Endorsing a Long-Shot: Rachel Anderson for the Senate from West Virginia

My parents grew up in West Virginia and the greater part of both of their extended families still live there.  From Weirton in the northern panhandle, to Clarksburg and Harrison County, and a few still scattered near my mother's home place in Doddridge County, down to Mingo County, Williamson and Matewan, I have a group of first and second cousins.  The younger generation on my Dad's side of the family has moved away from the coal mines and carbon plants that provided jobs for my parent's generation to being insurance agents, retail business owners, including one long-time Italian restaurant, and one West Virginia pub, quite a few nurses, nurse practitioners, one physicians assistant, and two dentists.  And I have one second cousin who is a university professor and an author.  

About half of my extended family no longer lives in West Virginia.  They've scattered to other places, one group to the Washington, DC area, mostly Maryland, and another group westward into Ohio.  The jobs just weren't there.  The half that remains, because of the transition they've made as far as their jobs go, have a decidedly more Republican outlook than my parents and grandparents generations, all of whom were union members.  

But that appears to be changing, especially among those who, like myself, are college educated and in a professional occupation.  Most of those with whom I still have contact started out by supporting Trump in 2016 and 2020, and then again in 2024, though a few of them had cooled off by the last election and I actually had some great conversations with a couple of cousins who saw the truth.  They'd basically dropped out of participation in politics, but since the indictments came down and reality set in, they have registered to vote and support Democrats.  

For months now, among the scattered social media posts and other communication in which I've been involved, there are several of us trying to talk the rest of our family into voting for Rachel Anderson for the U.S. Senate.  I won't be able to vote in West Virginia, but what I'm seeing in our conversations now is the realization that the senior Senator from there, Shelley Moore-Capito, has done nothing for the state, and has actually done nothing notable or vote-worthy for the entire time she has served in the Senate.  

Anderson, who is a member of the Morgantown City Council, and an attorney working in public interest and advocacy for 30 years, won the Democratic nomination.  In the state which Trump won by the largest margin, she is a long shot.  But maybe not as much of a long shot as might be imagined.  Moore-Capito, who is the least accomplished Senator out of a hundred, was not the overwhelming choice of her own party.  Even with Trump's endorsement, in a state he won by 40 points, turnout was underwhelming, and Moore-Capito picked up 66% of the Republican vote.  It cost her more in terms of campaign money than any of her previous primaries, and  it was the lowest vote total she has registered so far.  

I'm not seeing any support for Moore-Capito among those relatives I have in the state who actually register and vote.  Several of them have indicated support for Anderson, and have not received, in response, the normal criticism and derision from the others that would have happened in the past.  Everyone knows where I stand, and I often get the standard Republican push back from most of them, but in the recent discussions we've had, anecdotal and limited for sure, but quite different, there's been no disagreement, and there has been some acknowledgement that a change might be needed, and in order.  

I doubt there are any political pundits who'd predict this would go any way except for the Republican.  On the other hand, among Democrats in West Virginia, Anderson is well known, and one of the interesting political aspects of the state is that the only counties where there has been population growth in the last six decades are the ones where Democrats actually outnumber Republicans.  And while Democrats had a relatively high turnout in their primary, Republican turnout was low.  Don't get me wrong, it's still a long-shot.  

West Virginia is one of the poorest states in the country, it is losing jobs and population regularly, and it has been since 1950.  It is one of the most ignored areas of the country by politicians, and I cannot fathom how misinformed and ignorant the majority of the population must be, when they continuously vote against all of their own interests every election cycle, electing patrician politicians like Moore-Capito who vote for legislation that helps increase the poverty, does nothing to decrease unemployment or business development, and which continues to contribute to people leaving the state in droves. 

I've been following the saga of the only hospital and emergency room in Mingo County closing as a result of the COVID epidemic.  I have relatives who live there, and several who worked at the hospital, Williamson Memorial.  Fortunately, they were able to find jobs at the regional hospital across the river in Kentucky, but a lot of the staff just lost their jobs, and the closure left the county without a functioning emergency room.  

The local physicians group worked hard to get the hospital back open, investing large amounts of money to purchase and renovate the facility.  They got a lot of help as a result of their sitting Senator, and former Governor Joe Manchin, who, as a Democrat, had some pull with the Biden Administration.  And the federal government did come through.  The new Williamson Memorial Hospital is open again, thanks to Democrats, including former Senator Manchin and the Biden Administration.  It does not appear that Senator Moore-Capito was involved at all, except for trying to steal credit on the end result.  

And yet, this is a crisis for a number of counties in the state, especially in the southern counties.  People living in poverty without transportation are living in communities where hospitals are at risk of closing.  But this is not a priority for the Republicans.  

Remember Trump's promise to do everything in his power to bring the coal industry back?  West Virginia is now a wasteland of abandoned mines and laid off workers.  And his endorsed and favorite Senator from the state is doing absolutely nothing about it.  There's not even a hint from her that she cares about this.  

So West Virginia, it's a long shot, but if you really think it is time to send an old school, ineffective, do-nothing Republican home, then turn out and send Rachel Anderson to the Senate.  

Evangelical White Christian Nationalists Back in the Headlines with "Rededicate 250"

There was some complaining about the fact that all of the speakers at this particular event except one were Christians.  

I would disagree with that assessment.  "Christian" is not a term I would use to describe most of the speakers in that lineup.  Pseudo-Christian, yes, in that many of them are Evangelical, which is more of a political designation these days than a doctrinal or theological branch of Christianity.  But using the definition of "Christian" established by several of the Bible's New Testament writers, and the very words spoken in testimony of the faith, theology and doctrine held by the Evangelical speakers in this lineup, the conclusion must be made that they are not, by their own testimony, Christian, according to the words of the Biblical authors.  

The Apostle John, in his first church epistle, defines being Christian as acknowledging that Jesus was the Christ, sent by God to reveal him and his nature to the world in a clear and redemptive way that had not been revealed previously.  And, the gospel writers, specifically Matthew and Luke, directly quote Jesus equating the first two commandments, loving God with all your heart, soul and mind, and demonstrating that you love God that much by the way you treat others, as the very core of Christian faith practice.  

That doesn't leave room for the kind of loyalty most of these pseudo-Christians give to a worldly, and demonstrably evil politician who doesn't acknowledge God or the deity of Christ.  And the idea of "loving your neighbor as yourself," combined with the definition of "neighbor" that Jesus revealed, is not something that can be found in the faith practice of any of the Evangelicals in that "Rededicate 250 lineup."  

Left to consider who these people are, and what they've done with regard to ministry, it would be my observation that they are very much in love with money, and have figured out how to convince their constituents to part with some of theirs, hoping to stimulate their own financial windfall which is the only salvation and blessing dispensed by the god they have invented.  That's what they preach  and teach.  The redemptive message of the Christian gospel, which includes repentance, submission to Christ, restoration and a lifestyle based on the practice of a set of principles can't be found among Trump's Evangelical sycophants.  Just listen to them. Not a single one of the Beatitudes provides a blessing of money, but all of the blessings of the Trump Evangelical heretics are measured by how much of it they have.  

And what to they have to say to any of us?  None of them worries about putting a roof over their head, or where their next meal will come from as their food costs and medication costs have surged because of the Iran war, and none of them cares about what price they will pay for a gallon of gas at the pump.  Nor do they care about the millions of Americans who live on a fraction of what they do, on a social security check or a tiny pension.  And because of that, they have absolutely nothing to say to me, or to the millions of other Americans like me.  

So go peddle your phony pseudo-Christian "gospel" somewhere else.  

 

First Amendment Religious Liberty is For Christians Only, Says Jenna Ellis

 Baptist News Global: Jenna Ellis Says First Amendment is for Christians Only

Here's her quote: 

"The whole point of having a civil society that recognizes the principles of religious freedom is so that we can go and evangelize, so that we can practice our faith, so that we can train up our children in the way they should go, says Proverbs, so when they’re old they won’t depart from it. It’s so that we can preserve and protect the Christian way of life. I mean, we don’t have all these protections for our rights that our Founders recognize come from God our Creator, so that we can go out and live a pluralistic society and say, ‘Well, let’s recognize the dignity of Islam.’ I mean, that’s not the point, that’s not the purpose whatsoever. We have a civil government that protects the right of Christians to be able to live and work. And we have this whole perverted notion that somehow our Constitution demands pluralism. That just isn’t there. If you take the whole context of the Declaration, the Constitution, the founding and everything we’re celebrating in America 250, absolutely."

And ignorance really is bliss, I guess.  

There's a clear indication in the language of the first amendment that crushes Ellis' argument that the founding fathers intended to protect only the religious liberty of Christians.  For one thing, Christianity is not mentioned, referenced, or even alluded to in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution in its vague references to divine providence.  "Religion" was then, as it is now, an all inclusive term indicating an awareness of the existence of other faiths beyond Christianity, Judaeo-Christianity or Judaism.  

There is, in fact, no specific reference to Christianity in either the Declaration of Independence, or the Constitution.  That's not surprising, given that there were few Christians among the founding fathers, and none who understood Christianity in the context of conservative Evangelicalism's 19th century fundamentalist and pre-millennial dispensational perspective that is Ellis' understanding.  

The freedom of conscience protected by the first amendment is all inclusive.  Conscience includes religious practice, or the absence of any religious practice.  It also includes all other ideologies and thoughts, including those that are unique to any individual.  In the absence of any kind of interpretation written by any of the founders that would support Ellis' view, there is the fact that the courts have exercised the constitutional powers they have been given to interpret the Constitution as demanding and protecting religious pluralism.  

Christian faith practice does not require exclusive Constitutional protection.  True Christian faith, based on the core principles of the gospel revealed by Jesus Christ, can easily coexist, and win converts in a religiously pluralistic culture, as it did for the first three hundred years of its existence under Roman persecution, as it has everywhere else in the world, and where it has survived, and even thrived, under the  persecution of totalitarian regimes.  Ellis' pseudo-Christian religion is inherently weak, and requires being propped up by the power of civil government, lacking any real spiritual power of its own.  If they perceive a threat to their faith under the religious liberty provided by the United States Constitution, then they are genuinely insecure adherents of a false religion. 

And it's pretty clear that the establishment clause and the separation of church and state that it created was a clear benefit to Christianity in America, more than any other religion.  As Jefferson and Madison envisioned, and predicted, setting the church free from the state to practice faith with a free conscience was the best thing that could have happened to it.  

The attitude exhibited by Ellis, aside from the sheer ignorance she shows, isn't consistent with her claims of being Christian.  Jesus made it very clear that the one way Christians have of testifying to the veracity of their faith and commitment is by the way they treat other people.  As those billboards say, "That love-thy-neighbor thing?  I meant it! --God"  Jesus was pretty clear, using the example of a Samaritan to illustrate the answer to the question, "Who is my neighbor?" in his answer.  

So why isn't Ellis treating Muslims like they are her neighbor?  But then, those kind of people always have an answer as to why they don't have to be true to the core principles of their alleged faith.

Approval Rating of Democrats in Congress Signals Major Change is Needed

It's 19%.  

The difference between the approval rating for Democrats in Congress, and the polling data which shows the formation of a blue tsunami on the way in November is sending a message to which Democrats must pay close attention if they are to continue winning elections, especially down the road toward 2028.  We're going to win the mid-term elections, and in spite of media bias that includes the overanalysis and over-reporting of insignificant changes which mean nothing, will not only gain at least 25 seats in the House (I'm thinking 45 might not be overly optimistic) but we will also get the majority in the Senate.  That's not overly optimistic, that's just looking at day to day polling data without the media spin.  We're going to pick up two or three seats that will "shock" the clueless media.  

But it's not because we laid out a great plan for doing so.  Look at the difference between the approval rating and the generic ballot.  We will win because voters, especially a huge percentage of independents, have finally realized that electing Trump as President twice was the most ignorant and stupid political move Americans have ever made in our history, and he has to be taken down before he completely destroys everything this country stands for.  

Money in Politics is Not Just a Republican Problem

It's pretty easy to look at those first two years of the Biden administration and consider them a success in terms of the legislation that got passed.  We had the strongest economy in 60 years, with low unemployment, and steady growth of our gross national product, healthy and due completely to Biden's economic policy.  He managed to fix the major damage that Trump had done to our COVID recovery, in fact, and as a party, the Democrats got some things done.  

But, did we get done those things for which Democrats have been advocating and pushing for a decade or more?  And did we enforce the law against the criminal acts of the Trump administration, bring him and his cronies to justice and save this country from the disaster we are now facing?  Did we get big money out of politics?  Did we get the health care reform that we have been pushing for more than a decade now, that single-payer health care system that will actually make medical care afforable and accessible to all Americans without robbing us blind by the profiteering that goes on?  

We got a lot of excuses, especially when it came to the incredible incompetence of the Justice Department, and we got the same excuses we have always been given about health care costs and the changes to that system that are needed.  The Affordable Care Act has sputtered along, attacked and diminished, and is hanging by a thread, as opportunities to strengthen it and prevent the other side from killing it were missed.  Excuses and apologists, yes, but real action, no. 

There is a Clrar Indication of What Democrats Want Their Leadership to Do

The reality of the situation is that we need to win this midterm election in order to stop Trump and have anything close to a chance at repairing the damage he has done to everything American, including our reputation in the world, our economy, and to the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of the American people.  So we are going to support Democratic party candidates in the midterm elections.  

But I think the indications about where the party needs to go after that are pretty clear.  Graham Plattner is one good example of the kind of challenge new leadership is bringing to the table.  It seems that candidates backed by David Hogg's Leaders We Deserve, especially in state legislative primaries, have been successful without having the kind of money behind them that some old liners have.  Julianna Stratton, another progressive who was an underdog in the Democratic primary for the Senate seat being vacated by old school, old liner Dick Durbin, and who ran against big money, old line establishment Democrats and old school endorsements, won the nomination and will easily win that seat.  So Durbin, a good ole boy, old school politician afraid of risk and bold action will be replaced by a new leadership progressive who is not afraid to kick some Republican ass. 

We are well aware that Trump will remain in the White House after the midterms, if his health doesn't collapse like his mind has done.  We want a Congressional majority that will make his life miserable in the White House from day one, that will challenge everything he has done, undo as much as it can do, shut down the appointment of judges and work to use every lever of power that it has at its disposal to force a resignation or to move on impeachment articles that will set records.  

We also want to see our agenda set in place as much as is possible, preparing for the possibility of controlling both Congress and the White House after 2028.  Hit the ground running by major Supreme Court reform, which would require breaking the filibuster, amending the Judiciary act, and putting six or seven far left wingers on that court to silence the incompetence and restore justice.  

It's a Matter of Wanting to Win Elections or Keep Playing the Old Games

Both things are not possible.  It now takes a lot of independent voters to win elections, and if the leadership has been sharp enough to observe, it's the turnout of independent voters who have made the "No Kings" marches and rallies so successful and so large.  Democratic politicians are too preoccupied with their fundraising to take much advantage of this opportunity, it seems.  Those that are involved are mostly the progressives.  A lot of the credit for Democratic party gains this spring goes to Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez whose rallies turned out tens of thousands.  

Hakeem Jeffries is experiencing some of the pushback.  He seems, at least to me, to be the kind of politician who listens before he makes a decision.  Some Democrats seem to think he's too connected to the big money and the old school.  If he were a little more visible and vocal, I think he'd earn more trust and get more people behind him as a leader.  On the other hand, a little pressure from the left and a little uncertainty about his role as minority leader before the midterms might not be a bad thing.  

Schumer has to go.  Resign, let Hochul appoint a new senator and retire.  

We want to win, and we want to restore America, leaving no opening anywhere for another fascist to challenge American democracy.  

This is the Kind of Leadership Found in the Conservative Evangelical Right

Texas Monthly: He Remade the Southern Baptist Convention in His Image. Then Came the Abuse Allegations. 

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

I grew up in a Southern Baptist church, a small congregation in a small town outside the deep South, but with a membership made up of transplanted Texans, Tennesseeans, Virginians, Mississippians and Alabamans who had relocated there as a result of their jobs.  A nearby military base brought about half the congregation there.  A Mississippi-based construction company that built high intensity, long distance power lines and the Texas-based El Paso Natural Gas company were other employers that accounted for the other half.  

My parents were transplants, too, from West Virginia, and though my Dad had been raised in a Christian Church affiliated with a denomination known as the Disciples of Christ, and my Mom had grown up in a Methodist church, they were drop-outs by the time they got married and moved to this small town in Arizona.  They were attracted to this particular church by the pastor at the time, who was a co-worker with my Dad at the military base.  So it was that through my elementary and high school years, I found myself in Sunday School and worship service most every Sunday.  As part of that experience, I made the necessary "walk down the aisle" when  I was seven years old, and, in the church vernacular, "accepted Jesus in my heart," and was baptized by immersion with two or three other children.  

By the time I got to college, I had more or less determined that what my Sunday School teachers had taught, and what the succession of bi-vocational pastors preached, was a combination of a literal, verse-by-verse interpretation of the Bible combined with a dose of Dixieland superstitions and cultural customs, and some Appalachian fold religion.  

But the university I attended was also affiliated with the state group of Southern Baptists, and the required Bible courses in Old and New Testament history that I took completely changed my impression of Christian faith.  I discovered that the Christian gospel had a very systematic theology that emphasized spiritual transformation exhibited not in some kind of nebulous intellectual assent to a set of doctrines, but in a lifestyle of principles and values intended to make a difference not only in my own life, but in the lives of those whom I was commanded to love because they were my neighbor.  

So as a result of this renewed interest, along with majors in history and English, for the purpose of teaching in secondary education, I minored in Biblical studies.  And it was while I was in graduate school, in a Southern Baptist-affiliated university, that I first heard the names Dr. Paige Patterson and Judge Paul Pressler.  

The Conservative Resurgence in the Southern Baptist Convention

The Southern Baptist Convention has always been an oligarchy controlled by a small, elite group of pastors, mainly of large, influential churches.  It claims to be organized on democratic principles, but the fact of the matter is that only about 10% of its churches, in any given year, elect "messengers," which is what they call delegates to the convention.  And those who understand that involvement in denominational politics not only carries prestige, but power within the denomination, and opens a pathway to getting the necessary recommendations and influence needed to grab off the high dollar administrative jobs at the mission boards, seminaries and the Executive Committee agencies. 

Being a denomination with the majority of its churches in the South, and 80% of them being in rural areas or small to mid-sized towns, with an attendance of less than 80 people on any given Sunday means that most of the churches are going to have that folk-religion, supersition and verse by verse, word for word literal interpretation of the Bible.  There's an anti-education bias in most churches, who do not trust their seminaries and consider them to be liberal because that kind of systematic study of the Bible emerges with a different result than the hard line literalist, legalistic fundamentalism that prevails. 

The anti-education bias combined with the blending of right wing politics with conservative Evangelicalism during Reagan's campaign for President.  There were those within the Southern Baptist Convention looking for a way to influence seminary trustee boards to introduce a more fundamentalist theology and doctrine, at the same time there were those looking for ways to hook the nation's largest Evangelical denomination up with the Republican Party.  

Enter Patterson and Pressler.  Patterson was a protege of Dr. W. A. Criswell, the influential and long time Fundamentalist pastor of First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas, the SBC's largest church at the time.  He was President of the broken down Criswell College, the Bible college owned by the church.  Pressler, a member of First Baptist Church of Houston at the time, another large, influential congregation, was a Texas Appeals Court Justice and a Republican party operative.  

These two men set out to organize a political campaign within the denomination that had two purposes.  On the surface, it was to appear as an attack on liberalism in the seminaries, using the flawed Fundamentalist doctrine of the Inerrancy and Infallibility of the Bible as a means of convincing churches to send messengers to the convention meetings to elect trustees who would be willing to dismiss professors who didn't sign doctrinal statements claiming to believe this flawed doctrine.  

However, Pressler's job in this movement, was to connect the Southern Baptist Convention, through its board and executive leadership, with the Republican Party, initially to help get Reagan elected.  As a result of their political activity, both of these men secured positions in leadership in the SBC, Patterson as President of two of its six seminaries, Pressler, rotating from committee to committee, trustee board to trustee board and eventually the Executive Committee.  Over a ten year period, Patterson succeeded in pushing out the previous leadership, labelled as "moderates," but considered to be "liberals" in the classic sense of the definition of that term, in all six seminaries and on all of the trustee boards, while Pressler helped the SBC become a major influence and supporter of the GOP, and of white, Christian nationalist views.  

A Haughty Spirit

Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.  Proverbs 16:18

As can be discerned from the Texas Monthly  article referenced at the top, the allegations against Pressler involved alleged homosexual activity.   Initially, there was just one individual whose name was associated with these allegations but apparently, there are allegations involving cases that were settled out of court, involving individuals who came into contact with Pressler in at least two churches, including an independent Presbyterian church in Houston where he had been on staff as a youth pastor. 

I would suggest that every person who is concerned about the threat of white Christian nationalism, and the threat to American constitutional democracy posed by the Trump Administration and his fundamentalist, Evangelical allies, including the well-funded Heritage Foundation, read this piece in Texas Monthly.  The author of this piece, Robert Downen, worked alongside reporters at the Houston Chronicle on their expose of the sex abuse scandal in the Southern Baptist Convention, called Abuse of Faith, which came out in 2022.  

I'm one who insists that the integration of conservative Evangelicalism and Trump extremist right wing politics is a clear indication that most Evangelicalism in this country is a pseudo-Christian cult which has obviously abandoned the core principles of the Christian gospel, which is the lifestyle that is a testimony to authentic faith.  And their actions are rooted in a straight, up front, visible denial of what Jesus revealed to us as the first and greatest commandment.  And under the new covenant, which Christians believe was revealed in its fullness by Christ himself, leaders are expected to be moral examples.  

The fact that this is a heretical intrusion into the church that is leading it into complete apostasy is evidenced by the lack of moral character in its leadership.  Pressler is still revered by conservatives in the Southern Baptist Convention who once hailed him as one of the "architects of the Conservative Resurgence."  There is evidence, including a letter from the deacons of the church where he was a member, indicating that his homosexual lifestyle was known, and he was asked to resign from the positions he held in that church.  But aside from a warning that such activity could damage the cause for which he was working, they chose to keep it hidden.  The power he wielded, and the "cause" he was promoting were more important to them than the Christian gospel, or their own church and its testimony.

We Need to Know This

No one is perfect. 

But, this kind of moral bankruptcy, corruption, secrecy and hypocrisy is characteristic of both the religious right, and its Evangelical supporters, as well as the political right.  It needs to be understood, called out, properly and accurately discredited, in order to help people understand that this is not patriotic, it is un-American, and it is anti-Christian.  

This all had the effect of completely undermining my trust in almost any pastor or religious leader in the Southern Baptist Convention.  I have a few close friends who are still pastors in that denomination, and there are times when I'm not really sure that their motives are pure.  I can't trust what I hear from the pulpit, knowing the influence that had to be traded, and the favors that had to be paid in order for that pastor to get into that pulpit.  And in spite of everything that has been revealed about both of the men who are still called "the architects of the Conservative Resurgence," there has not been anything that looks like repentance or repudiation of this "intrusion of licentiousness" that has infected the churches of the Southern Baptist Convention.  

Even as its membership and attendance rapidly dwindles, there are still those who have been engaged in back slapping, glad handing, good-ole-boy influence peddling to try to get themselves into a prestigious pulpit, and a position of dwindling power on a committee, trustee board or the executive committee.  So they are silenced by their own pursuit of power.  

And in right wing extremism, it's a trademark.  

Where are the Real Christians? 

I must admit, it took me a long time to process all of this, and to try and recover some kind of trust in the practice of my Christian faith.  I realize that who they are and what they do does not have to affect who I am or what I believe.  But it is the bigger part of my own Christian experience, and coming to grips with the fact that I had to step away, leave it behind and find my way back to something I could believe in and trust was not easy.  As I look at my own values, principles and beliefs, when asked, I self-identify for others as a Quaker, though I am not able, at the present time, to fellowship with a specific Quaker meeting.  

I look with a totally different perspective upon those Christians who are part of the patchwork of denominations and fellowships that make up American Christianity, and realize that those values and principles that we hold in common is a bond that binds us together.  Churches that I was once taught were not "Bible believing" or "of like-minded faith and order" I now consider as fellow Christians.  And even in those congregations, churches and denominations there is this temptation to power, that seems to be the biggest obstacle to the practice of Christian faith regardless of the label that is worn.  

And one of the biggest blessings and gifts we have been given as Americans is Constitutional freedom of conscience in the first amendment.  Christian faith is a matter of individual conscience.  And when Jefferson and Madison determined that the only way the Christian church could be authentic and free was to be separated from the coercion of the state, they gave the Christian church the ability to be true to the gospel that was revealed by Jesus Christ.  

The bulk of Evangelicalism in this country, in its fundamentalist, Pentecostal or Charismatic form, has taken the side of politics with the expectation of using its power to enforce its beliefs, rather than on using the power of God's Holy Spirit and separating itself from the conscience of the state.  The article in Texas Monthly is a long one, but I encourage reading all the way through, because it will give those who are committed to resisting the anti-American Trump Administration, and the white, Christian nationalism of the Heritage Foundation, information they need to understand and motivate their actions.

This is Not the Christianity I Knew While Growing Up

The small Baptist church was almost at the end of the street, as far from the main drag in town as it could get.  There was a small Lutheran church on the other side of the street that dead ended in the city cemetary.  It was one of two Baptist churches in town, formed in 1954 by a group of people who had migrated there from southern states, mostly Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, and a cluster of families from Virginia.  The "other" Baptist church in town had once been affiliated with the American Baptist Churches, USA, the heir to the Triennial Convention headquartered in Philadelphia, known as Northern Baptists.  This particular church was affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention because, even though they were both Baptist, that's just the way it was.  

Or so it was in my way of thinking.  

My parents had migrated here from West Virginia, where most of the Baptists were of the Northern variety.  When they first relocated to this small Arizona town, they hadn't been participating in a church.  My Dad grew up in a church affiliated with a denomination known as the Disciples of Christ, and stopped going to church about the time he enrolled in college.  My mother was the wild child of her family.  Raised in a deeply rural area of West Virginia, she abandoned the Methodist church that her parents occasionally attended when she ran away from home to elope.  So finding a local church wasn't their priority.  

But after working at a nearby military base as an air conditioning mechanic, one of the other guys in his shop invited him to church one Sunday.  As it turned out, it was the Southern Baptist church he attended, and so my parents became regulars.  I'd gone to Sunday School there on occasion, so it wasn't a big change for a six year old.  So it was that I wound up being raised in a Southern Baptist church.  

The Essence of Southern Baptist Christianity

The "theology", doctrine and Christian practice that is found in smaller Southern Baptist churches, especially in small towns or rural areas where a pastor with seminary training is a premium, is more of a combination of superstition, folk religion and a literal, "verse by verse" interpretation of the Bible.  Since the Bible wasn't divided into verses when it was written, and a literal interpretation misses the entire original meaning and historical context of the original language, I don't think what I was taught was authentic Christianity.  

And I more or less figured this out by the time I was ten or eleven years old.  I didn't really have much of a choice as to whether I went to church or not, and I spent a lot of time in Sunday School trying to make some sense of what never really made much sense.  And as I got older, I learned that asking difficult questions only antagonized my Sunday School teachers, none of whom were educated beyond high school and who perceived difficult questions as skepticism and doubt.  I was told that my questions were a sign of my lack of faith.  

I did something else that some of the members of that church didn't like.  I was admitted to the freshman class at the small university that was affiliated with the Southern Baptists in the state.  I'd have thought they would have been pleased, but within this small congregation made up mostly of people who had been born and raised in Dixieland, there was a very strong bias against college and seminary trained pastors, and they sensed that the Biblical studies department at this university was "liberal."  

Learning the Basics of Christian Faith and Practice From Educated Liberals

It turns out they were right, at least, from their own perspective.  

I went intending to major in history and minor in English with a concentration in secondary education to get a teaching certificate.  Taking survey courses in Old and New Testament studies was a first year requirement for freshmen, and the professors I had for both of those courses really caught my attention.  From them, I got a perspective of Christian faith and practice that was focused much more on being a lifestyle than a set of intellectual assertions to specific doctrinal points.  

Most Evangelicals believe that all parts of the Bible are equally inspired, which undermines the Christian gospel and leads to the kind of literalist fundamentalism that has produced the pseudo-Christian nationalism that has led Evangelical churches into apostasy.  But what they call liberal is actually the Christian gospel that was revealed in the teaching and preaching of Jesus, beginning with the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount.  It's actually a lifestyle, not merely a legalistic intellectual assent to a set of doctrines.  

The Christian gospel is the interpretive criterion for every other part of the Bible.  And there isn't even full agreement on what actually constitutes "the Bible."   Understanding it requires knowing what its 40 different authors intended to convey to their original audiences, and understanding that the circumstances to which that meaning applied are long gone and no longer exist.  In Christian doctrine, the gospel as revealed by Jesus is where the values and principles that establish the practice of the faith are found.  

Human existence is considered sacred.  In Christian theology, humans are created in the image of God, a reflection of divine existence, and supported by Jesus' stating that the greatest commandment consists of two concepts.  One is true worship of God.  The other is that the evidence of being a Christian is seen in those who love their "neighbor," their fellow human beings, as they love themselves.  

Concepts That Are Inconsistent With the Christian Gospel

What this means is that almost everything I was taught, and believe to be Christian is completely inconsistent with the rhetoric of conservative Evangelicalism into which political ideology incompatible with Christian principles has intruded.  If the Christian gospel is a system of life-enhancing values and principles, lived out as love for one's neighbor, defined by Jesus as any other human being, then it is impossible to call any war "just."  

It is also not possible to claim that God's spiritual annointing is on a leader whose lifestyle shows zero consistency with any principle of the Christian gospel.  Old Testament leadership examples do not apply, since there is no longer any nation which exists as a theocracy under the direct control of religious leadership.  And while there are historical examples of "flawed men" God appeared to use in achieving his ends in governing ancient Israel, they also demonstrated full spiritual conviction when it came to their flawed character, depending on God for forgiveness.  That's not what we see in the American political leadership misled conservative Evangelicals accord to their political idol. 

The idea that an unrepentant, morally bankrupt, narcissistic, convicted felon and adulterer would be chosen by God as a political leader would have been considered absolute heresy by the people in that small town church in which I grew up, if that idea had surfaced back in the 70's.  Now? It's hard to say.  At any rate, such an idea is inconsistent with authentic Christian faith and practice, which is built on a foundation of grace.  Old Testament examples used to justify war and violence against people whose religious beliefs and cultural practices took place before Jesus introduced the Christian gospel.  They are irrelevant and inapplicable to the church age.  

Blessed are the peacemakers, said Jesus, for they shall be called the children of God.  

So, Let's Think About This...The Midterms Are Over, the Democrats Got Control of Both Houses, Now What?

We are seeing a frenzy of campaigning in advance of the 2026 midterm elections, and from my own memory, I can't remember a previous one in which the frequency and intensity of the rhetoric has been quite the way it is right now.  I counted from the time my phone pinged the first message I received this morning at 6:00 a.m. until just a few minutes ago, and I have received 21 emails, texts, and notifications asking me to give money to someone running for office.  The primary in my state is over, so 18 of those messages came from candidates in other states.  

I think my previous record was in 2024, when, after I made a small contribution to the Harris campaign through Act Blue, I got 10 notifications the next day.  

It's really pretty obvious that the momentum which I believe will carry Democrats to majorities in both houses of Congress in November is built on the unbelievable incompetence and corruption of the Trump administration.  We can talk about our issues, things we would like to see done, our politics, and a lot of those running for office are doing this.  But the fact of the matter is that the real agenda that has taken over, and in some cases has forced Democratic politicians to get out of their old school politics and regular old way of doing things is that Donald Trump is actually the existential threat to American Constitutional Democracy that has become the cliche phrase of current politics, and Democrats must acknowledge this if they are going to win.  

As much as we would like to think otherwise, we are not going to win the midterms with our own agenda.  The Republicans are going to lose the midterms because they are complicit with the crimes and unconstitutional corruption of the man they nominated to serve as President.  Democrats and our agenda are not nearly so popular as Republicans and Trump are unpopular.  And that reality is going to dictate what Democrats must do when we get control of Congress if we want the momentum to continue and if we want to win the Presidential election in 2028.  

The Playbook For This Has Already Been Written

It's called, "How Republican Majorities In Congress Rendered the Clinton and Obama Administrations Totally Ineffective."  

Remember Contract with America?  And if you do, it should sound familiar, because aside from the nastiness of the politics that surrounded it, guess who had a big hand in putting it all together for Newt Gingrich and Dick Armey to introduce into the House?  It was the Heritage Foundation.  That's right, the same group underwritten by billionaires, promoting the fascist pseudo-Christian nationalism that has embedded itself in Republican party politics of the Trump administration.  These people have been enemies of the American republic for a lot longer than most people realize.  

Gone was the compromising, the deal making, the give and take that was required for Congress to effectively do its job.  In its place, a political wall of resistance, determination through being stubbornly oppositional and uncompromising to cause the other side to be seen as the failure.  The commitment to make sure that government did not work while a Democrat was in the White House was the reality of a good part of both the Clinton and Obama administrations, which had to put up with oppositional Republicans for the better part of their terms.  

It was so bad, that the Republicans, under Mitch McConnell's leadership, stole--and I use this term correctly here--the opportunity for President Obama to appoint a Supreme Court justice by simply using their majority to delay until he was out of office.  The inept and failed court that we have now is the direct result of that theft.  The GOP became the "party of NO!" a reputation they deserved as a result of using the power they had when in the majority.  

Democratic Political Success in the Future Depends on How Aggressively They Attack the Trump Administration After Gaining Control of Congress

It's turned out to be a good thing that David Hogg didn't last long at the DNC after his appointment to serve as its assistant director.  His organization, Leaders we Deserve, is still relatively new, but its fundraising power is growing, they've seen some electoral success in their candidate support, and they are lighting a fire underneath the cumbersome, slow-to-react Democratic party.  That's where my contribution is going at the moment.  There's an energy there, and a sense of direction along with the ability to clearly articulate the problem and the solution.  They have, in fact, had a strong enough voice that the Democratic Governors Association has been seeking their support.  

Coming at the Trump administration with something along the lines of Contract with America isn't going to be strong enough.  Getting things done without a single Republican vote should be strategized and prioritized, there are clearly ways to do it and it must be done.  A lot of the momentum and support for the No Kings days has come from political independents.  It is time to leverage that, and shoot it like a cannonball at the GOP.  Let's see how they handle it.  

The approach to the remainder of the Trump presidency should mirror the approach McConnell took to the Obama presidency, and that was to do everything possible to make the President fail and do absolutely nothing that could be considered to his political benefit.  That's exactly the approach Democrats now must take with Trump.  No compromise, shut down everything that can be shut down and make sure he owns the consequences.  We need leadership that is politically savvy and sharp enough to make that happen and if it requires some dusting and cleaning the musty corners of the current status quo, so be it.  Let 'em go.  

The corruption must be exposed and expunged.  I will be highly disappointed if impeachment proceedings are not brought immediately, even though there might not be a possibility of conviction, but I'm not opposed to putting whatever pressure can be put on enough Republicans to force them to vote to convict.  There's certainly enough pork barrels in each red state to make them think about their own self-preservation.  

There are a lot of things that can leverage the President's ability to stay in office or be forced to resign, and all of that needs to come out.  Every aspect of his involvement in the Epstein scandal should be exposed.  The cases regarding his document theft and sedition on January 6th should be lined up with evidence, publicized and prepared to start trial the day he leaves office.  Let him dare to veto things that are popular with voters.  

Well, you get the drift.  We need to come out in an overwhelming way, force issues and expose it all.  

I hope, after the election, we have the leadership to do this.  

Evangelicalism in America Will Not Survive Trump

At this point, I would say that it is already past any point of no return, and is headed for a fall.  What is known and identified as "Evangelical Christianity" in America will not survive the Trump Presidency.  The declines in membership and attendance, and in the number of people who self-identify as "Evangelical" has dropped 25% since Trump first descended the escalator to announce his run in 2016, and it is getting difficult to determine where the lines have been drawn at this point.  

The Apostle Jude, in his very short, but straight to the point epistle in the New Testament warned the church about "ungodly" intruders who had slipped into the churches to subvert its message and use it for their own purposes.  They were in and among the membership, their deception unidentified, and in a position to influence others with immorality, along with denying the sovereignty of Jesus Christ.  

This is what I see happening now, as congregations come under the influence of intruders who are perverting the gospel, because the practice of its principles, which is Christianity itself, does not support their use of religion as a political tool.  And while there have been some Evangelical churches who have insulated themselves against this intrustion, and have not allowed it to pervert their preaching and teaching, the fact of the matter is that many churches have been subverted and corrupted, and there are plenty of those ready to step up to do the same in churches that have remained faithful to the Christian gospel.  

Evangelicalism Has a Faulty Theological and Doctrinal Basis

The Fundamentalism that developed in the 19th century following the Second Great Awakening, as a result of the lack of seminary trained preachers and pastors, led to some faulty theology and doctrines that skewed the interpretation of the Bible, and launched multiple groups that were more cult than Christian.  The historical and cultural context in which the Bible was written, along with the original meanings and purpose of the writers was lost in interpretations which failed to use the words of Jesus as an interpretive standard.  Belief in what Fundamentalists call the "verbal, plenary" inspiration of the Bible, and that it is without human error in its "original manuscripts," have led to the development of a theology and practice that is very different from twenty centuries of Christian faith and practice.  

Failure to consider the words of Jesus as the criterion for interpreting all of the rest of the Bible has led to all kinds of theological aberrations, including a very legalistic faith practice requiring intellectual assent to a specific set of doctrines in order to be considered "Christian," or experience conversion.  And the failure to connect to the historical and cultural contexts that determine the original meaning of each author's words has led to false prophetic outlines of doomsday threats, with "end times" scenarios based on those faulty interpretations of the Bible.  Things like "Seven Mountains dominionism," and a false way of looking at the book of Revelation known as "dispensationalism" have led to a postmillenial perspective among many Evangelicals that translates into white, Christian nationalism.  They think that by creating a Christian theocracy in America, they will usher in the second coming of Jesus.  

Blending extremist right wing politics with this white, Christian nationalism isn't Christian.  It does not lead to conversion, nor does it lead to the kind of influence, being salt and light as Jesus described it, that Christianity was designed to be.  It creates a power and money hungry cult, and it traps people who think they are sincere Christians inside, with no way to escape. 

There are Christians in most conservative Evangelical churches who see it for what it is, and who are doing their best to escape it.   Evangelicalism has lost over 16 million members of its churches since the 2016 election.  However, for the most part, the same gullibility that causes people to fall victim to this intrusion of false doctrine into the church also lends itself to their inability to see Trump as a corrupt, morally bankrupt, mentally imbalanced narcissist who is incapable of being President of the United States.  

Exposing the Pseudo-Christian Evangelical Cult Will Lead to Its Demise

The blend of extremist right wing politics, which is showing signs of complete collapse, with ultra-conservative Fundamentalism, especially some of the "word of faith" prosperity gospel cults, has exposed this intrusion of an "ungodly perversion of grace," as the Apostle Jude calls it in his epistle, verse 4.  And as Americans set aside the Trump version of populist politics, so will they set aside the Evangelicalism that supported this attack on Constitutional democracy.  

Christianity was never intended to be the kind of theocracy that once governed ancient Israel.  That was a unique aspect of revelation that had its own time and place, and then passed off the scene.  What it left behind was a deposit of information about how those people who had lived at that time perceived the idea of God.  When Jesus came along, according to Christian tradition, his divine nature not only provided a much clearer revelation of God, but also made it possible for him to be the sacrificial offering for human sin.  

What he left behind was not a faith that needed any kind of financial or political power to survive and to fulfill its mission and purpose, but a faith practice that exhibits a specific lifestyle, aimed at uplifting and encouraging others, and bringing human beings together in a spirit of  unity.  

In the aftermath of this Christian nationalist nightmare, the political power that Evangelicals now have because they are virtually the only Americans who are now loyal to the President will collapse.  And while there are always gullible people who will still think that this is the truth, even though it is not consistent with the Christian gospel, and has been demonstrated to be an immoral intrusion, the influence that this group will have in both political circles and in religious influence, will be minimal.  

It's in the Math

In addition to the fact that there are about 16 million fewer Americans who call themselves "evangelical" than there were a decade ago, real evidence is showing up, in denominational membership statistics, that people are leaving Evangelical churches.  The largest Evangelical denomination in the United States, the Southern Baptist Convention, has seen its membership fall from 16.2 million members in 2015 to just 12.2 million members in 2026.  This figure, reported by the churches themselves, adds up to almost 250,000 members per year.  

In 2026, several church research groups reported that attendance and membership in churches that self-identify as "evangelical," "conservative," or with the Charismatic or Pentecostal movement, has dropped significantly in the last decade.  And it's not just the church researchers willing to speak the truth.  Census data on religious belief and attendance has shown that there are an equal number of members between Mainline Protestant denominations and Evangelical conservatives.  Those numbers haven't been equal for more than 30 years. 

This is the United States, so it's not likely the number of conservative Evangelicals will fall below about 2% of the population.  But I believe that it is safe to say that there are not enough of them to have any kind of an effect using their normal tactics.  Authentic Christianity spends its resources and its time in helping people out, not on political campaigns.  

Being Salt and Light

Hopefully, the remnant of those in Evangelicalism who have turned away from white, Christian nationalism and the populist cult will become what Christ intended his church to become, using the terms "salt and light' to describe its mission and purpose.  Christianity is a faith that is practiced through lifestyle values like peacemaking, humility, integrity, a sense of human community and equality that works to make life better for those around us.  The fact of the matter is that the true practice of the Christian gospel that was revealed and preached by Jesus is woke, in every sense of that word.  

In Christianity, the core principle of practice is belief in the existence of God, and the only manner in which that belief is demonstrated is by loving one's neighbor as one's self.  Jesus defined that as the first and greatest commandment.  And I tend to think that this translates itself into action that includes caring for the elderly, using government resources on things like universal health care, education, improving housing, making the abundant food resources we have in this country accessible to everyone.  Loving our neighbor means lifting up, not putting down.  

Maybe that will be the result of the demise of the pseudo Christian nationalist cult.  I can only hope.

 

Why Did I Expect More of a Reaction to this From a Republican Gubernatorial Candidate?

Trump posts a picture of himself as Jesus, complete with vestments and hand ostensibly healing a man by touching his forehead.  It finally got a reaction from some of the pseudo-Christian cult among his MAGA party, and some tongue clicking disapproval, along with lengthy apologies from supporters who are as incapable of criticizing him as he is of recognizing and acknowledging his own mistakes.  

Darren Bailey, Republican Candidate for Governor of Illinois

Bailey is a guy who wears his MAGA identity and his fundamentalist Evangelical religious beliefs on his sleeve.  It's the way he runs for political office, and it led to a landslide win for his opponent, J. D. Pritzker, last time around.  It is apparently going to give Pritzker a very easy path to the governor's mansion this time around.  

Bailey: "I was shocked..."

Bailey's reaction:  I was shocked...

But that's it.  

He wasn't offended or outraged by a blasphemous mockery of one of the Trinity, one who had just ripped into the character and integrity of the Pope.  Bailey's not a Catholic, he's an Evangelical who runs a "Christian" school that has plenty of anti-Catholic rhetoric in its textbooks and classrooms. 

His disrespect of the Pope is far out of bounds for a man who has been credibly accused of rape, guilty on multiple occasions of adultery, theft, and credibly accused of supporting a pedophile, if not participating in his work.  His denial of his own need for forgiveness of sin because he claims he hasn't committed any disqualifies him from criticizing any religious leader, especially the pope.  

Bailey's reaction is a little but on the understated side and that makes me question whether his claimed Evangelicalism is something he actually believes or something he plans to use to get votes.  

We, The People, Impeach and Remove This President of the United States

Let's face the facts.  Electing Donald Trump as President was both a terrible joke, something to be tried just to get a laugh but, not taking into consideration the number of ignorant, stupid Americans who believe crazy conspiracity theories, populist rumors without any factual basis and a media owned by billionaires chasing money rather than serving as a free press, he got in.  

He's not qualified, far from it he is an emotional cripple raised in a psychotic, anti-social family that makes its living grifting and exploiting who ever and whatever is can, including the United States government,  Our own ignorance of what America's founding principles involve, and what we stand for as a nation has contributed to putting  just enough similar dumb-asses into the voting pool to bring about the reality that one of the dangers of Democracy is the freedom it provides to the people to destroy it by electing subversives. 

One of the other problems is electing an opposition that is also not capable of reversing the trends that are in the process of destroying it.  Democrats are too distracted by fundraising for their own nest, and by their own political interests to do much more than be the opposition.  We will win a landslide of seats in the House and probably enough in the Senate to control both, but only because the Republicans lost.  

What Can We Do About It?  

You mean, beyond throwing up our hands with a tsk, tsk, tsk, and whining about the fact that we can't do anything because we are not in power, and turning our focus back on the mid-terms?

A lot of responses to my throwing up my hands and trying to push to do more is met with the question, "What can we do?"  I no  longer accept that response.  We can do more, starting by just making an effort to be on solid Constitutional ground and figure it out.  

And I have a plan.  

The People's Impeachment

The "No King's" marches and rallies have brought out over ten million Americans in three separate events.  I keep wondering what effect that kind of massive political protest will really have in a country of more than 300 million people.  It has had massive impact.  In accomplishing its ends of drawing attention to a real problem and how much support the opposition has, it has been very effective.  

So let's take that a step further.  

Use the Effect of the Public Impact

I propose that the various organizing groups across the board get in touch with each other accross the country, since they seem to be keeping names and lists.  We need a formal effort with a date attached to it to ask every single participant in every rally to do the following: 

• Contact both Senators in their state with the message that when an impeachment vote comes their way, they must vote to convict Trump and remove him from office  Every GOP Senator would get a massive pile of email, contact on line or letters or phone calls from millions with the message, REMOVE TRUMP.  
• Contact their own Member of Congress with the same message about voting to impeach.  This means that every member of Congress would receive, on average, over 20,000 contacts, letters, emails, in-box messages, and phone calls advocating they vote to impeach the President.  
• This would be coordinated to take place starting on July 4, 2026, and ending on July 10.   

This would require organization, information and coordination well beyond the capacity of The Signal Press.   Though we would ask for the help of those who have organized the No Kings rallies to get the word out, we will do our part by making this post go as far and as fast as it can do.  Congress is the most disapproved of body in the country and the impact of nine million messages delivered to their routine contact email in such a short period of time would communicate that we are no longer going to tolerate their moribund idleness when it comes to getting rid of Trump.  The rhetoric, especially directed at Republicans, needs to be sharp and threatening, not violent, but of the use of the tools we have at our disposal.  The number of communications from individual Americans to Congress would be in historic proportions.  

The fact of the matter is this is how our Democratic Constitutional Republic is designed to operate.   Congress is supposed to have open doors and open commnication with constituents was the best way members were supposed to receive the will of the people.  

If there's interest in giving this a try, I will contribute the use of the blog, and whatever means necessary to get the word out.  I think this is the natural and effective ends of the effect on public opinion of all of the  rallies and marches we've been having.   This is one channel for the energy to go.  And while many of the people involved are probably already communicating with their Congress member, I think it will stun Republicans, who aren't hearing this.  

Come on, let's give this a try!     

Let's Set the Record Straight: Voting in the United States is Secure, and All Voters Are Identified

 Having lived, and voted, in six different states, I can't address how the others make sure that those who cast ballots at the polls are the same people who are on the voter registration roll.  In every state where I registered, I had to sign the voter registration roll and provide proof of address to make sure my ballot reflected the correct precinct.  When I showed up at the polls, I had a voter registration card that had been mailed to me, which matched the numbers and information on the roll.  I think a couple of the states where I registered used a bar code that was unique to the voter card they sent, and one state had the signature on the card.  

The problem comes if the signatures don't match.  And there are inherent risks in someone making an attempt to vote with someone elses credentials.  First of all, what would be accomplished?  The likelihood of getting caught is high, the penalties are not fun, and what would be gained by doing something like that.  I always hear the argument that "signatures can be faked."  Yes, but not as easily as photo ID's. 

There are, in fact, so few instances of attempted voter fraud, or instances where more than a small fraction of individuals, a fraction of a percent of the total number of voters, have attempted fraud and succeeded.  

This is the point where those who can't see the facts start complaining about how much voter fraud there is.  But the fact is that states which require photo id's do not  have any more or less voting irregularities than those who don't.  

The fact of the matter is that every voter who casts a ballot in an American election can be identified and their vote can be verified.  What's being pushed is not simple voter ID, it is some kind of proof of citizenship, an accusation made based on another baseless rumor that people here illegally are getting to vote.  That is faactually inaccurate.  It's not happening.  It sounds sinister, ooh, bad government look at how they are winning elections, but the fact of the matter is that there's not enough statisticaal data in this area to bother with changing a system that is working so well.  

See, here's the problem.  Trump sweated out election night in 2020, because ballots were still being counted in some swing states.  That's because one of them, the one that would make the difference, did not start counting mail-in ballots until after the polls closed, and it took a week to count, verify signatures and make sure vote totals were correct.  Trump couldn's comprehend that, because he had a lead in the same day ballots and he just wanted to stop counting at some point during the night and declare  victory.  

But almost half the population had voted by mail, and while it made Trump mad that those votes narrowed his lead significantly as every day passed, and the last 150,000 or so, all legitimately cast and mailed before the election put Biden over the top and in the White House.  He ignorantly and stupidly tried to convince people that these ballots were fraudulent, added in after it was clear he won, when that was not the case at all.  

So now, his attempts to put forth voting reform, sieze ballots and all of that other rhetoric is simply his frustration over the fact that he lost, and he's using the claim that reform is needed to support his lie about those Pennsylvania mail in ballots.  He thinks that if he simply asserts some populist lie that his followers believe,  then it's true.  All that shows is the gullible stupidity of his MAGA base.  

There is not now nor has there been massive voter fraud in the United States, the system we have now works, non-citizens do not vote in elections and when that vote count comes in, it can be trusted. 

American Evangelicalism's Faulty Interpretation of the Bible Produces the White Christian Nationalism Heresy

For certain men whose condemnation was aritten abut long ago have secretly slipped in among you.  They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and ddeny Jesus Christ, our only sovereign and Lord.  Jude, v. 4, NIV

Even in the first few years of its existence, the Christian church faced the danger of false apostles and teachers infiltrating the membership for the purpose of exploiting the membership for their own purposes and benefit.  Jude is writing a warning to be distributed among Christians who were facing persecution.  It was easier to lead people astray during such times, so Jude writes with apostolic authority to warn Christians aboutt the fact that this was happening, and to set the primary focus of the Christian gospel back in place so that genuine Christian faith was defined and could be identified.  

Though the issues about which Jude writes took place in the first century church, history is full of similar kinds of intrusions into the Christian church, intent on gaining trust in order to introduce apostasy and use the church, its people and resourses for their own purposes.  

This is, in fact, happening right now, as a good sized segment of American Christianity, known as Evangelicalism, has been invaded by intruders for their own purposes, mainly political and financial gain, and has been hijacked and separated from the Christian gospel.  The glaring inconsistencies that are showing up time and time again from what is an unholy blend of legalistic fundamentalist Christian practice with extremist right wing politics with what has been considered authentic Christian practice, rooted in an in-depth, historical, contextual and intellectual study of the Bible make it seem like the two things are not even the same faith.  

The Christian Nationalism that has almost completely infiltrated conservative, white Evangelicalism bears no resemblance at all to the words penned in the New Testament, quoting Jesus as he laid out the Christian gospel and revealed God to humanity.  As they have been historically, evangelistic outreach and the spread of the Evangelical version of Christian faith has never been about winning converts, it's always been about acquiring political power to use against perceived enemies.  

The Fundamentalist Doctrinal Foundation of Conservative Evangelicalism

There's a reason right wing Evangelicals fear and disdain education.  Their doctrinal and theological system is based on ignorance, not on a thorough study of the Bible using its original languages, as much of its historical and cultural context as can be discovered and incorporated, and on understanding the unique situations it addressed as instructional and inspirational, not as a set of rules or commandments applied universally.  

What we now refer to as Evangelicalism in the United States started in the 19th century, among people who had no access to educated ministers and preachers, and who depended on a word for word, verse by verse rendering of the King James translation.  King James himself changed the text of scripture, by pulling out somewhere around 16 books that had been part of the original canon.  And his translators were careful to include his personal bias in their work.  

So what emerged from nineteenth century America was a branch of the Christian church that has a nasty disrespect for education, especially in the clergy, and a fundamentally distorted perspective of Christian faith. It's belief in what they call the "plenary, verbal" inspiration of the Bible--that every word of the Bible is inspired by God, and that every part of the Bible is equally inspired contradicts the revelation brought by Jesus/ The Bible's writers themselves do not support this idea, nor is there any indication from them at all that what they were writing includes any kind of prophetic prediction about anything that will happen in the future.  

The theology of "dispensationalism," which is not found anywhere in the Bible, is the idea that different eras of history are marked by events dividing them into "dispenstations."  And the manner in which the teachings of scripture are applied in one dispensation are different in another.  Without going into a long, complicated explanation of how that works, what it does is allow for setting aside the entire Christian gospel and the basic core principles of Christian practice taught by Christ, in favor of a war-mongering, murder-justifying apocalypse to usher in Jesus' second coming.  

This perspective did not show up anywhere in centuries upon centuries of Christian theological study of the scripture.  It is, in fact, an aberration that did not emerge until the nineteenth century, out of an age when Great Britain was building an empire to economically exploit the undeveloped world, seeing themselves as "God's chosen," and when the manifest destiny enthusiasm of Americans, combined with the revivals of the Second Great Awakening, led to the push for military conquest of our weaker neighbors, most notably Mexico, cloaked and justified as an evangelistic effort.  

This Isn't Christianity, It's a Cult

The Bible is difficult enough to interpret.  It's easy to discern that the single affirmation which defines what it means to be Christian is the acknowledgement that Jesus was the Son of God, fully human and fully divine, the fulfillment of messianic prophecy, whose purpose was to reveal the person of God to his human creation, and to provide a path to reconciliation and redemption with Him.  

That doctrine comes from several places in the Bible, including Matthew, Mark, John, Paul and Peter, among the Apostles.  If that is the case, and the written record of what Jesus did and taught is accurate, and in fact there is no way to prove anything more than the accuracy of the transmitted text, then there is no possible way to even consider that other parts of the Bible are equally inspired.  The words of Jesus, who was Christ, are the interpretive filter for everything else in scripture.  

If that's the case, while it is difficult to try and figure out all of the contexts and historical background that influenced the writing of the Bible, most of which no longer exists and is actually unknown to us now, that is how systematic Christian theology is developed.  I doubt if there is one Evangelical in a thousand who has any idea of the history or inspiration of the Bible, and who sees it as anything more than a collection of sixty six books divided into chapters and verses, one of which could be their "life verse."  Nor are they aware that the sixty-six book Protestant Bible that we use isn't the full text of everything that the church, over its history, has accepted as canonical.  

People who are livid over things they see being 'added to" or "taken from" the text in Bible translations they don't like would be horrified to know the changes to the text made by King James alone, not to mention the things that church councils after the first century did.  The only remaining complete, preserved actual text, protected by its isolation in Ethiopia, is the 80 book  Ethiopian Bible.  Any full study of Christian theology requires looking at all of this history, which American Evangelicals won't do.  

The Apocalyptic Focus Which Doesn't Exist in the Bible 

Evangelicals are overly obsessed with end times scenarios and the violent judgment of the enemies of God.  They are waiting for a time when their preaching and evangelistic outreach is justified--a better term is avenged--and those who have refused to listen to them and their preaching are sent to hell.  That is preached and taught and put in the context of how it is done in most Evangelical churches, especially in Pentecostal and Charismatic circles where it is used to generate applause like a pep rally.  

And yes, as a former Evangelical myself, I've sat in church services where pastors generated rounds of applause by painting some picture in which godless liberals meet their maker and it's too late for redemption.  That's the "dispensation" they believe is coming, which will usher in the return of Christ.  And they get this all by simply ignoring the historical context of a couple of New Testament books, specifically Revelation.  In order to arrive at this particular futuristic, interpretation of the Bible, the accepted standards of interpretation must be changed because the intention of the original author is not to prophetically predict an apocalypse at the end of the world,  but to bring encouragement to the persecuted church in the first century.  

If you want a good example of just how far out of the realm of orthodox Christianity this kind of theology and doctrine goes, and what it looks like, listen to the rantings and shriekings of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.  It's characterized in the prayer of his pastor to bring death down on a politician with whom he disagrees, especially one who has a much clearer and accurate perspective of Christianity, Texas Senate Candidate James Talarico.  

Here's a clear, Christian theological and doctrinal point.  Neither the pastor, nor Hegseth, are demonstrating any belief or behavior that can be identified in any way as Christian.  That's not a judgement, that's just simple observation. 

There are encouraging signs that the Evangelical movement, I'm not going to call it Christian because it's not, is falling apart.  Among white Evangelicals, there are organizational connections building that help people separate their faith frorm Trumpism.  There's been a slow decline in membership and attendance among Evangelicals in the United States that shifted into high gear in 2016, resulting in declines that far exceed what the liberal mainline denominations have ever experienced.  And while white Evangelicals increased their support for Trump in 2024, up to 82%, the actual number of self-identified white evangelicals who voted was down a full 20% from 2016.  The largest Evangelical denomination in the United States, the Southern Baptist Convention, has lost almost 3 million members since 2016, a 20% decrease.  

If they want to survive after Trump falls, and he will fall hard, they'll have to educate themselves and their congregants in a truth that they do not know now, when it comes to the nature of Christ. 

Saturday, More than 3,000 "No Kings" Rallies Will Draw Out the Largest Protest in American History

And what will be accomplished?  

I certainly don't think this is a waste of time and effort, since I'll be joining in myself.  I think it is important to show support by showing up, one more of millions of Americans who see that Trump is trying to destroy this country's long standing democratic republic by subverting its constitution with his own will, while a do-nothing Congress lets him.  

The question in the opening paragraph is not merely rhetorical.  We've had fifteen months of a President ignoring the Constitution, doing as he pleases and a Congress that isn't exercising the balance of power they have to hold him in check.  We also have had a Supreme Court that, with a totally unconstitutional immunity ruling, perpetuated this insanity.  These marches and rallies need to do more than just get big turnouts, and give prominent and entitled politicians a speaking platform.  They need to make themselves felt among Republican members of Congress and the conservative members of the Supreme Court, in a way that robs them of their political security and puts them on edge as the mid-term elections approach. 

Oh, and About the Mid-Terms

The Republicans already know, they are going to lose big.  And so they are working as hard as they can on ways to prevent votes being counted for Democratic candidates.  We know this.  It happened in 2024, when they deliberately targeted the swing states and there is massive evidence they cheated to cost Harris an election she would have won otherwise.  It wasn't just voter suppression, there were multiple precincts in which voting machines were programmed to reduce her vote total.  We know this because those seven states were the only places where down ballot Democrats outperformed Harris.  

There were plenty of warnings and plenty of pleas to challenge the results, but all of the "no mass voter fraud" rhetoric spin by Democrsts had  them backed into a corner.  So no one did anything about it.  

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out they are going to try and steal this election in every way they can.  Anyone who follows this knows that's a fact.  They are even telling us how they are going to do it.  The response I see is, "Tsk, Tsk, Tsk, they're going to cheat."  And no one doing anything to prepare, prevent or put a stop to it.  If we lose, it will be our fault for letting it happen.  

We can turn out millions for a march or protest, but we can't find enough people willing to make sure the Republicans can't cheat?  And maybe there are people keepng an eye on this, and if so, and it appears to be something effective, please let me know because I need reassurance and I am not seeing anything reassuring.  

What Will Change After Saturday? 

Nothing.  

We are 0 for seven or eight now in terms of success versus the number of rallies and marches and protests that have been held.  I'm sure Trump notices, as do those around him, but it has no effect at all.  In fact, I think he gets mad and plans to do something outrageous as a result, just to get back in the face of the protesters.  

I'm not sure that the political principle of percentate of the population it takes to engage in protest to bring about change works in this case.  When the founding fathers, and succeeding government leaders, put the means in the Constitution to remove ineffective, corrupt demagogues from office, they depended on everyone having common sense and they couldn't imagine the amount of money used to bribe members of Congress to do nothing about it.  

What we need is to put enough serious public pressure on a minority of Republican members of Congress to see this for what it is and impeach and remove Trump from office.  They need to see that if they don't, they are going to lose their perky job.  They need to know that the American people mean business.  The rhetoric needs to go beyond lauding the virtues of Democracy to what's going to happen electorially in November to Republicans in marginal districts who are going to be fired.  

When looking at what kind of turnouts it takes to make political change occur, I think action speaks louder than words.  These rallies need to show up at the doorsteps of Congressional offices everywhere, conduct impromptu town halls and they need to focus on registering every eligible voter in some of these districts where Republicans get less than 25% of the support, but win because of apathy.  

I go because I want to see change, and I'm involved because I believe my voice counts.  So collectively, let's find the most effective way to apply the necessary pressure to make the necessary changes.

In the Middle of Chaos, America Needs Sensible Leaders, and the Democratic Party has Several

One of the biggest personal disappointments I am experiencing as the primaries unfold for the 2026 midterms is that my party, the Democratic party, does not seem to be departing from the "politics as usual" approach to the issues at hand that has cost them the White House and control of Congress more than once in recent years.  The emails and texts I get appealing for contributions are taking on a tone and appearance of self-interest, not focused on the danger at hand.  It makes me want to ask these people, "Do you really believe that Trump is an existential threat to American Democracy, or is this just a game you play to acquire money and keep your seat?"  

Of course, I want to do everything one person, one voter, can do to help the chances of Democrats in the mid-term elections.  My contribution is a sacrificial one for me, so I want it to go where it will count the most.  

Election season is when eyes focus on flashy candidates, those who have elevated themselves to the higher level of recognition in party politics mainly because they have excellent PR people who get the media to cover their every move.  I look past the flash, and I look at the words and actions of those who are fighting against this Presidential administration in real ways that are cutting deep and having an effect, and are, in every way possible, defeating Trump at every turn.  I've lached on to several leaders in our party who are speaking the truth, fighting and resisting in effective ways, and whose words resonate with me regarding what is at the very core of what's wrong, and how to fix it.  

Arizona Senator Mark Kelly

Attacked directly by this incompetent President, Senator Kelly was given a platform and he fought back, and won.  He did not look to PACs or big donors to finance his legal battle, he let his campaign fund raisers do that for him.  He was on solid ground, both with regard to military regulations and the Constitution, he knew it, and he used it to get the win.  Beyond the issue of his warning to miitary personnel not to follow illegal orders, he has provided insights and plans as to how to keep protecting American Democracy, and to stop Trump. 

Listen to this man.  He knows, and desires to protect, the Constitution, and is an advocate for the people who elected him.  I'm amazed that my home state that has been politically backward for so long was finally able to put two Senators in office who are provding intelligent, effective leadership like Ruben Gallego and Mark Kelly, but they've finally got enough support to get it done.  They are both the kind of leaders we need, and at this particular point, following his victory, Senator Kelly is speaking out, speaking the truth and providing leadership out of the miasma of chaos that we are experiencing.  There is no conciliation here, no compromise, no backing down.  

Hs wife, former Representative Gabby Giffords, was one of the first outspoken, intelligent, effective elected officials ever to represent Arizona in the House, which is why there was an assassination attempt on her.  And her support is another reason why Senator Kelly is so effective.  We really need to consider ussing party resources to put this man in position to run for President, because he needs to be in elective office, not some cabinet position.  And he would ignore standard protocol and push past the cumbersome delays and dawdles of political movement to get things done.  

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders

Senator Sanders tells the truth about why America  is in the fix that it is now in.  And the reason why some Democrats turn him off or dismiss him is because they are wealthy, and he is a threat to their personal financial status which is why they are weak concilators when it comes to their politics.  

We really made a mistake when we failed to nominate him for President in 2016.  Hindsight has showed us clearly that America wasn't ready for a woman President, and that the equally high disapproval that Hillary shared with Trump wasn't going to be overcome enough to put her in the White House.  Bernie doesn't deviate from his theme, because it rests on facts that the middle class in this country is being bankrupted by the accumulation of wealth among the one percenters.  His solutions are workable and would be highly effective.  His understanding of basic human rights enumerated in the Constitution can't be challenged.  

I can't help but think how different things would be now if Senator Bernie Sanders had been the Democratic party's Senate leaader during most of the time Schumer has occupied that position.  We would have ended a lot of the nonsense we now must endure.

Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg 

We need to take advantage of this man's leadership and put him in position to serve in elected office, and I wouldn't mind seeing him in the Presidency.  Set aside his personal life, including his sexuality, like the whole Evangelical right does with Trump, and pay attention to this man's words and his plans.  He's probably one of the best spokespersons for the left that we have.  

He's the kind of guy who brings people with divergent opinions together and gets them to understand how to work with each other instead of against each other.  He's the kind of person who can see the flaws in bad plans and can find solutions to make things work.  Check out the stats about the effectiveness of his direction of the Department of Transportation, though his articulate manner of laying out the facts is the biggest favor he is doing for the opposition to Trump right now.  

Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear

A left-leaning governor in a deep red state is a statement.  Mainly it's a statement about how to use voter turnout to win elections.  And it's also a statement about the difference between those who are conservative politically, and those who are Trumpers.  

Being a governor involves serving the people and that's why Beshear has been so successful.  He has accomplished something more Democrats need to learn how to accomplish, and that is how to stay in power and get things done on  their behalf that the other party wouldn't do.  The bottom line is that Beshear has managed to put in place a lot of programs and services that a Republican run state would never do because there's been a connection with a majority of the population that transcends the political labels.  And he uses his high profile popularity to pressure Republicans who are afraid of losing their own seats if they cross him.  

I would be very comfortable with Beshear moving into a bigger role in the national spotlight of the Democratic party, perhaps even as a Pesidential or Vice-Presidential candidate. 

Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker

Illinois has resisted so many attempts by this administration to vent the President's anger over the fact that he is not only not popular here, but that he is ignored and the state does exactly the opposite of what he wants.  His ICE brigade was ousted, defeated, and sent packing, along with the national guard he tried to call out based on a lie about crime rates in Chicago.  He's been called out as a liar and exposed time after time by a governor who calls his bluff because he knows when Trump is confronted, he backs down.   

It may be quite a contest to see, between Governors Pritzker and Newsom, who gets Trump to back down more often, but these two definitely need to get together and do some coordination of effort.  This is a governor who listens to advice from experts and works for the benefit of the people.  His opponents keep bringing up the tax rates in Illinois and claim Pritzker has done nothing about it and they'll never listen to the facts which prove otherwise.  Taxes are down for most Illinoisans as a result of this governor's policies.  Look it up.  

Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro

Pennsylvania's legislature has finally emerged from a nightmare with a Democratic majority in both houses and under the leadership of Governor Shapiro.  He is an example of the kind of courage and bold risk-taking that Democrats have sorely missed in Washington since 2016.  

When the people are served by their government, they tend to vote to keep it that way, and since 2024, it's become clear that Democrats, largely as a result of Shapiro's leadership, are moving ahead from an electoral perspective.  Pennsylvania  appears to be one of several states poised to elect a majority Democrat delegation to the House of Representatives because of Shapiro's handling of the state legislature.  

Democrats Who Don't Fold

These are the best examples right now of the kind of leadership the Democratic party will need in order to repair the damage being done to this country by Trump.  They draw lines and don't budge, there's no compromise.  I have no doubt that, if given the chance, any of these people would have taken every step possible to make sure that Trump never had a second chance at the White House.  They're the kind of politicians who would break that stupid filibuster in a second and then pack the court with judges who know, love, respect and are willing to enforce the Constitution.  

Any one of these individuals is capable of serving as an effective President of the United States.