Christianity Was Originally a Socialist Organization

In the middle of all of the caterwauling from Republicans about Democrats being communists, I am enjoying the amusement of seeing their hypocrisy pour out while the Communist dictator of China is entertained in the White House by Trump, with a welcome and red carpet rolled out that few visiting foreign leaders have received from this administration.  Being the mendacious suck-up that he is, Trump is making every MAGA Republican who is screaming and hollering about Democrats being communists look like stupid idiots.  While they are making completely false and totally ignorant statements trying to distract voters from the fact that they have completely and totally failed the working people of this country, their inamorata [and I chose that word deliberately] is entertaining the world's most notorious Communist leader, heaping praise on his leadership, bobbing and scurrying after him to blow his nose and wipe his rear, and making his followers look like the idiots he thinks they are.  

This has had the effect of moving my mind back to memories from my Southern Baptist upbringing, and the descriptions of the formation of the early Christian church in Jerusalem, following the crucifixion of Christ.  The distorted and false religion that MAGA identifies as "Christian" doesn't exist in the Bible at all, not anywhere.  What does exist is a narrative, in the early chapters of the book of Acts, which describe the Christian church that formed as a purely socialist organization.  

Don't take my word for it, it's right there in the text, the clearest narrative describing this is found in Acts 2:43-47 and Acts 4:37-37.  In Acts 5, there is an illustration that indicates just how serious the early church took this socialist atmosphere, when a couple, Ananias and Sapphira, failed to turn over all of the money from the sale of a property,  and were struck dead on the spot when they lied to the Apostles about it.  

In Acts 6, the narrative deals with a problem involving the unequal distribution of goods, primarily food, because the widows who were native to Jerusalem and Judaea seemed to be getting a bigger share, while those from the outlying provinces, and who spoke Greek, were sometimes left out.  Seven men were appointed to ensure that the distribution was done equally and one of those men, Stephen, was eventually martyred for his faith.  It seems like the political leadership of Jerusalem and Judea were not happy with the wholesome and enthusiastic atmosphere of this communal faith, not just because it redistributed wealth but because it didn't seem to recognize their religious authority, either.  

Combined with some other narratives in the New Testament, such as when Jesus overturned the tables of the profiteers and money changers in the Temple who were exploiting people's religious convictions by overcharging for animals needed for ritual sacrifices and unfairly shortchanging them when they tried to exchange their Roman currency for the coins that the Temple would accept as an offering, and  you kind of get the picture that early Christianity found itself in opposition to the kind of capitalism that promoted greed and made the rich even richer.  

There's also a narrative about a man from Jericho named Zacchaeus, who served as a tax collector, overcharging those who owed money and then skimming his own share off the top.  After being spiritually convicted by Jesus, and converted, he made the choice to return the amount he had cheated people fourfold.  

So it is pretty clear that Christianity, in principle and practice, stands against the commercialism, profiteering, and outright greedy cheating of capitalism.  There are still branches of the church which practice various forms of socialism, elevating the value of humanity and making sure that the needs of everyone in the community are considered equally.  No one becomes a millionaire or a billionaire out of their own labor.  It takes a community that includes laborers who work on their behalf to make it work.  In the United States, there are laws which protect everyone from harm equally, and which provide infrastructure to which everyone contributes, that makes it possible for billionaires to be billionaires.  Socialism puts value on the human community.  

The entire message of the Christian gospel is based on the belief that Christian faith involves selflessness, reflected in Jesus' crucifixion on behalf of all humanity's sin, while the opposite of that is selfishness, ignoring the sanctity of every human life and living in such a way as to exploit the resources of others for one's own benefit.  Socialism, as an economic system, is the ultimate control on unbridled and uncontrolled capitalism, and it is what balances out the use of resources which benefit everyone in the community.  Otherwise, poverty, decay and the breaking down of social values is the result.  

Why I Am a Democratic Socialist, Part 2

Yesterday my wife of 39 years passed away during a physical therapy activity in a skilled nursing/rehab facility.  She had been suffering for over a year with leg and lower back pain that was keeping her up at night, and causing her to drift between her recliner and the bed to find a way to get comfortable.  It took months to get medical care that would lead to a resolution, long waits for appointments with orthopedic and pain management physicians, sometimes more than a three month wait, because many of the doctors are either past retirement age or semi-retired, and there aren't many new physicians coming into the field. 

And why is this the case?  It's because corporations are buying up what not-for-profit competition remains, and taking the practice of medicine out of the hands of the experts who know what they are doing.  Insurance companies dictate treatment, and if they want to get paid, doctors have no choice in the diagnosis or treatment.   

During the long wait between appointments, her knee gave out and she fell, face first, on the kitchen floor.  This put her in the emergency room and subsequently in the hospital for a week.  What developed during her hospital stay was an inability to walk, because of the weakness in her right leg.  So the recommendation was an extended stay in a skilled nursing center for physical and occupational therapy rehabilitation.  

Medicare's rules and limitations on this, a development that happened during the first Trump administration, provide one hour of physical and occupational therapy five times a week in an in-patient skilled nursing facility while the patient basically sits around or lays around the other 23 hours.  The name "skilled nursing" is a joke.  Most of these facilities, including the one where my wife was admitted, are understaffed, and it is difficult to discern the qualifications of nurses, CNA's and physical therapy staffers.  

On my wife's unit, with 20 patients, sometimes more, there was one nurse and two CNA's on duty every shift.  So of course, the quality of care is questionable.  They barely have time to help patients get to the bathroom and get their food, much less do any kind of physical activity to supplement their therapy.  Yet that's what "skilled nursing" implies.  It's what I expected, and what the social worker who sold us on the place hinted would happen.  But that is not the case at all.  

What actually occurred was that she was left lying in bed for long periods of time, sometimes as long as 20 hours, the response time to a buzzer for help, which the brochure said was 5 minutes or less, turned out to be as long as two hours, with not getting a response half the time she pressed the buzzer.  "Use the diaper," was the response to many of her requests to be helped out of bed and to the toilet, a short five to ten minute break if that.  And she would wait, sometimes up to three hours to get changed.  

The reason patients are put in this kind of facility is that the cost of operation, because of the reduced staff, is less than a day in the hospital.  Because medical care in this country now is not about a basic human right to health care, but about money, and how to make it off people's pain, suffering and indignity.  The profits come off the top of the revenue in both corporate operated health insurance and corporate owned health care.  What's left over is all that's left for operations, and if there's a shortage, too bad.  

My wife's death was due to neglect.  She was left in bed for over 24 hours from Saturday evening to Monday morning.  During that time, it is very likely that she developed a blood clot, which came loose during her therapy exercise, and went to her heart. causing cardiac arrest and her death, in about 20 minutes.  Neglect caused by the cost cutting measures so that a skilled nursing rehab facility's owner can make a profit.  

And I will now become an activist and work for the complete overhaul of American health care and insurance.  I will do it, motivated by the memory of my dear wife, a victim of the profiteering and the lack of consideration for basic human rights by this presidential administration.  

 

People Are Leaving MAGA Run Churches, and Discovering Authentic Christianity

Alter Net: Women Are Running Away From Church to Escape MAGA 

"The version of faith that has so successfully branded itself as American Christianity is very authoritarian.  There's one right way of doing things.  When the face of Christianity is aligned with abuse, with Christian nationalism, and a thirst for power, then that does become a big problem."  Sarah Stankorb, author of Damned if She Does:  Why Women Quit the Church and What it Means for the Future of Religion.  

The trend that author Sarah Stankorb references in her book [see links above] is a new thing for American Evangelicalism.  In spite of the fact that they are frequently denied leadership roles in churches, as pastors or in any kind of clerical capacity, because of faulty interpretations of a couple of sentences found in the works of the Apostle Paul, most of the membership and a significant amount of the volunteer work done in churches involves women.  But Stankorb notes a trend that has been occurring as a result of the influence of MAGA politics among conservative Evangelicals.  Women are leaving these churches in large numbers.  

Frankly, the truth is that large numbers of members of Evangelical churches are finding their way out the door, in a rapidly increasing exodus, most of them people whose understanding of the Christian gospel runs deeper than the average pew sitter, and who are unable to reconcile the stark philosophical and moral differences between authentic Christianity defined by accurately interpreting the New Testament, and the pseudo-Christian cult beliefs which are used solely to justify the licentiousness of MAGA.  

"Christian nationalism teaches that there is just one kind of truth, and any other form is dangerous," says Stankorb.  "It says you have to follow certain leaders.  And when you look at the political leaders with whom they are aligned, you see one in particular who is very fond of telling lies, or you see cover-ups of abuse.  You see people who claim to have a hold on truth operating in falsehood."  

That, she says, makes it untenable to be part of the church that accepts this.  Trump has become the figurehead of a religion even though he is a serial philanderer, adulterer and pathological liar, all things that the Christian gospel defines as licentiousness.  

The early Christian apostle Jude warned about pseudo-Christian influences intruding into the Christian church, sometime during the first century.  It's a very short epistle, but his identification of intruders and the licentiousness they bring is a very accurate description of exactly what is happening now, with the MAGA cult and its white, Christian nationalism taking over many conservative Evangelical congregations and denominations.  

For certain intruders have stolen in among you, people who long ago were designated for this condemnation as ungodly, who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Lord and Master Jesus Christ.  Jude, v. 4  

It's almost as if Jude could look ahead into the future and see what would be happening in American Evangelicalism when he wrote that two thousand years ago.  Although the literalist, authoritarian fundamentalism of most conservative Evangelicals is not consistent with the gospel that Jesus preached and taught, and the appalling arrogance that they exhibit in claiming their own correctness has led to a perception of holiness in conduct, who'd have ever thought they would openly embrace unrepentant, and even defiant, adulterers, pathological liars and rapists because of their politics?  

And the significance of women leaving the church in such large numbers has some historical implications that do not bode well for its future.  With more women than men among the church membership of both the Millennials and Gen Z, Evangelicalism is facing a decline not only in the membership and attendance and the financial shortages that come with that, but also in its ability to maintain its own structure, because women do 80% of the work in Evangelical churches and institutions.

The MAGA Effect on Evangelicalism Has Caused Significant Membership Loss

What Stankorb is documenting with regard to women has been a common experience for American Evangelicalism since 2016, and even before that.  The blending of conservative, right wing politics with the strange quirks of fundamentalist and Pentecostal/Charismatic Evangelical practice has driven a significant percentage of church membership out the back door.   And, in fact, it has caused some entire churches to distance themselves from the heresy and pseudo-Christian cult that this mixture has produced. 

The largest Evangelical denomination in the United States, the Southern Baptist Convention, has reported staggering membership and attendance losses since it peaked at 16.2 million in 2006.  Over 90% of the losses have come since 2016, the beginning of Trump's first term.  Membership has fallen from 16 million to just under 13 million, a loss of more than 3 million in a decade, while attendance has fallen from 6 million to 4 million.  

The manner in which this denomination tracks its membership indicates that there are entire churches that are disaffiliating, in addition to members leaving churches that have become overtly political.  Churches that are affiliated with the denomination file what is called an "annual church profile," ACP, each year that includes their membership and attendance, along with making a contribution to the denomination's budget.  The number of churches which have stopped sending in an ACP, and which no longer contribute financially to the denomination since 2016 is somewhere around 8,000.  It takes five years for a church to drop off the statistical record kept by the denomination after it stops receiving contributions, so the membership and attendance loss is likely larger than what is currently reported.

Other denominations, including the largest Pentecostal denomination, the Assemblies of God, keep cumulative membership records, but both they and the Southern Baptists report a much larger membership than weekly attendance.  The number of people showing up on any given Sunday to an Assembly of God church in the US is down almost 12% since 2016, more than half of this in the last five years.  And in fact, there are no longer any Evangelical denominations now reporting any kind of attendance or membership increase.  The fact is, people are leaving, and that supports Sarah Stankorb's research that when women leave in larger numbers than men, it makes a difference. 

Overall, the attendance and membership in churches and groups that identify as "Evangelical" in the US is down almost 18% since 2015, according to census bureau reports and their own membership statistics. And that can be directly attributed to the fact that MAGA has taken control of most of them, and the Christians are leaving the non-Christian MAGA cultists behind. They aren't necessarily leaving Christianity, they are leaving the pseudo-Christian MAGA influenced cult.  And there is a growing recognition and awareness of churches and church leaders who are standing up to this apostasy, along with endorsing candidates politically opposed to Trump and MAGA Republicans.

Christian Nationalism bears no resemblance to the gospel of Jesus Christ.  It exhibits none of its values or principles, it distorts, misinterprets or ignores its theology and doctrine, and the churches that follow it have become political action committees instead of genuine "ecclesia."  And the declines in membership, which are growing larger with each passing year, 2025 being the largest single membership loss ever experienced by American Evangelicals, will lead to their eventual extinction.  

Yes, I'm a Democratic Socialist: Here's Why

Democratic Socialism and Marxist Communism are diametrically opposite of each other.  To be a Democratic Socialist is to be as far away from being a Marxist Communist as being a Christian is from being an Atheist.  

And I think that's a good comparison.  I majored in American history and government in college in order to teach it to high school students, and I've accumulated more than another Master's degree in continuing education since then.  I have also taught civics, American History and government at the AP and honors level, also taking multiple hours of coursework in order to do this.  Using these terms politically requires either being educated and informed, or being ignorant and stupid. So I have a difficult time maintaining my composure when I see ignorant and stupid people equate Democrats with Communists, and Democratic Socialism with Marxist Communism.  

And of course, I know that these are used as political buzzwords, to try and convince voters who don't really know the difference, not to vote for Democrats.  I will say this much.  If this argument has the ability to convince enough voters not to vote for Democrats, then there are far too many ignorant and stupid people in this country for its own good.  

Democratic Socialism Allows "We The People" to Determine How to Use Government to Serve Its People

Capitalism is about profit.  The free market, running on the law of supply and demand, follows the money wherever it goes.  It doesn't make judgements about the benefits provided by the money, and it doesn't direct resources to needs, because demand isn't always about people's needs.  

Capitalism is easily derailed by greed.  And left unregulated, it collapses in upon itself because money makes it possible to cheat, get outside the law of supply and demand, corner the market, create monopolies and ignore suffering.  We have a political party that is doing its dead level best to create a 
Christian nationalist oligarchy, based on faulty theories of racial inequality and on an economic version of Darwin's survival of the fittest theories, without a single principle of the actual Christian gospel being included.  

So it is that we have arrived at a point where a mere 1% of the population of the United States has acquired and accumulated 99% of the nation's financial wealth.  And trying to sustain life for the other 99%, on just 1% of the resources, as miraculous as that is, requires the application of the principles of humanity.  We did not get here because capitalism works so well, we got here because wealth was able to beat back as much humanitarian principle, and Christian principle for that matter, as it possibly could. 

My personal beliefs, including my theology, were admittedly influenced by being raised in a conservative, Evangelical denomination, Southern Baptist as a matter of fact.  The irony of that experience is that I attended a denominationally related university and graduate school where the theology classes I took contradicted much of the Southern folk religion that formed the basis of what most of the people in the pews believed.  They taught me how to think critically, and to use experience and knowledge together to make wise choices.  

At the top of the list of principles that are revealed in the words in the New Testament that Christians claim are those of Jesus himself, is "love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and love your neighbor as you love yourself."  And "neighbor" was defined by Jesus using the example of a member of the most hated and despised ethnic group of his day and culture, a Samaritan.  The idea of treating a Samaritan with any kind of human dignity, much less as an  equal, would have been anathema to virtually every individual of the same ethnicity and religion that was practiced in the Jewish provinces of the Roman Empire.  Samaria lay between Judaea and Galilee, and Jewish people travelling between the two took a much longer road around it, rather than cross through and have to deal with its people. 

And for those Evangelicals who want to literally transition the principles of the Bible to the current time and ignore historical and cultural contexts in interpreting it, their ability to explain away the way they despise and hate those who do not believe the way they do, and who don't look like them, is incredibly hypocritical.  

But I don't want to digress too far.  

I am a Democratic Socialist because Democratic Socialism is the primary means by which a reasonable measure of humanity is introduced into American society, and into its government. It is the effective counterweight to unbridled, unrestrained and corrupted capitalism.  It is a moral force for good.  And for those who want to consider the influence of Christianity on American history and development, it is more consistent with the genuine principles of the Christian gospel that Jesus revealed. 

Practical Aspects of Democratic Socialism

I am writing this from the waiting room of a Chicago hospital, where my wife is undergoing an MRI.  We are working class Americans, we have never earned a six figure salary, even with both of our incomes together, and we followed the advice of those we respected in planning for our retirement.  Of course, we depended on the thousands of dollars deducted, over more than 50 years of working, to provide us with Social Security and Medicare, and we are now benefitting from both of those socialist programs.  In fact, with the various ups and downs of the financial markets, and other issues that have come up, the majority of our retirement income is dependent on Social Security.  

We paid down almost all of our personal debt prior to retiring, purchased a reliable, new vehicle three years ago, and double paid to get it paid off in three years.  We are relocating to a state that is more tax friendly to seniors, with lower housing costs, in order to preserve savings, live in austere comfort, and enjoy retirement years.  All of that is possible because of the benefits of Democratic Socialism. 

We've had some unanticipated medical issues come up, and navigating through those has been a lesson in exactly why Democratic Socialism is a necessary part of our politics.  In no other field in this country have the abuses of profiteering and greed made a bigger mess of things than in our medical care.  This, and education, are the only two fields where those who have the experience, knowledge and ability to operate are not permitted to have much say over operations.   Insurance companies control every single aspect of health care, down to how many needles a lab tech can use while taking blood from a patient.  

And that's to save money of course, but not for actual health care.  It's to guarantee profitability.  American health care is based on how much profit can be made out of the pain and suffering of people who are sick.  The religious-based, not-for-profit hospitals which once dominated American health care are rapidly being bought up by health care corporations to eliminate the competition and to make more money.  And it's no surprise that we have reached a point where health insurance corporations are buying up hospitals and medical practices, to do just like old fashioned monopolies once did, owning every stage of the production.  

As a result, American medical research and practice no longer leads the world in research and development, nor in quality of patient care, though our rising mortality rates put us in the company of some third world countries.  

It is time for this country to socialize its health care provision and finance systems, take the profit out of all of it, drive the costs down, and let a single-payer health coverage plan take care of the expense, and of making sure that every American has equal access to the best quality health care.  That kind of equality stands on a basic American value.  About half of every dollar Americans spend on health care and health insurance doesn't go to their health care, but to profit margins and dividend payouts.  That's a lot of money, either to be saved, or to be applied to a higher level of quality healthcare. 

Being able to reform our health care system is one good reason why I am a Democratic Socialist.  This is the wealthiest nation on earth and while the wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, virtually everyone in the whole society helped contribute to it.  So government, breaking down the practices that have created the inequity, and doing a better job of helping people use what their labor has earned, is one of its functions.  I'm all in favor of letting it do its job.  

But the attractiveness of Democratic Socialism is found in the word "democratic."  The Quakers speak of a concept they call "that of God within," the idea that humanity is capable of rising above the level of instinct, and can enhance the quality of their lives with values that defeat selfishness.  This is rooted in their value of human equality, a principle derived from the influence of the Christian gospel.  Democratic Socialism is based on the value of human equality, and the belief that a government of, by and for the people must be subject to the will of the people.  The result, when values are applied, is something that elevates the collective quality of life.  

And that's exactly why I'm a Democratic Socialist.

 

The Difference Between the Theology of James Talarico and Robert Jeffress

There have been multiple social media posts recently featuring Dr. Robert Jeffress, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas, openly declaring that the Democratic party candidate for Senate from Texas, James Talarico, is not qualified because his Christian beliefs are too liberal, and therefore wrong.  Since no religious test is the constitutional requirement for any office holder in Congress, Talarico's religious beliefs, including his theology and his doctrinal position within the Christian faith is completely irrelevant to his qualifications for office, but of course, in a state full of right wing conservative Evangelicals, most of whom arrogantly think their interpretation of the Bible, which is a modern invention completely separated from thousands of years of Christian tradition and practice, is the correct one.  

This is a tactic designed to distract voters from the real issues in this election, and focus them on irrelevance so that Paxton's moral bankruptcy and criminal activity will not be noticed.  In any comparison of the character, truthfulness and integrity of the two men, Paxton, a serial adulterer, divorced from his wife due to marital infidelity, and impeached by the state legislature for criminal acts, exhibits none of those qualities while Talarico's character is unblemished and his word is as good as gold.  And it's not being judgmental to declare that any Christian who wants to turn this into a moral competition, and would support Paxton, is apostate, and is guilty of licentiousness (see Jude v 4) because that makes them an intruder in the Christian church, not a faithful member of it. 

Robert Jeffress is in Error in His Theology and Doctrine

Jeffress is a Southern Baptist, a denomination that has actually split over the theological error made by most conservative Evangelicals.  The evangelical Doctrine of Inerrancy claims that the sixty-six books of the Protestant Bible were verbally inspired by God, that the words chosen by forty different authors over the thousand or so years during which it was written are without error in their original autographs.  Of course, the original autographs have long since crumbled into dust, so many Evangelicals apply the Doctrine of Preservation, which states that the translations of the Bible, particularly the King James English translation, have "preserved" the inerrant and perfect nature of the scripture.  

There is zero evidence to support this.  The Bible's writers, especially those in the New Testament, make no claim that what they were writing was equal with what they called "The Scriptures."  Any examination of the earliest manuscripts, which date back to about 700 or 800 CE, shows that there are variants in the transmission of the text, many of which are associated with different theological groups that were part of the church during those decades and centuries.  

The primary error of this belief is that it distorts interpretation of the Bible itself.  The New Testament contains the four accounts known as the "gospels," which claim to be eyewitness records of the life and teachings of Jesus.  If Jesus was, as is the claim, the Son of God whose purpose was to reveal the nature of God to humankind, then the record of his words would be the high point of all Biblical literature, both Old and New Testament.  His words, coming from the very mind of God himself, would carry a level of inspiration that is superior to all other scripture, including the prophets, the law, and the Apostolic books of the New Testament.  

The Baptist Faith and Message, the doctrinal guidelines for cooperation within the Southern Baptist denomination, once declared that Jesus was the criterion by which the rest of scripture is to be interpreted.  But the 2000 edition of that document, heavily edited by fundamentalists of Jeffress' ilk, removed Jesus as the criterion for interpreting scripture.  That leads to the errors in Biblical interpretation which constitute the vast majority of Evangelical theology, including everything that Jeffress preaches from the pulpit.  

But there is another aspect to Jeffress' approach to the Christian faith that causes me not to trust his claims to being Christian, or his calling as a pastor, at all.  

Jeffress is one of the highest profile pastors in the country who spends an inordinate amount of time defending a man who is a pathological liar, a serial adulterer who cheated on his third, and pregnant, wife with a prostitute and porn actress, a convicted rapist, and with pending criminal indictments for inciting sedition and pedophilia.  A man who has openly blasphemed the Holy Spirit by declaring that he has not committed sin that requires God's forgiveness.  Jeffress has become one of Trump's favorite pastors.  Well, birds of a feather.  

Trump has, for some reason, decided his spiritual advisor wouldn't be Jeffress, who bobbed and scurried along behind him blowing his nose and wiping is rear end to gain his favor, and chose an even bigger apostate heretic, Paula White, for this job.  That had to be a difficult pill for Jeffress to swallow without comment, as a member of the inner circle of Southern Baptist leaders who think that calling a woman a "pastor," or a "prophetess" as is the case with White, is heresy.  But there is no open criticism from these hypocrites about White, whose doctrine actually makes her church into a cult, according to any Southern Baptist pastor who could be asked.  They hypocritically give him a pass on that issue.  

So Jeffress can be critical of Talarico's theology from his pulpit every single Sunday he preaches, it does not change the fact that he is the one who is promoting doctrinal and theological error, not Talarico. 

James Talarico is Right On Target When it Comes to His Interpretation of Biblical Truth

Just then a lawyer stood up to test Jesus. 

"Teacher," he said, "What must I do to inherit eternal life?"

He said to him, "What is written in the Law? What do you read there?" 

He answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself."  

And he said to him, "You have given the right answer; do this and and you will live."  

I've never heard Jeffress quote this scripture or interpreted it as Talarico does frequently.  These are the words of Jesus himself, and he is saying that eternal life depends upon obedience to the two greatest commandments, which Jesus actually equated.  Love God and love your neighbor.  This is an unqualified statement which Talarico interprets correctly.  Jeffress preaches that eternal life depends upon getting doctrine correct, meaning in agreement with what he has been taught to believe.  Talarico preaches that eternal life depends upon loving God and loving one's neighbor, a belief that is demonstrated by actions.  

And loving your neighbor doesn't translate into deporting them or their family members, denying them access to health care, or to food, or taking their money and turning a profit for the rich.  Remember, Jesus told the rich young ruler that his path to eternal life required him to show his love for God by selling all his possessions and giving the money to his neighbors, the poor.  

Talarico's Christian faith is obvious and evident, not just in what he advocates as a member of the Texas legislature, or in his church ministry, but in his politics.  

So Who Should Texas Christians Trust? 

How can Robert Jeffress be trusted to tell the truth when it comes to his political bias?  That's a simple question to answer.  He's not trustworthy.  

If he were, then he would not defend either Trump or Paxton, who have rejected Christianity.  Jude, verse 4 is a very accurate description of how both of these politicians are using Christianity for their own profit and could care less about doctrine or faith.  If he cared, he wouldn't support either man, morally bankrupt and licentious intruders into Evangelicalism.  It's been easy to see how they could do this, since Evangelicalism does not stand on truth, or on love of God and love of neighbors, but on wealth, power and influence.  Immorality is an inconsequential issue, when money and power get in the way.  

So if those who want to make a religious test take that seriously, they cannot cast a ballot for Paxton without labelling themselves as apostate. 

 

What Did We Expect From a Right Wing Personality Cult?

 The Guardian: Grief, Fury, Conspiracy Inside Turning Point USA After Charlie Kirk's Killing

It was a movement built on pushing for what they defined and called "traditional values of womanhood" that turned into a political movement to provide a stage for its founder to debate political liberals.  I use the term "debate" generally, since an actual debate implies that fairness is applied to both sides and facts must be used.  Kirk was a distorter of facts, and most of the debates in which he engaged were conducted under his ground rules, making sure those who disagreed with him were at a distinct disadvantage.  

Turning Point USA had a strong connection to the more extreme right wing side of Evangelicalism, the political element more aligned with its Charismatic/Pentecostal side.  It had a set of values that it claimed, but because Kirk's primary objective was to have Trump's back, and protect him from any kind of criticism as a result of his gross moral bankruptcy and the mounting evidence of his sex and political crimes, Turning Point USA could not actually stand on its values all of the time.  And that made it hypocritical.  

A personality cult is identified as a group which demonstrates excessive public admiration for or devotion to a famous person or a political leader.  The article I posted from The Guardian is lengthy, gives a rundown of the history of Turning Point USA and Kirk's leadership, and then gives examples of how it was nothing more than a personality cult by showing what appears to be a rapid decline in interest and participation since Kirk's death.  His funeral was apparently the high point of the organization's existence.  It's been downhill since then.  

A Very Typical Pattern for Evangelical Para-Church and Political Organizations

American Evangelical Christianity is full of personality cults.  The values and principles that they preach, and claim to be promoting, derived from their own interpretation of the Bible and of what they think defines the "Christian gospel" are basically the same.  It's a very legalistic system of doctrinal conformity based on a literal interpretation of the Biblical text that ignores two thousand years of Christian history, tradition, and especially the cultural and linguistic nuances and influences on the writing of the text itself.  

American Evangelicalism's growth over the past fifty years has depended on a small cluster of personalities who turn themselves into religious celebrities with the following they gather from their media outreach.  That more or less reached a peak with Billy Graham, whose radio and then television preaching made him the single most recognizable American Evangelical in the world. Most of the others who have come along afterward, in the current megachurch movement, are imitators of his success.  

They observed that he built a media empire around his crusade meetings, and that he made a lot of money. They observed that he had the potential to use his influence with politicians, and to move his followers in a direction that potentially gave him political power.  They also observed that when he stepped down, his son used the name Graham to build his own multi-million dollar evangelistic ministry off of his father's reputation, and turned the emphasis on evangelistic ministry into right wing political influence.  Franklin Graham lost the ability to be an evangelistic influence, but he has expanded his wealth and has used his name to become a major Christian nationalist influence in the Republican party. 

Almost all of the large, Evangelical media ministries have para-church organizations they've set up to use their influence in extremist right wing politics.  There's Falwell and the Moral Majority, Pat Robertson and the Christian Coalition, along with his "700 Club" that looks like a legitimate news provider.  Turning Point USA was just another one of those same kind of Evangelical religious-political organizations built, not on promoting truth, or even preaching an evangelistic Christian message, but around the personality of its founder.  

And now that its founder is gone, the organization is fracturing, fragmenting, and falling apart, because there was nothing beyond Charlie Kirk's personality to hold it together.  It's impossible to reconcile any core values claimed to be based on the Christian gospel with unqualified and unquestioned support for Donald Trump.  

And that's the hard reality Turning Point USA must now face.  

If We Do Not Defend Our Right to Vote, Then American Democracy Ends Here and Now

The allegations Trump has made about "massive voter fraud" in American elections have been one of the biggest provably false statements he has ever made.  They have also been some of the most revealing statements he's made about how he plans to rig elections as President.  Every accusation he has made about fraud and "rigging" elections is a direct clue to his plans for rigging the upcoming mid-term election.  

Of course, the claim that there has been massive voter fraud has been proven, multiple times in multiple ways, to be absolutely false.  But if you examine Trump's claims, and take a good look at what Marc Elias has has to say about how Trump is planning on rigging the midterms, you can see how the two things fit together.  Elias keeps things moving by filing lawsuits and getting courts to rule that Trump, as President, has no authority over elections.  That's slowed him down but Trump's getting things into the Supreme Court now, and all bets are off when it comes to what those renegade anti-Constitutionalists will do. 

So we, the people, those of us who know that Trump is a complete and total demagogue, and a fraud, need to support every effort made to make sure this election is neither suppressed nor stolen by Trump and his cronies.  We need to do everything we can, as small as it may seem, to make sure that the results of this election reflect the will of the people.  

What does that look like?  

I talk to my neighbors, a few of whom run now when they see me coming, because they know what I'm going to say and do.  I went to a local drugstore, bought a box with a hundred cards and envelopes, and a roll of stamps, and I send out handwritten notes to everyone on my address list, warning them of what is going on and encouraging them to take every step to make sure their ballots count.  I'm sure there are a few Trumpies on my list, but they get the point.  I know it has had some effect, because I've received notes and emails in  return, most of them thanking me for reminding them, a few of them telling me not to send them anything else.  

I've called my representative, expressed my view and offered my help.  I'll do whatever I can.  

And I will vote.  That's the most important step in this process, voting.  Because when we cast our ballot, we are disrupting the attempt to stop it.  And, knowing what we know, and being reasonably intelligent people, we will cast a ballot for those individuals who we believe will do the most to bring down Trump and his cronies and administration.  

If your state gives you the opportunity, make voting easy by simply marking the straight Democratic box on the ballot.  That makes voting easy and quick.  If you vote by mail, make sure it gets in the mail right away, or take it to the drop box for your precinct.  But make sure that ballot gets cast and counted. 

And yes, here it comes, I've made a financial contribution to the effort to stop Trump and his unconstitutional attempts to steal the election.  That's part of the effort that is also necessary.  It was a sacrifice but I did it anyway.  The corporate wealthy are going to spend whatever they think it takes to protect their own and they can buy election outcomes.  So I consider anything given money well spent. 

If the Republicans manage to maintain control of Congress under this President, we can say goodbye to American Democracy, along with a fairly regulated economy, our social security and Medicare benefits which we earned, and the life that we know now.  The country will become a hostile place for anyone who doesn't bow to the Heritage Foundation and its definition of what it means to be American.  That will be the consequence for every Trump opponent, now approaching 70% of the voters and adults in polling data, for not participating and doing everything possible to stop this demagogue.  

A Democratic Party Victory in This Midterm Will Not Fix Our Long-Term Problems

At this point, in September of 2026, just two months before the midterm elections, the priority for Democrats is to win as many seats in Congress as possible.  In more than forty years of teaching high school civics, and observing election cycles and American politics, I don't think I've ever seen an election where a majority of voters, according to the polls, are more focused on casting a ballot against a sitting President than for the issues represented by individual candidates.  It seems as if the bottom line for a huge number of voters this time around is the total inept incompetence of Trump.  

I'm a lifelong Democrat, the son of a World War 2 Navy veteran and devoted chemical workers union member who can count on one hand the number of times I've not voted straight ticket Democrat.  I get frustrated when it seems that some of our party leadership still thinks that the old school kind of negotiation, deal-making and compromise with the other side of the aisle is still the way American politics works.  But of course, the other party has never really offered anything that I would consider supporting.  

The Attack on American Democracy Didn't Start With Trump

By comparison, the recent Republican presidencies prior to Trump seem reasonable, and lack the kind of extremist populism that Trump uses to excite his mindless base.  But let's not forget that dividing up the government and selling it off piece by piece to corporate billionaires and wealth re-distribution that landed 99% of the nation's assets and money in the hands of 1% of its population started with Ronald Reagan.  So did the Heritage Foundation's agenda to drive America toward white supremacist Christian nationalism.  Reagan, and both George H. W. and George W. Bush were active in promoting policy and carrying out the duties of the executive office to make this become reality. 

Government has become the only institution in American life still capable of stopping the slide into capitalist oligarchy that will rip any semblance of American idealism and American values out of this nation.  But the balance of power is rapidly tipping in favor of the wealthiest of the wealthy and we may very well be on the brink of a point of no return when it comes to saving our democracy.  This midterm election is an essential step in the process of getting America back, but it will only be a small part of the long term work of restoring American democracy to our government and our society. 

Policies and practices going all the way back to the Reagan administration will have to be undone, repealed or abandoned.  Democrats will need leaders who will kick asses and take no prisoners, not those who will back down or compromise to come out with a few small gains, or nothing, as has been the practice.  That's exactly how the GOP got us to the brink of billionaire oligarchy and we can't get back to the democracy we once had by playing compromise and acting like Merrick Garland. 

Hopefully, the message was received during the primary season, when Progressive Democrats defied the odds, and the pollsters, and won in places where they concentrated their money and their efforts.  This is the main benefit that will come from this midterm election and which will lay the groundwork for the pathway that the Democratic party must take if it is to restore American Democracy. 

So Where Do We Start? 

We start with the courts.  

If Democrats get control of both the house and the Senate, then it will be time to shut down every judicial appointment Trump makes.  Nobody gets through.  Hold those spots open for the next Democratic President to fill.  This is something Democrats can do if we control the Senate, which is why that particular aspect of the mid-term elections is so important.  

And I'm not talking about some mamby-pamby negotiation to let some of the judicial appointments through, or some kind of compromise.  I mean that we need to stop any judicial appointments dead in their tracks, and prevent them from getting onto the bench.  In so far as it is possible, shut down any more Trump influence of the court.  We do not need any more Eileen Cannons. 

Then, in preparation for 2028, finding a line-up of some of the most progressive judges in the federal system, in order to expand the Supreme Court and nullify the corrupt conservatives, and also force them to adopt rules of ethics, such as not allowing them to take bribes like Clarence Thomas, and then to go through the long list of court decisions which helped the Republicans, going back to Reagan, sell the federal government off piece by piece to the one percenters, and in as quick a manner as possible, undo everything right up to Citizens United.  Any decision made by the conservative majority should be up for overturning.  

Does that sound like too much?  Not if there's an interest in the genuine restoration of American Democracy, it's not.  

Leadership Changes

If Hakeem Jeffries is willing to acknowledge that the Democratic party needs to embrace its left wing, and openly takes a position discouraging any indication of a move to the right of the moderate wing of the party, then I think he's put in the work and paid the dues, so to speak, to be Speaker of the House.  But he needs to be consistent and he needs to stop letting big money donors, including AIPAC, influence the party agenda.  If he does that, then I'll support his selection as Speaker of the House.  If not, then I'm in favor of letting the Democrats in the House pick someone else.  My personal favorite would be Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, of New York. 

Schumer needs to step down.  I'm not opposed to this being a position from which a Democrat openly campaigns for the 2028 nomination for President, so for that reason, I'd endorse someone like Mark Kelly of Arizona, or Corey Booker of New Jersey.  They are a couple of Senators who can kick ass and take no prisoners.  I'd be OK with either of them seeking the Presidency while serving as majority leader of the Senate.  And Tammy Duckworth would also be on that list. 

That's what this kind of effort will take, because there's a lot of legislation that will need to be re-evaluated and either changed completely or repealed for us to get our democracy back. And we need leaders in Congress who will aggressively pursue investigations into the criminal activity and constitutional violations committed by the Trump administration, and everyone involved, and make sure that the next Democratic attorney general has the mountains of evidence needed to hold this demagogue, and every one of his accomplices, accountable.  

Getting all of that started after the mid-term elections is essential.  Instead of the kind of obfuscation, delay and foot dragging that characterized Merrick Garland's half-hearted pursuit of Trump's criminal and seditious activity, we need bold, aggressive leadership that is willing to apply the necessary level of accountability.  Otherwise, there will be no deterrent to any future potential demagogues who will give this same thing a try.  

And keep remembering, Trump didn't start this.  The Republican party has systematically been allowing corporate big money to buy chunks of government since Reagan was in office.  So it won't be something that gets undone overnight.  

Work Toward the Big Priorities

A big part of what the American people want out of this midterm election is for politicians to handle the affordability crisis.  That will almost certainly be resolved by simply ending the Iran war,  on the best terms now possible, which are not great for the United States.  And as always, the resistance to lowering prices inflated artificially by political circumstances will keep going until someone does something about it.  Now I know that's socialism, by its real definition, but capitalist principle combined with tax breaks for the rich are counterproductive to reducing inflation.  Once a gallon of milk costs $5.00, no dairy producer or grocery store chain will drop the price.  It will have to be forced down. 

And I'm going to close with the admonition to Democrats who get elected to Congress this midterm, that the pressing need in this country now is for affordable health care, and our current, corporate-dictated, for-profit health insurance and care system is totally and completely out of control.  I'll say it so it can be understood, we need a single-payer, government controlled health care finance and provider system, "socialized medicine" if you will.  Where will the money come from?  Well, reducing the profit margin on insurance coverage and health care provision will be a good place to start.  Eliminating it altogether, and reducing administrative costs to put the bulk of what people pay into their health care will solve the problem.  

Of course, Trump will veto everything that benefits the people, and fairly evens the playing field with big corporate insurance and medicine, but his efforts to protect their profiteering need to be squelched.  People need a break, now, not down the road, and this would be something that Democrats could ride to victory in a series of elections if they get this right.  

For a party that has always had trouble with staying on the narrative, this is a remarkable opportunity.  Don't blow it.  

  

The Theology of the Texas Senate Race Between Talarico and Paxton

The attacks being levelled against Texas Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico are sending a couple of loud and clear messages from Paxton and his supporters.  One, they know that they cannot campaign on Paxton's record, or on his character.  Those are both losing propositions.  And the other message?  They see the numbers and they know that Talarico is poised to win.  In the past couple of weeks, his polling averages in several of the more reliable national polls with a reputation for accuracy has slipped above the 50% threshold.  He's picking up the lion's share of undecided, independent voters. 

Paxton is desperate.  So instead of campaigning on the issues, none of which go in Paxton's favor, they are attacking Talarico's character, his masculinity, and more specifically, his Christian faith.  None of those are things which have anything to do with what kind of Senator he will be and how he will represent Texas.  But they focus attention away from Paxton's moral bankruptcy and corruption, which led his own fellow Republicans in the state legislature to impeach him and attempt to remove him from office.  He survived the removal attempt because of the partisan makeup of the Texas legislature, though there were Republicans who voted in favor of his removal as Texas Attorney General.  

It's somewhat hypocritical to me for a man with the baggage of corruption that Paxton carries, including having had at least one well publicized affair, which a divorce court labelled adultery and considered as legitimate grounds for his divorce, to be championed by the majority of church members as qualified for any kind of public office.  Men getting away with adulterous affairs, and being warmly welcomed in Evangelical congregations, and sometimes treated as heroes as a result, is common, especially among Southern Baptists, one of whose churches Paxton attends regularly and holds membership. 

[Paxton Lets Sexual Abuser Adam Hoffman Off the Hook]

[Evangelical Church Elder and Youth Leader Arrested on Allegations of Sexual Assault of a Foster Daughter]

So when Talarico is attacked, mostly in social media, for making statements which are reflective of his theology and personal convictions as a clergyman in the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (PCUSA), known as the more liberal branch of Presbyterianism, it reflects a disgraceful and dishonest hypocrisy on the part of conservatives.  Clearly, this is getting a significant amount of backlash as the same polling data that shows Talarico trending toward the 50% threshold also shows that voters disapprove of this particular tactic of Paxton, by more than a 2 to 1 margin.  The criticism of Talarico's theology and faith by the Paxton campaign is hurting his chances with voters.   

The Theological Battle at the Core of This Campaign, Liberal vs. Conservative Christian

For those outside the very confusing tangle of what lies behind the high, thick walls American Protestants have built around a patchwork of unbiblical denominations build on specific doctrines of reformation-era theology, Conservative Evangelicalism is a Johnny-come-lately splattering of doctrine based on faulty theories of the inspiration of the Biblical text, and on a very distorted and falsely skewed literal interpretation and application of the text.  

American Evangelicals are split between the Fundamentalists, who are hard liners when it comes to being anti-education and separatist when it comes to their attitude toward anyone claiming to be Christian who doesn't believe exactly what they believe,  Charismatics and Pentecostals, who have added emotionalist and spiritualist error to the practice of the Christian gospel, and the Restorationists, who focus on "getting back to the original interpretation of the text," and take a literalist interpretation of the Bible to extremes.  

All three of these Evangelical traditions are relatively new on the scene when it comes to the history of the Christian church and they have several things in common.  They emerged from the anti-intellectual, anti-educational bias of the frontier revivals of the Second Great Awakening, when churches did not have access to very many educated pastors and ministers, and developed beliefs influenced by superstition and fear of the unknown.  Their lack of education prevented them from knowing or understanding the whole context of the history of the Christian church, its origins, and the language, history and cultural influences, the understanding of which is absolutely essential to a correct interpretation of the scripture.  

The primary error in interpretation that American Evangelicals make is found in their theories of the inspiration of scripture.  Evangelicals claim to believe that, because of God's presence in inspiring the writing of every word of the scripture, the whole 66 book Protestant Bible is inerrant in its original manuscripts, and infallible in practice.  The terms "verbal and plenary," applied to the expression of this belief, mean that every word of the Bible is inspired, and the whole of the text of the 66 books in the Protestant Bible is equally inspired.  

This is false doctrine, and a grievous error leading to all kinds of misinterpretations and faith practice that is essentially meaningless.  And it is diametrically opposed to the core doctrine of the Christian faith, which is the divinity, humanity and supremacy of Jesus the Christ.  

The life examples and teachings of Jesus, recorded in the four gospel accounts in the New Testament, form the criterion by which all other scripture is to be interpreted.  The person of Jesus as the son of God, one of three persons of the trinitarian view of God, is, in Christian doctrine, the only perfect revelation of the Christian gospel.  Any theories of interpreting scripture which lead to stand-alone interpretations of statements without filtering them through the thoughts and ideas of Jesus is contrary to true Christianity and to the gospel message of Jesus Christ. 

Nor can the words of any of the Bible's authors be equated in their inspiration or truth with those of Jesus Christ.  In Christian doctrine, Jesus was God, and the gospel he revealed, perfect.  And while it is legitimate to consider the other authors, such as Paul, John, Peter, and whoever wrote Hebrews, as being inspired by God, their words are subject to interpretation that filters them through the gospel of Jesus Christ before determining what they mean.  They do not stand alone in their interpretation, which produces obvious conflicts when they are incorrectly interpreted in the literal context used by most Evangelicals. 

No Christian denomination or church has a corner on correct doctrine and theology.  However, those who have been labelled as "liberal" for not accepting the literalist premises of conservative Evangelicals actually have a much better handle on the kind of faith practice that the gospel of Jesus Christ establishes.  What Evangelicals practice is salvation by works, which include making wise decision and following the rules, while abstaining and avoiding things that have been judged to be breaking them.  The Christian faith begins with the ten commandments, in their view, obedience is the key to true faith according to their doctrine and theology.  So if you do enough good works and you properly judge and condemn evil, you can add up enough points for God to let you into heaven.  This is exactly what their theology teaches, in spite of protests to the contrary. 

For the so-called "Liberal" Christians, like the PCUSA, to which James Talarico belongs, the Christian gospel begins with the Beatitudes, and it carries through the theme of forgiveness and restoration, according to scripture.  Following the example of Jesus and correct interpretation and practice of the principles he taught and modelled leads to salvation that comes from God's grace, and the serving of his creation, in the "liberal" view. The emphasis on the human end is the receiving of grace and living in gratitude as a result, with judgment and condemnation left up to God.  Jesus focused the core principle of the Christian gospel on loving God with all one's heart, soul, strength and mind, and loving one's neighbor.  The outcome and practice of the Christian gospel is quite different from the Evangelical Fundamentalist perspective. 

 Texas Has a Large Number of Moderate to Liberal Christians

Talarico has an M.A. in theological studies from Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary.  There's a reason why the Presbyterian Church USA, which is the largest and most liberal branch of the Presbyterian church, has a theological seminary in Austin, Texas.  That's because there are a large number of members of the Presbyterian Church USA in Texas.  The seminary is  known for social justice-oriented curriculum which is drawn directly from the Christian gospel.  The membership of the Synod of the Sun, which includes Texas, dwarfs the more conservative Presbyterian Church in America membership in the state.  

Texas also has the largest number of the very progressive Episcopal Church among its population, as well as the largest number of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, which is its most progressive branch.  And after the great schism among the Methodists, the more progressive United Methodist Church also has its largest number of adherents in Texas, with more than three times as many members as those who left to form more conservative churches.   

Then there are the Southern Baptists.  Yes, the Southern Baptists. 

Following the Fundamentalist takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention, which started in 1979, the majority of its churches and members across the country supported the ultra-conservative domination of the national body.  But the exact opposite happened in Texas.  

The state convention affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention in Texas, known as the Baptist General Convention of Texas, also split with conservatives forming the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention (SBCT) and the more moderate to liberal members retaining control of the BGCT.  The majority of churches and members in the 2.3 million member body have remained in the more progressive group, which has also affiliated with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, the more progressive group which formed on the national level.  

The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, and the Baptist General Convention of Texas, are both very active when it comes to social justice, and they both reject the literalist interpretations of the Bible that ignore or downplay the principles of the Christian gospel.  And while that might not mean they will vote for Talarico, it certainly means that they do not disagree with his theology and doctrine, which is being attacked by conservatives.  In spite of the split, the more progressive Baptist General Convention of Texas remains the state's single largest religious group.  

Take These Attacks for What They Are:  Republican Desperation

We wouldn't see these attacks on Christian theology and doctrine happening if Talarico were not a serious threat to the Republican retention of this Texas senate seat.  It's pretty desperate that a morally bankrupt politician, who attends church only when it suits his public image, and whose lifestyle reflects the exact kind of worldliness that conservatives and fundamentalists reject, would attack some of the terminology and concepts of an ordained minister who demonstrates a thorough grasp of biblical theology.  

Paxton hangs around with Evangelicals enough to know that many of them are theologically and doctrinally ignorant of their Christian faith, and he knows the buzz words and superstitions and where the lines are drawn in the sand.  So he's got people who are trying to distract voters from his record, on which he cannot win, so he has to scare voters into thinking that the evil bugaboo that conservative Evangelicals must rely on to set up their straw man arguments has infected Talarico, too.  

But there might just be enough Christians in Texas who have already been through the battle over the hearts and souls of their church members to know that Talarico speaks truth when he talks Christian faith and that it's the Evangelicals and Paxton who are the liars.  That. and the sinking popularity of an incompetent boob of a President are making Talarico's chances at winning this election excellent.

In a Trade War With Canada, Trump Loses His Ever-Loving Mind

He's gone over Niagara Falls in a barrel. 

The President of the United States lost his mind and his composure, and threw a tantrum when the Canadian prime minister, who understands exactly what kind of absolute craziness and insanity he is dealing with in Trump, dared fight back after his senseless, pointless and ridiculous tariffs on Canada exacerbated the growing trade war between the two closest allies in the world.  

--And I'm going to interrupt my own train of thought here to point out to the mindless and stupid conservatives who can't explain or define either socialism or communism, that their inamorata in the White House is trashing US relationships to other free, democratic allies in exchange for friendships with communists like Kim Jong Un or fascists like Vladimir Putin, and therefore are hypocrites--

That being said, this President's gross unfitness for office is on display in his use of an executive order to throw a genuine child's tantrum.  The executive branch of this nation is behaving like a spoiled child, demonstrating his unfitness for this office and his total lack of real leadership ability by issuing an executive order renaming Lake Ontario as Lake America.  

That's going to solve all of our economic problems, isn't it?  It not only fixes the economic problems, but in one fell swoop it has prospered the middle class and made the working class happy.  

There are some benefits to this embarrassing and ridiculously stupid tantrum result.  In any conversation referencing Lake Ontario, when someone refers to it as "Lake America," knowing looks will be exchanged and stupid people can identify other stupid people.  

What's next?  What will we tolerate and how long will we put up with it?  

"Blue Tsunami" is the Correct Term to Describe How the Mid-Term Elections Seem to be Shaping Up

Watching political poll numbers in the United States can be a full time occupation.  There are now a plethora of polls, covering every possible angle and opinion in politics.  It's still true that it takes four or five different polling averages on the same question to get a solid read on public opinion but there is now enough data being recorded to the point where it is possible to determine, down to the precinct level--almost--how an election is going to turn out.  

There is a lot of polling data out there on this coming mid-term election at every level.  Taken as a whole, the predicted result is that the Democratic party is very likely to gain control of the House, and less likely to gain control of the senate.  That's because polls are still based on the outcomes and turnouts of the 2024 election which are used as part of the way raw data is factored.  Predictions take into consideration how voters cast their ballots previously, and then factor in things like the typical lower turnout in a mid-term, and how shifts and swings in previous elections have gone to determine their guess.  

What seems to be happening in the current set of polling data is that information being gathered and sorted isn't always matching up with the level of voter enthusiasm for a particular candidate, or the actual outcome of the election.  The primaries have been particularly difficult to pick with some surprise results going well outside the margin of error of the polling data.  Angie Nixon's win over Alexander Vindman in Florida was, perhaps, the biggest shock.  Not only did he outspend her 20 to 1, she focused on progressive issues normally not a popular position to take in Florida, and had endorsements from the far left wing of the party.  But she focused on the issues that the polling data shows are big in people's minds, namely affordability, health care, housing and food assistance, and she pulled some publicity stunts which got a lot of media attention.  

She won big.  And she is the favorite in the general election.  

Her win mirrors other similar victories for candidates from the left side of the Democratic party who have, for the most part, been at the forefront of the "No Kings!" rallies, marches and protests.  This is a very large and very active and enthusiastic group of potential voters who are committing to turning out at the polls, and following through.  Their presence, which is starting to show up in polling data everywhere, is going to be a major influence in which Democrats get into which office.  And it is a big factor, not only in the fact that Democrats are favored to win control of the House, but in getting enough voters to the polls everywhere to also gain a Senate majority for the party.  

It's Looking More and More Like Democrats Will Take Control of the Senate

As things have turned out, the "most vulnerable Democrat" in the Senate seems to be becoming the most likely Democrat to get re-elected.  Jon Ossoff is running away with his race in Georgia, which Republicans once thought of as the best place to flip a seat.  That possibility has travelled north to Michigan, where Gary Peters is stepping down, but following their late-in-the-season, highly contested primary, as that race shapes up, Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic nominee, is edging out Mike Rogers, the MAGA backed candidate.  It looks to be close, but it is interesting to note that since the primary, El-Sayed's support is inching forward, while Rogers is slowly losing points.  

As far as potential flips go, no one could have predicted that Texas and Iowa would be Senate battlegrounds with Republicans clinging on for dear life to try and hold seats.  James Talarico, the Democratic nominee in Texas, has held a slight one to two percentage point lead ever since he won the nomination, in spite of polling stalwarts like Cook Political not changing their factoring based on previous outcomes.  And as more recent polling data piles up, we are now seeing several polls where Talarico is crossing the 50% threshold, which is a milestone in a race as close, and as ugly, as this one.  

Trump unpopularity is definitely a factor in this one, while Paxton carries baggage of his own, including a highly publicized affair and divorce.  The liberal religious perspective of Talarico, who is a United Presbyterian clergyman, has been used to attack him, even though the religious points have nothing to do with the issues.  But even that seems to favor Talarico, who responds by simply asserting his beliefs, not by backing down.  

In fact, over the past couple of weeks, it is starting to look like the Democrats may actually flip all of the Republican seats where they were considered legitimate challengers, including Maine, Ohio, Iowa, Texas, Alaska, North Carolina and Michigan.  Mary Peltola, the Democratic party nominee in Alaska, won a straight up primary against her Republican opponent a couple of weeks ago, causing many pollsters to name Alaska as the Democratic tipping point.  North Carolina looks like a sure thing for Roy Cooper, and Maine is starting to look that way as well.  Sherrod Brown is pulling ahead in Ohio.  

It might be a bold prediction, but I think Democrats may actually take all seven of those states, and get control of the Senate.  As we get closer to the election, the vast majority of polling data coming in reflects mostly declining numbers, especially for MAGA Republicans, and growing support for Democrats.  

Trump-Instigated Redistricting Has Lost It's Punch

The gains that Republicans hoped to make in states where they redrew district lines last spring have faded and dissipated in the most recent polling data.  Hoping to save up to as many as 17 seats, not enough to stop a Democratic majority from winning, but enough to mute the overall effect of a blue tsunami, the redistricting Republicans tried in several states has fallen kind of flat.  I've seen three recent polls, including an Emerson, which indicate the possibility that Republicans may not actually win any of those seats.  Well, the drop in support and approval of Trump has been staggering and none of the districts they redrew gave them a significant enough majority to overcome a 10 point drop in support.  And the drop for most MAGA candidates across the board has been about 14%.  

So it does indeed look like we are going to see an even more overwhelming blue tsunami than we did in 2018.  History does have a tendency to repeat itself, and it seems that we needed a reminder of just how bad Trump has been as President, and how bad Republican leadership has failed, to get to this point.  All that corporate money has been matched on the Democratic side by individual contributions, in spite of some whining and complaining.  And the advantage Progressive Democrats are giving the party is a clear and concise message that is well delivered.  That goes a lot further than slick advertising does.

This wave will surprise most of the pundits.

Some Bold Speculation About the Coming Blue Tsunami 

240.  

Keep your eyes on that number, because I think that's how many Democrats will find themselves elected to the House after November.  That's ten more than the pollsters are cautiously predicting now, using their 2024 voter data.  But it looks like the progressive side of the Democratic party is going to produce the most enthusiastic voters this time around, along with the almost 70% of independents who are fed up with Trump.  So I think that's going to be bigger than the pundits and pollsters are predicting.  

I am also going out on a limb and saying that the seven current GOP held seats that are considered the challenges--Maine, Ohio, Texas, Michigan, North Carolina, Alaska and Iowa, will all fall to the Democratic party.  That's how it's trending now, and I think it will be a close, but firm win for the Democrats come November, when things "tighten up."  And I think there might be a "pick one off" among what the GOP has left.  Darlene Graham was just nominated by the South Carolina GOP, and I think that's not going to turn out too well.  She's even more loony toons than her brother was, and that can be an appeal in a state like South Carolina, but I think there's going to be enough of a fall off in support to allow a Democrat to slip in.  

I also wish the Democrats had taken a closer look at West Virginia, and put some money behind Rachel Fetty Anderson. They might have made their "do nothing for decades" Senator Shelly Moore Capito get out and try and run on a record of having done nothing for the people of West Virginia for 12 years in the Senate.  I'm not sure they could have won the seat, but the Republicans there weren't all that excited about Capito this time around.  No wonder.  The sheet listing her accomplishments and benefits for her state as a senator is blank.  

I'm usually pretty good at this.  I underestimated the Democrats in 2018, and overestimated Trump.  Everything this guy touches eventually rusts and crumbles, including his political support.  And I think the second term, for Republicans, will be a disaster that will be hard from which to recover.  

Old School Politics Must Go! That Doesn't Work Any More

Personally, I like Hakeem Jeffries.  I thought his management of the Trump impeachment trial was impeccable and professional.  It is unfortunate that partisan loyalty prevented justice from being done, but that wasn't Jeffries fault.  

But I'm having trouble with his position on some issues, and I'm baffled by this recent meeting he took with Jared Kushner, "to determine where there can be cooperation between the two parties."  

I'm sorry, Congressman Jeffries, but that ship sailed a long time ago.  Rush Limbaugh helped the GOP weigh anchor and it's only been made worse under Trump.  There can't be any meaningful cooperation with a political party that has enabled the destruction of American Democracy.  

It Might Be a Good Idea For Democratic Establishment Leadership to Pay Attention to Their Constituency

Defeating Trumpism and removing any vestige of its influence or existence from American government is the priority of the Trump opposition.  You know, this massive group of Democrats, Independents and even some Republicans who have marched and rallied and pointed to the grievous mistake this country made when it elected Donald Trump, worse the second time than the first.  These are the same people who have energized the candidacies of dozens of Democrats running for current Republican-held seats in Congress and in the Senate, and in state legislatures and for governorships and have flipped the polling data on its ears in the past eight or nine months.  They are the reason why Democrats are going to win the midterms, not some long narrative on political reform.  

They are the reason why the polls have been virtually stymied and stunned when primary elections have gone fifteen points outside the Emerson or Quinnipiac or ABC prediction in favor of some of the younger, progressive candidates over establishment Democrats.  It hasn't caught on everywhere, but it is clearly the definition of a movement that so many progressive, Democratic Socialists are the party's nominees for seats in Congress.  And in most cases, the enthusiasm they carried into their primary election is going to win them the seat, because their message is on target with a mass of voters who are just finally and gloriously fed up with the orange headed buffoon in the White House.  

I'm a lifelong Democrat, the son of a Union member, who can count on one hand the times I haven't voted straight ticket.  I'll be less than a year away from starting my seventh decade on this planet on election day.  What do I want to see?  Well, the last thing I want to see is a meeting between the House Minority Leader, soon to be Speaker, and of all people Jared Kushner.  If that's the guy the Republicans have representing some kind of deal to find places where the two parties can cooperate, then there isn't anything good that I see coming out of that for Democrats.  The fact that Jeffries could even sit in the same room without vomiting is concerning.  

This is NOT what we want.  So remember that, because we're going to be voting soon.  And this isn't "bashing" or attacking or discrediting a Democrat.  It's expressing a legitimate disagreement in the hopes that the leader is mature and open minded enough to accept it and be open to debate and discussion.

It's Legitimate to Question This

We will not fix or repair what is wrong with the nation at this point by negotiating and cooperating with the very people who are bent on destroying it.  What will be the basis of cooperation?  Will they trash the hateful, arrogant, misguided Heritage Foundation?  That would have to happen for any meaningful cooperation to come from Democrats.  Will they force Trump to resign and then back off as he is brought to trial for his crimes in office and sent to prison, which is, as far as I am concerned, a non-negotiable position for Democrats after the mid-terms?  

Those would be the starting points for any kind of cooperative attitude or position from Democrats as far as I am concerned.  

And ultimately, then, if this is how Jeffries feels, who else is involved in this move?  Schumer? And do I want them to be in the leadership of the Democratic party at this point?  I've expressed it before, and I think the terms are accurate.  I want leadership that will kick ass and take no prisoners.  That is the only acceptable position for the Democratic party now, after more than thirty years of any kind of cooperation between parties being trashed and abandoned by the GOP.  And that makes me think that someone like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez needs to be speaker, and someone like Jon Ossoff needs to be Senate Majority Leader.  

Which Matters to the Democratic Party Leadership?  Corporate Influence or Voters?  

I don't want to fill this whole piece with cliches, but I certainly do smell a rat here.  It has all of the characteristics of big corporate PAC money buying influence.  It's an attempt to sabotage what has shaped up to be a massive blue tsunami that is even flooding the shores of places like Texas, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Maine, and apparently is reaching into South Carolina.  The GOP hasn't even tried to hide its fear, and its open plans to try and steal as much of this election as they can in whatever way they can.  

Democrats do not need to appear to be "cooperative" to try and pick up votes from some wavering conservatives.  For one thing, we're not going to get those votes anyway and for another, there aren't enough of them to make a difference at this point.  Democrats are going to win based on the turnout and energy of the party's left, which has combined with the almost 70% of independent voters who are sick of Trump and done with MAGA.  So looking "cooperative" is not only not necessary, but it can be interpreted as a sign of weakness.  

Democrats who are interested in holding on to their leadership positions on committees and in Congress when the tsunami rolls over the GOP had better take notice and get out of the failure of the old school practices of the past, or they will drown in the blue wave too.  

Issues of Importance to Progressive Democrats

The most important political issue in America at this moment is finding a way to neutralize Trump's political power and for Congress to be made up of enough patriotic Americans to shut down his agenda and remove his political power and influence.  The possibility of getting enough Democrats elected to the Senate to follow through by removing him from office following an impeachment is a remote one, not impossible, but not likely either.  But a Congress in which both houses are controlled by Democrats would be able to effectively end the madness and significantly limit his power.  

And that is the most important thing I believe the new Congress in 2027 will have on their agenda.  Democrats have said repeatedly that Trump is the greatest threat to American Democracy since World War 2, and I agree.  Now I'm going to expect them to live up to their statements.  I want to see visible results of Democrats leading the effor to do all that is constitutionally possible, with a majority in both houses, to end MAGA Trumpism and bring the man to justice.  

I've supported the more progressive wing of the Democratic party since George H. W. Bush was President.  I've listened to the lengthy political agenda that Democrats claim is important to the safety, welfare and prosperity of the United States.  I've been disappointed when that agenda wasn't enacted when Democrats had the power to do so, or when it was put on the back burner by Republicans.  The time is coming when the votes of those who are all united on the side against Trump need to start counting for more than just temporary shifts in who controls Congress.  

They need to start achieving the goals they set out for the benefit of the average, working class, paycheck to paycheck American, the people on whose back the prosperity and security of this country now rests. 

Agenda Item No. 1:  Repudiation of MAGA Trumpism and Restoration of Justice

Restoring the trust that was once part of what made the American Republic work will require more than just defeating Trump and then putting a different agenda in place.  Our values have been challenged, opposed and trashed.  Justice has been mocked and ridiculed, abused and distorted.  Repairing the damage from eight years of MAGA Trumpism will require repudiation of it, not merely winning over it at the polls.  

Trump committed crimes against the American people for which he must be brought to justice, he and everyone who enabled him.  There must be consequences for threatening our democracy and damaging the public trust in government.  In order to put up a defense against this kind of abberation ever happening again, and to discourage anyone who thinks they can try and get away with it because Trump did, justice needs to make sure that Trump gets away with nothing.  

This is an absolutely necessary step in restoring this country and repairing the damage.  Trump incited a seditious insurrection against the United States government and that must not be overlooked, and he must be brought to justice.  Evidence needs to be laid out which shows Trump has been lying through his teeth about election fraud.  This is a completely made up lie and whatever it takes to communicate this to the American people, like another highly publicized Congressional investigation, needs to take place.  People make up their own minds, but flooding the media with factual information about these crimes committed against the American people goes on the record, and consequences need to follow.

Constitutional free speech protects even the most anti-American ideology, but committing crimes to remain in power is a much different matter, and the American people need to see the difference, and they need to see that a nation of laws doesn't tolerate lawlessness.  The rest of the world needs to see this as well.  Every constitutional violation needs to be brought to justice, and if that means the Supreme Court needs to be packed with justices who will rule according to the law, then the list of qualified jurists who know, understand and respect the Constitution and who can overturn the injustices of the current court needs to be compiled.

The Democratic Party Needs to Become the Party of Working Class Americans Again

Where do we start with getting this done, noting that these are long term progressive goals, not necessarily what we will be able to accomplish over the next two years with a lame duck Republican still in the White House, and a highly corrupt and partisan Supreme Court.  Ultimately, taking back the White House and then neutralizing the massive corruption on the court are two long term goals.

The first thing will be to get corporate money out of elections.  Getting the Citizens United decision overturned in the Supreme Court will be a very tough proposition, but that needs to be the focus, and that means that the filibuster must be done away with in order to give a Democratic senate majority the ability to amend the judiciary act to add seats to the Supreme Court.  Then, the Democratic President who is elected in 2028 can make getting this done his or her priority.  

Using wealth to influence politics needs to be turned into a criminal act and enforced.  These are long term goals, since as long as there is a Republican in the White House, there will be limits on what can be done. 

In the meantime, on top of the mid-term victory that Democrats seem to be headed for in 2026, popular opinion has already made affordability the top issue for the next two years.  And there are a lot of things that Democrats can do to improve the current situation for middle class Americans, starting with ending the Iran War, and restoring the nuclear deal that was in place under President Obama.  

It's time for a Franklin D. Roosevelt kind of New Deal.  

Democrats need to be seen as actively pursuing the kind of reform that will benefit the working class.  There is a lot that can be achieved by simply blocking everything that Trump wants to do, and that's going to be how the next two years will go, unless the Democratic senate majority gets to the 60 vote margin, or Democrats decide to blow up the filibuster.  But the eighties are over, and so is the age of compromise and negotiation with the Republicans.  They have refused to cooperate, and so it is long past time for Democrats to adopt the same kick ass, take no prisoners kind of approach to their politics.  

Socialized Health Care

This is a big one.  

We've been talking about this for decades, but the fact of the matter is the current corporate dominated system of health care cartels and insurance monopolies in the practice of American medicine must be completely dismantled and rebuilt into a single payer, Medicare-for-all kind of system.  I don't think that private ownership or involvement in either health care provision or insurance must be completely eliminated, but it must be heavily regulated in order to prevent the massive overcharging and profiteering that costs Americans more than any other country in the world.  

There are multiple sources and studies which show that half of every dollar Americans spend on health insurance or health care goes to profit, and not to the actual services they receive.  The amount that would be required to make Medicare for all work would be a far smaller payroll deduction than current monthly insurance premiums, and it would benefit everyone involved by providing more resources for health care professionals and institutions, top to bottom, while saving patients money.  The only ones who wouldn't benefit are the one percenters who provide no services but only collect dividends.  

Think about it.  Instead of an individual or their employer paying a $595 a month insurance premium, the monthly payment for Medicare for all would be about $280, a savings of $315 a month, $3780 a year instead of over $7,000. As far as medical services to be received, nothing would change.  There would be a $500 annual deductible, and co-pays for some services, under the current Medicare configuration, with an additional amount for prescription drug coverage and perhaps, for what is currently referred to as "medigap." And these are just general figures, drawn from various proposals.  There's a lot more that could be done with some creative thinking. 

If Democrats could succeed in doing this, and there is absolutely no reason for this not to work, considering the multiple models for socialized medicine that exist in Europe, Canada, and other parts of the world, it might bring about an era of political success that would open the door to decades of political dominance and economic prosperity.  

In the Words of Senator Bernie Sanders, "Corporations and Billionaires Need to Pay Their Fair Share of Taxes

The tax burden on the middle class is unacceptable.  

Closing loopholes and favor granting needs to end.  I've read various proposals for what would be fair, and of course, I have my own idea.  "Fair" is that corporations and billionaires pay a percentage of the tax burden proportionate to the overall benefit that they receive.  All of what government has provided for them to make it possible to earn a profit costs something.  Transportation infrastructure, military protection and security, especially for those who operate internationally, local police and fire protection, all of that is paid for by tax dollars.  And in most cases, the lion's share of the expense is borne by the working class, the paycheck to paycheck people who are also, in many cases, underpaid and lack acceptable benefits. 

The difficulty here is that Democrats have had tax proposals on the floor before, and couldn't get them passed.  That's because not everyone is on board with this, and they haven't felt the pressure to get it done.  Senator Sanders has been talking about this ever since he ran for the Democratic nomination in 2016.  It hasn't been done yet.  It's a political win for Democrats, because this is something that, if it is done right, will be immediately felt and appreciated by the working class.  

That's Not All

The recognition of organized labor as a political force and as agents of change needs to be legislated back to effectiveness.  American business is among the most profitable and prosperous in the world, and those benefits need to do more than trickle down to the employees who make it possible for executives to become billionaires off of their labor.  This is one of the keys to Democrats becoming the party of the working class again.  

The question is, will the support exist among the party members who find their way into Congress after the mid-terms, and beyond, to get this done?  Among everything that was accomplished during the Biden administration, and during the two years when we had control of both houses and the White House, the party didn't really move in this direction.  But the primaries, especially this election season, have changed the narrative quite a bit.  Will those who return catch that message, and stop the bickering and infighting to bring Democrats back to their roots?  

I certainly hope so.