Democrats Who Keep Voting to Advance Trump's Agenda Are The Reason Behind My Anger and Frustration

Three Democratic Senators Vote to Advance Trump Agenda 

For those who are the politics police, no, this doesn't do anything except call attention to a problem that is supported by facts.  I'm just pointing out mistakes made by Democratic party leadership when they have had a chance to response in a better way.  

United States foreign policy hit an all time low point in the screaming, blame-filled rant of Trump and Vance, a verbal attack on a man who is doing his dead level best to preserve the freedoms his people have earned through hundreds of years of suffering under the domination of a more powerful neighbor.  There has never been a more embarrassing moment in the foreign relations of this country than that meeting and press conference with Ukrainian President Vlodomir Zelenskyy.  It was a display of some of the most anti-American, inhumane and unjust action that our country has ever embarrassed itself by allowing both of those men to do what they did with Zelenskyy. 

Marco Rubio, who is Secretary of State, has proven himself to be either the single most inept and foolish person in the Trump cabinet, or the worst of the worst when it comes to sycophants who suck up to the demented, incompetent Trump.  He's the Secretary of State, and we know that since the GOP has a congressional majority, the votes will go their way.  But this snivelling, duplicitous liar is just feathering his own nest with Trump favors while lying through his teeth when answering questions.  

He was confirmed with a vote of 99-0, which means that no Democrat voted against him.  And that is absolutely, positively, totally infuriating.  There are those of us out here, in the real world, who contributed to Democratic candidates in hopes they would win the elections and with that contribution, expressed trust and belief in the cause that they were advancing.  Or, that we thought they were advancing.  This is sheer disappointment.

Either Donald Trump is an existential threat to American Constitutional Democracy, or he is not a threat.  If he is, then there is no excuse, not one, for a 99-0 confirmation vote on any candidate the man nominates for any cabinet post.  Now I read where another vitriolic America-hating MAGAt, Lori Chavez-DeRemer, got three Democratic senators to vote for her to get her name out of committee as the nominee for, of all things, Labor Secretary.  A woman who is as anti-labor as they come, who stands against what the Democratic party says it believes when it comes to organized labor and workers rights, gets three Democratic votes on the committee.  

And you wonder why people are being critical of Democrats in Congress, accusing them of hiding out and protecting their own interests instead of fighting against Trump's Project 2025 agenda?  Why the questions keep coming up about where the hell is our leadership and what are they doing, even within the limits of their power, when these idiots and subversives come before their committee to be confirmed before being nominated to a cabinet post.  Why we are turning to individuals like Bernie Sanders, and Alexandria Casio-Cortez, and Jasmine Crockett, who aren't asking permission before they speak up and who are moving ahead with plans to opposed this evil, incompetent, criminal enterprise that is now in the White House.  

You, the party leadership, want me to trust you, and make sure my contribution lands in your coffer.  You notice that I give a little more than average, so you share my name and contact information with other Democrats.  In spite of the election loss, you appeal to my understanding that Trump continues to be a threat and offer opposition as a means to stop him.  He's still a threat, you tell me, and because we lost the election, we will need a little more of your help to stop him.  So here's where to send the money.  

And then, as hearings are held and nominees are confirmed, which is expected given the Republican majority, I read news reports pointing out which Democrats are voting to confirm these totally incompetent boobs Trump is nominating.  Democrats voting for them, for God's sake.  But the fundraising appeals keep right on coming.  Well, sorry if there hasn't been a response.  But I don't see anything the party leadership is actually doing to back up their words about Trump's threat.  

What the hell kind of opposition is that?  If Trump is an existential threat to Democracy, then act like it, question like it and vote like it.  And don't come asking for money until you have a plan that will work.  As long as Democrats vote for his nominees, I'm not contributing a dime.

The Same Sinking Feeling Keeps Coming Back From When We Realized Garland Wasn't Going to Move His Tail, Use the Power of the Justice Department and Make Sure Trump Was Tried for Insurrection

Every Democratic member of Congress' vote to confirm a Trump appointee is a let-down.  It's demoralizing.  What in the hell are we fighting for?  Those of us in the rank and file have been waiting to see who emerged as leaders of the opposition, capable of doing even some of the most difficult work possible, like convincing enough republican members of Congress to vote to impeach and remove him.  It doesn't appear that even all of the Democrats are interested in doing that.  

This is the ineffective Justice Department and Merrick Garland all over again.  Trump committed serious crimes and the Attorney General dragged his feet, obfuscated, went for a period of time without making any progress at all, deliberately, which we didn't know about until afterward, and then shrugged his shoulders in an irresolute way and let us know that the justice department of the world's most democratic, free, and prosperous country could not bring a notorious and obviously guilty political criminal to justice.  

The sick feeling I had when I realized he'd waited too long, and wasn't going to take bold risks but was going to hide out and try to stay off the radar screen and out of the courtroom is the same one I have now when I see Democrats acting irresolute in the face of the greatest danger our constitutional democracy has faced since the Civil War.  They are playing a game that is convincing me they do not think Trump is an existential threat to American democracy, and they are telling me they are really not going to do a damn thing about it except flap their lips.

It's the sinking feeling I had knowing that we had a Democratic majority in Congress for two years, and there was talk about taking the risk to end the filibuster, and then pack that damn Supreme Court, but the answer was no, the President didn't want to undo that senate tradition.  Well, there were certainly risks on the other side of that, but had it been done, we'd still have Roe, Trump wouldn't have been able to delay his insurrection verdict, there would have been no ridiculous, unconstitutional ruling giving unlimited immunity to the President, and while there might be other dangers to constitutional democracy posed by this Republican party when their hands got the Senate, Trump wouldn't be one of them.  

I did not vote for Democrats to have them rubber stamp Trump's agenda.  I voted for Democrats because I think Trump's agenda is wrong, bad for America, anti-American, in fact, and represents nothing but corruption and incompetence.  He's aligned himself with a satanically inspired religious cult and if this doesn't get stopped, America as we know it will cease to exist.  

Hakeem Jeffries told us that the Democratic party was united, and ready to do anything necessary to stop Trump.  That is apparently and obviously not the case.  

So I'm going to follow the people I see who are really doing something about it.   

Leaders in the Fight Against Oligarchy Are Emerging, and Bernie Sanders is at the Top of the List

He's 83 years old, and he puts to rest the misinformed discussion about the capabilities of older people with regard to carrying the mantle of political leadership.  Senator Bernie Sanders, still holding the confidence of the overwhelming majorty of voters in the state of Vermont, still standing absolutely firm in convictions regarding how American values should be affecting and shaping our culture, still calling out the immoral, inhumane, and patently unfair practices of a corporate-dominated government that one Supreme Court ruling, Citizens United in 2010, caused to completely push American politics over the edge of unbridled corruption.  

The Democratic primaries prior to both the 2008 and 2016 elections were difficult ones for me.  Having to choose between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton was tough, since there wasn't a whole lot, other than personality, experience and leadership ability, that distinguished them, and even in those areas, both brought assets to the table that made them strong leaders.  For me, in 2008, the choice was based on who I perceived would be the stronger candidate against whomever the Republicans would run, and I voted for Obama.  

In 2016, there was a distinctive philosophical difference between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton.  Clinton represented the mainstream core of the Democratic party, while Sanders has always been on the left, which is where I find myself being aligned, from a political perspective.  My Dad was a union member, and belonged to two different local chapters of the International Chemical Workers Union Council (I.C.W.U.C.) founded in 1944.  He was a World War 2 naval veteran, was one of the two members of his extended family who went to college, cast his first vote for President for F.D.R. in 1944, and his party affiliation and support reflected his belief that the working class was the backbone of America.  

And it was his influence over my political perspective that pushed me in Sanders' direction.  And of course, being a loyal Democrat, when Sanders lost in the primary, I supported Clinton's candidacy.  I don't know if we made a mistake back then, in not nominating Bernie.  Clinton brought her own strenghts to the campaign, and would have made an excellent President, unquestionably far superior to the corruption, lies, dishonesty and incompetence we got from Trump in his miserable first term.  But Bernie would have been a risk taker, and he would have led the way toward making some foundational changes, starting with the Supreme Court, that would have prevented what we are experiencing now.  

His age doesn't seem to be an obstacle, does it?  He's not concerned about protecting his turf, or hanging on to what power he can hold, he's willing to put that at risk to save American democracy and to bring about the kind of legislative reform necessary to protect the American middle, working class as the lifeblood of the nation.  He doesn't look at polling numbers before launching out into rallies where he simply tells the truth.  He is the most consistent liberal politician of my lifetime, and he's doing exactly what I expect, as a rank and file Democrat who believes that the time to stop Trump is to jump on it now and get it done.  

The DNC and Democratic party had better embrace this, and give it support that it deserves. Beyond that, we'd better examine the messaging here and how it is being delivered, and start bringing pressure to bear on vulnerable Republicans in Congress.  We need to put a stop to Trump now, we need to get Elon Musk out of the government, and nullify his ability to buy it for himself.  Yeah, I know, Bernie is an independent, not a Democrat, but he is doing a whole lot more to put a stop to the Trump oligarchy than the entire Democratic party delegation in Congress.  

I've been getting a lot of appeals, asking me for money.  Following the 2024 election, during which I gave far more than the average Democrat did, though a drop in the bucket compared to individual Republican contributions, and I did it because I am a loyal Democrat and I believe our candidates are best for this country, by far.  But that stopped shortly after the election. I still don't see that Democrats in Congress have a strong or unified approach to stopping Trump, which, according to their own rhetoric, should be a priority.  Bernie does, and he's not waiting for approval from the party protocol police to move forward.  

Trying to Be Optimistic, I Do See Some Glimmers of Hope 

The first contributions I've made since the election went to David Hogg's Leaders We Deserve PAC.  There's a young Democrat who knows what he is talking about, isn't bound by meaningless and ineffective party and political protocols and demonstrates party leadership potential.  I am hoping that his presence, along with Ken Martin, as leaders of the DNC will revive that moribund organization and make it the effective communicator of the Democratic party messaging, figuring out how to use its resources to get our candidates elected.  

I'm also contributing to the campaigns of the Democrats running to take the congressional seats in the upcoming special elections, two in Florida and one in New York.  It seems that the hunkering down and interest protecting stance of Democrats in Congress is precluding any public push to support those running for the three seats that strategically would put a stop to any initiative to cut budgets and strip federal agencies of workers, as well as to getting rid of Elon Musk as a, whatever it is he does, menace.  

The clearest message coming out of anyone in Congress right now, other than Bernie, is being laid out by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  Democrats are overdue in getting her into some place of more influence in the party.  She, along with Jasmine Crockett, are who we want in front of the cameras when the media isn't focusing on its "Trump, Trump, Trump, Musk, Musk, Musk" theme.  She's one who can get the attention of those cameras and she has a way of turning media negativity and bias back onto the reporters who awkwardly put themselves in position of having to keep up with her thought process and her speech.  

And if she can get media attention, which she does, Crockett, too, why can't the Democratic party leadership? 

Genuine and Unselfish

Given the treatment Bernie has had to endure, including criticism that falls outside the parameters of acceptable for those on the left, including most Democrats, his continuing push to set things right and to stop Trump is very unselfish and genuine.  He could also be protecting his interests, clutching his pearls, and collecting checks, enjoying congressional perks and simply letting the days pass while enduring whatever stupidity transpires in Washington, hoping it won't affect him.  He represents Vermont, so he doesn't have to travel far and the scope of the work of a Senator from a small state should be easy.  

But he's out there, one of the few who is finding an effective way of fighting against this criminal and corrupt Trump oligarchy.  

My advice is to pay attention and learn something, because he is getting this right.

Democrats Want Leaders to Step Up Now, With Actions, Not Mere Words, to Protect This Republic

 Hakeem Jeffries on Rachel Maddow

"Democrats want to hear from you, personally, as the senior Democrat in Washington, in the house where the margins are so narrow, to hear from you that you understand the scale of the threat, and that you have ideas about how to interrupt what feels like something we have not experienced since the Civil War in terms of the threat to our Republic."  Rachel Maddow, February 24, in an interview with Hakeem Jeffries, Democratic House Minority Leader 

Where Do Things Stand? 

With Trump and Musk being the first two mentions in every news broadcast in the country, and the sensationalism and drama of what unbelievable or incredible thing they are doing being the subject of most news, it was refreshing to watch Maddow's interview with Hakeem Jefferies, and have her give him a forum to vent some frustration and lay out some plans that will help get away from all of the sensationalism and provide some real, factual information along with giving something to the growing group of discontented voters, some of whom are waiting for signals to prompt their involvement.  

Jeffries said all the right things, demonstrates a keen awareness of the situation in the House and understands that it is a numbers game, and the numbers don't have to be big.  Right now, it's three.  They know what they need to do, one being stay united and on task, and two being to use public pressure to flip the votes they need when they need them.  I'd like to hear a little more about the strategy being used and what will be involved, since Democrats aren't always good at communicating their message.  Jeffries says the House Democrats are unified and ready.  

What I didn't hear, and didn't feel was communicated, was the seriousness of the threat, distinguishing this from politics as usual, and a commitment to do whatever it takes to put a stop to what has been happening.  Democrats were unified on the budget vote, but they were not able to pressure a single Republican into voting that down, in spite of the hollering and yelling and protesting that's going on in some of the Republican town meetings.  What kind of effort were they making and who was responsible for getting that done?  There are more than a dozen Republicans representing Congressional districts that Biden won in 2020 and 2024.  How organized and how thorough is the effort to pressure those members every time some key vote comes up?  Because what it looks like is that nobody thought of it until the last minute, nobody took responsibility for it and nobody did anything.   

I see two options here.  Either start showing some results with real pressure on those Republicans in districts where their re-election is at risk, or put some real effort into winning the three seats up for grabs in the House that will, in Democratic hands, do some real damage.  

Does "willing to do all we can" also mean "willing to take risks" and placing the priority of stopping Trump above the self-interest of preserving their own seat and their own power?  I didn't hear Jeffries say that.  

Democrats are also going to have to find a way to get Jeffries in front of more than just the MSNBC cameras.  The media's pattern of "Trump, Trump, Trump, Musk, Musk, Musk, Trump, Musk" is blockading messages from Jeffries.  Those of us who pay attention, and who are into the podcasts, social media connections and who still watch MSNBC rather than any other cable news, are hearing the rants from Democrats, including some of the most spot-on messages and quotes from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Jasmine Crockett.  In Illinois, we got statewide coverage of Governor Pritzker's State of the State address.  But a lot of where that needs to get coverage is missing out on it.  

What is it Going to Take? 

Trump must be stopped, legislatively and through the courts.  And as Jeffries said, the courts are putting a stop to most of his schemes, though he is inflicting damage as he goes.  It will take some risks, and a lot of bold moves to get results.  Ultimately, Congress is going to have to impeach him, and the Senate is going to have to convict and remove him.  Yes, that sounds impossible, and it might not happen, but Democrats have to make the moves to lay the groundwork and keep it moving that way, because while impeachment and conviction may appear to be virtually impossible, the fight and the effort to lay the groundwork may lead to enough public pressure to force Trump out by resignation.  

And getting Musk out is not only necessary, it's doable. 

Is there a concerted effort going on in the Democratic party to go all out in doing whatever it takes to win these three congressional seats.  I don't see one, but I could be missing something.  We have a new DNC exec, Ken Martin, who exhibited a lot of skills in advancing the party's position in Minnesota, and some youthful enthusiasm and strong, good ideas with David Hogg.  What are they doing to make sure we win these seats?  There's no time to waste, those elections are rolling right along and will be here before we know it.  Right now it looks like all three Democratic candidates are on their own. 

Jeffries said the Democrats are united.  But are they?  As Maddow said, Democrats want to see their congressional leaders get out of this talking stage and into the action phase.  Everything else that is on the agenda depends on stopping Trump now.  

We're Going to Have to Do This Ourselves

Pointing out the irresolute manner in which Democrats have acted in the face of the Trump threat to democracy in America isn't disloyalty to the party.  My convictions about politics are as liberal and progressive as they have ever been, as core Democratic party as those of anyone else.  I'm just looking around, at what the media is letting us hear and see, and I'm legitimately questioning the response of those who are in party leadership in Washington, which is the heart of where our politics happen.  

In a few short weeks, we've heard multiple false assertions about fraud in the federal government, justifying the wholesale cuts of federal programs and workers that are now taking place, but not providing a single shred of evidence for the claims.  They've got their book of talking points already laid out, and it follows the populist line of Trumpism, falsehoods about veterans affairs money being used for housing illegal immigrants, which is their reply about everything.  Republicans in town hall meetings are stepping up and requiring accountability from these members of Congress, but not Democrats in Congress or the Senate.  Not really.  

We've seen criminal treatment in the blatant and horrific lies told by our sitting President about Ukraine, in circumstances that would break the strongest of nations, but which is holding out because they have hope based on the freedom they have experienced.  There was a response to that, there'd better have been one, from Democratic party leadership, but it sure wasn't what I expected.  They look like they're in a rut, though.  

There are three open Congressional seats that, if Democrats can win the special elections, will take the GOP majority away from Trump and give Democrats the thinnest of majorities.  But it doesn't seem like there's much of an effort underway to help these candidates win those seats.  It looks like they're on their own.  If someone has information to refute that statement, please post it. I'm seeing the "business as usual" sign out.  

Repeat After Many Democratic Commentators and Talk Show Hosts:  Hold a Damn Daily Briefing!  

On multiple fronts, controlling narrative has been a long standing issue for Democrats.  Here, in the middle of growing discontent among Republicans for what is being done and how it is being done, is an opportunity for Democrats to grab hold of the narrative, and find ways to make sure the message blasts through the walls of the media silos.  I've heard multiple commentators, from local talk show hosts on WCPT here in Chicago, to national media persons like Thom Hartmann and Stephanie Miller, call for Democrats to provide a daily briefing on each day's events, from their perspective.  Put the facts out there.  Insist that there is no evidence to support Musk or Trump's claims that there is fraud that justifies cutting government jobs and spending.  Ukraine did not start this war.  

Come on, do it.  Say it.  Every day. 

It may take a while for something like this to penetrate the media silos and get into people's electronic media, but it needs to be done.  Because every time a news broadcast comes on these days, it's worse than it was between 2020 and 2024.  Every story, every headline starts out with "Trump, Trump, Musk, Musk,...."  It's not going to be long before people will forget the names of the Democrats who are still serving in Congress, unless they make the pilgrimage to Mar-a-Lago. 

No More Business as Usual

A little boldness, willingness to think differently and some risk taking during the last administration and Trump would not even have been able to run for President.  But it wasn't within the approved political protocols, and it would have required some unconventional thinking and action.  Dithering is no longer acceptable.  Every avenue of disruption, of being the determined opposition party, of speaking out and of taking risks if it comes to that, and it will, must be utilized to fight against the Trump administration and bring it down.  

In all fairness, I'm going to give Ken Martin and David Hogg at the DNC a chance, but only long enough to prove they're up to the job and willing to do it.  Martin made a lot of progress for Democrats in Minnesota, and I think his passion will carry over to the DNC here.  And I think Democrats made a great choice in naming Hogg his assistant.  Maybe some boldness and risk taking is coming.  Are they working on helping Democrats win  those two Florida seats and the one in New York?  If not, I'll be disappointed, and at least I'll know where not to provide support.  

My governor, J. D. Pritzker, put it into the plainest, most accurate terms possible, and put himself on the front line. Watch his recent State of the State address.  He gets it and he's ready to do something about it. I expect there will be action that can be supported and followed coming from him.  With few exceptions, I haven't seen much out of Congress that impresses me.  I listened to Hakeem Jeffries interview with Rachel Maddow.  Maybe he's shell shocked, or wasn't having a good day, but I don't see a lot of motivation or enthusiasm there.  It's going to take a lot more energy, enthusiasm and motivation than he showed in that interview to get rid of Elon Musk, and push Trump out, too, and frankly, that's what we have to do.  

Getting an impeachment to conviction seems impossible in this Congress.  And yes, that's a much tougher order than getting Trump prosecuted for inciting an insurrection, when we had a majority in both houses and the ability to take some bold steps, like packing that damn Supreme Court, or moving Merrick Garland out of the way and getting an attorney general who would bring the power of the Presidency to move that trial right along.  If we'd pushed for either of those things, we would not be where we are now.  

Think about that, for a moment.  

Yeah, So What is it That You Want? 

Well, first of all, we need to get Elon Musk out of the government and back to South Africa.  He's not elected, he's vulnerable and public pressure can achieve this.  The goal of the mounting protests and public pressure needs to be to displace Musk and make him pay dearly for what he has done. 

Second, get Trump impeached and convicted.  Yep, that's a tall order.  Don't tell me there is no way to get this done.  I am absolutely convinced that every Republican has a price, and Democrats need to set about finding out exactly what that price is.  I'm not advocating anything illegal, I'm just saying that with the anger and disgust that has been characteristic of Trump's first month in office, there is plenty of emotion and motivation to get something like that done.  There aren't many Republicans who wouldn't give their right arm and left leg if it meant holding on to their power.  We have a lot of smart Democrats, let's figure out how to get this done and who is willing to take the political risks to save their country instead of saving their ass. 

What kind of opposition party are we if we can't get this moving?  

And I'm going to leave it there for now. 

 

After a Litany of Lies, the Silence of Trump's Conservative Evangelical Sycophants is Evidence Their Faith is Phony

Baptist News Global: Evangelical Supporters of Trump are silent about his lying about Ukraine

There are six things the Lord hates--no, seven things he detests: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that kill the innocent, a heart that plots evil, feet that race to do wrong, a false witness who pours out lies, a person who sows discord in a family.  Proverbs 6:16-19 

Lying gets mentioned twice in this list, an emphasis on just exactly how much of an evil practice it is considered to be.  I'm going to cut to the chase quickly here, and simply point to the fact that Trump is a pathological liar.  It's pretty well impossible, at this point, to find a statement he's made publicly that is truthful.  But, living in a time when people have lost the ability to discern fact from fiction, and are able to live away from the real world in a media silo protected from truth, and when they'd rather play games on their phone, I run into adults who aren't even aware Trump has returned to office, and can't tell me what day of the week it is.  Such is the state of the adult mind in the United States today.    

Conservative Evangelicals claim that the Bible is inerrant, in its original autographs, and in spite of the individual writing style of each of its 40 plus writers, is infallible in its content, bringing the revelation of God through written word to humanity.  If that is the case, then blatant lies told by a secular politician should certaintly draw some criticism or ire from the Bible thumpers, and there should be plenty of leaders in America's Christian churches who would point out, for their congregants, lies told that have a major affect on national policy and foreign relations, especially to demonstrate their point, that the country is being taken to hell in a handbasket.  

Since Trump entered back into public office a few weeks ago, what's come out of his mouth, to defend actions he desires to take, has been a litany of lies.  I can't verify, by multiple sources of information, a single coherent sentence he's made that is true.  He's lied about everything from the extent of government waste to claiming social security has people getting benefits who are well past 100 years of age.  Not one of the economic claims he's made has been right.  

Now, it's a litany of falsehoods about Ukraine.  

There's a segment of the American population that is ignorant about Ukraine, the war, the people and what's happening, don't care and are easily duped by simple assertions.  But a majority of Americans have been following it, and not all of those have done so from the limited, and skewed perspective of Fox News or Newsmax.  It's fairly easy to identify, out of the word salad that Trump has dumped about the Ukraine War, what is true and what is not.  What is true is that Ukraine is at war with Russia.  Noting else Trump said is true. 

Silence From His Conservative Evangelical Sycophants About His Lies Identifies Them as "Pseudo-Christian" False Propehets

There may still be some confessing Christians among the conservative, Evangelical denominations, but I believe most of that movement, which was already steeped in a litany of false doctrine and faulty theology, falls well outside the boundaries which define Christianity as a set of core values on which a lifestyle is based, more than the legalistic assertion of a set of subjective doctrinal points of fundamentalism, or the phony "signs and wonders" of Pentecostalism.  Evidence of its collapse is visible by watching where followers of those considered to be it's "leaders," named in the Baptist News Global piece cited above.  

Those named include Franklin Graham, Executive director of Samaritan's Purse and son of the late Billy Graham; Tony Perkins, former Louisiana legislator and head of Family Research Council; Robert Jeffress, Pastor of First Baptist Church of Dallas, who captured Trump's attention; Jack Graham, pastor of Prestonwood Baptist Church of Dallas, one of the largest megachurches in the Southern Baptist Convention, and Paula White-Cain, a self-proclaimed "prophetess" in the prosperity gospel movement who is Trump's "spiritual advisor.  The fact that he chose a prosperity gospel heretic for this role shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who understands that "the love of money is the root of every kind of evil [I Timothy 6:10].  

Trump lies, and these pseudo-Christian leaders are silent.  In their silence, and that of hundreds of other pastors and church leaders caught up in the anti-Christian evil of the cult that has been formed by blending conservative Evangelicalism with right wing political extremism, is the reason why nothing they say can be trusted.  Their failure to call out his lies makes them liars right along with him.  They preach a distorted, false gospel, exposing their heresy and proclaiming their churches as apostate. 

To be fair, there are some conservatives who see all of this for exactly what it is, and are calling it out, including, rarely, an occasional Evangelical.  The article from BNG mentions several political conservatives, including Heath Mayo and John Bolton, who call out Trump's lie and point out how ridiculous and dangerous it is.  The only conservative Evangelical who is mentioned, Malcolm Yarnell, a Southern Baptist theologian and self-proclaimed conservative, said, just after the election in November, "Do not trust those who would surrender any part of Ukraine to Russia in the name of world peace and security," and he calls out any effort of the west, including the US, to turn its back on Ukraine. 

Without a Foundation of Facts, This Approach is Going to Collapse

Trump has already missed his deadline for ending the war in Ukraine, which he claimed he would do on day one, yet another lie.  His purpose in putting forth a view of the war that is so obviously false is to bring about terms favorable to Vladimir Putin.  That's the guy who made the threats, for months before launching the attack, who had his generals draw up invasion plans, laid down the political pretexts, and ordered the attack.  Other than the phony pretexts, which didn't fool anyone, and which provided a basis for President Biden to rapidly re-activate the NATO alliance Trump had been trying to downplay and eliminate.  

Putin's goals haven't been hidden.  A Ukrainian democracy on their southern European border is seen as a threat, a potential NATO member that brings the alliance much closer to Moscow and the inner military infrastructure of Russia itself.  Trump's lies, and most of his rhetoric and his actions toward Ukraine when he was in office, seem aimed at helping Putin achieve his goals, not in providing United States support for a democracy that was formed out of a former soviet Republic.  So in addition to the immorality resulting from endangering and supporting destruction of a country's infrastructure and national identity, Trump is siding with an enemy of the United States of America.  There are serious implications, including the possibility of treason, associated with all of that. 

The truth is out there and it cannot stay hidden inside some media silo or in the hope that most Americans will choose to remain blissfully ignorant.  The Ukrainians are not backing down, and in fact, there is evidence that Trump's lies are helping President Zelenskyy galvanize his support, and expanding Ukrainian desires for peace on their terms.  Trump's lies have served to  strengthen their own position and that of the European allies supporting them, because it has expose the fact that they, not the US, have been the biggest backers of Ukrainian independence and freedom.  

What an embarrassment for the United States of America, to have a President who is turning out to be "the ugly American."  

Illinois Governor J. D. Pritzker Steps Forward and Tells the Truth

Illinois Governor J. D. Pritzker, State of the State Address, 2025 

Democrats seem to be lacking leadership.  I think a real leader just stepped to the podium in Springfield, Illinois, and identified himself as one.  

Don't be surprised.  This governor has demonstrated the kind of leadership it takes to get things done and make government work on behalf of the people.  I was here in Illinois during the COVID pandemic, and the disaster that the pandemic proved to be in so many states, where leaders were in denial, or working in ignorance, didn't materialize in this, the sixth most populous state in the country.  In Illinois, we had leadership that worked to make things happen for the benefit of the people, not just during the pandemic.  the conservative right has had to come up with a whole new set of lies about Illinois, when it comes to crime rates, fiscal soundness, taxes, public services and all of the things touched by state government because ours is working, and we have a leader who knows what he is doing.  

I don't know what happened to Democrats, politically, over the past four years.  We caved in some places, played the same old, tired game of compromise with the minority during Biden's first two years that really wasn't necessary.  Then, instead of party leadership stepping up, recognizing that we would need to run a full Presidential campaign, and that Biden needed to go with the original "transitional presidency" plan, we let the same old, worn out protocols push a second Biden campaign for President.  

I was disappointed that Biden didn't make the decision not to run again when he ought to have made it, a full year before he did, but there weren't any other leaders stepping up to the plate, and we were still playing games after narrowly losing the house in the mid-terms.  

There was a lot of excitement and enthusiasm surrounding the Harris-Walz campaign.  But they lost, passed off the stage quickly, went into radio silence and left the party where it is now, in the wake of a second Trump term implementing Project 2025 point by point, based on every single point of its false assertions.  Our members in congress, some of them, are making a little bit of noise.  A few have capitulated.  

But I think, after yesterday's speech, we have a real leader.  

  

Holding Out for a Hero, Democrats Need Bold, Fearless, Risk Taking Leadership. Now.

Bonnie Tyler, "I'm Holding Out for a Hero

The Trump administration is slowly dismantling the government, based on populist premises that government is overly wasteful, not only spending too much money but that the treasury is just paying out without accountability, every potential government program for the benefit of people, from social security and medicare to USAID is rife with fraud and Trump is going to save the taxpayers trillions by letting Elon Musk turn off the tap, because he supposedly knows how.  

This is all one big lie.  It appeals to what people believe, coming out of all of the conspiracy theory talk that flourishes on the political right, among people who tend to be less educated, more ignorant and easily gullible.  Some people tend to believe ridiculous things, like we spent $50 million on condoms for people in Gaza, which is another big lie that they directly spread, or that there are literally millions of social security checks going to people who are over 100 years old, yet another lie.  Conservatives must have a straw-man to knock down, an obscure, nebulous "enemy" to fight against, one that is conspiring to remake the world on their own terms and has the tech savvy, know how and support to drive this worldwide conspiracy against the "regular white guy."  

It's not like we didn't know this was coming.  He told us.  Democratic party leadership labelled him an existential threat to democracy years ago.  But I question, really, whether they took that as seriously as those of us who observed, who saw what he did and intended to do on January 6th, what he said and how he said it.  If they did, then more effort would have been put into getting him to trial for insurrection against the United States, which is the crime he committed.  Some risks would have been taken.  It would have been worth it to break the filibuster, and it would have been worth it to pack the court.  Those would have been big risks, but looking at what we're facing now, finding solutions to live with the consequences would have been a lot better than having to endure the damage to the country of a second Trump Presidency, including some real doubts about whether the Constitution and democracy will surivive. 

And here, on this side of where we are, what have we got?  Nothing, that I see.  If we didn't have leaders who were willing to risk a few things to make it happen when we had the power to do it, we aren't going to have any now who will risk it.  Right now, protecting their own interests is the priority.  

I watched Mitch McConnell, when he had just 47 votes in the senate, make a shambles of Democratic party plans, by playing every possible hand the senate rules gave him to play.  Ironic, isn't it, that McConnell is now the only Republican in the Senate who seems to have a realistic grasp on the damage that Trump is trying to do.  I've heard some impassioned speeches, some angry words, and a few threats.  But when it comes down to McConnell doing as much to put a stop to this as any Democrat, we're in big trouble. 

There are lawsuits being filed, and a good measure of success there so far in getting some of the worst abuses stopped.  That'll last as long as there are still judges who are committed to following their oath to the Constitution.  But it won't last forever, and right now, the biggest doubts are whether the Supreme Court will uphold, and enforce, the lower court rulings.  Those conservative justices didn't get those huge bribes for nothing.  

So What Exactly is it That We Should Expect of Our Leaders?

We should expect them to do their job.  And that's not protecting their turf, or preserving their electability.  That's protecting us and preserving the Constitution. 

The first thing that is on the agenda is to win three Congressional seats that will give Democrats a razor thin majority in the House, where most of this can be stopped.  Maybe I need to look in a different place, but I don't seem to be seeing a concerted effort to make this happen.  These are special elections, and turnout will determine the outcomes.  What is the Democratic party doing to ensure that its voters turn out in record numbers in these three very winnable districts? 

I still see appeals for money coming from the Harris campaign, from other Democrats who are almost two years away from the next election, and all kinds of cross purposes and self interest.  Apparently, Democrats running for election in those districts are on their own to win.  And if they're not, then show me the evidence that sets this straight.  The Republicans are so afraid of what could happen, they're slow-walking the appointment of Elise Stefanik, in the hopes of delaying a special election there.  The 2024 election is over, we have three more seats in Congress opening up, and that's where our money and attention should be going.  

I might be willing to provide a few campaign contributions in the direction of Harris if she had taken up the mantle of party leadership in the wake of this razor thin election, but she went home to California, Tim Walz went back to Minnesota, and we haven't heard much from either of them lately.  He wants to run for Senate.  Well, then, get out in front of this and provide us with some leadership.  My Governor sure is taking steps to resist this.

I'd like to send my contributions where it will do the most good. 

It hasn't taken long, and we've seen that Trump is exactly the existential threat to democracy that Democrats have been saying he was.  My expectations in this regard are high.  I expected indictments for inciting an insurrection, a trial, and guilty verdicts long before the ink dried on the electoral ballots.  But that was too much for the leadership we had at the time.  Failing that, I expected a trial and verdict well before the 2024 election had a chance to get moving.  

The Supreme Court was a casualty of failures to get the vote out in important mid-term elections.  In fact, the entire justice system is now riddled with partisan judges on the bench, and if that's where we are now putting our confidence in stopping the worst abuses of Trump, then we are not in any position of strength.  If we manage to hold the democracy together, I'll be impressed.   

Now, we're left fixing the mess with more rudimentary means.  The Constitution clearly provides for the removal of an incompetent, or dangerous, President.  Unfortunately, none of the founders ever envisioned a justice system in which it would take years to get crimes to trial, or so difficult to get a just verdict, or they would have specified that a convicted felon could not be eligible to serve.  But that doesn't matter a lot, since the convictions were never coming. 

So the expectation is that the Democrats, independents and whatever allies they can make, must use the system as it is.  We have to figure out a way to get just enough Republicans in the senate to vote to convict in the event of an impeachment.  He's been impeached twice, finding grounds for that, among the hell he's raised over the past two weeks won't be the slightest problem, he has disqualified himself, including mentally, in multiple ways.  

It will take pressure from Democrats in ways they haven't ever even dreamed of using.  Clear messaging and getting inside the Republican misinformation silos won't be easy, but boy, what damage could a solid, simple, understandable message do to his political chances?  The way misinformation flies through that network, think what well-placed, simple truth can do.  But it will take Democrats becoming leaders, learning how to deliver a clear message and being believeable.  I don't know if we have anyone in Congress capable, or willing, to take that kind of risk.  But that is what it will take. 

During the height of the opioid crisis, just following the 2016 election, Bernie Sanders made a speaking appearance in Welch, West Virginia, a town hard hit by the crisis.  Welch is the county seat of McDowell County, deep red in a deep red state.  It is an impoverished place, employment once booming because of coal, now depressed as thousands have moved away, replaced by jobs at a state pentitentiary and federal correctional institute, it is one of the most desperately depressed economic areas in the state. 

Sanders interview with Chris Hayes, Welch, West Virginia 2018

Sanders, very out of place as a liberal, Jewish Senator in a county buried in the West Virginia mountains, along with Chris Hayes of MSNBC, delivered a message that resonated with the people there.  Sanders has a knack for this, and while he's getting up there in years, he is one Democrat who doesn't back down, and doesn't count the political cost before he makes a decision.  This is what we need.  And while people don't like him, and might disagree, it's tough to argue with his success.  He tells it like it is.  

We need ten more just like him.

  

The American Way to End the War in Ukraine

Let's be clear about some facts when we discuss what's going on in Ukraine.  Russia is the aggressor here.  Circumstances being what they are, as the Soviet Union fell apart, and independent nations began to emerge from among the traditional, cultural, linguistic and political boundaries that existed, separate from those of Russia, the borders around territory and populations claimed by the emerging countries was recognized by both Russia, and the rest of the world.  

Ukraine was a vital and intricately connected part of both the Czar's empire, and the subsequent Soviet Union.  But it has a distinct culture, language and identity, because it did exist as an independent state at one time, one of the major influences on the culture of the region, including Russia.  It's capital, Kyiv, is a cultural center for both Ukraine and for Russia.  

But the Ukrainians declared their independence, legally, separating from the Soviet Union, and establishing an independent republic, democratic in nature.  It encountered many bumps along the way, including obstacles related to Russian style government corruption, which threatened to derail its democracy.  But the Ukrainians had some ideals in mind, similar to those of the United States.  They are entitled to their sovereignty, and to the area that was originally a part of the country when it was created thirty some odd years ago.  

In spite of some corruption, including some unfortunate involvement with the Trump administration previously, Ukrainian democracy has landed on its feet.  It has faced, weathered, and fought off this Russian bullying intrusion remarkably well, and with most of its government intact.  In fact, the people of Ukraine have invested their trust in their government leadership, something that might have taken much longer had there not been a war to bring people together in a common cause. 

They have paid a terrible price, unimaginable in the post-World War 2 era, as several of its major cities have been largely destroyed.  That's not new to Ukraine, much of the country was laid waste by the Nazi invasion in 1941, and again during their retreat in 1944.  But it's something we thought we were past, or at least we had hoped that we were.  But they have demonstrated their willingness to stand up for their freedom and independence, and they have defended it for three years.  

American idealism has set an example for the world.  That's not being arrogant, the fact of the matter is that a lot of the rest of the world that has become free from political oppression in recent years has modelled its independence after ours.  Some of them won freedom in a fight, some of them simply took advantage of favorable circumstances.  But this has put us in the position of being the supporter of, and promoter of democracy throughout the world.  That's who we are, that's why we exist.  And without getting entangled in a foreign war, we have been able to help Ukraine fight for their freedom.  

So here is how the peace agreement should go, according to good, old fashioned American values.  

Ukrainian sovereignty is restored to all areas of Ukraine that were once part of the independent country without exception.  This includes the Crimea, the Kerch Peninsula and the Donbas region.  It's all Ukrainian and it should be under Ukrainian sovereignty.  Russians living in those areas need to recognize Ukrainian rule and either become citizens, so they can have a measure of freedom that their fellow Russians do not enjoy, or they can move back into the large, open spaces of Russia itself.  

That's a reasonable settlement.  The Ukrainians should agree to nothing less, the Russians should accept it and the United States should gain support for it through the United Nations.  

In addition to this, Ukraine should immediately be accepted into NATO.  As a full military ally, the United States and the rest of NATO should guarantee the security and sovereignty of the country.  

Russia must agree to finance reconstruction of all damaged areas, down to the last damaged apartment building in the last damaged town.  All of it, 100% of the rebuilding, should be at Russia's expense, especially the infrastructure they deliberately destroyed.  

And if the Trump administration isn't willing to accept this, then they are exposing themselves as unAmerican, anti-Patriotic traitors.  Nothing else is satisfactory, nothing else meets the standard of American values.  

Irony in Illinois: Madigan Convicted of Corruption; Blagojevich Pardoned by Trump

Madigan Guilty on 10 Counts, Not Guilty on 7

Trump Pardons Former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich

Two stories within days of each other, involving corrupt politicians in Illinois.  One is found guilty on ten counts of corruption, and is now awaiting sentencing.  It remains to be seen whether his influence will affect how much jail time he gets, or how his sentence is handled.  The other, already convicted and serving time in prison, has been pardoned by Trump.  

Here's the message, if it's not abundantly clear up front.  We have a President who repeatedly finds ways to deliberately thwart the rule of law.  

That's not news, though. 

Turning the Law Upside Down

For all of the criticism heaped by conservatives on Illinois politicians, Chicago politicians, and the reputation both have for political corruption, the conservatives are losing credibility in a huge way on this one.  And the timing couldn't be better for Democrats.  

Former Illinois Speaker of the House, Mike Madigan, a Chicago politician who was a huge figure in Illinois Democratic party politics for decades, was just convicted on 10 different counts of various kinds of political corruption.  It was a long, and very public trial in which Illinois Democrats have made clear they will not tolerate this kind of political corruption.  They had already started down that road with Blagojevich's conviction, until Trump made friends with the former governor, and decided to commute his sentence during his first term.  Ultimately, that turned into a full pardon.  

Well, what do we expect from a President who is, himself a convicted felon, 34 counts up to this point to be exact, and guilty of multiple more.  It's really difficult to figure exactly what it is that has pushed Trump to pardon Blagojevich, a Democrat, or should we say a former Democrat, though he must think he is going to get something out of it.  He got Blagojevich's loyalty, and devotion, and public thanks, and support, for whatever that might be worth at some point down the road.  

This should earn him the disgust, and criticism of Illinois Democrats, and it sure has done that.  Whether the full force of that narrative ever gets out there remains to be seen, but it would be to the benefit of the Illinois Democratic party to disavow this pardon, point it out as part of the full picture of the total corruption of the Republican party, and make a lot of points with voters as a result.  

Blagojevich, among other things, tried to use his ability to appoint then Senator Barack Obama's successor as a means of gaining personal profit and political standing, and he said so in a conversation caught by the FBI.  Trump's full pardon of the guy tells us all we need to know about the depth of his own corruption and what he is willing to do to defy the constitution and push his own agenda.  

Trump's Pardon of Blagojevich Nullifies Critics of Democrats and Madigan

"To me, this is the most significant political corruption and conviction in at least my lifetime because it truly reflected that, for 40 years, Mike Madigan corruptly ran his operation in Springfield, never for the benefit of the citizens of the state, all transactional," said political consultant Pat Brady.  

"Here you have another example of another extremely powerful Democratic politician who is going down because of the pay to play system that he dominated at," said political analyst Laura Washington.  

And then along comes convicted felon Trump, with the power of the Presidency, and gives a full pardon to another former Democratic Illinois politician for corruption charges arguably as bad as those against Madigan, and since they involved bribery in choosing the replacement for a United States Senator, I'd say they were worse.  But a conservative, Republican President doesn't seem to think so.  And the timing of this couldn't be better.  It's possible, people, to put two and two together here and come up with the conclusion that Trump is more corrupt than Mike Madigan.  And he's proved it. 

So come on, Republicans!  Fire up that "own the libs" rhetoric!  

It seems like Madigan does have a way out of this.  He can open his mouth, pay allegience to Trump and make friends with a fellow felon.  

Baptist Editor Calls Out Trump's "MAGA Mafia" And Says It's Not Christian

Mark Wingfield, Baptist News Global: This is Not Christianity

Democrats Have More Christian Allies in Politics Than They Imagined

Though I have never met Mark Wingfield personally, my first encounter with him was when he was serving as the editor of the Western Recorder, the news journal of the Kentucky Baptist Convention, the state body that relates to the Southern Baptist Convention.  At that point, the denomination was embroiled in a controversy between theological fundamentalists and a more moderate, traditional element of Baptists, and in Kentucky, because of the presence of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, the more moderate element was able to hold on to leadership for a longer period of time.  

Wingfield was decidedly on the moderate side of the controversy, and his editorials and management of the Western Recorder, which assured that perspective got a fair hearing, was one of the reasons why the state body remained in moderate hands longer than most of the other state conventions did, after the SBC executive committee became dominated by the fundamentalists around 1989.  

While it may not look political on the surface, the controversy that erupted in the Southern Baptist Convention in 1979 was most definitely the result of the influence of right wing Republican politics introduced to conservative Evangelicals through Jerry Falwell and the influence of his Moral Majority activists.  The controversy itself was aimed at controlling the office of SBC President, the officer who presided over annual meetings of the denomination, but who also appointed a committee that was in charge of choosing nominees for trustee boards at the denomination's entities, including its six theological seminaries, two mission boards and its Lifeway Publishing House, along with Baptist Press.  

To control the presidency and that committee was to control the denomination and when conservatives captured it in 1979, their aim was to make sure that only theological conservatives, or fundamentalists, were appointed.  And underlying those choices, aligned with Falwell and the Moral Majority, was Richard Land, who, along with Paul Pressler, considered one of the "architects" of this conservative "resurgence," were seeing to it that the SBC was moved to a place of support for conservative Republicans.  

The Side of the Southern Baptist Convention That is Not Politically Conservative

Wingfield was among those Southern Baptists who were resisting the political and theological takeover of the denomination.  And while they failed to hold on to control of those positions in the denominational bureaucracy from which they could still wield influence, over time, this more moderate side of the denomination, while not exactly forming into a whole new denominational body at once, has transformed into a theological, doctrinal and political fellowship which strives to remain a-political, but which is theologically and doctrinally diverse, incompatible with both Christian fundamentalism and the influence of right wing extremism into its churches.  

Among those Baptists who have landed on the opposite bank from the Southern Baptist Convention include the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, an Atlanta based organization made up of about 4,500 former Southern Baptist Churches, the Alliance of Baptists, a smaller group, further to the left theologically and more openly political, and a few state-based denominational bodies, including the Baptist General Convention of Texas, the Baptist General Convention of Missouri, and the Baptist General Association of Virginia.  Their main media outlets are The Baptist Standard, a Texas-based publication and Baptist News Global, the weekly publication edited by Wingfield, based in Virginia. 

Though this more moderate group of Baptists has avoided secular politics, or at least, hasn' t let them dominate their news cycle, publications or business, and it hasn't been openly political, it is clear that the vast majority of those who can be found in the pews of its churches are DEI friendly, woke-friendly, and would be on board with the Christian principles Bishop Budde preached that elicited the demand for an apology with Trump.  So it is not surprising to see one of their leading journalists come out with such a strong, anti-Trump sentiment.  

In fact, Wingfield does something here that I have been waiting to see from Christians in this country who have stuck with their principles and who have correctly concluded that Trump is anti-Christian, and that those who support him who claim to be Christian must deny major principles of Christian doctrine in order to do so.  He correctly labels the Christianity that has allied itself with the MAGA faction a fake Christianity, and has "turned Christian theology upside down."  

What Will Be Found in a Moderate Baptist Church? 

Wingfield served for almost 17 years as an associate pastor in Wilshire Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas.  What has set it apart from its appearance as any other Baptist church in the south is what has transpired over time.  Wilshire welcomed black members long before most churches in Texas were integrated, and in fact, most still aren't integrated in practice, though the rules have been taken down.  Wilshire was also on the cutting edge in ordaining women to its diaconate, as well as to the pulpit ministry.  It's the church where people who are facing some stark physical needs know to go and get help, and where the emotional wounds can receive care.  

I'd suggest watching worship services from Wilshire to get a feel for what this kind of Baptist, and this kind of Christian, is all about.  It is quite a contrast from the loudness and arrogance of the MAGA mafia, not just in appearance, but in the depth of its theology and in the consistency with which it practices Christian faith.  It is a predominantly white, but integrated congregation with a black pastor that invests its time, energy and money into ministry, rather than into the pastor's bank account.  It is, by biblical definition and testimony of its own practice Christian, and that gives Mr. Wingfield the ability to call out the MAGA mafia, and say that it's not Christian, without violating any biblical principle against judgement.  

I'd also suggest reading through editions of Baptist News Global.  To those who have a progressive political agenda, aimed at preserving and strengthening American democracy, these people are allies.  

Irony in Trump's Choices to Serve in His "White House Faith Office"

Trump is staffing his newly created White House Faith Office, which I think is a violation of the establishment clause of the first amendment of the constitution if it is taxpayer funded, or if it receives, rent-free use of office space, since it would then be an "established" endorsement of religion by government, with some interesting individuals.  On the surface, it may just look like the face of the extremism among conservative Evangelicals, mostly the "prosperity gospel" preaching and theology that isn't really Christianity by its own biblical definition, to which Trump and his love of money and power is attracted, because it offers him more than the "loving your neighbor", "turning the other cheek," and "repenting from your sin" brand of Christianity that he rejects openly, with vitriol.  

But there are some interesting contradictions here that point to the fact there is absolutely no genuine Christian support for anything having to do with Trump's far right wing extremism, and that the combination of far right wing Republicanism with ultra-conservative fundamentalist and Charismatic Evangelicalism is both a political and a religious cult, built on monumental hypocrisy. 

The Open Rejection of Women in Pastoral Leadership by Conservative Evangelicals is Something The Consider the Core of Their Orthodoxy 

The nation's largest Evangelical denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention, recently went on a two-year tear through its congregations, for the purpose of exposing, and then kicking out, churches who had women on their ministerial staff serving in a role that used the title "Pastor."  At two of their annual meetings, the delegates from churches, known as "messengers", considered a motion to "disfellowship," the Saddleback Valley Community Church in Mission Viejo, California, from its membership.  An action to "disfellowship" means that the denomination cuts all ties to the church, stops receiving its contributions, and basically kicks it out of the denomination.  

Saddleback Valley, which is the largest congregation, membership wise- in the denomination, and was one of its single largest contributors, had offended by allowing three women to serve on its staff in the role of "teaching pastor."  They were not the senior pastor, they were under the authority of the church elders, all biblical as far as that goes.  But the Southern Baptist Convention has decided to hang its doctrinal hat on some obscure, literalist interpretations of the Apostle Paul, without using the filter of the gospel of Jesus, and declared that the "office of pastor" is reserved for men only.  

That conclusion is based on one phase, in a list of qualifications for the position of pastor, found in I Timothy 3:2, that is sometimes translated "the husband of one wife."  Of course, in the culture of the day in which the Apostle Paul wrote that phrase, marriage was not the same thing it is today, but the phrase is actually a prohibition against polygamists serving as pastors or "bishops" as the Greek word used is translated, not a probibition against women serving in that capacity.  Jesus, whom Christians accept as the most authoritative source on doctrine, says nothing to indicate that women are prohibited from any position of leadership in the church.  

And so Saddleback Valley was kicked out, because they, as a local and autonomous Baptist congregation, refused to follow a denominational edict that was not based on any biblical or ecclesiastical authority, and determined that its female teaching pastors were an asset to their ministry, and refused to change their title or demote them to a lower position.  Along with Saddleback Valley, Fern Creek Baptist Church, a Lousiville, Kentucky congregation with a female serving as its senior pastor, was dismissed.  As a result of that, a growing list of churches voluntarily severed their ties with the denomination rather than change the titles of the women on their church staff serving in a pastoral role.  

Irony or Blatant Hypocrisy? 

Those among the leadership of the denomination who are the most opposed to allowing women to serve in a pastoral role are condescending and critical of churches who engage in this practice.  They go so far as to claim that those churches are apostate, and are outside the circle of Christian orthodoxy, and are caustic and condemning in their criticism, in a way that is not reflective of the core values of the Christian faith.  

So I wonder how these individuals, among whom there must certainly be a healthy number of Trump supporters, are handling his appointment of a female senior pastor, Paula White Cain, who uses the biblical term "overseer," in Greek "Episkopos", or Bishop to describe her role as pastor of Story Life Church in Florida, a large, Charismatic church that preaches pure prosperity gospel.  Of course Trump, with his love of money, is attracted to that kind of gospel, which is more or less the antithesis of the Christian gospel that Jesus preached and taught.  

It makes me laugh to myself to think that some of these hard line fundamentalists, like those of the Jerry Falwell ilk, have to swallow this because Trump has done it and they can't utter a peep in opposition.  Well, they could, and if their claimed convictions were sincere, and their Christian faith were real, they would speak up.  They lose on at least three points here.  First, she is a female, senior pastor and executive director of a worldwide mission organization operating in about 150 countries.  So she is a female in leadership over ministries that these hardliners are claiming is heresy worthy of being kicked out of the faith.  

Second, she is, by their own very clear definition, a preacher of heresy herself, because she preaches the "prosperity gospel."  Most Evangelicals claim that gaining wealth and health is promised by God in exchange for obedience to a specific list of commands, which includes helping those serving as pastors and church leaders to become wealthy.  For most Evangelicals, this is false doctrine, an abuse of what Jesus and his apostles had to say about wealth and power.  But, apparently most of them are willing to compromise on this point, because, well, because their idol has made her his "spiritual advisor."   

Third, she is "Charismatic."  This is a branch of conservative Christianity that, according to the conservatives, steps away from use of the Bible as the final authority and revelation of God to the church, and depends on spiritual manifestations, like speaking in tongues, or faith healing.  White-Cain is also very heavily into "Seven Mountains" dominion theology, a Christian nationalist heresy that incorporates white supremacy and pulls in the use of obscure Old Testament prophecy skewed to fit a different purpose than originally intended. Most conservative Evangelicals reject the manner in which Charismatic Christians claim the Holy Spirit makes God's presence known.  

In short, White-Cain is exactly the kind of person you would expect Trump to place in a position of authority and importance.  And in any other circumstance, her presence would lead the fundamentalist, conservative Evangelical leadership to declare her a heretic, and condemn Trump for choosing her as a leader.  Is this a deliberate face-smack of the smirking, smiling, Evangelical sycophants who bow down to him at every turn, a way of asserting his influence over them by ignoring the things they are on record as considering tests of orthodoxy and appointing someone to be his closest "religious" advisor who embodies absolutely zero of the things they claim to value?  

Here is one thing of which I can be 100% certain.  There will not be one peep about this from any of Trump's conservative, Evangelical sycophants.  Not even an eye blink, or a knowing look will pass their composure.  And because of that, we can be 100% certain that any such Christian leader who claims to support Trump is, in fact, a self-serving hypocritical liar.  

No, You Really Can't Make This Stuff Up

If Trump were a devil-worshipper, most of his Evangelical sycophants would be playing the Rolling Stones' song, "Sympathy for the Devil" in their church worship services.  The selective application of what Evangelicals refer to as "biblical truth" is an inconsistency that undermines their credibility.  What makes it possible for the leaders to get away with this is massive ignorance among the members of their congregations.  Few pay attention to any of the details of issues such as this.  

The ignorance of biblical theology and doctrine among those who sit in the pews of Evangelical congregations when it comes to differences between those who preach and teach extremism, mainly for their own financial gain, is very high.  Few Evangelicals are even aware of who Paula White-Cain is, and those who are couldn't explain how her preaching themes are not consistent with the doctrine preached in their own church.  For a religious group that claims to value a literalist interpretation of the Bible, and who claim that its contents are infallible, and without human error, it almost seems the level of ignorance is deliberate, maintained to keep the cash flow consistent.

Personally, I don't think there are any boundaries here to prevent Democrats from exploiting this inconsistency and hypocrisy as a political issue.  These are church leaders who have chosen to incorporate the right wing extremism of Trump politics with their church's theology and doctrine, to ensure votes for Trump.  They shouldn't be able to object, on any religious or moral ground, when the hypocrisy and the heresy is exposed for political purposes.  

My background in an Evangelical church occasionally brings back flashes of verses from the Bible I memorized as a child, intended to provide guidance when there were "challenges" to my faith.  One of those verses popped up as I was thinking about all of this: 

But those who want to be rich fall into temptation and are trapped by many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruinand destruction.  For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, and in their eagerness to be rich some have wandered away from  the faith and pieced themselves with many pains.--the Apostle Paul, I Timothy 6:9-10, NRSV

For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion, leading them to believe what is false, so tha tall who have not believed the truth but took pleasure in unrigheousness will be condemned. --the Apostle Paul, 2 Thessalonians 1:11-12, NRSV

 

  

Conservative Evangelical Leaders Leave No Doubts About Their Apostasy

Baptist News Global: Christian Groups Praise Trump's "Healthy Masculinity" and "Manifest Destiny Reborn"

"I don't intend to overstate.  I think we understate the case, because I think Donald Trump is the greatest threat to the world that we've seen in our lifetime.  He is a menace.  I believe he's against everything Jesus Christ teaches.  I believe he is cruel.  I believe he is evil. I believe he is Satan in disguise and I I'm not overstating that." --Mark Wingfield, Baptist News Global Executive Director in an interview on the podcast "Stuck in the Middle With You."  

The word "apostasy" comes from the Greek root word apostasia, which basically means to forsake or desert the faith that one formerly held.  It's a term that gets a lot of use within the boundaries of the various forms of Christianity that have been shaped by history.  In the United States, where Christianity developed in an atmosphere of complete religious liberty, with no political power dictating doctrine, theology or practice, the term has more often gained popular use when one group of Christians, who conclude that they are God's chosen people because of their doctrinal purity, and their adherence to a set of specific practices, or "commandments," criticize another group of Christians whose doctrine, theology and practice differs from their own.  

Looking at what has happened to the conservative, Evangelicals who have fallen victim to the idolatry and apostasy of Trumpism, there's not even a need to argue that their version of the Christian faith isn't an authentic or accurate one.  Their support for Trump is a denial of their own version of Christianity and their own interpretation of the Bible. Wingfield told the podcast interviewer, Bejamin Cole, "unwittingly supporting the antichrist."  

Unwittingly?  Trump's statements, beliefs, lack of ethical behavior and worldly, licentious immorality are defiant in their abject denial of anything resembling the Christian faith.  Every public act of his has been an explicit and deliberate violation of every characteristic of the Christian gospel Jesus laid down in the Sermon on the Mount, found in Matthew 5, 6 and 7, from his pathological lies and denial of truth, to his driven, wicked desire for vengeance against those not loyal to him, to his adulterous affairs and divorces so that he could marry the "other women," with whom he was having an affair, except Stormy Daniels, who he bribed to cover it up, because he couldn't afford the bad publicity in a run for the presidency.  His open denial of having done anything for which he requires God's forgiveness is a blatant refusal to accept Christian conversion, and a defiant act toward both God and the Evangelical leadership who serve as his willing sycophants.  And their support for him makes them apostates.  

So when some conservative, Evangelical like Gary Bauer, of the James Dobson Family Foundation, comes along and praises Trump without mentioning any Christian value or virtue, because those are not observable in Trump, he is telling us, very clearly, that he is apostate.  He, along with most other white, conservative, Evangelicals in the United States who overlook Trump's open denial of the Christian conversion experience, and his immoral, licentious, anti-Christian lifestyle, have abandoned the Christian gospel in favor of the gospel of Trump.  

This is How Unhinged Focus on the Family Has Become

These Are Not Virtues of the Christian Gospel

There's been nothing particularly "Christian" that would characterize anything having to do with Trump's second term, except the Christian nationalist themes that come with Project 2025, but those are not found anywhere in the Christian gospel, though they prompted a complaint from James Dobson Family Institute officer Gary Bauer that the left was characterizing and criticizing them as "Christian nationalists."   Bauer made the argument from absence of evidence, claiming the "other side," meaning the Biden Administration, was made up of "radical secularists, socialists and globalists," and that it promoted "tyrannical, decadent, perverse and ungodly" policies while ignoring the Constitution and "attempting to demonize Christians who love Jesus and America, calling us 'Christian nationalists.'" 

Prove those claims, Mr. Bauer.  And if the "Christian Nationalist" label is offensive, then don't adopt a Christian Nationalist political agenda like Project 2025.  

In fact, groups like the James Dobson Family Institute, the Family Research Council and Dobson's former ministry, Focus on the Family, are full-blown endorsees of Christian Nationalism.  The pseudo-Christianity that they preach rests on an intellectual assent to a specific set of doctrines, mostly theological commandments, that developed as the practice of the fundamentalist movements of the late 19th century, and the Pentecostalism of the early 20th, which abandoned Christian faith as a lifestyle generated by the spiritual transformation of a Christian conversion experience, visible in the values and virtues of the gospel, found in Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, and in other places in the gospel accounts of the New Testament.  

In fact, Family Research Council's Jerry Boylan, a retired lieutenant general, advocates genocide in Gaza as a means of resolving Israel's "Palestinian problem." He has determined that the Palestinians have been "predestined" to be condemned, because of their refusal to acknowledge the existence of God, and to accept Christian faith and practice.  And because this has been determined by the will of God, they cannot be redeemed.  This is diametrically and fundamentally opposite the foundational principle of the Christian gospel, the sanctity of all human life created in the image of God.  Such a belief is defined by the Apostle John, in two of his church epistles, written in the latter half of the first century, using the term "antichrist."  

It's pretty clear, by observation, that there is nothing Trump or his followers support that resembles biblical Christianity, and all of it, in its self-declaring defiance, can be defined as "antichrist."  Most conservative Evangelicals, particularly those of the Pentecostal/Charismatic persuasion, get caught up in confusing and speculative "end times prophecy" scenarios, seeing "antichrist" as some historical figure or world ruler.  I don't believe any of that, but the term "antichrist" does have a clear meaning in defining philosophy, religion and actions that are the opposite of the Christian gospel taught and lived out by the example of Jesus.  And I think the political philosophy and principle, if you can call it that, of Trump's politics, including making right wing political extremism into Christian theology and doctrine, is most definitely antichrist.   

Neither the "healthy masculinity" that they credit to Trump, which is nothing more than psychotic misogyny, or the "manifest destiny reborn," provide any evidence of a connection between Trump and biblical, authentic Christian faith and practice.  And those conservative, Evangelical leaders, following the path of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson by leading their followers down the same path, are causing the apostasy of conservative, Evangelicalism in the United States.  

Change of Leadership is Necessary for America's Survival, and for the Democratic Party, Too

We just lost a major election that frankly, given the issues and the politics on each side, along with the qualifications, character and ability of the candidates, would have been a slam dunk thirty years ago.  The factors which brought us a second Trump term are not all the fault of Democrats.  We've lost our free press, billionaire ownership of the media, including once reliably "fair and balanced" sources, along with the ability to reach into most of the population with a clear message, no longer exists.  Those elements of our society which provide for an educated and informed electorate have disappeared.  And a renegade Supreme Court, bent not on strict constructionism, but on reforming and changing the Constitution's meaning from the bench, made it possible for money to buy election results through their Citizens United ruling several years ago.   

The cost of this election and owning a political candidate to one specific billionaire turns out to be about $300 million. 

But there are some things for which the leadership of the Democratic party must accept responsibility, and leadership which brought those things about, and the manner in which they continue to lead must be addressed.  Doing so is not bashing, it's the kind of discussion we need.  This needs to happen fast, in order for the party to be able to effectively limit Republican aggression, and Trump's gross mismanagement and abuse of the Presidency, put a stop to his abuse and dismantling of American Constitutional Democracy, and elect a Congress in 2026 that will shut him down.  

The Biden Administration accomplished some remarkable things.  But during a two year period, when we had a majority in both Houses of Congress, a sitting Democratic President and control of the justice department, we failed to deal with the single largest issue of the day, which was the act of sedition committed by Trump in organizing an insurrection to attack the Capitol on January 6th, and his subsequent illegal attempts to thwart the peaceful transfer of power.  

We had good, solid, experienced party political leadership, but not bold enough to take some risks that would have overcome the obstacles cited as excuses for not achieving his arrest and conviction, and prevented him from being eligible to run again.  "It would look too political," they said.  It was a risk that would require some innovative thinking to pull off, and some courage to carry out, in that some of our leaders might have had to risk the sacrifice of their power and position in order to see it through, on behalf of their constituents.  The old school, status quo manner of doing business precluded the boldness, and self-interest and self-protection precluded the risks and the courage.  

That's one big failure for which Democratic leadership must account.  The other was failing to recognize the transitional nature of Biden's Presidency, and the weakness within caused by perception of his age and ability to do the job.  Running the risk of a faltering, stumbling debate performance, combined with fewer public appearances getting media coverage that the press was giving to Trump, was a failure, and in the final analysis, it was a major factor which did cost Harris the election.  Democratic leadership, which allowed an embarrassing, month-long period of confusion, mostly negative media coverage, and open the door for Republicans to insert unfounded speculation and criticism , must be held accountable for this as well.  

Steve Schmidt: We Are Under Attack 

I take much of what former Republican political strategist and Bush and McCain campaign advisor Steve Schmidt has to say with a grain of salt.  I expect him to take off the velvet glove in his criticism.  But Schmidt has earned credibility for his recognition of the subversion of the GOP by Trump, and by his willingness to go out on a limb to express it, risking the loss of his position and power, which he did.  And he sees politics for what they are, and he recognizes the status quo bullshit with which some of the old line Democratic party leaders still do business, including Chuck Schumer.    

"Let us be clear what it is that is being stolen from all of us in plain sight without a fight."  

I will say this because it needs to be said, Steve Schmidt, the former Republican Bush-McCain strategist, a political independent even at this point, though he is an MSNBC contributor, is 100% correct.  These words are now out, incredibly, and I won't take them back.  Steve Schmidt got this right.  Go ahead, finish reading the linked article.  

Why Did We Lose an Election We Should Have Won Easily, With Our "Outstanding" Leadership?

We failed to prevent an "existential threat" to American Democracy from being able to run for office again, and we lost the election in which he ran.  Let's put that into perspective.  We lost an election to a con artist who had a track record of abject failure as both a businessman and as President.  We lost to an inarticulate, age-demented, corrupt, spectacularly immoral and indecent clown.  With the kind of leadership and experience the Democratic party brought to bear on the election, we still lost.  

The excuses are just more of the status quo political bullshit some Democratic party leaders think still works.  Well, when she lost, two years ago, Pelosi stepped down.  Oh, she still wields influence, but she recognized that, while she did a great job, her time had passed.  Chuck Schumer now needs to do the same. 

So it is that I'm looking at Steve Schmidt's words with some renewed interest, since he seems to have a better grasp on the reality of the situation than what's left of current Democratic party leadership, most of whom clearly didn't see what was coming, even though there were plenty of warnings, and in spite of the fact that when they had the advantage, and could have prevented this whole scenario during the first two years of Biden's administration, they didn't get it done.  

And that's not bashing Democrats.  That's just the truth. 

Let's take personalities and past political associations out of the equation, so we can look at this fairly.  This is an excellent assessment, it has the facts straight, and the conclusions  drawn and solutions offered are more than reasonable.  

Trump is an existential threat to American Democracy.  And yet, the actions of Democratic party leaders over the whole nine year period of time since Trump first was elected in 2016 do not always match the truth of that sentence.  For the most part, as Schmidt points out rather sharply, it is Chuck Schumer who characterizes much of the Democratic leadership's failure to see this coming, figure out how to deal with it, and successfully stop it.  

He's quite critical of Schumer, in a very negative way.  I think this paragraph is the best summation of criticism of Schumer, though there are several other Democrats who also bear some of the responsibility for acting the same way: 

"He is a fool being unmasked in the town square, where he stands naked pretending to fight back against something he didn't stop when he could have, and didn't see coming when he should have."  

I don't know if I would say that there are a lot of Democrats who didn't see this coming.  They did.  They just ignored it, hoping it would go away. They kept saying Trump was an existential threat to Democracy, but they placed far more value upon the preservation of their own personal political power, and avoiding the appearances of being "political" than they did on making sure Trump was removed once and for all as an existential threat.  And they've done nothing but make excuses for it when they failed.  

Let's put this in terms in order to understand how big of a failure this was.  A man who organized an insurrection, sedition by the correct definition of the term, for the purpose of overturning a legitimate election and overthrowing a legitimately elected American government, subject of a damning Congressional and FBI investigation in which every scrap of evidence turned up indicted him, was not prosecuted to the full extent of the law because the prosecution was grossly incompetent, did not make this prosecution a matter of urgency, and was defended in his incompetence by party leadership who failed to keep this in front of the American people.  

Trump's back, as corrupt as ever, now a convicted felon who got away with flaunting the rule of law because Democrats let him get away with it, and as Schmidt says, "while the Constitution is being singed by the flames of arsonists, Schumer has reached for an avocado and a Corona."  

Sharpness of the Criticism Aside, It's Time for Schumer to Step Aside as Senate Minority Leader

To be fair, Schumer isn't the only Democrat who needs to step aside and let some leadership that is not steeped in old school politics take charge of the attack on the Trump administration.  Republicans have always made messes, blockaded legislation and stopped progress of Democrats, even when they are the minority in both houses, because they use everything they have at their disposal to get it done.  They find every obscure motion or procedure they can use to delay, obfuscate, and oppose, and they make progress a frustrating and confusing tangle of legislative mess.  They get some Democrats to back down because of the trouble and risk involved in stepping forward.  

So we need some bold, risk takers who understand that if Trump really is an existential threat to Democracy that they claim he is, then there is NOTHING good coming out of his administration and there should be no compromise, or routine business involved in governing during his administration.  Every vote should be a resounding NO!, no confirmation should get through without major opposition and every process should be slowed down to the crawl, or stopped if possible.  

And anyone who crawls down to Mar-a-Lago for the purpose of "bi-partisan" compromise should be considered a full member of the opposition. 

Attention needs to be focused on every Democrat who is now the minority leader of every senate and house committee, starting with Senator Durbin on the Judiciary committee.  Are they capable of boldness?  Are they willing to take risks?  Will they abandon the ridiculous protocols which Republicans ignore and use to their own advantage?  If not, then step down and let someone else step in.  

We finally got a leadership change at the moribund Democratic National Committee, an organization that was virtually worthless during this past election cycle.  I'm more excited about David Hogg being vice-chair than I am about Ken Martin as chair, but that's because I really am not all that familiar with him.  He certainly accomplished a lot in Minnesota.  If he brings that kind of moxie to the DNC, it will be a good thing. 

A "Wake up Call", Which is What This is, is Not "Bashing" 

I'm a lifelong Democrat, and I believe in its core values, especially in promoting diversity, equality and inclusion, in the unity in diversity it promotes, and especially in its "big tent" philosophy that stands in stark contrast to the anti-American, anti-Patriotic, white supremacist, Christian Nationalist oppression of the Republican party, now run by right wing extremist Trumpism and the phony, subversive, fascist Heritage Foundation.  I'm not a "take my vote and go home" kind of American.  I'm a get involved, find the best place to be in effective service kind of voter.  

Party loyalty may seem to be a good thing, on the surface.  But it creates good-old-boys clubs, circles of exclusivity that are counter productive and prevent the cream of the crop in leadership from rising to the top.  We are where we are because of political party establishment's failures.  Country and Constitution need to be priorities, and willingness to sacrifice in order to preserve them the highest quality of our party leadership, not self-preservation and protection of power.  

And we'd better work fast, because Trump and his handlers sure are.