Supporting Trump Means Owning Everything He Stands For

Baptist News Global: Rodney Kennedy, "Why I Keep Writing About Donald Trump" 

Rodney Kennedy has become one of my favorite authors this summer.  I picked up his most recent book, Good and Evil in the Garden of Democracy in June, and it has been my summer reading.  Clicking the link will take you to bookshop.com where you can order it and support your local, independent, freedom of conscience-supporting book shop owner.  

To Evangelicals who Support Trump:  You Must Own Who He is and What He Stands For 

Kennedy's description of Trump is pretty succinct. 

"He is a low grade fascist, a demagogue, a renegade populist, a rhetorical pervert, a serial liar, and a rhetorical arsonist who will not hesitate to light the fire and burn down the house of democracy."  

That works for me. And I will add that he has already helped his conservative, Evangelical supporters burn down their faith, and their church, destroying its reputation, its ability to fulfill its evangelistic, Christian, biblical mission and purpose and he has created massive divisiveness and introduced heresy in the form of criticizing the person of Jesus Christ and rejecting his core teachings.  If you need evidence for any of that, take a look at church membership and attendance records since Trump became President in 2016. 

Across the board, Evangelical groups and churches are seeing plummeting attendance and membership, way worse than what COVID brought about, [though Trump can be blamed for the problems that has caused as well].  And not all Evangelical leaders are loathe to admit the truth.  Check out Losing Our Religion: An Altar Call for Evangelical America, by Dr. Russell Moore, the former executive director of Southern Baptists' Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, and current editor in chief of Christianity Today.  Moore is an evangelical who tells the truth about the devastation of the Trump effect on Evangelicalism in America, and issues a call to repentance, yes, repentance from it as the only path back to God for apostate Evangelicals who have thrown Jesus under the bus and made Trump their savior.

Russell Moore: Christianity is in Crisis if People Think Quotes From Jesus are "Liberal Talking Points"

Was it Worth It?  

The only accomplishment of the Trump administration that some Evangelicals can claim on his behalf is the appointment of three Catholic justices to the Supreme Court, not a single Evangelical among them, which tells me all I want to know about what Trump thinks of the level of intelligence among one of his most supportive constituencies.  These three justices made for just enough of a majority to overturn Roe v. Wade.  Those who think this is worth what they now must own as a result of their support for a demagogue and charlatan must consider not only the damage that has been done to American democracy and to national security as a result of those four years, but what could happen in the future.  Who benefits the most from a second American Civil War that Trump followers, and Trump himself, are now openly pushing?  

Evangelical Christians claim that they believe in a spiritual transformation which occurs, prompting repentance and a turn toward dependence on God as the conversion experience bringing a person into the Christian faith.  If that is what they genuinely and sincerely believe, there's no evidence of it at all in their approach to politics.  Laws can be passed which require obedience based on religious principles, but that doesn't result in any spiritual transformation.  

In fact, the support Evangelicals are giving to Trump is sending a very clear message that they no longer believe in spiritual transformation, which explains why people are leaving their churches in droves, and they're not seeing the revival they claim to desire.  Depending on a political candidate, especially one who projects an image via a lifestyle of worldliness which contradicts Christian teaching at every turn, is destroying their testimony and resulting in declining and closing churches in record numbers.  

You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in the heaven above, or on the earth beneath, or in the water that is under the earth.  You shall not bow down to them or worship them.  Exodus 20:4

So, was it worth it?  

Owning the Lies of a Serial Liar and the Lack of Moral Character

Having political conversations with Republicans these days goes nowhere.  Once I start citing facts, that usually ends the discussion.  I've challenged a couple of my neighbors to come up with something Trump has said, or concluded, that is actually truthful.  One of them responsed right away, "Well he's a politician and politicians never tell the whole truth."  So the argument, that we don't really know the truth and can't get to it, is all they've got.  

But that's very weak, in the face of what are literally hundreds of obvious, provable lies, thousands, actually, that emerged from the lips of the former failed President 45 over the course of his Presidency, and since.  It's nothing new, it was a pattern that covers his entire business career, and according to those who knew him when, he's been a serial liar all his life.  His own niece points this out and backs up what she has to say with evidence.  Ignoring that, attempting to discredit his critics, or simply not believing it doesn't change the fact that his supporters must own his lies.  

These aren't just fibs or "little white lies."  They are lies told to deliberately deceive the American people, especially his own supporters.  Many of them contradict earlier lies, displaying a personal measure of contempt for the intelligence and credibility of his own followers.  If he thinks they'll believe everything he says, then he must think they are bottomlessly naive and incredibly ignorant, to allow such blatant manipulation.  

Did President Clinton lie?  Yes, he did.  And the Christian right attacked him ruthlessly for it, claiming it disqualified his claim to being Christian, and disqualified him as a leader, especially President of the United States.  But apparently, among some Evangelical Christians, lying is only a sin when committed by Democrats.  Their hypocrisy on this knows no bounds.  Let's just be honest.  Lying is a sin and the unqualified support given to Trump by politically far right Evangelicals undermines their credibility and their Christian testimony.  

Evangelicals certainly took former President Clinton to task for his indiscretions, claiming that his marital infidelity disqualified him from the Presidency prior to his being elected and then using that very issue to bring about an impeachment in his second term.  Fine, if that's the line they want to hold, then where is it now?  Has their definition of good moral character changed that much, or is this now something that they are willing to overlook because it doesn't suir their purposes any more politically.  Either way, it makes them hypocrites.  

CNN: The 15 Most Notable Lies of Donald Trump's Presidency

The Hill: 30,573 False Claims Made by Donald Trump as President

Owning Anti-Democratic, Anti-Americanism 

The bottom line is that there is a segment of conservative Evangelicalism in America that has always held a very distorted view of the intention of the founding fathers behind the development of this country.  Making the United States into a Christian theocratically-ruled nation is a higher priority than preserving the idealism that the founders wrote into the Constitution and put into words for future guidance.  They set the churches free, with religious liberty and breaking the ties to the state, but they intentionally separated the two institutions with divergent missions and purposes.  

So the attacks on democracy, including the insurrection on January 6th, 2021, aimed at overturning a legitimate election, isn't such a big evil to them, and this is something that they do own without resisting the ownership. They don't see it for what it is, however, in its purest form as an anti-Patriotic, anti-American style of tyranny.  They don't care about tyranny as long as they aren't the victims of it. They don't care about law and order.  And they don't seem to care that this is all a complete abandonment of their faith and the basic principles and doctrines of the Christian gospel.  

Jesus was a Weak Liberal 

Newsweek: Evangelicals Are Now Rejecting "Liberal" Teachings of Jesus

Sooner or later, it had to come to this.  Russell Moore, the author mentioned earlier, who is the editor of Christianity Today and former Executive Director of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, points out that Evangelicalism is now in crisis because of Trump.  He notes that there are some Evangelical preachers and leaders whoa re denouncing the core teachings of their faith because it is "too weak and liberal" for their liking.  

"Multiple pastors tell me, essentially, the same story about quoting the Sermon on the Mount, parenthetically, in their preaching--'turn the other cheek'--to have someome come up after and say, 'where did you get those liberal talking points?" said Moore in an article in Newsweek.  

"When the pastor would say, 'I'm literally quoting Jesus,' the response would be 'Yes but that doesn't work anymore, that's weak.  When we get to the point where the teachings of Jesus himself are seen as subversive to us, then we're in a crisis." [emphasis mine] 

Frankly Speaking...

The modern-day Christian "movements" or branches that have developed under the broader label of "Evangelicalism" in the United States all have doctrinal and theological flaws resulting from a lack of unified mission and purpose as the religious liberty of the United States let to the development of thousands of independent churches and hundreds of denominations, each competing with the other for membership that brought financial resources and stability to the congregations.  Out of the various revival movements came some spectacularly ridiculous occurrences, such as the Millerite movement around the turn of the twentieth century, when people believed the "rapture," a gigantically misinterpreted, misrepresented occurrence in scripture was imminent.  

So it was inevitable that a heretical doctrine, full of emotional appeal and lacking any sound foundation in the Bible's written record, known as "Christian nationalism," would intersect with white supremacy and far right wing politics to produce a very fascist political perspective hiding behind the Republican party and promoting itself as mainstream American politics.  While it is aimed at subverting democracy, because of the liberal idea that all are equal under law, it has also produced an apostate branch of the Christian church, one which has not only distorted the gospel message of Christ, but is turning against Jesus himself in finding a new messiah who will better meet their own selfish needs  

The country, and its churches, are in a crisis.  The protective walls built into constitutional democracy have, up to this point held.  They are dependent on the discernment and wisdom of the majority of the population seeing this for what it is, and using the tools they have been given, mainly the law and the ballot box, to defend the Constitution and protect the nation from subversion that would result in the extinction of individual freedom.  

It will be up to the remnants of church leadership to fix their crisis.  Conservative Evangelicals have been praying for "revival" for decades, but depending on politics and government to bring it is a certain guarantee that the church will continue to be in crisis and decline.  It has lost its first love and is giving away its loyalty to someone who will only destroy it, not save it.  

Christians Should Always Choose the Truth, Especially When Choosing Leaders

For you were called to freedom, brothers and sisters, only do not use your freedom as as an opportunity for self-indulgence, but through love become slaves to one another.  For the whole law is summed up in a single commandment, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."  If, however, you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another.  Galatians 5:13-15, NRSV

During the time in the 2016 Presidential election campaign when it appeared that Donald Trump might emerge as the front-runner in the Republican primaries, in a conversation with a co-worker whom I knew attended an Evangelical Christian church, I made the statement that I could not, as a Christian, justify casting a ballot for someone to serve in political leadership whose lifestyle, personal conduct and public image were as diametrically opposed to the Christian gospel as one cold get. The response I got surprised me, and clued me in as to the kind of mentality that had developed among Evangelicals connected to the far political right.  

"We're not electing a pastor-in-chief, we're electing a commander-in-chief."  

That wasn't the first time I'd heard that statement.  It's a self-justifying response designed to completely excuse any candidate, like Trump, whose lifestyle doesn't demonstrate any real connection to the Christian faith, from any accountability when that's the candidate they want to support. There's nothing wrong with a candidate choosing to live their life in a manner that doesn't demonstrate adherence to the Christian faith, or for that matter, to any faith.  In America, people have the freedom to live apart from religious convictions, in any manner in which they choose.  The problem, though, for people who have married their Christianity to their right wing politics, is that they are trying to justify something that can't be justified. 

What are the Implications of That Statement

There was no self-determination or choosing of government leaders during the time that Christianity was being established.  Those who lived in Palestine in Jesus' day were subject to the local civil and religious law enforced by the Sanhedrin, a group of Jewish elders and teachers who theoretically earned their position through strict adherence to the Torah and who were appointed to their position by the rest of the members, upon the recommendation of the chief priest.  The development of the Sanhedrin comes from the Pentateuch, and from the period of Jewish history following the Babylonian captivity, when there were no heirs to the throne of David.  

Though the people did not directly choose the members of the Sanhedrin, there were standards written in the Pentateuch for those who would be elders and leaders among the Jewish people.  The primary qualifications, according to the written scripture, included setting an example by being faithful to God in the practice of faith, and obedient to the Torah, the law.  Those who were chosen, according to passages found in all of the books of the Pentateuch, were to be men who were honest so that they could be trusted by the people they led.  

Jesus, whose life and teachings form the core of Christian doctrine, theology and practice, set the example for the kind of leaders he intended to serve in his church.  He lived and taught the values he preached, outlining a specific set of character values, found in Matthew 5:1-11, which we call "The Beatitudes," that result from the spiritual transformation which takes place as a result of Christian conversion.  The apostles and other writers of the New Testament put these same character values at the forefront of their message.  The Apostle Paul, in defining the characteristics required for those who were set aside as officers and leaders of the church, references this list of values, in addition to specifics of a lifestyle that exhibits honesty and generates trust from those for whom the leaders are responsible.

So why, when the opportunity presents itself to have a say in choosing one's political leaders, would the values and characteristics, and the honesty and trust that are at the very core of the faith that one claims to practice, not be considered in making this choice?  

Yeah, I Get It, No One is Perfect

Your pastor isn't perfect.  According to the Apostle Paul, in I Timothy 3, those who aspire to the office of bishop [or elder, or pastor by extension], must meet high qualifications in order to serve.  This was to build into the congregation being served the ability to trust the pastor's leadership in matters related to their own spiritual life.  If the church leaders aren't committed to the spiritual principles, doctrinal practices and theological beliefs expected of the congregation, how can they lead the church to accept these things and practice them? 

But, why would you hold only your pastor to those high standards, and not those who are political leaders?  Why would the standard of honesty and trust for politicians be less than that of a pastor, since both have responsibility for effectively leading people and must earn confidence in their competence as a leader, as well as trust in their judgement?  Holding a lower standard for political leaders means that you don't expect your country's leadership to respect your values or your faith.  

And if a political leader uses his faith as a means of promoting his character, then he better live up to the same expectations as my pastor.  That's my own personal goal, to live up to what I expect of the pastor of my church.  So a politician who wants me to trust him or her because they include their personal faith as a Christian as part of the package had better live up to those standards, if they want my vote and my trust in their leadership.  

And if those leadership qualities, including things like humility, being a peacemaker, grieving over your mistakes and desiring to do better, hungering and thirsting after righteousness, mercy, and being pure in heart, are not part of a politician's character, hiding behind opposition to abortion rights or LGBTQ rights will not impress me or get my vote.  That's hypocrisy, in its purest form, and I won't be patronized, either.  

Worse, even, than that is to use Christian faith as a political tool.  Standing in a circle of self-appointed, so-called, Evangelical leaders with heads bowed, laying on hands is not a conversion experience, especially when the photo is circulated with clear political intentions. Genuine repentance is the first step, acknowledging the complete need for God to forgive a sinful nature.  A denial of ever having done anything requiring forgiveness, accompanied by proclaiming that God is whoever or whatever one thinks he is, is not evidence of a genuine conversion experience.  

I believe that the Christian conversion experience is one of complete spiritual transformation.  I'm not saying it can't, or doesn't, happen in the middle of a circle of self-proclaimed, Evangelical leaders, but if, and when, it does happen, the change of character is visible, if it really did happen.  And I would expect that someone whose conversion experience did take place in the presence of highly visible, well-known Evangelical "leaders" would also, presumably, be guided by those same leaders, helping the new convert understand, and begin to exhibit, the values, character traits and qualities that are the evidence of what most Christians call "new life" in Christ. 

The constant lying would cease.  The dishonesty and deceit would give way to behavior that would elicit trust and confidence from former opponents.  The vengeance and violence that were former themes and practices, and means of self-defense would give way to leadership that sought the forgiveness of enemies.  Bombastic speech and dishonest flattery would be replaced with a pure heart, meekness and a desire to use power to be merciful instead of vengeful.  That's what a genuine Christian conversion experience, in the public eye, would look like.  

I don't know what to call the religion that has developed out of this intersection between far right wing politics and far right wing American Christianity, but since there's already a specific definition for Christian, defined by the values of the gospel of Jesus Christ, I don't think that's what this is.  

If It's Sincere, Genuine Faith is Visible Without Prompting

I can't think of another American President in recent history who is an example of living out the values and virtues of the Christian faith in a way that enhanced his leadership and generated trust more than President Jimmy Carter.  It's kind of ironic in a way, and certainly very telling, that his steadfast faith, and the manner in which he lived it personally, and in which it made him into the man that he is and the President that he was has generated the most criticism from Republicans who claimed to be the party of family values.  

Carter's convictions, beliefs, doctrine and theology have remained steadfast.  The turn that Evangelicalism made away from genuine Christianity and into politics happened because of Carter's testimony and faith.  It exposed the political motivation of Jerry Falwell, Evangelist James Roberson, and Pat Robertson, who endorsed the secular, New Age believing Ronald Reagan in 1980, separating political Evangelicalism from confessional Christian faith.  Carter is an outstanding example of how Christian faith affects politics.  The political movement represented by Falwell and Robertson is an example of how politics affects faith.  

By contrast, the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.  There is no law against such things.  Galatians 5:22, 23 NRSV 

By observation, it can easily be seen who exhibits and values these characteristics and virtues.  And that's how the sincerity of one's faith is made visible.  Go ahead, point out someone on the far political right who is an example of these values.  

  

Bad Politics is the Result of the Loss of Rational Thinking

The claims that a presidential election could be "stolen" actually started about the time Trump looked like he might be the front runner in the 2016 GOP nomination race.  From his campaign and his entourage, ideas and conspiracy theories were floated about how President Obama might set things up to stay in office and keep Trump from being inaugurated.  I had this discussion with one of my neighbors who had heard these theories put forth on Fox News (where else would falsehoods and lies like that come from?) and was absolutely convinced that President Obama was planning this, because he was part of some worldwide conspiracy plotting to take over America and redistribute its wealth.  

All of what they eventually tried to do after Trump lost the 2020 election was part of that discussion. After Trump was declared the winner, according to my neighbor, the plan went into motion.  While President Obama would be looking for an excuse to declare martial law, there would be a plot involving Vice-President Biden somehow refusing to certify the electoral votes.  There would be "alternate slates of electors" whose ballots would be counted in Congress, from states where the legislatures would over-ride the Trump votes and pick their own candidate.  The military would then step in and prevent Trump from taking office.  

I tried not to be rude, but couldn't avoid laughing at this.  First of all, there were no states won by Trump with a legislature that would have overturned the vote, even if it legally could have done so.  That got a blank stare.  So did my insistence that martial law would not prevent the constitutional peaceful transfer of power, that the Vice-President could not alter the electoral vote total and only presided over the certification, which was actually an act of Congress.  

His end of the discussion didn't consider any of the points I made. He was as certain of this happening has he was that the moon landing had been faked.  Every day he worried about some news event or another triggering martial law, or that some states that took their time getting the vote certified were delaying because they were plotting to change the outcome.  Recounts triggered in Wisconsin and Michigan by close final outcomes were, in his mind, "the smoking gun."  And when the peaceful transfer of power occurred without a hitch, his response was to never bring the subject up with me again.  

Rational Discussion Doesn't Seem to Penetrate Conspiracy Theories

The nature of conspiracy theories makes them difficult to refute, because they are theories without a shred of evidence to support them.  They thrive on secrecy.  Any evidence produced which refutes them is part of the conspiracy.  Any source which denies the conspiracy is either duped by fake evidence or is part of the conspiracy.  

One of the most laughable and ridiculous episodes in this whole history of election conspiracy theories involves the Arizona legislature and a group known as the "Cyber Ninjas," and that name just adds to the ridiculous stupidity and ignorance surrounding this incident following the 2020 election in Arizona. In spite of a complete lack of evidence, and after two legitimate audits following a recount, Trump supporters continued to insist that there had been fraud in Maricopa County simply because the county turned blue between 2016 and 2020, and because mail-in and drop boxes had been added, it took longer to count the ballots.  

Instead of hiring someone with election auditing experience, the state legislator hired the "Cyber Ninjas," the CEO, Doug Logan, being a Trump supporter who, during the whole process of the alleged "audit" was communicating with the conspiracy theorists.  They followed every crazy theory possible, including claiming that they had special equipment to check ballots for "bamboo fibers" which would supposedly "prove" they came from China.  That claim alone is enough to question the intelligence of anyone who believed it, and proves the point that rational thinking is no longer part of conservative politics.  No proof of bamboo fibers was ever obtained.  

After what turned out to be a comedy of errors, including the "auditors" having to return, like inattentive kindergartners, to the board of elections on multiple occasions to find out how to access and use the voter database, the verification process for mail-in ballots, then leaving boxes of stored ballots opened and scattered around the area where the audit was taking place, exposing expensive voting machines and counting equipment without security, and taking months beyond their stated time frame to complete the job, they finally packed up.  

Logan declared bankruptcy, more than likely to escape accountability and having to refund money for not providing what had been promised in his contract with the state.  What they stated in their report was that they found Maricopa County's vote count, as reported by its board of elections and in both prior state audits, was accurate, though the numbers they actually reported showed Biden getting about 150 more votes than the original county report showed, with no explanation of the discrepancy.  Initially, they claimed that mail-in ballots had come from areas where, according to a Google map, no one actually lived but the county board pointed out that the Google map they were using was unofficial, and the satellite photos were twelve years outdated. They were using a 2008 map in a county that had grown by 350,000 people in the time since the photographs were taken.  That sort of undermines their claims to being competent anything, especially election "auditors."  

A rational thinking person would look at this disaster and, after a good laugh, would discount the information and conclude that elections in Maricopa County are as secure and accurate as any in the country.  Accusations of "massive voter fraud" and "stolen elections" would require knowledge of the system by which votes are gathered, tabulated and reported.  Stealing an election from Trump would involve Trump supporters engaged in the conspiracy at every level in multiple precincts and counties within a state, and that doesn't make any sense at all.  It would involve somehow deceiving and cheating a system in which the checks and balances are so accurate, the number of ballots affected by human error is maybe a couple of dozen out of a million that are cast and counted.  And that makes the Cyber Ninjas, and other fraud claims since then, even more illogical, irrational and frankly, ridiculously naive and stupid.  

From the Republicans in the state legislature who had authorized this fiasco, silence.  Ultimately, the senate chairperson who had pushed the conspiracy theories and pushed for this phony audit, Senator Karen Fann, had to take some responsibility for the damage that had been done, to millions of dollars of equipment, the frivolous and unnecessary waste of taxpayer dollars Republcans claim to be protecting, and to the political reputation of Republicans in the Arizona legislature, and was forced into not running for re-election, so the GOP could have a chance at keeping the seat in 2022.  The fiasco was a big factor in helping Democrats sweep three of the four statewide executive offices in the 2024 mid-terms, including the governorship, and outpoll the GOP.  If it hadn't been for gerrymandering, the amount of votes Democrats got in 2022 would have flipped the legislature.

I Can't Explain This Because I Can't Understand It

It's impossible, I think, for someone who has been trained to think logically and practically, who has lived their life by making practical decisions based on facts and reality, and who hasn't had any experiences that have led to developing a sense that someone, somewhere is pulling the levers and strings of control in such a way that we are oblivious to it and victims of it at the same time, to believe conspiracy theories.  Rational thinking relies completely on facts.  Conspiracy theories thrive on lies.  That explains, as best as I can understand it, why Trump has a following that doesn't believe who he is or what he stands for, and doesn't care, as long as he throws them a few bones and claims he's their savior.   

I understand the way our political system works and the differences which have created, and then undergirded, the political parties that dominate our society.  What I don't understand is why there's a desire to remove individual freedom from people simply because their lifestyle and their politics doesn't agree with the other side.  It is possible to coexist, without bothering anyone else.  But by nature, being "conservative" carries with it a measure of personal insecurity and a desire to justify that particular position by imposing it on everyone else, becoming both inhumane and tyrannical.  

The fact that a majority of people might believe something, do something or live in some particular way does not affirm the correctness of what they believe or do or how they live.  But it is a fact of human nature that putting someone else down helps us feel better about ourselves.  Or does it, really? There are liberals and progressives who do this too, though I can't identify a single liberal or progressive or moderate Democrat politician who advocates the removal of anyone's individual freedom, or whose policies and politics would lead to that outcome.  But pick any conservative, and odds are they will be on board with restricting individual rights of those they believe do not deserve to have them because of who they are or what they believe.  Conservativism, across American history, always creates a heirarchy of second class citizenship.  

Believing in conspiracy theories is a way of avoiding responsibility and accountability for our own actions.  That is one reason why Trump has the kind of support that he gets.  There is no accountability in ignoring reality.  But that's the whole point of conspiracy theories.  They are accusations without proof to justify actions without reason.  And that is the political reality we now live with.  

A Beating for the Ages

If enough Americans are convinced that living under a constitutional democracy is the best way to live and enjoy the kind of personal liberty that is at the core of our identity, then there is one way to rid ourselves of the problems posed by MAGA politics.  The Republican party, which has basically allowed itself to house this abberation and threat to freedom, must either return to the prior understanding of the give and take of compromise and respect, or it must dissolve and lose its identity, something that has already occurred to a certain extent.  I see only one way for that to happen, and that is for them to sustain an electoral defeat in 2024 that will be memorable for generations to come.  

Whether Democrats are capable of uniting their progressive wing, avoiding another Jill Stein disaster, and pulling in enough independent and moderate GOP voters to crush the GOP in 2024 is going to depend on a messaging battle that seems to be just beyond their grasp at the moment.  We've seen the most effective two years of a Presidency in decades, one that should already be intimidating any Republican wanting to run.  That's what needs to happen to get back control of Congress and to send a message that things need to change, or their party will go the way of the Whigs.  

A rational message appeals to people who are rational thinkers and those are the people Democrats should be aiming to get on board.  It's OK to be liberal, let's talk about exactly what that means.  Let's talk about economic recovery and low unemployment and other benefits we are receiving because of our current President's polcies.  But let's also pursue the conviction of a former President who committed crimes against the American people and back up our claims of being a nation of law and order.  I think taking this seriously, moving it forward quickly and prosecuting it effectively will be the ticket to ensure Democrats terms in office long beyond the next election.  People are waiting to see some real resolve.  If they get it, we win big.  

The Cyber Ninja disaster in Arizona succeeded in getting the state senate president, Senator Karen Fann, out of office.  On a national scale, the Republicans need to be the recipients of an electoral beating that will not only get rid of Trump forever, but will also put the rest of the party's political leadership out of commission, so that new leadership that is more sane and reasonable, and more rational, can run the party.  We'll see who steps up and gets the nod when Ted Cruz, Lindsay Graham, Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell are gone.  

We can do this.  It means uniting behind Biden and turning out the vote in all Democratic constituencies.  It can be done.  

Desantis Rhetoric Makes him Sound Like a Psychotic, Anti-Social, Deranged Demagogue

The Hill: Desantis Vows to "Start Slitting Throats" on Day One 

In referencing over 20 years as a history and civics teacher, and about 40 years of closely observing politics in this country, I do not believe there is a period in our history in which the rhetoric has become so hostile, vitriolic and absolutely missing anything resembling truth.  I can imagine that the language in debates prior to the Civil War, and perhaps even afterward, got pretty colorful.  But in my lifetime, in spite of political differences, civility and manners--yeah, I'll use this old fashioned term--have been observable, even when candidates might be seething with rage underneath.  

All of that went out the window with Trump's 2016 campaign.  And since then, the Republican party, which, in my lifetime, has never really valued rational thought or critical thinking skills and which has depended much more on political rhetoric than on facts or a logical and systematic platform of policies aimed at genuine governing in a way that benefits "we the people," has gone off the rails in some of the most outlandish and extreme ways.  It has not benefitted them.  If it were not for extreme gerrymandering and the ridiculousness of the outdated Electoral College, the Republicans would have been the party of the past after George H.W. Bush lost to Bill Clinton.  

Now, the campaign for the Republican nomination for the Presidency has become a ridiculous contest of oneupmanship, with a train of Trump imitators vying for the cheers and applause of a shrinking group of misfits and angry ne'redowells who think the world owes them a living and are angry because it's not being given to them.  

After four years of Trump lies, ridiculous, laughable comments and attempts to use shock value to get attention, I thought I was pretty well prepared for anything some Republican candidates might say, or do, to get attention they seem to be starving for.  But I was surprised, and shocked, when I heard the reports that Florida Governor Ron Desantis said that he would "start slitting throats on day one when it comes to taking on the 'deep state'."  

I don't think I would have been more shocked, or absolutely disgusted, if he had taken off all of his clothing and stood there stark naked.    

That an American politician would say such a thing is an absolute betrayal of everything this country was founded on, and every principle on which it stands.  Ron Desantis is engaged in a contest to be named the single most anti-American, anti-Patriotic candidate in the GOP field, and that is quite an accomplishment in and of itself.  As far as I am concerned, he disqualified himself from every vestige of his American identity.  Not only is he clearly not the man to lead the country in the presidency, but after making a statement like that, he should have his American citizenship revoked and left to find refuge in a place like Sudan or Iran, where he would fit in with the extremists who run the country. 

That's a statement made by radicalized terrorists, not by the governor of an American state.  

That's Not Desantis' Only Disqualifying Remark 

Someone in his campaign needs to tell him that his Ayatollah Khomeini and Kim Jong Un imitation is clearly not helping his presidential aspirations, as he seems to be losing a lot of ground, a lot of major donors and money, a lot of support and if he ever had any, his ethics, morality and integrity.  We do not slit throats in American democracy.  We show a measure of integrity, intelligence and humanity, understanding that equality under the law is the strength of our country and leaders like Desantis, who sew seeds of discord, anger and rebellion, are not qualified to serve, and make us wonder whether they should even be living among us.  Seems like he'd be happier if he moved about ninety miles south of the Florida peninsula.  

Baptist News Global: 14 Dangerous Words

But remarks about slitting throats aren't the only inhumane, and disqualifying, remarks made by the Florida Governor.  His support for Florida educational inituatives aimed at completely undoing history facts and replacing them with myth in Florida's schools is another example of why this man should not be President, and why he should not even be serving as the governor of Florida.  Fourteen words are described by history teacher and author Harold Smith, in Baptist News Global, as "dangerous." 

"Slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit."  

Those fourteen words contain such a measure of ignorance, inhumanity, and bigotry that it is virtually impossible to fathom how they could find their way into the curriculum objectives of the fourth most populous state in the United States.  In a state like Florida, with as ethnically, culturally and religiously diverse population as any state in the country, it is an indication that something is horribly and tragically wrong, either with the mannner in which state educational objectives are evaluated and placed in the curriculum, or that the people responsible for keeping an eye on the interests of the state's students are either completely, and criminally, apathetic.  

This, too, is the work of Governor Ron Desantis.  

Desantis has Clearly Stated his Message

Desantis does not have a problem controlling his own narrative.  It's clear where he stands.  His candidacy and his character offer nothing of value to the office he is seeking, and it indicates a grossly negligent lack of leadership to the state that he currently serves as governor.  Thankfully, and this is something to be very grateful for as well as contributing to hopeful optimism, his support is melting away like the Wicked Witch of the West did when Dorothy hit her with the bucket of water.  And I use that analogy on purpose.  

But Desantis is just a wannabe, a monkey-see, monkey-do imitator of Trump.  He's campaigning  under the grossly mistaken belief that the enthusiasm for Trump he sees at rallies is found elsewhere in the electorate.  Clearly, that's not the case.  He's creating a self-image of an anti-patriotic, anti-democratic, anti-American with these words that he wants people to believe because he thinks it will get him enough votes to win the Republican party's presidential nomination.  In a political party that can't campaign on any issues because it doesn't have any, and which is not behaving rationally or capable of rational, reasonable thought, it's surprising that almost all of the votes are still going to Trump.  

It must be pretty dog-gonned humiliating to imitate the party boss and lose support from the party.  That's good news for Democrats, because it means that there's not enough extremism or extremists to win the election for the GOP, not without gerrymandering, voter suppression and attempts to steal the election by simply over-riding majority votes with legislative action.  

But this kind of rhetoric, lacking factual support and representing what can be evaluated as extremism or radicalization, is an early indication of the party's desperation, and of the fact that they are very likely to lose the election, big.  I know I'm not alone in being shocked, disgusted and sickened by this kind of rhetoric.  Everyone else who is needs to make sure they cast a ballot in the 2024 election, to put this in its place. 

Denying Constitutional Rights to Some Americans Will Have Consequences for All Americans

Federal Judge Denies Parent Group Petition to Overturn School District Bullying Policy

Moral Bankruptcy from "Parent" Group in Ohio School District

There are a lot of political groups in this country, organized for the purpose of opposing rights for some Americans, mainly those whose lifestyle and personal beliefs they do not agree with, or that they think somehow has a reflection on the culture at large and they don't want to have to explain to their children, or perhaps worry that they might be influenced and take up that kind of lifestyle.  Among many groups of Evangelical Christians, especially the Pentecostal and Charismatic branches, there's a belief that God is going to hold America accountable for allowing people who live, according to them, a sinful lifestyle, to have rights like everyone else.  

That's bad theology, a twisted and inaccurate interpretation of the Bible, and its shocking to hear that coming from people who are supposed to be reflecting a whole different set of values than vengeful hatred of anyone they don't like.  But it plays well behind the pulpit, to beat one's chest, decrying the sinfulness of the world and longing for the day when God destroys this country because its Christians haven't converted enough sinners.  

So there's this group in Ohio, "Parents Defending Education," that has been outspoken against protecting the rights of LGBTQ+ persons.  In fact, this group has exhibited unbridled racism in their desire to see book bans of LGBTQ issues and Critical Race Theory in schools.  This group actually filed a lawsuit against the Olentangy School District in Delaware County, an affluent, predominantly white-flight suburban area north of Columbus, to have a policy protecting transgender students in the school district from bullying overturned.  

Specifically, the parts of the policy they sued to remove included identity-based bullying, identity being based on race, color, national origin, sex, including sexual orientation and gender identity, disability, age, religion, ancestry, or genetic information.  They also wanted  the policy against the use of derogatory language aimed at these protected groups removed from the rules.  

I find it very difficult to imagine a group identifying as parents would want to have rules against draconian behavior against students because of their identity overturned, so that bullying, cussing people out and tormenting them can take place without consequences.  Their attitude leads me to define them in the terms used by the Apostle Jude, in his epistle in the New Testament, calling out intruders in the church who had the same kind of attitude.  He called them "blemishes, waterless clouds carried along by the winds, autumn trees without fruit, twice dead and uprooted, wild waves of the sea casting up the foam of their own shame, wandering stars for whom the deepest darkness has been reserved forever."  

A Ku Klux Klan Without Robes and Hoods

When I was in high school, I wrote a paper in my civics class, defending free speech, using the abhorrent message and behavior of the Ku Klux Klan as an example of how, no matter how bad we think something may be, no matter how morally low and depraved and twisted the people who push these ideas can get, as long as they do not interfere with the rights of other Americans, touch their physical person or property, they have the right to free expression.  The law intervened when Klansmen became violent and threatening, committed crimes and terrorized African Americans, and later on, anyone they didn't like or who didn't meet their definition of white, protestant American.  But their right to freedom of consicence and freedom of speech was constitutionally protected. 

I had a hard time wrapping my mind around that.  It was difficult to separate their violent behavior, I thought, from their angry, misguided, morally wrong words and attitudes.  What an absolutely visionary, remarkable document that makes the United States Constitution, that its protection is strong enough to hold up in the face of the complete absence of values and morals for a group like the KKK.  

And here we have, in the "Parents Defending Education," abhorrent, disgusting racism without the hoods and robes.  Of course, one of the reasons the Klan wore those ugly things was to prevent being personally identified.  These people, apparently, have lost that shame. 

Turning the Tables

Thankfully, a federal judge who knows the Constitution well enough to know what it protects and doesn't protect, denied the lawsuit and upheld the school district's right to protect its students, all of them, from violence, trauma and bullying.  There will still be those who, in their cruelty and anger, will refuse to enforce these district policies,  overlook the bullying, or walk away from it, or pretend it isn't happening while secretly hoping those being bullied will get hurt because of who they are.  Hopefully they will get fired for overlooking it if they are caught.  

But suppose this policy had been overturned?  That means the children of the "Parents Defending Education" could be subject to bullying and torment for any one of a dozen reasons kids to that to each other.  And there would be nothing the parents could do about it, and no consequences for the bully.  If LGBTQ students can be subject to bullying because of who they are, and there are no consequences for the torment, then any student can be subject to bullying because of who they are, or what they believe and those who did the tormenting would not be subject to any consequences.  

Why is it that any time conservatives are in charge, including those who supposedly claim Christian faith, the end result of whatever situations they argue over is always violence and hatred?  What group of parents are favorable toward any child being bullied for any reason?  How despicable and morally bankrupt is this group of parents, who are not defending anything except their own ignorance? 

Consider yourselves fortunate that the Constitution protects your freedom of conscience and free speech.  And consider yourselves lucky that this federal judge, Algenon Marbley, determined that your lawsuit was unconstitutional and wrong.  What you are advocating is open season for bullies in school, and some of the victims might have been your own children. Your advocacy would have left you with no recourse.  

So think about someone else, for a change, and not just your own selfishness.  These students, being who they are, do not cause you any problem by having the same rights as you do, including the right to be protected from violent,, anti-social, evil bullies who get their kicks out of hurting people they don't like.  There's no tyranny involved here, at least not for you, and if your children were participants in the bullying these students endured, then shame on them, and shame on you for allowing it and letting it go unpunished. 

Scatter Shooting With Random Thoughts and Observations

I write sometimes just to get thoughts out of my head and where I can organize them.  This is the result of a very interesting conversation with a couple of people who I would consider marginally Republican, but not capable of the kind of discernment that comes with rational thinking, without some kind of help, which I tried to give them.  

We've finally got to the point where they understand that it was simply not possible to commit the kind of "massive voter fraud" Trump claimed, and that the election of 2020 was the most secure in all American history.  But moving from that has been slow progress.  Then, the news came down about the most recent indictments, this time, for January 6th.  So this is where I am now.

This is Wrong in so Many Ways

We live under a constitution that guarantees individual rights, including the right to a "speedy" trial by a jury of our peers, and under which we are considered innocent until proven guilty.  But even if proven guilty of a crime, which involves a conviction and a sentence, unless that crime specifically involves an act of disloyalty to or rebellion against the United States of America, it does not disqualify the criminal from being elected, and from serving, at least in principle, as President of the United States.  That is, in my opinion, a serious flaw in the constitution.  

As much as we might think our society and our country would not elect someone to its highest office who is not of the highest level of integrity, that's just simply not the case.  Even compulsory public education, which was aimed at providing an educated and informed electorate, does not preclude the election of a tyrant.  We looked down our noses as the fledgling democracy in Germany failed to prevent the rise to power of a demagogue dictator, who almost destroyed the whole world, and whose twelve years in power left Germany, and a good portion of the rest of Europe, in ruins, physically, emotionally, psychologically and spiritually.  We clicked our tongues, believing it couldn't happen here.  

Then, Donald Trump got elected as President.  That was partly the result of our quirky, antiquated, anti-democratic electoral college, a device born out of fear of the commander in chief somehow turning into a dictatorial monarch.  But it was also the result of a breakdown of trust and of the age of technology making the spread of conspiracy theories about the "deep state" and a cult-like following developing around all of that nonsense.  The political divide we face now can't be solved by reason, logic and rational thinking, because the far right has abandoned rational thinking and has been overcome by fear.  I'm a rational thinker, at least, I hope that I am, so I have no way at all to relate to someone who is driven by fear and I cannot understand how someone can believe something that has no evidence or facts to support it, and which flies in the face of reason and reality.  But his followers do.    

Trump's popularity and base is pulled together by conspiracy theory.  The idea that there is some kind of sinister evil out there, wrapping itself in government power and it's out to get everyone who is not rich, prosperous and powerful plays very well and Trump panders to that like nobodies business.  His followers are incapable of rational thought because they are brainwashed like the mindless members of a death cult.  They don't believe facts staring them in the face that don't support what they already have concluded is the truth.  And while many of them are high school dropouts and weren't good students even during the few years they spent in school, it defies all reason and logic that many of them are highly educated, but have lost their appreciation for their education, why they got it and their ability to use it.  

And that's where many of us have difficulty understanding this.  We think rationally, understand facts, and don't believe outlandish lies. Trump supporters are confronted with facts and evidence that proves him, and them, wrong about almost everything he says.  He can't get behind a microphone without lying.  For him, its a character flaw.  For them, it's a lack of discernment.  But there's a mental blockade there, somewhere, that prevents them from understanding or even recognizing rational though and reality.  And he plays that like a fiddle.

And, while I hesitate to say this because such comparisons to extremes aren't always appreciated, even if they're true, Trump's pathological lying, repeating the same falsehoods over and over again and never acknowledging any contradictory evidence, is taking a page from Mein Kampf.  Hitler wrote about the short memory, and the blatant stupidity of the masses.  His modus operandi was to continuously repeat big lies over and over again, until people believed them because they'd heard them so much.  

Such comparisons and similarities should be chilling.  They certainly are to me.  

Selling Out to the MAGA Cult has Made Much of American Evangelical Christianity an Apostate Cult

The biggest irony, in my own opinion, regarding the fact that someone like Donald Trump, who is completely lacking in any ethical or moral foundation, whose lifestyle is a model of a kind of self-centered, worldly indulgence that is as far on the opposite side of American Evangelical Christianity as it is ideologically, philosophically and practically possible to get, found a supportive constituency among American Evangelicals.  In fact, had their support been even marginally less for him than it was, just 1% in fact, he would never have been elected.  He should never have been nominated by a party that claimed to be the superior example of law and order and honest, conservative politics.  But many Evangelicals, and most of their self-acknowledged "leaders," turned out to be just as power hungry and morally bankrupt as Trump.   

Those Evangelicals who follow Trump do so because he threw them a few bones in exchange for their support.  They got the Supreme Court justices from him that they wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade.  That's really all he's given them. For their part, they think they can now use him to establish their misguided, heretical theocracy that they think was the intention of the founding fathers.  For his part, he thinks that he can lead them to abandon those bothersome principles of the Christian gospel that he himself flatly denies, and actually transform them into a cult that worships and adores him personally. He's been successful in getting some of them to throw Jesus under the bus and burn their Bibles, or at least, cut the ethics, morality and virtues out of theirs.  

Their support for Trump exposes their hypocrisy.  Trump himself lays no claim to being Christian, and, in fact, goes to great lengths to avoid any answer to questions about his faith that would be interpreted as some kind of acknowledgement of it.  He denies that he has done anything requiring God's forgiveness, which is an outright denial of an essential Christian belief leading to conversion, or salvation as Evangelicals use the term.  He has claimed that turning the other cheek makes one a "sucker" and "loving your enemies" is the reason why Christians have been excluded from the centers of worldly power and influence.  He's slowly, but certainly, attempting to get Evangelicals to replace their loyalty and commitment to Jesus Christ with loyalty and commitment to him.  And some of them have done just that.  

He is an immoral philanderer, adulterous, misogynistic, narcissistic liar.  He's the direct opposite of the character Jesus defined in the Sermon on the Mount, diametrically opposed to every Christian principle, living a life that defies everything Christians believe and practice.  The fact that many Evangelicals accept his leadership and support him is a denial of their faith and abandonment of its values.  

The Power of the Vote

We do have the power to stop an indicted, corrupt demagogue from becoming President again.  We got a good taste of just how inept, incompetent and unAmerican his leadership was during his first term in office.  We saw his disdain and disrespect for the Constitution and the will of the voters.  We don't need that again.  The power we have to stop him from ruining this country is the power of the ballot box.  If we are going to save our democracy and preserve our freedom, we are going to have to vote.  

I get frustrated at the casual manner in which Democratic party leadership often reacts to things that they should be pro-actively working to defeat, and one of those things is the flirting with the electorate from left wing, progressive candidates who want to make a third party run for President.  Do these people not understand that their biggest political enemy is Donald Trump, not Joe Biden?  Whatever it takes to stop these fringe third parties from putting Trump in the White House again needs to be done.  

Surely, after the election results were analyzed in 2016, Jill Stein had to come to grips with the fact that she handed the election to the candidate with whom she and her party had the least in common.  She helped a demagogue whose political position and personal opinion were far more detrimental and damaging to her party's cause than Hillary Clinton would have been.  But, out of fear of giving them publicity, or angering some small constituency, Democrats fume and fuss about the third parties that take away their party's power, but do nothing about them.  

That must change.  Now. 

And What About the GOP?

Republicans still have the ability to turn their party back from the disaster that is already happening to it.  Of all people, I certainly did not expect Chris Christie to be the one Republican with the courage to tell the truth about Trump.  After all of the crawling and begging he did, for most of Trump's political career, the former New Jersey governor is earning a little bit of respect from me, for what I see as too little, way too late.  

But half of the GOP hasn't shown up in polling data as supportive of Trump.  

It's difficult to overcome intimidation and the fear of retribution, which is what happens to Republicans who don't give their loyalty to Trump.  He, and his party minions have already fixed things with the nomination process to make sure he doesn't have much opposition on the way to the nomination.  Unless they come to the conclusion on their own, apart from his influence, that he is going to lose the election, the party will make this as smooth as possible. 

Conservatives tend to be groupies and conformists by nature, not independent thinkers.  So there's already a disadvantage in having anyone speak their convictions against nominating this brute. I doubt that anything which will put any more of a dent in Trump support among Republicans than there already is.  Where he will encounter trouble will be on the national stage, where more than 60% of the electorate now say they will not cast their ballot for him.  

So, the question is, will Republican leaders see where things are headed and figure out how to put a stop to it, or will they be the wimps that we know them to be, and let it go?  If that's what happens, and they don't try to take the party back, it will dissolve in the aftermath of what will be defeat at the polls, both in Congress and with the Presidency, in 2024.  

Can Democrats do anything to hasten this demise?  Find some good, third party person to undermine the Trump vote, or will one of the republican ego maniacs now running in the field collectively gathering less than 10% of their support, get angry and launch out on their own?  And will that make any difference.  

Well, that's enough word salad for the day.  Have a nice one.  Go get the popcorn ready for the upcoming trials, lots of television to watch in coming weeks and months. 

Hold the Defendant for Trial

Indictments were handed down yesterday, the decision of a grand jury, against a defendant who was a former President of the United States, but whom I will not name for two reasons.  One, the name has been used so many times in the media, multiple times every day, it's wearing out and getting boring.  Two, if we truly believe everyone is treated equally under the law, then the identity of this indicted individual shouldn't matter, should it?  We all know who it is and what its about.  

This is an appeal to the judge presiding over the arraignment.  Treat this defendant fairly, and equitably under the law, as any ordinary American in similar circumstances, charged with the same crimes, would be treated.  Equally and fairly.  Look at the circumstances.  As one of the American people who, collectively, will be the offended plaintiff in this case, please hold this man without bail, for trial.  

There is good reason to do so in a manner that would be fair and equitable under the law.  

He is a danger to the American people.  He used his social media accounts and his personal name and influence to gather an insurrection against the Capitol with the intention of overturning a legitimate election and disrupting a function of the government.  It's clear that he's been pushing armed action against his enemies and in defense of his personal interests from multiple messages he's sent out.  This is the reason defendants are held in custody for trial all the time.  To be fair, and to treat this defendant like any ordinary American would be treated, lock him up.  

He is a flight risk.  He has a passport, a private jet and obedient staffers who would not think twice about violating a court order to transport the defendant out of the country and away from the DOJ's jurisdiction.  Legal limits on the bail amount would not be a deterrent in this case.  So, to be fair, he needs to be held in custody for trial.  

It will ensure a speedy trial.  He's entitled to one under the Constitution.  This would guarantee all of the attempts at delay and obfuscation, which are frankly tacit admissions of guilt, would be expedited to get to trial quickly.  This would likely clear court dates in Manhattan, Florida and Georgia as well, once all of those indictments are handed down.  

And frankly, it would help the poor Republican party save at least some of its badly tarnished image from the ridiculous position it finds itself in as the most reactionary, genuinely anti-democracy, anti-patriotic, anti-American, fascist former President we've ever had, and the biggest failure, is currently considered the front runner for their party's nomination.  In spite of a lot of rhetoric to the contrary, they can't seem to rid themselves of this millstone around their neck.  I'm not particularly interested in helping the Republican party, but I also don't want the country to go down with them.  

It would stop this ridiculous media circus centered on his campaign to win the GOP nomination.  That, too, is a huge embarrassment to this country.  Perhaps then the media, which will have little else to do, can focus on the achievements and accomplishments that are benefitting the American people under President Biden.  But I don't want to get too "political," here.  It's not like this is a crisis for democracy or anything like that, huh?  This has been a nightmare, and unless this defendant is treated fairly and equitably under the law, like any other ordinary American would be, it won't ever end.  

To the judge overseeing the arraignment, do something good for the American people.  Keep this defendant in custody until his trial.