fathers.  So there can be no wrong committed in restoring it, according to them.  

Trump's defeat in 2020 only slowed them down temporarily.  But they've had four years to plan their strategy which includes being sneaky and secretive, using the influence, power, wealth and assets of billionaires who support this cause, and to lay the groundwork to try and steal, and I'm going to use that word because that's exactly what they're going to try and do, the 2024 election.  

The TPM article which is linked will cause a chill to run up and down your spine when you read it.  This group is committed to establishing a Christian theocracy in America, patriarchal leadership in the household, and "acceptance of the wisdom of our American and European Christian forebearers in the political realm."  

Looking at what TPM has uncovered and revealed here, it seems that Trump losing the 2024 election isn't an obstacle to putting him in the White House.  Everything that's been thrown against the wall regarding the "stealing" of the 2020 election has been intended for use in some kind of coup, from a "cold civil war" as this group now says we are experiencing, to keeping mindless MAGA nuts agitated and ready for violence in the event that an opportunity for a violent overthrow occurs again.  Apparently, they initially thought that the insurrection would topple the government and that's when they were going to take over.  They're going to try the same thing again. 

Using Subverted Christianity as a Weapon

As has happened so many times in history, subverting the church in order to use its influence and power as a political weapon is nothing new.  So it's not surprising that yet another subversive group, aimed at destroying Democracy and establishing a white nationalist dictatorship, is emerging from right wing American Christianity.  It's not hard to figure out why.  The more conservative, fundamentalist, Pentecostal and Charismatic branches of the church are easily infiltrated by heretical ideology, in spite of their claims to biblical fidelity, because there is no central authority or governance, because they are already prone to errors as a result of their turning the Bible into something that its writers and those who canonized it never intended when they were doing so, and because so few of those who sit in their pews every week ever bother to read or study it in its correct context.  

It's only taken a generation to undermine the core beliefs of most Evangelical churches and denominations, brand the clear teachings of Jesus as "liberal theology" and direct the attention, loyalty and financial resources of American Evangelical Christianity to far right wing politics.  

And anything related to Christian nationalism is a subversion of Christianity.  It's pseudo-Christian.  But, as has occurred in every relationship between politics and the church in its 2,000 year history, the damage done is residual, even though there is vitrually nothing in any of these religious political movements, whether it's state supported and controlled churches, or the Moral Majority and Christian Coalition in modern America, that reflects any of the values of true Christian faith.  

Christianity loses its very essence, the substance of what it is, when it becomes politically coerced.  It is impossible to bring about spiritual conversion, or genuine spiritual revival, by legislation and enforcement of the law.  That's oppression, not faith.  Jesus deliberately and intentionally defined the Christian gospel as a spiritual kingdom, contrasting it with the old Israelite theocracy as an imperfect covenant with God.  And Peter, who along with Paul was one of the more influential apostles in establishing the church, is the one who opened the door to "gentiles," erasing the exclusivity of the old idea of a "chosen" people based on race and ethnicity.  

Christian nationalism, in every one of its current forms, reduces Christian faith to political trash. 

Simplifying the Values of the Christian Gospel

The Quakers, whose membership as a proportion of the whole spectrum of denominations, heirarchies and churches that make up American Christianity is a small fraction of the total, have managed, in their simplicity and plain-spokenness, to simplify the practice of the Christian faith in a remarkably understandable and uncomplicated way.  They don't presume to define conversion as a franchise experience for everyone, they leave that up to individual conscience.  

Once defined, faith becomes a practice that reflects values.  That's exactly what Jesus and his apostles taught, and wrote, in the New Testament, accepted by virtually all of Christianity as being authoritative in doctrine and theology.  

The values are discerned from the written record.  Living by those values earned the Quakers the trust of pretty much everyone else around them.  They include peace, integrity, simplicity, stewardship, equality and community.  In one way or another, those values are discerned from the written record left behind by the authors of the New Testament.  And in Quaker practice, being Christian is reflecting those values to the point where everyone around them, Christian, Quaker or not, could trust them living in community with them.  

Looking at what is transpiring in American right wing politics, who would you rather have living next door, Quakers or right wing, white supremacist, Christian nationalists?  

The 2024 Election Offers the Clearest Choice for President I've Ever Seen in my Lifetime

It's clear, unless indictments from January 6th, or stolen classified documents, or voter intimidation, render the GOP presumptive nominee ineligible to be on the ballot, a feat that the Supreme Court does not seem capable of accomplishing, that Donald Trump and Joe Biden will be the two candidates of the major parties in November.  This is the clearest, most obvious choice we have had for the Presidency in my lifetime, and in the scope of my ability to vote, which goes back to the 1976 contest between Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford.  

The "he's too old" arguments more or less evaporated this week when it became clear, after Super Tuesday, that Trump would be the GOP nominee.  If the GOP is willing to nominate Trump, then age isn't an issue for them, so it shouldn't be an issue for Democrats either, since the years rest better on Biden, obviously, than they do on Donald.  Watching Republicans during the speech, it's clear from their demeanor, hunched over, eyes down, that they realized they're not going to capitalize on the President's age, or fitness for office.  

About the only thing critics of the President's speech can say, at this point, is that "it was too partisan."  Well, of course it was, the last State of the Union prior to his re-election campaign, though he successfully slapped the failure of the border legislation right squarely on the GOP and Trump, where it will be one of several failures they can cite in November as the reason for Biden's re-election.  Quoting Ronald Reagan's statement to then-Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" and contrasting it to Trump's statement, "Let the Russians do whatever the hell they want," was brilliant. That will go down in history as one of the best SOTU quotes of all time.  And did you see the looks on the faces of the Republicans in the room when he said that?  

From the Perspective of a Democrat who is Also A Policy Wonk 

Let's start with where this choice is obvious, from a traditional, policy versus policy perspective. 

Unemployment has been under 4% consistently for over three years, the longest period of such low numbers since the 1960's.  There are three million more jobs now than there were prior to the COVID pandemic.  And we just got another solid, strong, jobs report indicating a strong economy getting better and not showing signs of slowing down.  Gosh, it's just like Bill Clinton or Barak Obama were in office, low unemployment, massive job growth, a roaring, sustained economy.  No Republican in the last 50 years has been able to sustain that kind of economic growth.

Wages are up.  Hey, people, put on the thinking cap.  Do you think the inflation we are experiencing might have at least something to do with increased prosperity and growth in wages?  It's called basic economics 101.  The combination of rapid recovery from COVID and job and stock market growth in a free market economy is being managed by interest rates.  Being managed.  That's a key phrase. 

CEO confidence in the economy is running as high as it ever has.  The stock market is soaring, a sign of healthy economic growth, also something we haven't had this consistently since the 1960's.  

Drill, baby, drill is a reality, as the United States now produces more oil than it ever has, and permits for drilling are wide open.  You won't catch the conservative media saying anything about it, but big profits for big oil, which is why the price of gas is so high right now, is a Republican mantra.  Ultimately, Biden's energy policy will drive oil prices down, and with it, the price of gasoline.

Crime is actually down.  The federal government doesn't really have much control over that, though the funding they provide for policing is also at an all time high, contrary to the "defund the police" nonsense that has been spreak around.  It's hard to make that argument stick anymore.  

Traditionally the leader of the Democratic world, under Joe Biden, and contrary to some Republican and MAGA claims, Biden has restored confidence in the NATO alliance and united it in its mission and purpose again, after Trump tried to destroy it.  

From a Practical Standpoint

COVID cost 1.3 million American Lives.  It was bound to be a disastrous pandemic, but let's not forget that what made it far worse than it had to be was the inept, incompetent bungling of Trump, who called it a hoax, and then became one of the biggest obstacles to effective handling of a serious pandemic anywhere in the world.  

It was President Joe Biden whose actions expidited the development and distribution of vaccinations, who committed resources to fight the pandemic so that it didn't become another Republican profiteering venture, accessible only by those who could afford the treatment, and whose surgeon general provided the first practical advice Americans ever heard when it came to fighting the pandemic.  

The Inflation Reduction Act is one of the most economically beneficial pieces of legislation ever passed by Congress and signed by the President whose promotion of it helped make sure it got through the legislative process.  

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) ranks right up there with the IRA in terms of this President's legislative achievements.  It is a reinvestment of American tax dollars back into the economy where they help people.  It puts people to work, keeps people at work, increases wages, and best of all, is replacing decaying and crumbling infrastructure, from municipal water and sewer systems, to highways, roads and bridges, to port facilities and other economic engines such as the railroads and the air traffic control system, airports, and I could , of course, go on and on.  

It is worth noting that Trump voiced opposition to both of these bills.  Both of them.  

Border Security is an issue on which I tend to think the Republican party has blown their chances.  It's a big issue, made that way by a lot of publicity over the influx of people coming across the Mexican border, mainly from Central America and Venezuela.  Forgetting that three million people entered the United States illegally under the Trump administration, as opposed to these immigrants coming in for asylum, it's a big deal.  And the President and the Democrats were willing to go along with the proposal of Republican Senator Lankford, until Trump torpedoed that bill.  And while the MAGA crowd is mostly not intelligent enough to realize how bad that was, and will vote for him anyway, those who are genuinely concerned about it have had a good chance to see what has happened, and how Trump was playing politics.  

His move was a bad one.  It will be one of the things analysts will point to when asked what cost Trump the election.  Because it will cost him the election. 

The Dobbs Decision and the overturning of Roe v. Wade has been a huge vote generator for Democratic candidates for office, even in deep red states.  The party's string of electoral victories is due to a great extent to the increased awareness of exactly what is going on and what Republicans want to do about abortion.  The motivation to pass legislation to codify Roe, and get around the Supreme Court, decision will carry a lot of Democrats to victory this year, including the President. 

From a Moral and Ethical Perspective

Character has a lot to do with competent leadership, a statement from a quote by Senator Mitt Romney, who has ruled out supporting Trump, but hasn't yet actually endorsed President Biden.  But he's not the only Republican who sees support for Trump as a quandary for a party that once claimed the high ground in the culture wars on moral values, but has now become the American political outlet for fascism, white Supremacy, Christian nationalism, Russian dictatorship and the openly immoral worldliness that is the chosen identity of the man they appear to be headed toward nominating for the third time.  

Where Nikki Haley Went Wrong

I'd love to sit around the table while ballot counting is happening, providing commentary as results come in, like the commentators on the cable networks do.  I'd have more fun at MSNBC than anywhere else, I think, because they seem to recognize the fact that observations and results don't always go along with old political standards.  They bring up the past, use some trends that used to be reliable in making predictions, but they're a lot more open in their discussion, and more likely to note when things have changed and the old ways of predicting outcomes aren't accurate any more.  

And there's always someone at the MSNBC table who comes out with a blatantly honest evaluation of a campaign, and nails the analysis.  Count on Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, Lawrence O'Donnell, and Nicole Wallace to tell it like it is, and Joy Reid to move the conversation to the left and take into consideration things that most reporters and commentators would ignore, or not even catch.  Last night was great.  

An Honest Evaluation of Nikki Haley's Campaign 

I'll acknowledge that some of my information, and my perspective, has been influenced by the MSNBC election night coverage crew.  That's fair.  But I think I have a pretty informed, and well observed viewpoint of my own.  I am a trained social studies instructor, have taught students from middle school to junior college, more of this kind of experience than Kari Lake, or Donald Trump, had before they got into politics. But I'm not just parroting MSNBC here.  I think they held back more than they should have, but I also get why.  So let's chat for a bit, huh? 

Of all of the potential GOP nominees, Haley had the best shot at winning the nomination, next to Trump, whose former Presidency is his name and face recognition.  Out of the traditional kind of Republican base that Mitt Romney and George W. Bush built their base, and with which they won, Haley was the best candidate to fit in with the ideology and bring some of her own perspective into the mix without losing voters.  The problem is that base is now fragmented, scattered and no longer unified.  Some of it has given into the MAGA philosophy out of party loyalty.  The rest of it might have had a candidate around which to rally if Haley had given them something at the outset of the campaign, instead of joining in the chorus of sycophants who doomed their chances by trying to be Trump clones.  

But she didn't make the turn into the sort-of anti-MAGA, never Trumper candidate until too late in the campaign.  And that made her look less savvy and much less experienced than she needed in order to attract the kind of voter to the GOP that she needed to have a chance. There are moderates who are somewhat reluctant to support Biden this time around because of his age, voters at which she might have had a shot at getting, had she started by pointing out how far away from traditional Republican and Christian values the MAGA cult really has gone. But she joined the sycophants.  Her line that he was a good President then, just not so good for now was weak and demonstrated a fear of his political power within the GOP.  And ultimately, that was what sunk her boat.  

She was also, frankly, just too Republican to attract the kind of voter who would have stuck through the campaign and voted for her instead of Biden.  The Dobbs decision has been, and will be, a huge turnout machine and vote getter for all Democrats in 2024, especially the President.  She either can't or by conviction won't go there, and that's what would have taken her out of the competition against Biden. 

Her economics was more of the traditional Republican favor for the white, corporate elite.  She offered nothing that made her stand out, and a lot that spoke very loudly of potential recession, higher taxes for the working class, cuts in social security and medicare, and a general indifference for the kind of people who once put her in the South Carolina governor's mansion.  

Haley needed to forge a coalition of moderate Republicans, maybe the 20-25% of the party whose votes she did pick up, with the broader spectrum of independent voters, who make up 40% of the electorate and for whom the President's age might actually be one of several problems they have with him.  However reliable polling data might be these days, Haley had a shot at independent voters, had she only been more assertive in her anti-Trumpism.  

Anti-Trumpers in the GOP Come to the Surface

Haley did seem to uncover a rather unexpectedly large number of anti-Trumpers in the GOP who are, by their own admission, not going to support him in November.  There may be more of those out there than we realize, or than showed up to vote for her in the primaries.  Turnout of primary voters hasn't met expectations, it's been under polling data estimates and a lot of the primary voters are willing to tell exit pollsters that they're not going to vote for Trump in the general election, along with an additional group who say that a conviction will change their minds.  

By the time Super Tuesday rolled around, and the rest of the GOP field had dropped out, it was more difficult to tell whether those not showing up were just staying away because they figured the primaries were already foregone conclusions, or whether they're not going to support Trump now that their preferred candidate is no longer running.  Either way, if 2024 turns out to be anywhere near as close as 2020 was, the big question is whether primary voters who aren't showing up for him now, and those who showed up for Nikki Haley, will be party loyalists or independent thinkers.  

And perhaps one of the best things Nikki Haley has done to take votes away from Trump is that she has helped establish a Republican anti-Trump narrative that will carry some weight into the campaign.  She pointed out, from a conservative Republican perspective, that Trump is a liar, is incompetent, is showing signs of dementia and isn't the best choice for America as its president.  And if that only resonates with 10% of Republican voters, then that's enough.  But Trump has clearly lost the majority of the independent vote as well, something we saw in the crossover primaries.  

So in the long run, it was her failure to put a lot of distance between her and Trump early on that brought about her campaign's failure.  She didn't look like a leader, she looked too much like just another Trumpie sycophant, and that, in the long run, did her in.  

This is What Democrats and the Biden Campaign Have Been Waiting For

I don't think there's ever been much doubt on the Democratic side of this campaign, that Trump would be the nominee.  And while it is concerning that he is able to gather the kind of support from as many people as he does, there's a confidence there that he has hit a ceiling of support and is never going to get enough electoral votes to reclaim the White House.  He hasn't done anything to expand his base of support, in fact, he's done things which lead people away from it.  The same baggage that Haley picked up when she started her campaign is dragging Trump down.  

The President, on the other hand, can campaign on a roaring economy, on the reaction to the Dobbs decision, and to the negativity on the Supreme Court, record economic growth, record low sustained unemployment, higher wages, America regaining the respect as the leader of the democratic world it lost when Trump was President, and on every gaffe and mistake Trump hands him.  The border deal botch was gigantic.  And by Trump being the apparent GOP nominee, Biden's age has evaporated as an issue.  Poof.  Gone.  

Biden's Presidency has a response to every Trump false accusation.  America is more respected around the world now than ever.  When we hear "drill, baby drill," we know that we are producing more oil than we ever have.  Inflation is a sign of wage growth, which is approaching record levels now.  Three million more Americans have jobs now than prior to the pandemic, and unemployment has been sustained under 4% for the first time in more than 60 years.  "The election was stolen" has not only run out of steam, but its driving people away from Trump.  And to people for whom personal character is an issue, it's no contest.  

My biggest fear isn't that Biden will have difficulty winning, but that Trump and the MAGA crowd has already laid the groundwork for cheating and trying to steal the election.  We know they have.  What we're doing about it, I don't know, but I do know they're going to pull all of the tricks out of the bag, including using the people they have in state offices to suppress votes, skew vote counts and cheat to high heaven.  

I will be volunteering, canvassing for votes, writing blogs to support the President's candidacy and doing all that I can to help.  We've got this.  The blue, democracy saving wave is on the way.  

Voters Need to Educate Themselves About the Dangers of Christian Nationalism

Baptist News Global: The Threat of Christian Nationalism in All 50 States, Illustrated 

The article which is linked above is a very colorful explanation of the threat of Christian Nationalism to the United States.  There's no question that we are vulnerable to this kind of ideology, because of our guarantees of freedom of conscience, free speech and religious liberty, and because people are running for office, appealing for votes from a segment of the population that believes this is the "will of God" for the United States, and is the reason why he gave favor to the white, European settlers who came here to exploit its natural resources and develop themselves into the world's most prosperous, militarily powerful nation.  

As can be seen from the survey, 30% of Americans are identified as adherents or sympathizers to the various perspectives of Christian nationalism, including those dependent on racist white supremacy as a foundational essential, a number large enough to affect the outcome of elections and put politicians in place who will use their power to bring about Christian nationalist objectives.  There are already plenty of those serving in state legislatures, a few governorships, and in both the House and Senate, along with a scattering in the state and federal court system, including at least two identified members of the Supreme Court.  

This is Not New

I was raised in a small Baptist church, and was taught by three successive Sunday school teachers that America was a "Christian nation" because our founders were led by God to establish it that way, and that our prosperity and military might are his blessings, given as a reward for our obedience.  So if we ever start to do things bad, like the Israelites did, he will get mad at us and cause some other pagan country to come and take over us just like he did when Babylon conquered and carried the Israelites off into captivity.  

I was taught that we could be judged as a nation for electing the wrong people to office, specifically, people who weren't the same kind of Christian as we were.  And that God would judge the country collectively for passing laws that he didn't like and were against his will.  We got on the slippery slope to destruction when the Roe decision was handed down by the Supreme Court, according to them.  

No joke.  That's exactly what was taught and what it was like.  Imagine the effect of having that repeated, in countless such Sunday schools all over the country.  

Why Christian Nationalism is Dangerous to American Democracy

The idea of America as some kind of a promised land for white, European Christians predates the founding of the country, according to Robert P. Jones, who authored the commentary on the research in Baptist News Global.  It turns political contests in to apocalyptic battles, leading to the justification of violence, in spite of Christian principles against the use of violence under any circumstances.  And, says Jones, it leads to the belief that political opponents who are perceived to be representatives of "evil," should be jailed, exiled, attacked and even murdered for disagreement.  

Those Sunday school teachers I mentioned had no formal education beyond high school to speak of.  In fact, one of them didn't finish high school, and the others never went to college.  Nor did they have any formal theological or doctrinal training in Biblical content.  As a result, their teaching didn't even always reflect some passage of scripture, it was just some idea they had come to accept because it fit with what they believed.  So it is that Russell Moore, the editor of Christianity Today, is encountering the idea that some of the values Jesus taught as being essential to the faith, such as turning the other cheek and loving one's enemies, are now being called "liberalism" by many conservative, Christian nationalists. 

Completely abandoning the core values taught by Jesus, the survey results provided by Jones indicate a significant percentage of Christian Nationalists believe that it would be right for them to resort to violence in order to restore a nation that has gotten so far off the track of its Christian roots.  They believe that being an American patriot means that it is justified to take up arms and resort to violence to "save" the country, while others believe that some kind of upheaval will be necessary to sweep away the "elites in power" and restore the "rightful rulers."  

This is a very real threat.  As many as 44% of all Americans believe in some form of Christian nationalist need to take over the government to "restore" it.  There is absolutely no justification in the Christian gospel, or in the scripture Evangelical and conservative Christians claim is their "authority" for faith and practice, for the use of violence in this way.  

In fact, both of the leading apostles of the early Christian church, Paul and Peter, acknowledge the power and authority of the civil government, regardless of who it came from, as being established by God, and they weren't speaking about theocratic Israel, they were talking about the emperor of Rome and his civil authorities.  And as a result of their words, when severe persecution broke out against the church through most of the second century of its existence, there was no violent uprising against what was clearly an evil attack on Christianity.  The authoritative words of the Apostles in the New Testament taught that violence of any kind was sinful, submission to authority was Godly and personal sacrifice for the cause of the faith was necessary.  

There's no better example of loving one's enemies or turning the other cheek anywhere in scripture.  

Trumpism, the MAGA Cult and Extremist Right Wing Politics is Neither Saving the Nation Nor Is It Christian

Christians who need an authoritative word to show them how wrong, sinful and evil is Christian nationalism will find it in the short epistle of the Apostle Jude, near the end of the New Testament. Jude writes,

"Beloved, while eagerly preparing to write to you about the salvation we share, I find it necessary to write and appeal to you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.  For certain intruders have stolen in among you, people who long ago were designated for this condemnation as ungodly, who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ."  Jude v. 3-4 NRSV  

It's an easy test of the faith to apply to anyone who claims to preach and teach the gospel to see if they pass the test of orthodoxy.  Denying things which Jesus specifically taught as the very nature and core of the Christian gospel, such as meekness, being a peacemaker, humility and hungering and thirsting for righteousness, as opposed to violence to achieve their cause, makes one an anti-Christ, according to I John 4.  So I would evaluate Christian Nationalism, in any form, as anti-Christian.  And when Jude calls those who rebel in this way "waterless clouds carried along by the winds; autumn trees without fruit, twice dead, uprooted, wild waves of the see, casting up the foam of their own shame; wandering stars, for whom the deepest darkness has been reserved forever, he's hitting the nail on the head in discerning the Christian nationalists of our day.  

The character of the leader of the MAGA cult tells you that neither he nor any of his followers have anything to do with the name "Christian."  A man who publicly bragged about his multiple adulterous affairs with porn stars and prostitutes, while humiliating his wives, who has been adjudicated as a rapist, who openly committed business fraud, who terrorized election workers and lied about their character and their actions is anti-Christ, not Christian.  

This Issue is a Voting Priority

Christian Nationalists, in any form, are people who are advocates of political revolution, which is also an anti-Christian concept (Romans 13:1-7 and I Peter 2:13-17).  And the best way we have in our American constitutional democracy to neutralize their influence and prevent them from getting into any position of power is to vote against them when they run in any election.  And since they have established themselves as the "ideological keystone" in today's Republican party, we must commit to cast our ballots against every Republican running for office in America.  Every single one.  

 

Preaching the Gospel While Standing on the Side of Hate is Hypocrisy

Franklin Graham has been conducting a crusade along the US-Mexico border.  A ten-day tour, preaching in border towns because, he says, the people there "need to hear a message of hope," it just so happened that Graham "ran into" Donald Trump while he was making his visit to the border in the town of Eagle Pass, Texas.  Trump was not there to preach a message of hope, he was there to create campaign photo ops while aiding the effort to stamp out the hope of people who see entry into the United States as their last hope for a decent, and safe, life for their family.  

The fact that Graham "ran into" Trump, says more about his intentions, and the sincerity of his message, than any words that come out of his mouth while preaching during this tour.  Critics have said that this "tour," during an election year, has a political motive.  The meeting with Trump on February 29 confirmed their claims.  How can Graham claim to be preaching a message of hope while deliberately meeting with Trump, publicly shaking hands, and endorsing his presence, which, on his side, has been a hatred-filled diatribe of bigotry and prejudice, accusations of criminal behavior that can't be proven by any factual information and one of the most blatant displays of both anti-American, anti-Christian behavior that we have seen from someone who has proven he is a master at both of those things?  

That meeting, and handshake, undermined every word that has come out of Graham's mouth, not only during this border tour, but that he's ever preached.  He's been a supporter of Trump for a long time now, and that tells us everything we need to know about what he supports.  He's a hypocrite whose alleged words of hope are not nearly as loud as Trump's vocal support for Texas Governor Greg Abbott's placement of sharp metal barbs under the water of the Rio Grande at Eagle Pass, and other places along the border, to purposely inflict injury and pain.  

I wonder if Graham mentions anything in his sermons about the advocacy of legislation that will allow property owners in border areas to shoot people on their property who they believe have crossed the border illegally.  Arizona is now considering that, and Trump has enthusiastically endorsed it.  So I wonder how Graham works that into his alleged message of hope, along with his endorsement of Trump?  And where, between endorsing Trump and his "message of hope" does he fit the rape of E. Jean Carroll or the 13 other women who have proof of similar allegations?  The multiple adulteries he committed against all three of his wives, along with the public humiliation of them in which he revelled and bragged?  The business fraud?  The pathological lying?  Inciting an insurrection against the United States?  

I'd love to hear how Graham works all of that into the sermons he is preaching on his tour.  

Apparently Graham's motivation also centers around numbers, citing 20,000 as the number of people who have come out to hear him preach on his tour.  Along with that, a petition, circulating among the Christian churches of the Rio Grande Valley in Texas gathered at least 20,000 signatures urging the organizers of the tour to back out, because of Graham's open endorsement of Trump.  Apparently, there are a large number of Evangelical Christians who see through the hypocrisy and aren't interested in endorsing it.  

Graham tried to put a positive spin on Trump's appearance in Eagle Pass, telling him, in front of reporters, that his appearance there "was a great encouragement to many people."  That while protestors, who outnumbered supporters by about a four to one margin, kept conveniently at a distance so the media couldn't get photographs of them, could be heard chanting.  

Frankly, I have to admit I really don't see Franklin Graham as anything but a religious profiteer.  The heir to the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, whose trademark program is a Christmas time distribution of shoe boxes filled with dollar store junk that Americans collect to give to the poor children of the world just adds to the fortune he already has, and continues to earn off the contributions of people who are sincere in their support of this ministry with his Dad's name on it.  I just have a little bit of difficulty according leadership status and providing support to someone who grew up rich and didn't know anything about having to sacrifice for Christian ministry.  

But chasing after a corrupt, worldly politician with tissues and toilet paper to try and gain their favor, while they deny every virtue and practice of the Christian gospel, including their own need for God's forgiveness, which is an essential core doctrine of Christianity, is the clincher when it comes to Graham's credibility as a Christian minister and evangelist.  When he shook hands with Trump, he surrendered his credibility as an evangelist and minister of the Christian gospel to give credence and loyalty to a worldly denier of the gospel of Christ.  

Going to the border for a preaching tour during an election year, and claiming to be bringing hope to the people on the American side of the border is a cruel mockery of those who have come to the border and gathered on the other side, looking at the hope of freedom and security in this country that has drawn them here.  And the best thing that can be offered to them is a shoe box full of dollar store junk and an underwater barbed-wire barrier to discourage their hope?  There's nothing Christian in that message.