Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
lees1975
lees1975's Journal
lees1975's Journal
December 19, 2024
Conservative Evangelicals are paying a financial price for the intrusion of Trump extremism into their churches.
https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2024/12/significant-decreases-in-funds.htmlIt's been a little over nine years since Trump came down the escalator in his New York office building and announced he would be a candidate for President of the United States in 2016. That same period of time happens to coincide with a staggering decline in the membership and attendance within the churches of the nation's largest Evangelical denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention. Is there a correlation? Of course there is. And similar drops in membership and attendance are occurring in other segments of the broader spectrum of conservative Evangelicalism that are overwhelmingly white, and overwhelmingly influenced by right wing political extremism.
Southern Baptist leadership has, until recently, been very tight lipped about the decline of their membership. Membership plateaued at 16.2 million around 2000, and remained there, with tiny annual increases until 2008, when a drop of about 38,000 members was recorded. The decline continued at about the same rate, just under 50,000 annually, until 2016, when a loss of just over 200,000 was reported. The membership dropped by 240,000 in 2017, and 280,000 in 2018 before a sharp drop of 435,000 happened in 2019. Then, from 2019 to 2022, the annual losses exceeded 450,000 until the decline slowed in 2023, with a reported loss of 241,000 brought the total down to under 13 million for the first time since the 1960's.
Altogether, since 2006, the Southern Baptist Convention has lost 3,324,156 members, Average weekly attendance has dropped, over the same period of time, by more than 2.2 million. That is a loss of 38% of its total average weekly attendance, and over 20% of its total membership, most of that occurring in the last decade, and the steepest declines occurring since 2016. Only someone blind to reality would insist that the intrusion of the very worldly, immoral, corrupt style of right wing extremism into the churches of this denomination, in which over 75% of its members are self-identified Trump voters, didn't have anything to do with the decline.
Of course it did.
Southern Baptist leadership has, until recently, been very tight lipped about the decline of their membership. Membership plateaued at 16.2 million around 2000, and remained there, with tiny annual increases until 2008, when a drop of about 38,000 members was recorded. The decline continued at about the same rate, just under 50,000 annually, until 2016, when a loss of just over 200,000 was reported. The membership dropped by 240,000 in 2017, and 280,000 in 2018 before a sharp drop of 435,000 happened in 2019. Then, from 2019 to 2022, the annual losses exceeded 450,000 until the decline slowed in 2023, with a reported loss of 241,000 brought the total down to under 13 million for the first time since the 1960's.
Altogether, since 2006, the Southern Baptist Convention has lost 3,324,156 members, Average weekly attendance has dropped, over the same period of time, by more than 2.2 million. That is a loss of 38% of its total average weekly attendance, and over 20% of its total membership, most of that occurring in the last decade, and the steepest declines occurring since 2016. Only someone blind to reality would insist that the intrusion of the very worldly, immoral, corrupt style of right wing extremism into the churches of this denomination, in which over 75% of its members are self-identified Trump voters, didn't have anything to do with the decline.
Of course it did.
December 18, 2024
So, maybe there are those who don't like Rahm Emanuel, but I think we need to carefully consider his words.
https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2024/12/rahm-emanuel-outlines-road-back-to.htmlYeah, So What's the Point?
Well, the point is that, 1.) He's right, and 2.)There are plenty of Democrats who see this and take this seriously who are saying almost exactly the same thing.
I think the theme of "abandon failed orthodoxies" can be applied to every single point that has been made here. We've lost the free press, it no longer exists in the world of corporate billionaire controlled media for profit. We don't need "out own outlet, like Fox News is for the GOP," as is the solution that is often proposed, what we needed to do, when we had majorities in both houses and the White House, was to pass legislation that would have protected the free press, and broken up the gigantic billionaire corporations that own media networks. That means getting rid of the damned filibuster in the Senate, packing the damned Supreme Court and passing legislation defining and defending constitutional free press, ruled on by a court that understands how essential it is to the preservation of Democracy.
And I'll add this to the rest of it. We cannot affort to be irresolute in the face of direct threats to American Constitutional Democracy, like Donald Trump's insurrection. If that danger materializes into the dissolution of the American Republic, as many of our political scientists, experts, and many Americans, think that it very well could, then the failure of Merrick Garland to take hold of a Congressional investigation and turn it into guilty verdicts then history will blame President Biden for allowing it to happen, along with Trump being blamed for carrying it out.
Rahm Emanuel has to be regarded, not only as one of the more successful Democrats in electoral politics in recent history, but also as an expert in the behind-the-scenes kind of organization, political knowledge and skill required to chair congressional party campaigns, and serve as one of the chief advisors to two of the more successful Democrats to serve as President of the United States. And it's not possible to serve in those kind of positions, along with municipal government and Congress, without making a few enemies along the way.
As I said up front, I'm a lifelong Democrat. During a relatively short part of this election cycle, we experienced panic, and then confusion and disorder, following the first Presidential debate, the aftermath of which was having the President, and the party's nominee, step down just three months before an election. The loss of the White House, and control of the Senate, while razor thin, as the polls predicted, has left the party in a bad spot, still trying to cope with the loss while at the same time preparing for an existential threat to democracy to materialize. So what Rahm Emanuel has to say is important to consider, if we ever want to think about the possibility of a recovery.
Well, the point is that, 1.) He's right, and 2.)There are plenty of Democrats who see this and take this seriously who are saying almost exactly the same thing.
I think the theme of "abandon failed orthodoxies" can be applied to every single point that has been made here. We've lost the free press, it no longer exists in the world of corporate billionaire controlled media for profit. We don't need "out own outlet, like Fox News is for the GOP," as is the solution that is often proposed, what we needed to do, when we had majorities in both houses and the White House, was to pass legislation that would have protected the free press, and broken up the gigantic billionaire corporations that own media networks. That means getting rid of the damned filibuster in the Senate, packing the damned Supreme Court and passing legislation defining and defending constitutional free press, ruled on by a court that understands how essential it is to the preservation of Democracy.
And I'll add this to the rest of it. We cannot affort to be irresolute in the face of direct threats to American Constitutional Democracy, like Donald Trump's insurrection. If that danger materializes into the dissolution of the American Republic, as many of our political scientists, experts, and many Americans, think that it very well could, then the failure of Merrick Garland to take hold of a Congressional investigation and turn it into guilty verdicts then history will blame President Biden for allowing it to happen, along with Trump being blamed for carrying it out.
Rahm Emanuel has to be regarded, not only as one of the more successful Democrats in electoral politics in recent history, but also as an expert in the behind-the-scenes kind of organization, political knowledge and skill required to chair congressional party campaigns, and serve as one of the chief advisors to two of the more successful Democrats to serve as President of the United States. And it's not possible to serve in those kind of positions, along with municipal government and Congress, without making a few enemies along the way.
As I said up front, I'm a lifelong Democrat. During a relatively short part of this election cycle, we experienced panic, and then confusion and disorder, following the first Presidential debate, the aftermath of which was having the President, and the party's nominee, step down just three months before an election. The loss of the White House, and control of the Senate, while razor thin, as the polls predicted, has left the party in a bad spot, still trying to cope with the loss while at the same time preparing for an existential threat to democracy to materialize. So what Rahm Emanuel has to say is important to consider, if we ever want to think about the possibility of a recovery.
December 17, 2024
Pardon my ignorance here, but isn't Biden still President until January 20?
What's with this almost complete radio silence? Other than the pardon of his son, it's like he's not there. It doesn't seem like Congress is there, either. Where's our party leadership and how are they preparing for resistance against this existential threat to our democracy.
Or are those just words, and they're going to be content sitting around, holding office, collecting my tax dollars to pay their salary and riding it out until circumstances change. But who's going to be the leaders who have the courage to help bring about the change?
Yeah, I guess I'm on a ledge, waiting to be talked down. I cared, I contributed, I made calls, I knocked doors, I argued with and lost friends on social media. Did that count with any of our leadership? What are they doing for us now? Where are they leading us? Because if it is not to immediate resistance and a pathway to get back in control in two years, then what?
December 16, 2024
How will Democrats handle themselves moving forward?
https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2024/12/a-month-away-from-presidential-transfer.htmlThere is no shortage of speculation, in the aftermath of the most consequential election of our time, about what Democrats should do, or ought to do, or aren't doing, or won't do. I've read plenty of speculation, but I think I'm capable of making my own observations without the assistance of a journalist pundit who is missing some critical thinking skills and analytical thinking ability.
My first step, and it's one I highly recommend to anyone else in this country who understands exactly what we are about to face in a second Trump Presidency, is to read through Timothy Snyder's book, On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons From the Twentieth Century. That's an important piece of information which will guarantee the ability to define exactly what is occurring in order to form reasonable, effective resistance.
My first step, and it's one I highly recommend to anyone else in this country who understands exactly what we are about to face in a second Trump Presidency, is to read through Timothy Snyder's book, On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons From the Twentieth Century. That's an important piece of information which will guarantee the ability to define exactly what is occurring in order to form reasonable, effective resistance.
If we consider the causes that motivated the Democratic party in this election as priorities, then blame for the loss is a dead issue. Gone are the days in American politics when the opposition party that lost an election shook hands, congratulated the winner and pledged bi-partisan support for whatever it was that could be supported. We Democrats set up the parameters for this election, rightly so. We called it "the most consequential election of our time," and we declared that Trump "was an existential threat to Democracy."
Well, was it? Was he?
If we act like it wasn't either of those things, then we have no credibility. We're liars, just like they are. It was all a political game and it's back to business as usual and politics as usual and hope we can do better in 2026. It will be very tempting for those Democrats who are now still in office as a minority party to try and protect what they have through self-interest, to try to hang on to their perks and privileges rather than take the kind of risks that are necessary to unify this party, fight Trump's real threat to this constitutional democracy, and find a way to defeat creeping facsism once and for all.
Real leaders will step up and take risks, rather than try to hover and protect their piece of what's left. Real leaders will take the risks that will bring genuine unity, and will motivate followers to get up off their rear ends, inform themselves about what is going on and fight for their constitutionally protected liberty.
So we need leaders who are not afraid to act like this was the most consequential election of our time, and that Trump is an existential threat to constitutional democracy. And we need to start acting like that now, before he ever takes a second oath of office that he will ignore.
Well, was it? Was he?
If we act like it wasn't either of those things, then we have no credibility. We're liars, just like they are. It was all a political game and it's back to business as usual and politics as usual and hope we can do better in 2026. It will be very tempting for those Democrats who are now still in office as a minority party to try and protect what they have through self-interest, to try to hang on to their perks and privileges rather than take the kind of risks that are necessary to unify this party, fight Trump's real threat to this constitutional democracy, and find a way to defeat creeping facsism once and for all.
Real leaders will step up and take risks, rather than try to hover and protect their piece of what's left. Real leaders will take the risks that will bring genuine unity, and will motivate followers to get up off their rear ends, inform themselves about what is going on and fight for their constitutionally protected liberty.
So we need leaders who are not afraid to act like this was the most consequential election of our time, and that Trump is an existential threat to constitutional democracy. And we need to start acting like that now, before he ever takes a second oath of office that he will ignore.
December 16, 2024
A University's football coaching hire and some right wing political hypocrisy.
https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2024/12/a-universitys-football-coaching-hire.htmlWest Virginia University just did something this week that is rare in college football. They rehired a former successful coach who had left in 2007 for a head coaching job at Michigan.
Social media has been buzzing about Rodriguez since Neal Brown was fired after the last game of the season. While a lot of those who were opposed to his return went back to the manner in which he left WVU for Michigan, there were a lot more who cited "moral concerns" about his alleged affair, and sexual harassment leading to his dismissal at Arizona as the reason they didn't want him back.
And that's what I found interesting.
In each of the last three elections, West Virginia has been one of the most supportive states, in terms of percentage of voters casting ballots for Trump. It's been above 65% all three times. And there were a few people, in the social media melee that surrounded the coaching discussion, who pointed out that it seemed a bit hypocritical for people who more than likely voted for Trump in past elections to consider rumors about an affair to be a disqualifier for hiring a head football coach.
I mean, if people are all that concerned about the dishonesty, lack of integrity and immorality reflected in the character of someone who had an extra-marital affair, shouldn't that be a much bigger concern with regard to putting someone in the Presidency, where character matters and where that kind of dishonest lack of integrity and morality could endanger the entire country, than it would be in coaching a college football team?
And that's what I found interesting.
In each of the last three elections, West Virginia has been one of the most supportive states, in terms of percentage of voters casting ballots for Trump. It's been above 65% all three times. And there were a few people, in the social media melee that surrounded the coaching discussion, who pointed out that it seemed a bit hypocritical for people who more than likely voted for Trump in past elections to consider rumors about an affair to be a disqualifier for hiring a head football coach.
I mean, if people are all that concerned about the dishonesty, lack of integrity and immorality reflected in the character of someone who had an extra-marital affair, shouldn't that be a much bigger concern with regard to putting someone in the Presidency, where character matters and where that kind of dishonest lack of integrity and morality could endanger the entire country, than it would be in coaching a college football team?
Trump had multiple extra-marital affairs, some surreptitiously, some he bragged about to boost his own brand. In once case, he committed multiple felonies, 34 to be exact, to cover up an affair he had with a porn star. But it doesn't appear that was enough to disqualify him, at least, not as far as the people of West Virginia were concerned. So why should unsubstantiated rumors of an affair by a former football coach, and all charges dropped regarding the sexual harassment suit after an investigation, be a problem for West Virginia football fans, many of whom obviously voted to put the proven, three time adulterer in the White House?
December 15, 2024
The New York Post admits the Biden Administration has made significant accomplishments.
https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2024/12/the-new-york-post-admits-biden.htmlNot that anything the New York Post would write could be considered factual or credible, when it comes to its "reporting," if it can be called that, about the Biden administration. But in its own way, this tabloid is venting its frustration over the fact that it cannot change the record on one of the best and most accomplished Presidential administrations since Lyndon Johnson, and the frustration and consternation that is working its way into the coverage of its final weeks is not only hilarious, but quite telling when it comes to what they know as opposed to what they write.
With this piddling list of complaints, apparently all they can come up with, the Post is acknowledging the significant achievements of the Biden Administration. They can't complain about the long list of achievements and legislation that has worked so well, so they complain about what hasn't, in this tiny little list of virtually insignificant stuff.
With this piddling list of complaints, apparently all they can come up with, the Post is acknowledging the significant achievements of the Biden Administration. They can't complain about the long list of achievements and legislation that has worked so well, so they complain about what hasn't, in this tiny little list of virtually insignificant stuff.
The bottom line here is that they were caught off guard, stunned, and burned to a crisp over the pardon given by the President to his son, Hunter Biden. That has eliminated any and all possibility of the Post's editorial staff's ability to think straight, if they ever had that ability in the first place. Privileged use of the government's power for personal and family benefit is supposed to be the exclusive domain of the Republican party, for goodness sake! The world has been turned upside down by an honest Democrat in the White House doing something they think is in the exclusive domain of the corrupt Trump.
They're really in between a rock and a hard place on this one, because they weren't critical at all when Trump let his former advisors off the hook, anticipating what was coming regarding January 6th. So coming from the Post, this criticism is a huge compliment to Biden.
The criticisms of Biden's most recent round of commutations and pardons just adds to the praise of Biden's judgement. There isn't anything in that whole list of some 1,500 names that comes close to the heinous and traitorous acts of those Trump pardoned on his way out, and they know it. They just can't get over the fact that Biden became a realist and did something anyone else would do.
And that's all they've got.
The criticisms of Biden's most recent round of commutations and pardons just adds to the praise of Biden's judgement. There isn't anything in that whole list of some 1,500 names that comes close to the heinous and traitorous acts of those Trump pardoned on his way out, and they know it. They just can't get over the fact that Biden became a realist and did something anyone else would do.
And that's all they've got.
December 15, 2024
Something we've been saying for a long time.
I don’t want to cast the Democrats as monolithic, though. While Schiff is unique in his milquetoastiness, others are showing grit. I was glad, for instance, to read about Dick Durbin and his reaction to Trump’s pick to head the FBI. Durbin will be the Senate minority whip. He told his caucus to “reject this unprecedented effort to weaponize the FBI for the campaign of retribution that Donald Trump has promised.”
That’s more like it, but the liberal resistance to America’s totalitarian drift shouldn’t stop with Kash Patel. The Senate Democrats should vote against every one of Trump’s cabinet nominees. They should, not only because they are terrible – terribly unfit, unqualified and corrupt – but also because that’s good politics. There’s no downside to opposing what will be the worst administration of our lifetimes. There’s no upside to the Democrats being reasonable in the face of it.
Indeed, the Democrats have a chance to break a vicious cycle, and with that, put themselves in a better position when the time is right.
What cycle?
Whenever the Democrats are in power, the Republicans manufacture a makebelieve crisis – for instance, “open borders.” They do this for the purpose of pushing the Democrats out. Once they are back, the Republicans trigger a real crisis – for instance, the covid pandemic. At that point, the Democrats say to voters, “look at this mess!” They vow to clean it up. Once the Democrats are in power again, the Republicans begin scheming for ways to manufacture another makebelieve crisis.
Time to decimate the Republican's standing with the public and the press.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/it-s-time-to-decimate-the-republicans-standing-with-the-public-and-the-press-opinion/ar-AA1vRvEN?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=LCTS&cvid=ef7c72e52be14c49ade1a59516ad8516&ei=18Something we've been saying for a long time.
I don’t want to cast the Democrats as monolithic, though. While Schiff is unique in his milquetoastiness, others are showing grit. I was glad, for instance, to read about Dick Durbin and his reaction to Trump’s pick to head the FBI. Durbin will be the Senate minority whip. He told his caucus to “reject this unprecedented effort to weaponize the FBI for the campaign of retribution that Donald Trump has promised.”
That’s more like it, but the liberal resistance to America’s totalitarian drift shouldn’t stop with Kash Patel. The Senate Democrats should vote against every one of Trump’s cabinet nominees. They should, not only because they are terrible – terribly unfit, unqualified and corrupt – but also because that’s good politics. There’s no downside to opposing what will be the worst administration of our lifetimes. There’s no upside to the Democrats being reasonable in the face of it.
Indeed, the Democrats have a chance to break a vicious cycle, and with that, put themselves in a better position when the time is right.
What cycle?
Whenever the Democrats are in power, the Republicans manufacture a makebelieve crisis – for instance, “open borders.” They do this for the purpose of pushing the Democrats out. Once they are back, the Republicans trigger a real crisis – for instance, the covid pandemic. At that point, the Democrats say to voters, “look at this mess!” They vow to clean it up. Once the Democrats are in power again, the Republicans begin scheming for ways to manufacture another makebelieve crisis.
December 14, 2024
The parade of incompetent, corrupt, sexually promiscuous buffoons and druggies that Trump is nominating for positions in his administration reminded me of someone from the recent past who, while he may not fall in exactly the same category as the assorted deplorables Trump is choosing, is one of those extremists on the far right who, regardless of the incredible lack of integrity and ethics in public comments that they make, manage not only to escape criticism or accountability, but somehow get rewarded for their insanity.
Let me introduce you to Wiley Drake. Drake is pastor of the First Southern Baptist Church of Buena Park, California, or, at least, he was a decade ago when some of these events happened. Originally from Arkansas, Drake is an activist of sorts who turned his church recreational building into a makeshift homeless shelter without consultation with the neighbors or the city of Buena Park. Then, when city officials tried to enforce ordinances that were, in effect, the will of the people, he played the role of the poor, persecuted guy who was being harassed by liberal government officials for just trying to do some good.
The church also houses a radio station, hosting Drake's own program which is a combination of ultra conservative religious mish-mash and social issue advocacy, particularly raging against the usual targets of abortion rights activists, and the LGBTQ community. But he made a name for himself among his Southern Baptist brethren by calling for "imprecatory prayer" against President Barack Obama. For those who may not recognize that term, an imprecatory prayer is a prayer for someone to die as punishment for disobedience to God. It's mentioned in the Old Testament, most frequently in the Psalms, associated with King David who prayed for God to deliver him from his enemies and there are occasional, less subtle prayers asking God to deliver the death of an enemy.
But imprecatory prayers are not part of the Christian gospel. In fact, Jesus turns this idea completely upside down early on, instructing his followers not to resist an "evildoer," but to turn the other cheek, to love their enemies, and pray for their persecutors, not against them. Noting that in the context of Christianity, one of its essential core doctrines is the belief that Jesus is divine, is the son of God and was sent to reveal God to humanity, these words of Jesus take precedence over everything in the Old Testament, imprecatory prayer would be an act of disobedience to Christ.
Progressive liberals, Democrats, even political moderates, would never be able to get away with that. But among the conservative religious element that has allowed an ungodly, licentious intruder (See Jude v.4) into the various fundamentalists, Baptists, Pentecostals, Charismatics and non-denominational conservative, right-wing Christian churches in the form of right wing political extremism, it's become the brand.
Why do they always get away with things no Democrat or Progressive Liberal could ever get away with?
https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2024/12/why-do-they-get-away-with-it-and-we-dont.htmlThe parade of incompetent, corrupt, sexually promiscuous buffoons and druggies that Trump is nominating for positions in his administration reminded me of someone from the recent past who, while he may not fall in exactly the same category as the assorted deplorables Trump is choosing, is one of those extremists on the far right who, regardless of the incredible lack of integrity and ethics in public comments that they make, manage not only to escape criticism or accountability, but somehow get rewarded for their insanity.
Let me introduce you to Wiley Drake. Drake is pastor of the First Southern Baptist Church of Buena Park, California, or, at least, he was a decade ago when some of these events happened. Originally from Arkansas, Drake is an activist of sorts who turned his church recreational building into a makeshift homeless shelter without consultation with the neighbors or the city of Buena Park. Then, when city officials tried to enforce ordinances that were, in effect, the will of the people, he played the role of the poor, persecuted guy who was being harassed by liberal government officials for just trying to do some good.
The church also houses a radio station, hosting Drake's own program which is a combination of ultra conservative religious mish-mash and social issue advocacy, particularly raging against the usual targets of abortion rights activists, and the LGBTQ community. But he made a name for himself among his Southern Baptist brethren by calling for "imprecatory prayer" against President Barack Obama. For those who may not recognize that term, an imprecatory prayer is a prayer for someone to die as punishment for disobedience to God. It's mentioned in the Old Testament, most frequently in the Psalms, associated with King David who prayed for God to deliver him from his enemies and there are occasional, less subtle prayers asking God to deliver the death of an enemy.
But imprecatory prayers are not part of the Christian gospel. In fact, Jesus turns this idea completely upside down early on, instructing his followers not to resist an "evildoer," but to turn the other cheek, to love their enemies, and pray for their persecutors, not against them. Noting that in the context of Christianity, one of its essential core doctrines is the belief that Jesus is divine, is the son of God and was sent to reveal God to humanity, these words of Jesus take precedence over everything in the Old Testament, imprecatory prayer would be an act of disobedience to Christ.
Progressive liberals, Democrats, even political moderates, would never be able to get away with that. But among the conservative religious element that has allowed an ungodly, licentious intruder (See Jude v.4) into the various fundamentalists, Baptists, Pentecostals, Charismatics and non-denominational conservative, right-wing Christian churches in the form of right wing political extremism, it's become the brand.
December 12, 2024
So, when your church betrays your conscience...
https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2024/12/my-church-has-betrayed-my-conscience.htmlTo be honest, I'm not really surprised or shocked that, over the past nine years or so, the merger of right wing extremism in politics with the conservative, right wing Evangelical branch of Christianity has solidified itself, turning the bigger part of the churches and denominations which follow that line of theology, doctrine and politics, into what can only be described as a cult, by definition. Among those conservative Evangelicals who support Trump, complete abandonment of most of the core principles of the Christian gospel was a necessity to achieve the acquisition of political power. They are in a "deal with the devil," aligning with a politician who not only doesn't share their values, but lives and acts in a way that indicated he abhors and defiantly disrespects them. They campaign for him, raise money for him and help him get elected, he, allegedly, helps them achieve their ends.
They've given up on claiming what they call the "power of God" to lead them to their goals, which includes turning the United States into a Christian nationalist theocracy. What they are claiming is that God's power, and will, in bringing this about, is Trump. It's not possible, in any context of the Christian gospel, for this to be the case. There's no principle of the Christian gospel that supports this contention.
They've given up on claiming what they call the "power of God" to lead them to their goals, which includes turning the United States into a Christian nationalist theocracy. What they are claiming is that God's power, and will, in bringing this about, is Trump. It's not possible, in any context of the Christian gospel, for this to be the case. There's no principle of the Christian gospel that supports this contention.
So if Trump's conservative, Evangelical supporters have been deceitful, and they've distorted the Christian gospel and the scripture text to do something like this, how is it that we can trust anything preached from the pulpit of someone who is a Trump supporter? The answer is simple. It is not possible to trust any preacher who believes in and supports Trump, whether openly or secretly. They are, like him, liars and deceivers.
It is possible for church leadership to be deceived by imposters. It's happened throughout the 2000 year history of the church. Even as the New Testament was being written, around 50-55 A.D., there were prophetic warnings about deceivers and intruders whose intention was to deceive for the benefit of their own cause.
It is possible for church leadership to be deceived by imposters. It's happened throughout the 2000 year history of the church. Even as the New Testament was being written, around 50-55 A.D., there were prophetic warnings about deceivers and intruders whose intention was to deceive for the benefit of their own cause.
December 7, 2024
An Introduction to American political propaganda and the fall of our free press.
https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2024/12/an-introduction-to-american-political.htmlThere are times when I am reluctant to link an article, an editorial that drops in a few facts among the fiction to take a backhanded slap at President Biden, as an example of what we can expect from the corporate-owned and controlled American media. But this piece, by Liz Peek (doesn't ring any bells for me) in The Hill, which isn't really a widely distributed publication, as far as print media goes (24,000 circulation), is what we've seen for four years, and what we can expect for the next four. The Hill is owned by Nexstar Media Group. And why is that important to note?
Nexstar is the largest corporate owner of television stations in the United States. That includes local network affiliates in larger markets, and independent stations, like WGN in Chicago, as well as stations in smaller markets, places like San Angelo, Texas. And that does indeed have an impact on the perspective with which The Hill, along with those other network affiliates, delivers the news.
And here's the perspective. Trump, Trump, Trump.
From just personal observation, it was pretty clear that the American media engaged in a four year campaign, during the Biden Administration, to report everything Trump was saying or doing in response. I haven't seen any specific studies that have analyzed the news reports from the past four years in each category of media, but I wouldn't argue with a conclusion that found Trump was mentioned on every media outlet that has news coverage on a daily basis, since leaving the White House, and that the amount of time he got in terms of coverage was at least twice the amount given to the Biden administration.
And yes, I'd be willing to bet on that conservative estimate.
Nexstar is the largest corporate owner of television stations in the United States. That includes local network affiliates in larger markets, and independent stations, like WGN in Chicago, as well as stations in smaller markets, places like San Angelo, Texas. And that does indeed have an impact on the perspective with which The Hill, along with those other network affiliates, delivers the news.
And here's the perspective. Trump, Trump, Trump.
From just personal observation, it was pretty clear that the American media engaged in a four year campaign, during the Biden Administration, to report everything Trump was saying or doing in response. I haven't seen any specific studies that have analyzed the news reports from the past four years in each category of media, but I wouldn't argue with a conclusion that found Trump was mentioned on every media outlet that has news coverage on a daily basis, since leaving the White House, and that the amount of time he got in terms of coverage was at least twice the amount given to the Biden administration.
And yes, I'd be willing to bet on that conservative estimate.
Profile Information
Gender: MaleHometown: Tucson, Arizona
Current location: Chicago, Illinois
Member since: Wed Dec 25, 2019, 01:02 AM
Number of posts: 6,313