A journal for the purpose of discussion and expression aimed at speaking with grace, gentleness and respect
Thursday, January 30, 2025
How Many of Those Geniuses and Brilliant People Were Not Hired Because of Discrimination?
Living in a Fantasy World Created by the Media
The last time I was in the mountains of Western North Carolina was early spring, 2006. It was mid-April, and I spent a week at a writer's conference in a picturesque setting just east of the small town of Black Mountain. The area is very beautiful, the mountains steep, the small valleys and "hollows" narrow, and prone to periodic flooding. Of course, what occurred prior to the disaster brought by the remnants of Hurricane Helene was nothing in comparison. Helene's remnants brought once in a lifetime rains and flooding, and the narrow valleys and streams, filling with water coming down at high velocity, was well beyond the capacity of the rivers, lakes and streams to handle.
The Trump campaign pounced almost immediately. In spite of the fact that he is the one who has used disaster relief money as a bribe in the past, and advocates using it for that same purpose now, something conservatives applaud when he mentions it, he claimed that the Biden administration was withholding FEMA assistance on purpose because the area tends to vote heavily in favor of Republicans.
It was not true, of course, though FEMA funding was limited because of House Republicans deciding to wait until after the election to vote on increasing the aid. Most people in Western North Carolina, especially those who are Trump supporters, are inclined to believe those lies, even though FEMA assistance poured into the area as quickly as it has after any disaster, and not only were they among the first on the scene, but they had more to offer in short term assistance, as well as long term help, than anyone else did.
Then, because of rumors pushed by right wing media, threats against FEMA workers were made. Well, hey, if I've been sent to a place to help with flood relief, and I've brought equipment, food, bottled water, blankets, bedding and money to help people out in the short term, and I'm met at the end of someone's driveway with a loaded rifle, telling me to get lost, then let me tell you, I'm going to move on from there. I'll take that as a "no, thank you" to what I have to offer. But that person better not be critical of my attempt, or say that they weren't offered any help.
By some miracle, and a few media outlets who are still interested in telling the truth, there is word coming out of Western North Carolina, and Eastern Tennessee, that the massive destruction, which completely wiped out highways, bridges, railroad infrastructure, and thousands of homes and businesses, is being cleaned up and roads and bridges are being rebuilt in record time. And let's be realistic here. This kind of damage takes years to fix. But in spite of bad media reports, and all of the rumors deliberately triggered by Trump supporting liars, the efforts of the US Government in rebuilding infrastructure, clearing up damage and helping residents recover are being done in record time. Thanks, of course, to the efforts of President Joe Biden and his administration, which has managed FEMA as well as any President in history.
I have personal friends who live and work just east of Asheville, in the small community of Black Mountain, which was devastated by the floods. Their home sits on the side of a hill, and escaped the flooding, but the access road into their neighborhood was completely washed out, along with most of the streets in the town below. The day after the water receded, two crews were working in Black Mountain to clear debris and to put down gravel fill so that trapped residents could leave their neighborhood. The sound of the crews working were everywhere, bulldozers, chain saws, trucks carting stuff away. Two large refrigerator trucks were set up on the parking lot of a nearby church, distributing food items and household supplies.
It was all from FEMA. All of it. It would be about a week before any other relief organizations showed up to help. FEMA was there first. My friends noted that neighbors who were affected by the flooding got immediate financial assistance from FEMA, and were able to apply for all kinds of assistance depending on the extent of the damage, and what their own insurance would cover. And their reports, on their social media accounts, say that the recovery is moving as quickly as could be expected in the face of the scope of that disaster.
They, of course, saw the false reports, and they also saw people, in some cases people in poverty, refuse to accept FEMA aid because some Trump idiot had told them if they did, they wouldn't qualify for anything later on. That's the tragedy in Western North Carolina. It's lying and ignorance, and the tragedy is the trust these people place in a pathological liar only interested in using them to stuff his own pockets.
There are people who are having difficulty putting their lives back together, not because the government isn't helping fast enough, but because they bought into the lies Trump and the media have been telling and they've refused the help that has been offered. Rebuilding and repairing the damage there was a monumental task, the progress that has been made so far is ahead of schedule and remarkable considering the circumstances, and the fact that Mike Johnson and the House Republicans wouldn't call a session to pass an aid package for the area. That's how much they think of the voter support they get from Western North Carolina.
Criticism of Bishop Budde by Republicans Characterized as "Un-American". It's Un-Christian, Too.
Atlanta Journal Constitution Opinion, Sophia Nelson: Bishop Budde Was Right to Speak Truth to Trump
"Somehow, a portion of the Republican party, including President Donald Trump and his followers, many of whom profess to love the Lord and and demand the Ten Commandments be displayed in schools, have decided that it is OK to attack a Bishop, Marianne Budde of the Episcopal Diocese of Washington, for her humble and respectful plea to simply show the least of these among us--our fellow citizens--compassion."
So says Sylvia Nelson, a news commentator, in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Nelson self identifies as a Christian. She adds, "I consider religious liberty one of the most sacrosanct freedoms our Founding Fathers left for us to protect and honor. So to see a sitting President openly attack and revile a bishop who asked him to show mercy to immigrants and other vulnerable people is appalling," she said, and added, "Worse, it is un-American."
Amen to that.
Clarifying the Definition of "Professing to Love the Lord"
There's no question that Trump's demand for an apology from Bishop Budde, because she dared speak truth to him based on a core principle from the Christian gospel, which she supported with a citation of a portion of that gospel, is un-American. There's no surprise in his demand for an apology, since he has no idea what the Constitution says, and even if he did, his ego would not allow him to submit to obedience of it. Let's get this straight. We have a President who is a lawbreaker and a felon, and so we should not be surprised when his actions show ignorance of the law, or, more likely, contempt for it.
Desiring to display the Ten Commandments in school classrooms in the United States, is also a violation of what Nelson correctly calls a "sacrosanct freedom" It is not a sign of someone professing to "love the Lord," but is a political statement made by those who are ignorant of both the first amendment's guarantee of a free conscience when it comes to religion, and of the separation of church and state. And if Trump, and his followers who profess to "love the Lord" really did what they claim, they would not have criticized a Bishop who "rightly interpreted the word of truth," as the Apostle Paul says, by preaching a biblically supported core principle of the gospel of Jesus Christ in a sermon during a worship service aimed at bringing about reconciliation and redemption.
Anyone who professes to love the Lord would have found the Bishop's words inspiring, and an accurate characterization of what true Christian practice actually looks like. The Bishop based her sermon on the words of Jesus, as he was closing one of his own sermons to his disciples, getting ready for his crucifixion.
Jesus defined "loving the Lord," in the passage she used.
"For I was hungry, and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink. I was a stranger and you welcomed me. I was naked and you gave me clothing. I was sick and you took care of me. I was in prison, and you visited me."
"Just as you did this to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me." Matthew 25:35-36, 40, NRSV
Being critical of a sermon that is calling on people to practice their Christian faith by humbling themselves and serving others is not "loving the Lord." It is characteristic, however, of what has divided American Christians for most of the 20th and 21st century, the period during which Evangelicalism developed.
The moderate to liberal Christians in this country, whose interpretation of the Bible considers its historical and cultural context, and does not consider the whole book as equal, in terms of either authority for Christian practice, or in the manner in which it is interpreted, have collectively focused Christian practice on how being a recipient of grace by faith in Jesus causes someone to view the world and live by the values that Jesus considered core components of the Christian gospel. Their faith practice includes those things on which the Bishop focused in her sermon, the love of one's neighbor equal to the love of one's self, and all of the core values of the Christian faith emphasized and preached by Jesus in every reference to his teaching in the gospel.
A more literal interpretation, emphasizing how separate parts of the Bible read and are interpreted literally, as the translators have determined the meaning of the text, is a late 19th century-early 20th century development in Christianity, which led to the development of what we now call conservative Evangelicals, in its various forms, most notably the fundamentalism of Jerry Falwell and the Pentecostal/Charismatic practice of Pat Robertson. Their literalism removes most of the historical and cultural contexts by which the Bible's authors interpreted Christian faith and practice, and how they looked at the Christian gospel, and focuses the practice on one's self, on the acquisition and maintenance of one's personal holiness, and on developing this holiness by following the rules and commandments found all through the Bible, including the Old Testament.
So when Nelson says that many of Trump's Evangelical followers profess to love the Lord, they look at what defines doing so in a very different way. While it is not consistent with the character of the Christian faith to impose commandments on anyone, since the Christian gospel teaches a lifestyle that is motivated by grace, through faith, not the result of checking off obedience boxes to a list of commandments, the fact that these people want the Ten Commandments in classrooms is quite telling about their lack of understanding of the Christian gospel. If there was an insistence on posting something on the wall of a classroom that represented Christian faith and practice, it would be the Beatitudes, or the Christian principle of being "salt and light," emphasizing values on which the Christian gospel places the highest value, like peacemaking, mercy and forgiveness, integrity, good stewardship, a sense of community, humility, and loving one's enemies and neighbors equally. That's the true essence of the Christian faith.
Where are those things evident among the rhetoric, the lies, the cheating, the thirst for vengeance, and the authoritarian intentions of Trump and Project 2025? Trump and most of the conservative critics of Bishop Budde, are not really demonstrating a faith that shows their love for the Lord, they are demonstrating a measure of selfish ambition in using Christianity as a means to pursue a very selfish agenda that ultimately exists for the purpose of enriching the few at the expense of the many.
Trump Attacked Bishop Budde, Religious Liberty and Church-State Separation
One of the differences of opinion between right wing extremism and the Christianity represented by Bishop Budde is that Trump's attack on the bishop was also an attack on the first amendment, particularly on the principle of separation of church and state, the "wall" built by the establishment clause. White Evangelicals have, since the beginning of their existence in the late 19th century, promoted some form of Christian nationalism. This is caused by their faulty, literalist interpretations of the Bible which attempt to impose elements of the Old Testament Jewish theocracy into Christian practice. There's a long history there that is worth knowing, especially by those who wish to see this movement defeated in elections.
There's a whole history of a movement labelled "Anglo-Israelism," that is an underlying feature of Evangelicalism, the idea that the white Europeans who emigrated to America were chosen by God to be given a chance to build a Christian nation using the resources of the virgin North American continent. The establishment clause and the first amendment are clear obstacles to this perspective, and clear evidence that the founders were not intending to establish America as a "Christian nation".
Trump, to secure his Evangelical base, has made the erosion of this separation part of his agenda, evident in his attack on Bishop Budde. This is where the Bishop's sermon has drawn the battle line. The establishment clause and the principles of religious liberty were the result of the influence of Christians in the United States who had experienced persecution under state church rule, and who came here to escape from it. Bishop Budde, and the millions of American Christians who are in churches and denominations not influenced by aberrant fundamentalism or mystic Pentecostalism, are the strongest supporters of church-state separation and religious liberty. They are an essential part of any agenda formed, or reformed, to help combat Trump and his Project 2025 agenda.
Saturday, January 25, 2025
There are Bright, Silver Linings in Those Very Dark Clouds
Reaction From the Evangelical Right Wing to Bishop Budde's Sermon Reveals Their Idolatry and Hatred
As expected, the angry reaction from the fundamentalist, conservative, Evangelical, Pentecostal/Charismatic wing has been predictable, finding ways to pick apart the values that Bishop Budde preached. Here's the bottom line. There wasn't a doctrinal or theological problem with anything the Bishop said, and in fact, they know she "correctly divided the word of truth." What some of them have come up with is a very twisted and manipulated interpretation of various Biblical texts, taking them out of the meaning that comes from understanding their historical context, and applying their own literalist standards to make the Bible's writers say something they didn't mean. They're good at that. In so doing, they've contradicted their own teaching, but they know most of their followers have absolutely no idea how to interpret scripture, and are dependent on these leaders to do it for them.
But there's another interesting response in here that tells us most of these so called "Christian" right wingers have a different gospel in mind, other than the one found in the New Testament, revealed by Jesus and recorded by his apostles. They perceived this as a public attack on their idol, Trump. Would their reaction have been so quick, so vitriolic and so angry if this had merely been a sermon preached from the pulpit of the Washington National Cathedral during a regular Sunday morning service? They would have passed this off as just another example of Episcopalian liberalism, and it's doubtful they would have torn into the contents, or into the character of the Bishop the way they did which, by the way, is a violation of the very scripture they claim to be defending.
The god that these conservative Evangelicals, the fundamentalists of Falwellian ilk and the charismatics of the Robertson ilk, worship is money. And their idol and object of their adoration is Trump.
The Apostle Paul actually addresses this kind of apostasy in the church, in his second epistle to the church at Thessalonica:
"The coming of the lawless one is apparent in the working of Satan, who uses all power, signs, lying, wonders and every kind of wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason, God sends them a powerful delusion, leading them to beliefe what is false, so that all who have not believed the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness will be condemned." 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12, NRSV
For those who aren't Christians, this might not have any specific meaning, but for those who have been caught up in the Trump cult, these are terms they understand, and have falsely applied to anyone who doesn't follow their theology and doctrine. Trump's very public and repeated denials of his need for God's forgiveness is more than just a difference of religious opinion, it is an outright blasphemy of the core doctrine of Christian conversion, and constitutes a public rejection of the Christian faith. In fact, Trump even takes it a step further by claiming to have formed his own god, in whom he believes, not the one revealed by Jesus in the Christian gospel.
This might all just sound like religious fiction and nonsense to those who don't profess the Christian faith, or who are not engaged in religious practice. However, in the political climate in the United States today, in which political power is quickly becoming entwined with a very real agenda and philosophy of government known as "White Christian Nationalism," the non-religious need to understand the roots of what is going on across the whole spectrum of Christian doctrine, thought and practice in order to unite with those Christians who understand the implications of all of this for the purpose of protecting our basic rights to freedom of conscience, our common freedom of, or from, religion, and especially to strengthen the wall of separation that exists between the church and the state, for the benefit of both.
The reaction to the Bishop's words, from several conservative Evangelicals in Congress, most notably Speaker Mike Johnson, from leaders like Franklin Graham, along with some of the more vitriolic elements of Charismatic pseudo-Christianity and fundamentalist televangelism, is telling. They've jumped up to defend Trump being confronted by the truth, in a way that they have never confronted him themselves about his blatant, public licentiousness, claims to worldliness, pathological lying, angry vengeance he spews, and his openly and blatant violations of the law, including the violence he promoted on January 6th, and the hatred and murder he advocates for those who have opposed his lawlessness. He is the idol they worship. They no longer follow Jesus Christ, if any of them ever did.
He fits the Apostle Paul's description of "the lawless one."
Friday, January 24, 2025
When Genuine Christian Values Showed up in Washington, It Wasn't in the Form of a Conservative Evangelical, Fundamentalist, Pentecostal, Charismatic
It was the female Episcopalian Bishop of Washington, a prelate of the liberal, progressive, left wing Episcopal Church, a post which makes her essentially the "pastor" of the Washington National Cathedral. The Reverend Mariann Edgar Budde, an Episcopal postulant, deacon, priest, rector and now Bishop of Washington, which is essentially leadership over the diocese where the church's headquarters are located.
There are some implications involved in her speaking truth to power that really shine some light on the hypocrisy, heresy, apostasy and failure of conservative Evangelicalism to be the testimony for Jesus Christ that they claim to be, and that they criticize the Episcopal Church for not being. The world has just turned upside down, right on top of some of the biggest hypocrites in the United States.
She is Everything They Are Not
I've watched video of Bishop Budde's sermon at the National Cathedral several times, and I'll enjoy it every time I watch it.
Conservative Evangelical leaders, for the most part, label the Episcopal Church as "liberal," and consider it in apostasy for the manner in which it interprets Christian faith, claiming that it either deliberately ignores parts of the scripture that doesn't support its progressive social views, or that it misinterprets them to suit its own presuppositions. They are dismissive of its theology and doctrine, but even more so of its liberal social practices that include its acceptance of gays and lesbians into church membership and into orgination as clergy, and what they consider to be a soft position on abortion rights. And on the basis of those interpretations, they claim that the Episcopal church cannot be evangelistic, in that it is not capable of leading people to a Christian conversion experience.
And, of course, conservative Evangelicals are opposed to allowing women to serve in their clergy, specifically with the title "Bishop, Pastor, Overseer or Elder," which they claim are different titles for the same "office" within the church because being the "husband of one wife" is one of the qualifications to serve in this office, found in I Timothy 3.
So, when Bishop Mariann Budde preached the sermon in the inauguration's prayer service in the National Cathedral, a church which falls under her jurisdiction as Bishop of Washington, she "correctly divided the word of truth," a Biblical phrase from Timothy that Evangelicals often use as a prooftext to proclaim their own correctness. Preaching from Matthew 25, Bishop Budde laid out some principles of the Christian gospel that seem to be foreign to most of the Republicans gathered in the Cathedral, and to those in Trump's MAGA movement.
And from the reaction she got from Trump supporters among the conservative Evangelical leadership across the country, including conservative Evangelicals in Congress, like Mike Johnson, and those among the prominent Evangelical leadership that openly supports Trump shamelessly, she hit a live nerve.
The biggest problem most of her critics seem to have with her sermon is that she was right. It spoke truth, and they couldn't find any way to counter that without looking like little anti-Christs. The spirit of God came down, and rested upon a woman, a Bishop of the Episcopal church, a progressive, liberal, Christian, who didn't preach from some scientific journal or psychiatric reference, or academic history, but who quoted the scriptures, in their correct context, and pointed out where the President's practices were wrong, from a Christian perspective.
Amen!
And She's Not Backing Down
They didn't get what they wanted. Not only is she not backing down, she's getting all kinds of media attention and opportunities to emphasize exactly what she did. She's been on MSNBC with Rachel Maddow, and the sermon content has gone viral, excerpts and quotes showing up everywhere, including AP News, the New York Times, NPR, and Time Magazine. What she had to say is being called a core teaching and practice of the Christian faith.
And they can't stand it.
For the first time, the media is actually reporting the contrast between the Christian gospel and Trump lies and disinformation, and is putting conservative Evangelical supporters of Trump on the side of lies and disinformation. The coverage has been amazingly extensive.
We are also seeing the true corrupt character of Trump and of MAGA come out. Their response has been far less than Christian, in fact, it has been as worldly and as evil as expected. They've threatened the Bishop's livlihood, and there have been death threats, or at least, as she characterized them, some detractors wishing for her demise. Their true character is showing, and it is certainly not as focused on the gospel as she has been. In fact, we are seeing a genuine example of exactly why Trump and MAGA are not Christian at all, in any sense of the world.
And the follow up to this was provided by Franklin Graham, who said "Trump stands for truth," and has yet to offer a single piece of evidence to support that statement. I'm going to say something here that needs to be said. I know a lot of liberals who don't place any faith at all in the existence of God or in the spiritual power of the Christian faith. But here's an egregious example of someone who has been blinded to the truth by some kind of spiritual force, something the Bible calls a "powerful delusion." Franklin Graham isn't the only one blind to Trump's evil, anti-Christian agenda. But he is definitely blind to reality and to the truth.
And Yet Another Element of the Christian Gospel, the Bishop Offers Grace
Noting that it is something Episcopalian Christians are encouraged to do, the Bishop made note of the fact that, in spite of how she feels about his politics and policies, she will pray for the President. That's a private act of one's faith that others can't know for certain. Given the rhetoric that many of the conservative Evangelical leaders and pastors convey when they speak of Democrats like Joe Biden or Barack Obama, it's hard to take them seriously when they claim to pray for the President, no matter his partisan affiliation. Well, OK. I won't judge. But I trust Bishop Budde. I know she will do what she says, because her sincerity was visible.
Author's Note, January 25, 2025
As expected, the angry reaction from the fundamentalist, conservative, Evangelical, Pentecostal/Charismatic wing has been predictable, finding ways to pick apart the values that Bishop Budde preached. Here's the bottom line. There wasn't a doctrinal or theological problem with anything the Bishop said, and in fact, they know she "correctly divided the word of truth." What some of them have come up with is a very twisted and manipulated interpretation of various Biblical texts, taking them out of the meaning that comes from understanding their historical context, and applying their own literalist standards to make the Bible's writers say something they didn't mean. They're good at that. In so doing, they've contradicted their own teaching, but they know most of their followers have absolutely no idea how to interpret scripture, and are dependent on these leaders to do it for them.
But there's another interesting response in here that tells us most of these so called "Christian" right wingers have a different gospel in mind, other than the one found in the New Testament, revealed by Jesus and recorded by his apostles. They perceived this as a public attack on their idol, Trump. Would their reaction have been so quick, so vitriolic and so angry if this had merely been a sermon preached from the pulpit of the Washington National Cathedral during a regular Sunday morning service? They would have passed this off as just another example of Episcopalian liberalism, and it's doubtful they would have torn into the contents, or into the character of the Bishop the way they did which, by the way, is a violation of the very scripture they claim to be defending.
The god that these conservative Evangelicals, the fundamentalists of Falwellian ilk and the charismatics of the Robertson ilk, worship is money. And their idol and object of their adoration is Trump.
The Apostle Paul actually addresses this kind of apostasy in the church, in his second epistle to the church at Thessalonica:
"The coming of the lawless one is apparent in the working of Satan, who uses all power, signs, lying, wonders and every kind of wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason, God sends them a powerful delusion, leading them to beliefe what is false, so that all who have not believed the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness will be condemned." 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12, NRSV
For those who aren't Christians, this might not have any specific meaning, but for those who have been caught up in the Trump cult, these are terms they understand, and have falsely applied to anyone who doesn't follow their theology and doctrine. Trump's very public and repeated denials of his need for God's forgiveness is more than just a difference of religious opinion, it is an outright blasphemy of the core doctrine of Christian conversion, and constitutes a public rejection of the Christian faith. In fact, Trump even takes it a step further by claiming to have formed his own god, in whom he believes, not the one revealed by Jesus in the Christian gospel.
This might all just sound like religious fiction and nonsense to those who don't profess the Christian faith, or who are not engaged in religious practice. However, in the political climate in the United States today, in which political power is quickly becoming entwined with a very real agenda and philosophy of government known as "White Christian Nationalism," the non-religious need to understand the roots of what is going on across the whole spectrum of Christian doctrine, thought and practice in order to unite with those Christians who understand the implications of all of this for the purpose of protecting our basic rights to freedom of conscience, our common freedom of, or from, religion, and especially to strengthen the wall of separation that exists between the church and the state, for the benefit of both.
The reaction to the Bishop's words, from several conservative Evangelicals in Congress, most notably Speaker Mike Johnson, from leaders like Franklin Graham, along with some of the more vitriolic elements of Charismatic pseudo-Christianity and fundamentalist televangelism, is telling. They've jumped up to defend Trump being confronted by the truth, in a way that they have never confronted him themselves about his blatant, public licentiousness, claims to worldliness, pathological lying, angry vengeance he spews, and his openly and blatant violations of the law, including the violence he promoted on January 6th, and the hatred and murder he advocates for those who have opposed his lawlessness.
He fits the Apostle Paul's description of "the lawless one."
Thursday, January 23, 2025
What it Looks Like to be Done With Politics as Usual and Party Loyalty
Monday, for the first time that I can remember in my adult life, I did not watch the inauguration of a President. As a historian, and a civics and social studies educator, and a lifelong member of the Democratic party, I could not bring myself to sit there and watch something happen that never should have taken place, had our government worked the way the founding fathers desired. Without the level of trust that they determined, in their day, must exist in order for the constitutional democracy they designed and ratified to work, it reached a point of failure on January 20, 2025 from which it may never be able to recover.
Frankly, the level of trust required to make government work the way it was designed to work hasn't existed in Washington for a long time. There have been times, over the past eighty years, when a strong leader was able to make Congress deliver for the people, but that job has become much more difficult with each passing Presidency. And none of the problems perceived by those who voted for Trump, expecting that he will fix them, will get fixed, because as President, he has neither the authority, nor the ability, to fix the problems he convinced his supporters were the reason to vote for him.
What's disconcerting about all of this is that the man who made that rambling, disjointed, factless, vindictive, and demented speech as the newly inaugurated President of the United States won a razor thin election by relying on lies, anger, vindictiveness and revenge, and without offering any policy that would solve any of the problems he claimed he would fix. The party that offered a sound record of fixing problems that government needed to solve, and providing benefits that helped people deal with existing problems, along with long term, common sense solutions, lost, by a razor thin margin but still, a loss is a loss.
And the rest of the world wonders how it is that a country, blessed with the resources of the United States, and the freedom it has enjoyed for 235 years, would willingly put that freedom at risk to elect, of all things, a reality television star, as the political leader of the country and commander in chief of its military.
I wonder that same thing.
Where the Priorities Need to Be
It's not like we didn't see this coming. Rush Limbaugh was the one who pushed the idea that if the Republicans wanted control, and couldn't get it through the ballot box, then they had to keep picking up pieces of the judiciary when they could win elections and have those appointive powers, and they had to get rid of a free press in favor of propaganda outlets they could control, like his EIB network. Thom Hartmann has repeatedly reminded us of this fact. We lost those mid-term elections we needed to win to stop this from happening.
We did have options open to us. Maybe Obama's first term was too far back to see someone like Trump coming down the road, but we were already fighting with the far right over the Supreme Court. The Republicans were more than willing to step outside the bounds of acceptable protocol, and deny President Obama the opportunity to replace Antonin Scalia because they had a majority in the Senate and simply refused to even conduct hearings on his nominee.
So, it would have been practical to have considered amending the Judiciary Act, when we had a majority in both houses, and creating several additional Supreme Court justice seats for Biden to fill when he came into office. That would have prevented Roe from being overturned, which was allegedly an issue of high importance to Democrats, and it would have prevented the ridiculous and unconstitutional immunity ruling this court came up with. It would have been relatively easy to figure out legislation that would have prevented the next GOP majority Senate from doing the same.
That would have solved another problem for Democrats. It would have expidited Trump's insurrection trial and gotten a verdict quickly.
All of that was talked about, and some Democrats in Congress tried to get things started. But our party, well, I don't know. It appears that some Democratic party leaders really didn't think Trump was an existential threat to American democracy, or they didn't think he would win, one or the other. Either way, that was a grave mistake. There wouldn't have been anything at all wrong with packing the court and then, amending the judiciary act to make it virtually impossible for them to change the number of judges on the court. That would have been bold politics, risky, but doable.
Lost opportunities, though, aren't worth discussing at this point. What we need now, immediately, in spite of the malaise and depression that seems to have Democrats in its grip, is more bold action. It's time for some leadership willing to do that to step up. Not in a few months, when things are settled, but now.
And What Would Bold Action At This Point Look Like?
Running candidates, and funding them, in those races where Trump snatched members of the house out of their seats would be a good place to start. So what if they are red districts? Challenge every single seat. Surely, we can raise the kind of money that might require. Maybe it's a long shot, but special elections don't always go by the rules, especially when the turnout isn't high because there's not a presidential election, or anything else on the ballot for that matter.
I know that the system for choosing candidates to run for political office is severely flawed, skewed in the same direction everything else in our government is skewed toward, and that is the influence of money. But we need to run the best, most electable candidates possible, we need to keep the narrative simple, clear, and under control, and we need the money to get the turnout necessary to win. Special elections don't always follow patterns, thinking back to when Doug Jones was able to win the Senate seat in deep dark red Alabama when he was the only candidate on the ballot.
So let's pick up some house seats and throw the Trump agenda into disarray during its opening phase.
One of the highlights of my morning commute is the beginning of the Stephanie Miller Show. This is where I get my daily inspiration to keep going, to keep thinking in a positive direction, and frankly, just to hold it together. They have the exact correct approach, a mix of comedy, with a lot of ridicule thrown in, a check of the facts and a discussion of the big issues of the day in a manner which keeps my attention focused where it should be, and beyond that, assures me that there are plenty of other people out there who think like I do.
I don't know if becoming one of the most reliable progressive media sites was what they had in mind when they initiated their program, but we need to figure out how to get that program linked up with progressive Democrats everywhere. They, along with Thom Hartmann, Amy Goodman and David Pakman, would be a knockout media group, doing, in the free press, on the left, what Fox does on the right.
Sometimes, an offhand remark can get things started. This morning, I filled up with gas. Saturday, at the convenience store across the street from my building, the price of a gallon of gas was $3.29. When I stopped today, two days after the orange headed buffoon's inauguration, it was $3.49. I made a comment to the clerk, "Well, Trump's been in two days and the price of gas is up 20 cents!" He laughed, and one of the other customers said, "It's going to get worse than that if his tarrif plans go through."
Now that tells me there are people who are paying attention to this stuff. I also heard someone in the grocery store yesterday make note of the fact that Trump had been in office for 24 hours, and the price of eggs had not come down. Is that trite? Maybe so, but it's funny, and it is nice to hear people talking that way. I have to keep reminding myself, this is, after all, Chicago, which is a liberal, progressive bubble at the core of a group of collar counties that control Illinois politics and consistently elect Democrats to Congress. But still, it helps to imagine exactly how helpful it could be for Democrats to control, not only their own narrative, but the messaging, and make sure it saturates enough of the electorate to make a difference in election results.
That's what we need to be doing, NOW!
We Need a Leader, Now
I'm curious to know where the support is going for those who are running for DNC chair. Frankly, I'm not sure I'd call the DNC effective, at least not recently. I think we need a strong leader, and the only person running for chair who has said anything that caught my attention was, incredibly, Marianne Williamson, who said, "It's important that we recognize the psychological and emotional dimensions of Trump's appeal. We need to understand it to create energy to counter it. MAGA is a distinctly 21st century political movement and it will not be defeated by a 20th century tool kit."
Amen to that. But that's about as far as the dialogue interested me. And it doesn't appear that there's much of a 21st century tool kid developing at the DNC, with the other candidates. It looks like business as usual. Whining about lack of diversity among the candidates for chair is not a good place to start. The Hill: DNC Chair Race Sees Lack of DIversity in Candidates
I'm supporting David Hogg's bid to become First Vice Chair of the Democratic National Committee. It's my personal perspective and opinion that the DNC has been moribund for some time now, and it badly needs leadership that can not only unite the Democratic party quickly, but become proactively engaged in being that point where strategy comes together to help Democrats take Congress back in the 2026 mid-term elections. We need this to be the kind of political think tank like the Obama Presidential campaigns, or Bill Clinton's.
I'll tell you what did the trick for me, as far as getting on David's bandwagon. Well, "I get it that its uncomfortable to be told what you don't want to hear," he said, after being admonished to be quiet at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, "but we need to build that culture as a party."
Yes, we sure do. Democrats, not wanting to be told what they didn't want to hear, lost the Presidential election on the margins as a result. There was plenty of expert political advice coming their way that they didn't take until a debate performance by then nominee and President Joe Biden shook them awake. But it was too late, then. I want to see someone at the DNC with the political savvy to see things coming before its too late, and to bring those conversations out into the open for discussion, no matter how uncomfortable. We'd be in much different circumstances today, had a Democratic party political candidate had a full year to campaign, instead of just a few weeks.
The problem is that the Democratic party needs a real leader now. We can't wait for the election wounds to heal. Harris and Biden have left Washington, and it seems that Democrats have scurried into one hole or another.
Someone needs to step up and earn my vote.
Monday, January 20, 2025
Pseudo-Christian Intruders Are Wolves in Evangelical Clothing and a Destructive Force to American Democracy, And to its Churches
Saturday, January 18, 2025
For Democrats, the Days of Gentlemanly Old School, Status Quo Politics Are Over
Thursday, January 16, 2025
Thank You, President Joe Biden
Tuesday, January 14, 2025
What Loving Your Neighbor Looks Like in the Face of Unthinkable Tragedy
When Our Church was Tested by Fire
The entire ministry focus of the First Baptist Church of Pasadena, California changed dramatically between Sunday, January 4th and Sunday, January 12th. Between Tuesday, January 7th and Thursday, January 9th, more than 1,400 homes, businesses, schools and other buildings burned in the cities of Pasadena and Altadena, in the Eaton fire. The pastor of First Baptist Church tells a harrowing story of his family's evacuation of their own home, of having to go through the trauma of deciding which belongings were most important, and which ones they might not see again, and then, having to leave their house behind as flames, close enough to be seen from their roof, engulfed the northern streets of their city.
They were among those who were fortunate enough not to lose their homes. But several families who were members of the church community did, along with many others who took refuge in the church building which was opened as a shelter during the evacuation and has continued to serve in that capacity ever since. The congregation did gather for worship on Sunday, something the pastor says in the BNG article that they do best, and it became a time of not only giving comfort to those within the church who suffered such an unimaginable loss, but also to organize themselves, put their building to use as a place to organize relief for the community, and then determine how best to use their resources to shift to this ministry that has become a sudden and immediate priority.
They are, of their own initiative, not waiting for a hint or a push, stepping into the need and making themselves available, sacrificially. It's a natural thing to do for a church which understands the basic Christian principle of loving your neighbor as you love yourself.
The Church's Website Provides Ways for People to Help
The first thing to be seen when the website for https://fbcpasadena.com/ is open is the page providing information about the church's ministry in the wake of the wildfires. There are multiple ways listed there for people to help, information provided about exactly what the church is doing to help and indicating that this is their ministry priority now until the need is no longer there. The help and resources are available to anyone who is looking for either.
I would also suggest listening to the Daily Encouragement messages that are recorded there. Doing so will be an inspiration and a motivation to get beyond thoughts and prayers, and think of the people as fellow human beings, our neighbors, even if they are a long way off. These are people just like the rest of us, going about their regular business a week ago, never imagining that in a few short days, their home would be gone, and in some cases, family members, friends and neighbors would also lose their lives. The evacuation, with winds blowing down trees, smoke spreading everywhere, streets blocked, and traffic crawling as entire communities fled, must have been a terribly traumatic experience, as the pastor describes his family's evacuation.
So if this kind of tragedy is still a bit too far away to feel anything, then listening for a few moments is the right thing to do. It's far removed from the politics, indifference and hatred that's been spewed as a result of this tragedy. Here's a church providing an example for the rest of us to follow when it comes to loving our neighbor as we love ourselves.
No strings attached.
I read somewhere last week that 85% of the members of Congress claim to be Christian, of some kind or another. So how is it that the members of Congress who are both Christian and Republican don't want to offer relief for the fires without political strings attached to it? How evil is that? I'd suggest listening to some of the messages recorded by this church's pastor and taking heed.