Religious Bigotry Threatens America as a "Safe Haven" from Oppression

 "When was it too late?" Some US Jews Wonder About Their Place in America

The fact that there are Jews in America who are considering selling their property and leaving the country to escape coming persecution of the kind experienced by their European counterparts in the early part of the twentieth century is an absolutely appalling, horrifying circumstance. This isn't some kind of conspiracy-theory type paranoia, either.  There are still plenty of Holocaust survivors around, most of whom were children at the time it occurred, but the survivors have done an outstanding job of preserving the memories of both the horror of the experience, and the warning signs that it was approaching.  And what they are beginning to see, in the United States of America, are some of the same warning signs in the social and political atmosphere that preceded the Holocaust in Europe.  

This should be a wake-up call that prompts us to take action to make sure this doesn't go any further than it already has.  It's naive to think that something like the Holocaust could never happen in the United States.  In spite of our lofty idealism and the language of founding documents that talk about valuing the equality of human beings as something that we strive to achieve, our history has been one of several "holocausts" with their roots in racial and religious bigotry that is as common in America as it is everywhere else in the world.  The nation fractured and went to war over slavery, and the racism and bigotry that caused it has lasted into this century.  During the Holocaust itself, perniciously restrictive immigration policy was the result of state department obduracy that created obstacles to Jewish immigration prior to the entry of the United States into the war.  And much of that occurred after the United States government became aware of what the Germans were doing to European Jewry.  

At what point do we reach the level of maturity in our idealism, so that things like this are no longer tolerated and no longer acceptable?  When do we get to that point that we recognize that "all human beings are created equal, and are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness"?  

Capitalizing on Divisive Politics

The first time I heard Rush Limbaugh's radio program was on a small town AM radio station that covered a large swath of territory in southern Missouri and northern Arkansas.  I was driving home from a meeting, and his program caught my attention because the bigotry was obvious.  It didn't take long to figure out his agenda, which wasn't to discourage it or aspire to any kind of idealism, but to use it to advance a particular political perspective over another.  I was surprised by the intentional divisiveness, and by the fact that there was someone on a nationally syndicated radio program, originating in New York, who was promoting white supremacy and racism, and who was blaming all of the American problems of the day on those whose racial, ethnic or religious status made them a minority, and who were striving to achieve the equality promised by American idealism. 

This current revival of anti-Semitism didn't originate with Limbaugh, but he saw how to turn it into a political tool to advance his brand of extremist conservativism, and he is to blame for helping it to turn enough corners to send warning signals to Jewish Americans who always keep a wary eye out for the dangers it brings.  I'm sure he had an army of lawyers on hand, to make sure he never crossed any of the legally defined boundaries of free speech and whenever someone questioned him about it, he always made sure to point out that this was his "God-endowed" right, a term he used frequently.  But I strongly believe that he bears a huge responsibility for the rapid rise in anti-Semitism that some Jews now perceive as enough of a threat to begin making preparations to protect themselves and their families. 

It's bad enough that Limbaugh had an audience willing to accept his bigotry, and who were motivated to act by helping to elect bad politicians who made it part of their agenda when they were elected to office, setting back progress being made toward achieving American ideals, so he is no patriot, no matter how often he claimed that title.  But what's worse is that he made a fortune for himself off of of promoting what can only be described accurately as evil.  He chose himself over his country and its ideals, and he helped promote bigotry that has the potential to disrupt people's lives.  Not being willing to work toward the kind of America reflected in its idealism is selfishness, and is unAmerican.  

We Can't Permit This 

I'm completely committed to constitutional protections of the freedom of conscience, which includes religious liberty, and to free speech.  But there is that point which we often discuss, at least theoretically, about whether constitutionally protected free speech covers someone yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.  When the life, liberty and happiness of others are threatened by the potential results of collective bigotry, those threats are not protected free speech.  

I can't begin to describe the kind of feelings I had when I read the linked article, and had to consider the fact that some Americans, because of their religious beliefs, feel compelled to make drastic changes in their life because they sense imminent danger from an oppressive evil that is most definitely interfering with their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  Did we not learn anything from what we saw happen in Europe during the Holocaust?  It's an absolute tragedy that we have to even consider this, and now that we see it, what are we going to do about it?  

I'm still convinced that our best weapon against this kind of thing is the ballot box.  And we've been warning people for decades that apathy, and failing to show up to cast a ballot may one day result in us losing the power that our founding fathers, in the Declaration of Independence, claimed is derived from the will of the people, or popular sovereignty.  We can easily identify the source of the racism against African Americans, Latinos, Asians, and other ethnic and racial groups, and against Jews, Muslims and other religious groups.  Protecting idealism sometimes takes a priority over voting to favor a political position.  

Michael Moore advised Democrats to become more active in the local branches of their party.  That's another way to fight against this evil.  Our local branch of the party did a lot of good in the midterms, not only making sure people turned out to vote in our precincts in this state, but crossed the border into Wisconsin to help Democratic candidates there get out their vote.  That effort was, at least in part, successful.  

Awareness, and calling this stuff out in every possible forum, is also a way to put a stop to it.  Bullies back down when someone stands up to them, calls their bluff and confronts their evil.  These people who are being threatened are fellow Americans.  Let's show up for them.  A good place to start is at school board meetings which are becoming forums for the promotion of American ideals against attempts to remove books from library shelves and ideas from textbooks.  Anti-Semitism has some strongholds there.  Then move on to the city council.  All of those places are important.

No American should ever feel threatened in their own country to the point where they feel they must start to plan to flee in order to avoid danger, because they are of a different race, ethnicity or religious belief.  

 

"Enough is Really Enough," Says Maricopa County as a Second Set of Sanctions is Filed Against Kari Lake

Maricopa County and Governor-Elect Hobbs File for Sanctions Against Kari Lake for "Frivolous Lawsuits"

What we are seeing in Arizona politics is a paradigm shift.  The fact that Maricopa County, where the board of supervisors is still dominated by remnants of the establishment Republican party, though that is shifting, has had enough of the futile, baseless, frivolous attempts of a Trump-endorsed right wing extremist candidate for governor, who narrowly lost, is clear evidence of the shift.  They are asking the court to sanction Lake and her legal team for their most recent attempt to have the will of the people overturned by courts.  The county's basis for their suit is Lake's statement prior to the election that she wouldn't accept the results unless she won.  The judge in the case is proceeding with the sanctions.  

Let's be clear, Lake knows that most of her support comes from a constituency that is mindlessly and hopelessly ignorant, pitiful in their fear when it comes to ridiculous conspiracy theories and suckers when it comes to handing their money over to despicable candidates for office like this.  That's why she let it be known, before the election, that she wouldn't accept the results if she didn't win.  That was to get her base riled up, perhaps toting their weapons to places where they might genuinely interfere in the counting of ballots or certifying the election.  But, from a legal perspective, it was a pretty stupid thing to say, since it has handed the county all they need to prove their sanctions claim, and to prove that her claims of election fraud are bogus.  

Republican Frustration with the Shift in Arizona Politics

In spite of Trump's endorsement, Lake trailed Democrat Katie Hobbs in virtually every reliable poll prior to the election, though the race did tighten, and some of the "fake" polls that were inserted into the data made it look like Lake might actually win by two or three points.  But Arizona's explosive population growth over the past two decades, much of which has occurred in its most populous county, Maricopa, where over 60% of the state's population, and voters, live.  

Outside of Maricopa County, the heavily Republican rural areas are balanced out by four heavily Democratic counties, including the state's second largest, Pima, where the 1.2 million residents of the Metro Tucson area make up 50% of the population of the state outside Maricopa County.  The Republican advantage outside of Maricopa County has been, in the past three election cycles, virtually non-existent.  

It's not enough to simply run as a Republican in Arizona any more and expect that to be the main focus of the campaign.  Democrats and Independents who increasingly vote Democrat, now outnumber Republicans statewide, and candidates must have a viable agenda and address real issues facing the state's voters to win elections.  In a state that Biden won by just over 11,000 votes in 2020, on the strength of a 45,000 vote margin in Maricopa County, it wasn't very perceptive of Lake to try to run without any prior political experience, on a similar agenda.  

Hobbs not only had a coherent agenda, and a clear plan for a political path forward for Arizona, but she led the effort to protect the integrity of Arizona's vote count against attacks from the Trump campaign.  The silly wastefulness exhibited by Republicans in the state senate, in securing the hugely expensive services of the unqualified auditors known as the "Cyber Ninjas" for an unofficial "audit" of Maricopa County's 2020 votes that turned into an "unmitigated disaster" according to county supervisors and election officers, probably did more than anything else to tilt the balance of the vote in Maricopa County in Hobb's favor, which led to her winning the election.  Legitimately.  

With the exception of the office of State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Democrats have won control of every other executive office in state government in Arizona, an unprecedented event in state history.  All of the other Republican candidates for these offices followed Lake's lead, and filed lawsuits to win their election in the courtroom, instead of among the voters expressing the will of the people.  Aside from that being a demonstration of an appalling lack of patriotism, and a subversive attack against American democracy, it is also now a colossal failure.  None of the other Republican candidates and their legal teams could find a shred of credible evidence that there was fraud in the election and that it was deliberately "stolen" from them.  The voters of Arizona, including among the 3 million new residents who have moved there since 2000, and almost 5 million since 1990, have spoken.  

Bilking "Suckers"

This is about raising money for future political ambitions.  Lake knows she lost, as certainly as Trump knew he lost in 2020 once the vote tallies were finalized and certified.  Her entire demeanor and approach to this whole post-election tantrum conveys a very clear understanding that she knows she lost and she also knows that her claims that she "won by 200,000 votes" are bogus.  There are always glitches and equipment issues and a whole array of problems associated with elections, but there are solutions to all of them which make it possible for every voter's ballot to count accurately.  The failure of a handful of printers in Maricopa County provided cover for Lake's bogus claims, but the county was right on top of that and documented the fact that every voter who chose to cast a ballot did so, and their votes were counted.  

But a little bit of "cover" goes a long way among people primed to believe in advance that there is a problem.  Dragging out lawsuits and keeping people believing that at some point some court is going to take a case in which there is no evidence and reverse what a previous court has done.  And as long as there are believers, there will be money.  Trump is collecting millions and he's selfishly hoarding it, keeping other Republican candidates from getting as much.  I'm sure there were some elections at some level the party might actually have won this cycle, if their candidates had resources that Trump collected and held.  

And that's what's going on here.  Kari Lake will never become governor of Arizona, certainly not at all based on an election that she clearly lost.  She's trying to figure out her next move, and she wants her supporters to pay for her time and effort.  And that's what this is all about.  

American Elections are the Most Secure in the World 

Election deniers thrive on ignorance.  It's not easy to admit that a majority or plurality of voters don't see things the way a specific candidate may see them.  The polarization that we've seen, introduced by hostile media elements, promoted by various extremist factions including elements of the religious right, has introduced an "all or nothing" attitude into politics, which makes it difficult to make government work.  So convincing people who don't really pay much attention to anything except their own self, that someone is "rigging" elections is easier than it should be.  

But factually, it is virtually impossible.  The scope of a conspiracy to "steal" an election, with the technology that we have available today, would be virtually impossible to achieve.  Too many eyes are watching.  People who are informed, and understand the process, know this.  

Don't believe otherwise.  And keep an eye on your checkbook.  

Zelenskyy Visit to the US is Another Reminder of Faltering Patriotism Among Republicans

When Missouri Senator Josh Hawley claimed that his reason for not showing up for Ukranian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's speech to Congress was that he didn't want to be part of a photo op for Ukraine asking for more money from the United States "when they have not given us an accounting on anything they have spent," it reminded me of a little bit of American history surrounding Lend-Lease, Franklin Roosevelt's historic legislation that was a major factor in the allied victory over Nazi Germany during World War 2.  

Lend-Lease was a historic policy.  Recognizing the danger to the United States that was caused by Nazi Germany's conquest of the European continent and particularly the fall of France, Roosevelt got Congress to pass Lend-Lease, which provided for sending war goods, initially to Great Britain, in the form of a "loan" which, theoretically, they would pay back after the war was over.  Lend-Lease did two things which helped the United States win the war, after the Pearl Harbor attack made it a genuine "world war."  It enabled the British to defend their homeland and remain in the war, wtithout which winning it would have been a much more difficult, longer and deadly prospect for the United States.  And it helped gear up American industry for wartime production, so that when war did come, America's industrial capacity was able to supply a military operation of historic proportions. 

Though the intention of Lend-Lease was that countries which received help, initially Britain, but later on, Russia and the Nationalist Chinese, who had been fighting the Japanese since 1935, would pay for the goods when their economies recovered from the war, no real accounting was ever kept.  National security was the priority, as it should have been, and there is no amount of money that could ever pay for preserving the security and sovereignty of the United States, as far as most Americans were concerned.  The objections were mostly from Republicans who, ironically, were known Nazi apologists and sympathizers, and were silenced when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and Hitler declared war on the United States.

Of course Hawley, as usual, doesn't know what he is talking about and doesn't have any facts to support his contention, which isn't surprising for him or other Republicans any more.  His deliberate ignorance of the situation and downplaying of the significance of American aid to Ukraine, along with the false narrative he and other Republicans put out, making it sound like the United States is doing everything and our NATO allies in Europe are doing nothing by comparison, is another false statement, a lie, that the facts also don't support.  There has been an accounting for everything.  And Ukraine is receiving help from the other NATO countries, including billions in humanitarian aid coming from the European NATO allies.  

Republican Attitudes are Anti-Freedom, Anti-Patriotic and Anti-American.  What's the Motivation Behind All of Their Whining? 

Why would members of a political party that once waved American flags in the faces of perceived enemies, launched military invasions of countries to impose "democratically elected government", and declared Russia and China as the biggest enemies of the American ideals of individual freedom and democracy suddenly act so foolishly ignorant when the head of state of a nation that is fighting against one of the declared enemies, and advancing American ideals along with defending their freedom and sovereignty, comes to Congress to thank us for our help and to ask for more?  Republicans have lost their minds, and that's showing up in these actions as well.  But I see two explanations, both credible, both supported with evidence.  

It's political.  Trump made some ham-fisted mistakes with his handling of Ukraine as President.  Among the long list of his inept actions, his attempted bribery of the Ukrainian government, asking them to lie against his political opponent in exchange for help that Congress had already appropriated was one of the lowest moments of his failed Presidency, and considering how much corruption there was, this was one of the most immoral and depraved things he did.  Republicans like Hawley, who have no integrity and grovel at his feet, are miffed at the fact that President Zelenskyy refused to get involved in their corruption and refused Trump to his face.  

Hawley's refusal to show up for President Zelenskyy's speech to Congress is understandable.  How could he be in the same room with someone who has demonstrated the kind of integrity, honesty, and commitment to his nation's sovereignty and freedom and not be completely shamed and embarrassed by the contrast to himself?  There are some Republicans who know the depth of Trump's corruption and insanity, who can't seem to find the character, integrity and strength to stand up to him, who seethe with jealousy against those who do have the character, integrity and strength to tell him "NO!" to his face.   I don't know if Hawley is one of those Republicans who realizes that Trump is a fraud, but it would certainly explain his actions and the tone and temperament of his words. 

There's some Russian interference in there, somewhere.  We have several hundred pages of The Mueller Report that document multiple ways in which Putin has interfered in American elections, specifically 2016.  There's documented evidence that Russian money and propaganda finds its way into politicians campaigns, PACs, and social media posts, and there are documented attempts by Russian operatives to hack directly into voting apparatus.  And one of the most interesting observations about these multiple, known attempts is that they aren't intervening on behalf of Democratic party candidates.  I'm not aware of any specific evidence connecting Hawley to any Russian interference.  But refusing to show support for the Ukrainian President on his visit to the US while his country is at war with a dictatorial oligarchy that sees American freedom and democracy as its primary enemy makes speculating about such interference legitimate.  

Failure to Support Ukraine is a Sign of Faltering Patriotism and is Dangerous to the Freedom of Americans

Ukraine is fighting for their freedom and sovereignty, on our behalf.  After hundreds of years of oppression under Russian Czarist imperialism and Soviet communism, and the devastation of the Nazi invasion during World War 2, along with suffering under Nazi domination for almost four years, including one of the bloodiest Jewish massacres of the holocaust happening in Kyiv, the Ukrainians chose democracy and freedom.  Like most fledgling democracies, in countries where the people have never lived in true freedom, they had some stumbles and falls during the early years of their national government.  But it hasn't taken them long to figure out how to stabilize their economy and their politics.  Their leaders point to the example that we Americans have set for them.  

That's exactly why they are a direct threat to Putin and his government.  Russians are increasingly aware of the differences between life in Ukraine, and life in Russia. Unlike Iraq and Afghanistan, where we attempted to force democratic reform militarily, Ukraine adopted American idealism on their own, by their own experience and observation.  Their country has prospered by it.  The contrast with Russia is visible by just crossing the border, according to Ukrainians I know who have told me.  The Russians who live in Ukraine, and who are in a position to cross the border themselves, also see the difference.  That's why Putin has been so interested in capturing the Donbas region, where most Russian-speaking Ukrainians live, and where there is ample opportunity for Russians, crossing back into their own country, to observe what freedom and democratic government look and feel like. 

Why Republican Americans would not whole heartedly and enthusiastically support Ukraine and be willing to provide them with the resources they need to defend their country is unexplainable and unjustifiable by any standard.  Over 80% of Americans support the aid we are sending, and somewhere around 60% say we're not sending enough.  Republicans were quite supportive of sending in the military to topple Saddam Hussein, and also to toppling the Taliban in Afghanistan.  There are Americans, a sizeable minority if you accept the accuracy of polling data, who are willing to risk sending in the military to help Ukraine.  

So what's wrong with these Republicans who are behaving so badly?  Yes, that' a rhetorical question. 

The Power to Make Change is Still Ours, Through the Ballot Box 

The Republicans who showed their true colors when President Zelenskyy visited are not people of integrity, they have no character to speak of, and they have sold themselves out to a lust for power and money that they are dependent on a failed, former President to continue to deliver for them.  We have to do a much better job of getting rid of them than we did during the 2022 election.  Our turnout fell short of what it should have been.  We're still playing by the same old political rules, still not getting that these midterm elections also count, and not getting ahead of the narrative and the themes that seem to motivate voters.  

Notice, in many of the articles here in The Signal Press there are some terms that I choose deliberately, to send the message.  Republicans are not patriots. Americans appear to worship the almighty dollar and are money-driven and that can sometimes be confusing when it comes to figuring out our true values.  But equality, freedom, fundamental human rights, and a government that is empowered by "We, the People," are American values.  The Ukrainians have confirmed this.  So do the thousands of people seeking asylum here from all over the world, who are willing to line up at the border and wait months or years to get it.  

Some Republican politicians are showing us that they no longer value freedom and democracy, and they prefer a more authoritarian approach that enables them to enrich themselves at the expense of others.  They are no longer willing to consider other people as equals, and they don't believe in the basic human rights outlines in our constitution.   I think pointing those failings out is the best path we have to keeping what we value as a nation.  That's the narrative we need to promote at every opportunity.  

Thanks to politicians like Hawley, we have examples and evidence of faltering Republican patriotism.

Who Believes in American Idealism and Freedom? Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian People Do

The United States of America has spent trillions of dollars attempting to export its democracy and values to other places in the world since it emerged from its isolationist period following World War 1 and became the leader of the free world.  World War I and the Versailles Treaty was a setback to the emergence of the United States in that role, but the Second World War, and the defense of democracy that was required in its wake brought about the change.  

In many ways, our handling of this role has been ham-fisted and awkward.  Not every nation where we became involved in defending democratic freedoms understood exactly how to handle them, and in some cases, such as Nicaragua, South Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, were ill suited for any kind of democratic government because of all kinds of internal factors.  But we spent billions and billions of dollars, and thousands of American military lives, to attempt to bring it about.  

So I'm having trouble understanding the Republican party's cool response and subtle opposition to providing assistance to help Ukrainians preserve their national sovereignty, democracy and freedom against Russia, one of the world's perpetual enemies of individual freedom and democratic reform, led by one of the most virulent opponents of that kind of idealism.  This is the political party that was willing to bankrupt the United States treasury to preserve what passed for democracy in South Vietnam, that approved meddling in the internal affairs of Nicaragua to prop up a dictator because he wasn't a Marxist, though he was far from a freedom loving idealist.  This was the party that spent trillions trying to impose democratic reforms on a divided, hostile Iraq, a country created by British imperial interference after World War I, and a culture hostile to the kind of equality required to have democratic values in a government.  

And it was the party that invested trillions of dollars in "nation building" in Afghanistan, in yet another country hostile to democratic values and idealism and incapable of sustaining either a democratically elected government or a military force capable of defending it.  And in every case, the motivation behind American involvement in every single one of those places, even Nicaragua, was to get a step ahead of the Russians, and preserve a military and political advantage against them.  This was particularly intense in the days when Russia was a communist country, but it is still a foreign relations priority now.  

Considering the position the Republicans have taken when it comes to promoting American democracy around the world, their response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and to the support this country is giving to the Ukrainian government and military, is quite political, exposing their complete and total lack of patriotism and a grotesque, selfish, anti-patriotism.  It's clear that when it comes to protection of individual freedom, respect for democratic values and protection of the constitution and the ideals it has always represented, the Democrats are the party of patriotism, while the Republicans look more and more like fascists.  

The Ukrainians adopted American idealism when the Soviet Union dissolved, and they finally became an independent nation after hundreds of years of being a satellite state to Russia's Czarist imperialism and Soviet communism, forced on them by geography and conquest.  Struggling, as expected, during the early years of establishing a democracy under a constitution very similar to that of the United States, whom they considered the best possible example in the world to follow, the determination that the Ukrainian people have demonstrated in defending their nation and preserving their democracy is worthy of every dollar spent in support of their defense, and more.  We didn't have to force our idealism on them, they accepted it after seeing how it worked for us.  

The rhetoric of Republicans since the Second World War should have been supported by unbridled enthusiasm for Ukraine's fight against an illegal invader who also happens to be this country's greatest enemy at the time.  Their response to this courageous and historic visit of President Zelenskyy to the White House, and to the whole effort to support Ukraine in defense against one of our biggest enemies makes them hypocrites and exposes their motives against patriotism and American ideals.  They seem to be more willing to give aid and comfort to the enemy than to help Ukraine remain free.  Their actions demonstrate opposition not only to Ukraine, but to the values and ideals embodied in the United States Constitution.  

Not only is Ukraine fighting to preserve its democracy, based on American idealism, but it is fighting on behalf of the United States, helping us gain a military and political advantage over Russia without having to endanger a single member of our armed forces.  Victories for Ukraine against Russia are also victories for the United States.  That Republicans can't seem to see that, and are unwilling to support it makes me question the oath of loyalty to the constitution taken by every Republican member of Congress when they were sworn in.  Ukrainians and American Democrats are true patriots, defenders of freedom and of the ideals embodied in the United States Constitution and in the Ukrainian constitution that mirrors it.  Republicans, taking the opposite side, can't be considered patriots or defenders of the constitution, they have made themselves enemies of it. 

Senator Hawley, and I only use his title out of respect for the office and not its despicable occupant, didn't bother to attend President Zelenskyy's speech because he was upset that there hasn't been an accounting for the aid we've sent to Ukraine.  Well, Mr. Hawley, this patriotic American is in favor of unlimited military assistance to Ukraine in the form of whatever we have they can have and I don't care if they ever account for it.  We never required such an accounting of lend-lease help to either England or Russia and the fact that the Ukrainians are standing for us against Moscow gives us every reason to support them with unlimited aid.  By his own actions and words, Mr. Hawley has identified himself as anti-patriotic and an unAmerican, fist-pumping insurrectionist supporter.

I admire President Zelenskyy.  What a gift it has been to Ukraine that they were able, through their representative democracy, to elect him to office for such a time as this.  He has more courage and integrity, and more respect and love for America, and its ideals and freedom, than all of the Republicans in Congress put together.  

I don't want this conclusion to be too complicated.  President Zelenskyy's visit to the President of the United States and his address to Congress was a show of solidarity among freedom-loving people in both countries.  Our unconditional support is exactly the right, moral, decent, and patriotic American thing to do.  The Republican reaction to this tells you they aren't patriots, don't care about American ideals or democracy and more than anything else, no Republican politician who feels this way and openly expresses it deserves to get your vote.  

If you really want to make sure that American remains a strong, great nation, support the aid to Ukraine and work to defeat all of the Republicans who hold public office and will be on your ballot. 

Note 12/23:  To those of you who asked about my frequent use of the term "patriotic", you're right.  I was making a point.  Republicans aren't, and this is one of multiple pieces of evidence of their drift into fascism.

American Democracy is "On the Brink" and Public Education is Part of the Problem

Gallup: By a 55% to 42% Margin, Americans are Dissatisfied with Public Education

Count me among those dissatisfied with the American public education system, though not for the same reason most people find themselves feeling that way.  This particular poll, along with other recent polling data, attributes some of the recent increase in dissatisfaction happening among conservatives and the far right, who have bought into a false narrative about instructional objectives which "groom" students to consider a gender identity other than the one they were born with, and which promotes other "woke" ideas like racial equality, critical race theory and this whole idea that all Americans, regardless of their gender identity, sexual orientation, race, religion or lack therof, native language or other distinguishing differences, have equal rights guaranteed by the constitution.  

Did you detect a note of sarcasm there?  

Schools are a microcosm of the communities they serve, so naturally, they reflect community values.  They are government-owned institutions, which means that they cannot constitutionally promote or favor students or employees based on their religious beliefs, or the absence of them.  But they should be fulfilling a primary purpose, one that was intended by those who saw the value of providing the opportunity for education to everyone in the country, and that was to use education as a primary means of preserving the democracy through having a well-informed, educated electorate.  

I'm not convinced that public education in this country is living up to that expectation, nor has it been doing so for a while.  My opinion is based partly on observation, from having been an educator for most of my career, and having a front row seat to observe what is happening in schools.  And it is based on the observation of what has been happening in politics and government.  We're seeing some dangerous extremes, not that we haven't seen this sort of thing before, but we haven't seen the widespread acceptance of ideas that have no factual foundation, and which gain acceptance without any evaluation of their truthfulness or any evidence that the issue driving them is a reality.  

Education Doesn't Work as a "For-Profit" Business Enterprise 

The absolute reality of education in a free society, especially in a constitutional, representative democracy, is that it must have adequate resources to succeed.  And the primary key to success in education is the quality of those who are engaged in the occupation of teaching the students, starting in the lowest grade levels.  Private business, motivated by profit margins, secures the best employees it can find to staff its operations because the ability to make a profit depends on their ability to compete in the marketplace.  

The inequity of achievement among American schools is directly related to the inequity of funding available.  More accurately, it is directly related to teacher compensation and the provision made for their continued professional development and advancement.  The difference between overall levels of student achievement in states where teacher salaries are similar to other professional occupations, and where professional development in the form of both graduate-level education and in-house training are provided by the school systems, and those where teacher salaries are low by comparison, and teachers must pay for most of their own training, is staggering.  

That inequity of funding is as political as it gets.  It's one of the fundamental differences between Democrats, who support public education at a high level and understand that providing high quality, competitive education requires paying for high quality, well-trained teachers, and Republicans, who seem willing to let public schools deteriorate and collapse around the students enrolled in them to give tax breaks to the wealthy and to corporate business.  Then those same businesses seek their employees from those places where Democrats are in charge of the schools. 

The difference in teacher pay and benefits across the country is also as staggering as the differences in levels of student achievement.  The two things go hand in hand.  And the level of student achievement directly affects the issue of political awareness required to be members of the supportive electorate in a representative democracy.  

Start Social Studies Education Early, and Make it Equal with Science and Mathematics Requirements

The emphasis on technical education, and on mathematics and science core objectives in schools is understandable, given the comparisons between American students and those in the rest of the industrial and developed world.  But it has come at a sacrifice of time spent in other subjects, most specifically social studies.  From someone who has taught government and constitution over a period of time, and who has seen the objectives reduced and the requirements downgraded, this has been discouraging.  It also explains, in my humble opinion, exactly why our democracy has come to this particular point in its history.  Ignorance exhibited publicly about matters pertaining to American history, the founders, the constitution and how government and the economy actually work, by members of Congress who missed out on simple, eighth grade instruction, has been appalling.  

And if that's what members of Congress don't know, the level of misinformation among the electorate is also appalling.  And dangerous. 

The common complaint I've heard, when I bring this up in educational circles, is that math and science requirements take up too much of the time, and they've crowded out the social studies requirements.  But the solution to that is simple.  Students in European countries, and in places like Japan, China, Singapore and Korea, have a longer school day, as much as two hours longer in some cases.  While most American students are in between 8:00 and 8:45 a.m., they're out by 2:30 in most cases, earlier in some places, on their way home and done with school for the day.  Many of them will only log on to their computer to play games or get on social media after that.  But elsewhere in the world, leaving before 4:00 p.m. is unusual, and depending on the block schedule for the day, dismissal at 5:00 is not unusual.  

Several years back, I lived and worked in a school in the suburbs of a large city in a southern state where many of the students were the children of Asian immigrants from Singapore, Malaysia and China, engaged in the research side of two major oilfield companies near the school.  Almost all of these students would leave our school at dismissal, and would spend another two hours a day every Monday through Thursday in a supplemental educational program hosted at a local ethnic community center, where they studied Chinese, English grammar, composition and public speaking skills, and studied American History, Government and Democracy.  One of the parents told me flat out it was because they observed the inadequacy of the public school education and because of the "glass ceilings" which existed in the American culture in which they chose to live, the added education gave their children an advantage.  They came here because of the opportunities and freedom provided by American democracy, and wanted their children to understand it, respect it and benefit from it.  

Imagine that.  

So what would be the problem with adding an hour to the school day and making sure our students in every school are educated in the full scope of American history and civics, not only to avoid the mistakes of the past, but to help students understand the scope of the freedom they enjoy, not to take it for granted or expect that it will always be there, but to encourage direct involvement to help make it work even better than it does?  Is that not worth an additional hour of school per day, which would still not equal a 40 hour week? 

Education is the Power to Fight Against Ignorance

Nelson Mandela said, "The worst enemy of humanity is ignorance and fear, and the best weapon to fight this is education.  If you educate a person, you are empowering that person."  

This isn't an instant solution for what has become a chronic, long term problem.  Undermining education appears to be part of the strategy that is being used to slowly destroy or completely change American democracy.  It's one of many things that must be done now to put up a front against the ignorance that is the best weapon of the enemies of democracy, who are using other institutional tools, including religion, social media and massive amounts of wealth, to bring about their own kind of change.  

We have to save our schools, so that they can empower the next generation, or our children and grandchildren may never know the freedom we've known and experienced.  

"We the People" Are the Power Behind the Constitution

The January 6th Congressional Committee has wrapped up its investigation and concluded with four criminal referrals to the Department of Justice.  The Constitution separates powers of the branches of government and the legislative branch has come to the limits of its powers of investigation.  Enforcement of the law is an executive branch responsibility.  We, the people, are now expecting the Department of Justice, as the primary government agency with the task of carrying out the executive branch's law enforcement responsibility, will follow Congress' recommendations, supported by a mountain of virtually irrefutable evidence, and bring all of the indictments necessary to start the process of holding Donald Trump and everyone who supported and helped him try to subvert the constitution and overturn the results of a legitimate election accountable.  

It is time to issue the indictments.  It's probably wishful thinking to hope that they will hold Trump, Flynn, Eastman, Stone and Bannon without bail until trial, but that's not an unreasonable expectation here. A case can be made to support that kind of action.  But to expect that these guys would get treated like average, everyday Americans in criminal matters, while reasonable, logical and is the way that it should be handled, I'm not holding my breath.  

It has become clear, from facts, that America has emerged from the single most corrupt Presidential administration in the history of the country, far worse than the long forgotten scandals of the Harding administration, which were pretty bad for their time.  This has been worse than Watergate and the Nixon Administration, which has been the prime example of government corruption in America since it happened.  Worse than Watergate.  That, too, was about manipulating the electoral process, but this was far worse.  This was an insurrection, a violent attempt to overthrow a legitimately elected government and overturn a legitimate election.  It was an attack on American values, ideals and patriotism, and on the constitution and the peaceful transfer of power that is a bedrock and cornerstone of this nation.  

Take that thought in for just a minute.  This was worse than Watergate.  Far worse. 

It warrants indictments and convictions on criminal charges, resulting not only in the disqualification of those convicted, including Trump, from ever serving in public office, but in appropriate prison sentences that fit the crimes committed.  We, the people, expect at least that much.  

An example needs to be set and the firm defense of the constitution and American democracy established in order to deter those who would try to take us down this path again.  This is America and democracy and individual freedom are American ideals.  I hate to use cliches, but there's one that applies here.  This is America, love it or leave it.  

And this is just the January 6th Trump Insurrection corruption.  There's more, involving the removal of classified documents from the White House to Mar-a-Lago.  We're expecting indictments in that case, too.  The reputation of the Biden administration, as the executive branch responsible for enforcing the nation's laws, depends on the Department of Justice doing the right thing.  

Yes, People Are Leaving Evangelical Christian Churches Because of Right Wing Politics

Lots of them, in fact, are leaving precisely because they cannot reconcile one of the foundational principles of the Christian gospel, the "second greatest commandment" to love others as one loves themselves, with the behavior of people in the church, particularly those actively engaged in politics. 

Brandon Flannery, Baptist News Global: I Asked People Why They are Leaving Christianity and Here's What I Heard 

A Significant Exodus

The twenty-first century has seen a dramatic drop in the percentage and number of Americans who claim affiliation with a church.  The decline experienced by mainline Protestants in the latter part of the 20th century was blamed on "creeping liberalism" by Evangelicals.  But the decline among conservative Evangelicals in this century has been much more significant, and rapid.  And it's based on a combination of reasons with the failure to follow gospel principles, in spite of claims by conservative Christians that they believe the Bible to be "inerrant and infallible."  "Love your neighbor as you love yourself," and "love your enemies" doesn't match with the pseudo-Christian, right-wing political philosophy that has intruded deeply into the churches and denominations of conservative Christianity.  

People notice when behavior doesn't align with principle.  

"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.  This is the great and first commandment.  And a second is like it:  You shall love your neighbor as yourself.  On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets."  Jesus Christ, recorded in Matthew's gospel, chapter 22, verses 37b through 40, ESV. 

In Flannery's research, he discovered that the inconsistency between what Jesus defined as "loving your neighbor" and how most churches treat people who are different, including LGBTQ persons, immigrants, women and women's rights activists, and civil rights advocates (those criticized by the conservative religious right as "liberal, woke") as the primary reasons why people are leaving churches and leaving the Christian faith altogether.  The term "politics" shows up in his research as one of those reasons, specifically the use of the Confederate flag as a racist symbol, and all of the baggage, including the racism and anti-Semitism, immoral worldliness and the manipulation of Christian faith and the scripture by Trumpism as a tool to get people to conform to ideals that have nothing to do with the gospel.  

I find it specifically aggravating to see Christians insist that marrying their faith experience to Trumpism, based on the abortion issue alone, while ignoring the fact that Trump is not a Christian at all, but an adulterous, womanizing, sexist, racist, greedy opportunist who denies the conservative definition of "salvation by grace through faith in Christ" because he claims he has no need for repentance and has done nothing for which he must ask forgiveness.  That's a faith of convenience and cultural acquiescence, not one defined by Biblical principle based on the gospel of Jesus Christ.  No wonder people are leaving that, there's no substance there at all.  I left one of those churches myself.  Finding one that still sticks to the Christian gospel isn't easy these days, and I understand why people just give up trying.  

"Christianity is a religion that boasts about its love," says Flannery, "but people are not seeing it and they're walking out the door."  

The decline has been quite significant, from 90% of the US population in the 70's who claimed Christian affiliation, to just 64% in 2020.  That's a lost of almost 80 million people, not counting the fact that two-thirds of the 64% who identify as Christians rarely attend the church to which they claim to belong.  But among Evangelicals, the most serious losses have been in the last decade.  And that's a direct result of the intrusion of extremist right wing politics, blending with the doctrine and theology preached and taught by the churches.  

Flannery's research shows that departures from Evangelical churches are almost all related, one way or another, to inconsistency between the practice of a Biblical, orthodox Christian faith, and what has intruded into the church in the form of the alliance between more extreme branches of right wing politics whose ideologies are subverting the Christian gospel, manipulating it into something that can be used to get votes.  

For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only master and Lord, Jesus Christ.--Jude 4

Those Who Fail to Learn From History...

The Christian church was never intended to use the power of the state to advance its mission and purpose, nor does political influence ever benefit the church when it does.  James Madison observed the hundreds of years of bloodshed, caused by religious violence, as European monarchs clashed with each other and with the papacy over the extend of control and influence.  His determination to keep that bloodshed and violence from happening in America resulted in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which created a free church in a free state. 

The literal approach to interpreting the Bible leads conservative Evangelicals and fundamentalist Christians to focus on historical events recorded in the Old Testament as foundational to their doctrine and practice and they miss the point of the Christian gospel.  Jesus provides an interpretation of the "law and the prophets" and lays the cornerstone of the foundation of the Christian church on the two greatest commandments, loving God and loving others like self.  John, who had a reputation for forceful expression, goes so far as to call those who "hate their brother" liars when they claim to love God. 

And while church leaders look at research like that found in Flannery's report, and blame it on the increasing influence of the "liberal, woke" world, I find this encouraging.  Most of those who are leaving churches for all of the reasons the survey found aren't leaving the Christian faith, they're just getting out of places where politics has been allowed to creep in, or in some cases, welcomed with open arms, and they're going elsewhere to worship.  It also shows that the grip of extremist right wing politics on conservative, right wing American Christianity is not as strong as the media portrays.  The bond between individual Christians and the churches where they worship is strong, so if people are willing to leave, because of the reasons they've cited, in the numbers by which they are leaving, they must feel pretty strongly about it. They must be liberal and woke.

I don't expect the influence of politics among conservative Evangelicals to wane much.  Too many leaders within the churches have counted on it to build their own personal empires, and are now dependent on it.  This is not something that is easy to undo, even as membership continues to decline.  But the impact will change.  White, conservative, Evangelicals and those who are on the political right represent a shrinking constituency, an 8% drop in total participation since 2016, and a similar drop among self-identified white, conservative Evangelicals in support for Trumpism.  

My Christian beliefs and convictions, along with my personal practice of the faith, haven't changed at all.  However, I no longer identify as "Evangelical," and I make it pretty clear that the way I vote and my political convictions do not define my Christian doctrine and theology as "liberal and woke," or any other judgmental terminology the far right likes to use in its self-righteous efforts to feel good.  "Anyone who does not love does not know God," says the Apostle John.  "As he is, so are we in this world."  

I don't see this exodus ending any time soon.