16 thoughts on “News/Politics 10-14-22

  1. Biden’s base is at it again.

    “‘Kill All Christian Nationalists’: Vandals Trash Michigan Catholic Church With Pro-Abortion Graffiti

    Security cameras caught the cowards in the act. I’m shocked they didn’t make any references to handmaids.”


    “A security video caught three people vandalizing the Church of the Resurrection in Lansing, MI, with pro-abortion and anti-Catholic graffiti.

    I’ve lost count of how many Catholic churches people have targeted since SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade.”

    “You are so edgy and original trashing a Catholic church because no one has ever done it before:

    The words “Abort the court” and “Death to Christian nationalism” were spray-painted in black on the walkway in front of the steps at the Church of the Resurrection. The vandals also painted a cross with a slash through it between those two statements.

    Two upside-down red crosses were left on two of the church’s doors as well.

    More red graffiti on the walkway spelled out “Feminism not fascism,” “smash patriarchy,” “Restore Roe,” and “Is overturning Roe worth your life or your democracy?”

    Other graffiti, both on the walkway and the church’s LED-lighted sign, contained explicit language. A photo shows young children being exposed to the language as they walked out of Mass on Oct. 9.

    One of the messages on the church’s sign read, “Kill all Christian nationalists.”
    In true Catholic spirit, the church’s electronic sign states, “To whoever [sic] vandalized our church: We forgive you and we are praying for you.””

    Liked by 2 people

  2. It’s almost like everything the press and Dems said was true about Trump were all complete lies, because they were.

    “Seven times ‘disinformation’ turned out to be just the opposite

    From Hunter Biden’s laptop to the origins of COVID-19, numerous contentious claims deemed false and misleading by elites have since proven legitimate.”


    “At the heart of the second trial to come out of Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion probe is a story of disinformation.

    Marc Elias, general counsel for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, testified both during a House Intelligence Committee investigation in 2017 and recently during Durham’s ongoing probe that he was the one who hired the opposition research firm Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on then-candidate Donald Trump.

    Fusion GPS went on to commission former MI6 agent Christopher Steele to create the infamous “Steele dossier,” which purported to show collusion between Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin. It contained several salacious and since-debunked claims about Trump and his alleged ties to Russia.

    The federal government infamously used the now-discredited dossier to obtain a warrant to surveil former Trump 2016 campaign aide Carter Page. The Justice Department later admitted the warrant application was full of misinformation and the surveillance warrant should’ve never been approved.

    The primary source of the Steele dossier was Igor Danchenko, a Russian analyst who’s now on trial as part of Durham’s investigation for allegedly lying to the FBI about his own sources for the information that he provided to Steele.

    Federal prosecutors allege that Danchenko, who has pleaded not guilty, fabricated and concealed his sources in conversations with the feds. The trial began in Alexandria, Va. on Tuesday.

    The case highlights how potent a weapon disinformation can be in today’s political climate, where falsehoods can slip through the cracks and transform into received truth without the public noticing.

    However, it works the other way as well.

    Indeed, in the past few years the opposite has more often been the case: Something deemed disinformation ultimately turns out to be true. Here are seven recent examples of elites in government, Big Tech, and other positions of influence targeting various ideas as mis- or disinformation only to be proven wrong in the end as the facts come in:

    1. Hunter Biden’s laptop

    In October 2020, the New York Post obtained emails from a laptop that President Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, had abandoned at a repair shop in Delaware.

    Shortly after the story was published, Facebook’s policy communications director boasted the social media giant was “reducing its distribution on our platform.” He added the report would be scrutinized by third-party fact checkers “to reduce the spread of misinformation.”

    Twitter quickly followed Facebook’s lead, blocking users from posting or reading the story. The company even locked the Post’s primary Twitter account, apparently because of “the lack of authoritative reporting on the origins of the materials included in the article.””

    Liked by 1 person

  3. The Jan6 scam continues….

    “Jan 6 Committee Finale: Handing Anti-MAGA Football To DOJ For Prosecutions After Dems Lose the House

    The made-for-TV J6 show trial has concluded, but the endgame unfolds: Criminal referrals and a subpoena to Trump to hand the football to Merrick Garland and DOJ to keep up the attacks after Democrats lose the House.”


    “The final episode in the made-for-TV movie called the January 6 House Select Committee Hearings has just finished, with the final “hearing” today.

    Of course, the hearings were not hearings. There was no opposition permitted. Thousands of hours of video and tens of thousands of pages of evidence were edited down and selectively used to do one thing: Get the political opposition as broadly as possible. This was no search for the truth, it was a political infomercial.

    The final episode was today, but the final play is to hand the anti-MAGA football to Merrick Garland and DOJ to prosecute Democrats’ political opposition once Democrats lose the House, as is likely.”

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Sure Biden was lying when he said he was springing all the pot convicts charged federally, but the rubes fall for it. 🙂

    “”It doesn’t take a reading of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s famous novel to understand that crime and punishment in modern-day America is seriously out of whack.

    President Biden announced the other day that he was going to pardon all those Americans with federal convictions of illegal pot possession, which is pretty funny because currently there is nobody in federal prison for illegal pot possession.”


    “Getting credit for releasing nobody from federal prison is part and parcel of the Democrats’ Achilles’ heel in the midterm elections. Try as they might, they can’t run away from their home-grown “defund the police” movement.

    Bill Clinton had a pretty simple and effective message when he ran for reelection in 1996: He put more cops on the street and locked up as many criminals as he could.

    In the old days, Biden would have claimed credit for Clinton’s success. After all, he was chairman of the Judiciary Committee when Clinton’s crime bill was signed into law in 1994.

    But the newly woke Democratic Party has turned its back on Bill Clinton. Hillary Clinton herself was forced to renounce her husband’s efforts to put criminals behind bars when she ran for president in 2016. Biden similarly had to bend a knee to the BLM movement in the wake of the George Floyd death and subsequent violent riots that engulfed America.

    In D.C., we have a Black Lives Matter Plaza in front of the White House, but we don’t have functional control of the streets. Outside my office, people are smoking crack and gunshots are a regular feature on the streets of my Capitol Hill neighborhood. Our local ward committeeman, Charles Allen, is a defund-the-police kind of guy who supports the whole liberal agenda of letting criminals out of jail and having more compassion for the perpetrators than the victims.

    I live in the District, so I know — it is highly unlikely that a Republican here can beat a white progressive like Allen who promises more of the same nonsense when it comes to fighting crime. But in other places, being on the right side of the crime and punishment issue will help propel Republicans to victory.

    In Pennsylvania, for example, Democratic Senate candidate John Fetterman (who didn’t make a living on his own until he was in his 40s) has a track record of letting violent criminals out of jail. That doesn’t play well in crime-ridden Philadelphia or anywhere else in the Quaker State.

    In Wisconsin, Republican Sen. Ron Johnson has rightfully pounded Democratic Senate candidate Mandela Barnes on his embrace of the “defund the police” movement. This message resonates in Milwaukee, which has faced a crippling crime wave for years now, and in places like Kenosha, which was ground zero for protest violence.

    In Minnesota, Democratic Rep. Angie Craig’s largely suburban voters are tired of the anarchy that has sprung from the defund-the-police movement, and she is facing long odds in winning reelection.

    Even in the Pacific Northwest, the desire for law and order is making Democrats think twice about voting for other long-time Democrats. Sen. Patty Murray is in serious trouble in Washington state as voters lament the decline of Seattle because of out-of-control crime. In Oregon, Republican Christine Drazan is leading Tina Kotek, the Democratic candidate, in the race for governor, mostly because voters blame the Democrats for what happened in Portland and its casual embrace of anarchy.

    Most polls have crime as a top issue of concern for the voters. “

    Liked by 1 person

  5. “The federal war on pro-life activists”

    The left really hate parading old people.


    “the federal government is at war with pro-life activists.

    By that I don’t mean that Democrat politicians are doing everything they can to extend the so-called “right” to abortion until birth. That is politics, and for better or worse in the United States political decisions about when life begins and constitutional protections for human beings is afforded to a fetus belong to the states.

    Police powers are the fundamental ability of a government to enact laws to coerce its citizenry for the public good, although the term eludes an exact definition. The term does not directly relate to the common connotation of police as officers charged with maintaining public order, but rather to broad governmental regulatory power. Berman v. Parker, a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case, stated that “[p]ublic safety, public health, morality, peace and quiet, law and order. . . are some of the more conspicuous examples of the traditional application of the police power”; while recognizing that “[a]n attempt to define [police power’s] reach or trace its outer limits is fruitless.”

    The division of police power in the United States is delineated in the Tenth Amendment, which states that “[t]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” That is, in the United States, the federal government does not hold a general police power but may only act where the Constitution enumerates a power. It is the states, then, who hold the general police power. This is a central tenet to the system of federalism, which the U.S. Constitution embodies.

    A state’s regulatory power, therefore, is incredibly broad and is limited predominantly by the state constitution, powers which the federal government holds exclusively, the Takings Clause and the incorporation of fundamental federal rights through the Fourteenth Amendment.

    I know that’s a long prelude to my post, but it is important background–and frankly, everybody should know this stuff before they spout off about what laws should be passed and by whom. In general, except under specific circumstances, matters of “[p]ublic safety, public health, morality, peace and quiet, law and order” belong to the states.

    The current war on pro-lifers should be understood in this context. The federal government is currently exercising powers that legitimately should belong to states, and doing so for the explicit political purpose of intimidating and punishing people for exercising their rights to freely assemble and peacefully protest in favor of saving lives.

    Some specifics from Life News:

    The Biden administration has been under heavy criticism as Joe Biden’s Justice Department targets peaceful pro-life Americans for protesting abortions in such as a way that they blocked access to an abortion center.

    The Justice Department has charged 11 more pro-life activists with violations of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act for blocking the entrance of an abortion clinic in 2021. The 11 activists were charged with FACE Act violations stemming from their 2021 “blockade” of an abortion clinic in Mount Juliet, Tennessee.

    New information about one of the pro-life advocates arrested recently shows she is an 87-year-old woman who is a concentration camp survivor.

    A federal indictment alleges that the pro-life defendants “engaged in a conspiracy to prevent the clinic from providing” and patients from receiving abortion services and violated the FACE Act by “using physical obstruction to intimidate and interfere with the clinic’s employees and a patient.”

    In theory, the fact that one of the arrestees is an 87 year-old concentration camp survivor means little in terms of whether the person should be charged with a crime. It adds color and context to the story, but if she were a murderer we wouldn’t excuse her crime because she has suffered terribly herself.

    On the other hand, the fact that she is who she is in this case is very relevant indeed, as is the case for all the defendants in this case, because of what they did and how the federal government is coming down on them like a ton of bricks. Each of the defendants is a devoutly religious peaceful protester whose crime was doing precisely the same sort of protest as was done by civil rights protesters in the 1960s, and who are now heroes to Americans. Their sole goal was the preservation of innocent life, and their sole means was the exercise of free speech and the right to assemble peaceably.

    They did, however trespass, and the state arrested a few of them and subsequently released them because the charges were so minor. In almost any other case, this would be the end of it.

    Compare that to the riots of 2020–which were celebrated by the Left and despite horrendous crimes being committed, very few people have been prosecuted. Vast swathes of Americans cities were occupied, burned down, violence committed. You know the drill. And the response of the federal establishment? Our public health officials who had been locking down the rest of us declared that the protests actually served the public health. I kid you not.

    See the contrast? Certain protests, as long as they are “mostly peaceful,” are great. But if you protest against abortion, the FBI will come after you with guns drawn.”

    Liked by 2 people

  6. Time to call in the feds….

    “Man Sues Baltimore After It Fined Him for Holding Pro-Life Signs”


    “A Maryland man is suing the City of Baltimore for violating his rights to free speech and exercise of religion. Thomas More Society attorneys are representing John Roswell in the federal lawsuit, filed on October 10, 2022, in United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The suit alleges that the City of Baltimore and its officials violated Roswell’s First Amendment rights.

    Roswell has been advocating for life on the public right of way near the Planned Parenthood abortion center in Baltimore. For several years, he has done so regularly, peacefully exercising his First Amendment rights, engaging with women considering abortions as they approach or leave the facility. Roswell shares information and resources about life-affirming alternatives to abortion. His actions are a visible demonstration of his deeply held religious convictions that human lives are being terminated inside the Planned Parenthood facility.

    As Roswell sought to establish a personal rapport with the women he encounters, he approached each in a kind and caring manner. Over the years that he has witnessed for life outside of the Baltimore abortion facility, Roswell has relied upon stand-alone A-frame signs to help him communicate information to women considering abortion. These signs, featuring photos of living babies in the womb, bear messages such as, “Unborn Babies Are Human and Feel Pain.” The signs do not impede sidewalk traffic, as they are only two and a half feet wide and less than three feet high.

    In January 2020, the City of Baltimore cited and fined Roswell for having the signs next to him on the sidewalk as he engaged in dialogue with women entering and exiting the facility. Despite the constitutionally protected nature of his speech, Roswell was informed that he needed a permit for his signs, regardless of the fact that the signs went with him each time he left.

    “John Roswell is a good citizen, so he set about gathering information about the permit process,” explained attorney Cameron Guenzel, Thomas More Society Special Counsel. “He learned that the signs require two permits, even though they are temporary and not affixed. Those permits can only be obtained via a costly and burdensome process, and can be granted, denied, or revoked at the unfettered discretion of the City of Baltimore and its employees.”

    “The real problem,” Guenzel observed, “is that the City of Baltimore requires, for each permit, the consent of the adjacent landowner – in this case, an abortion provider that is hostile to Roswell.” Guenzel noted that he, on Roswell’s behalf, tried working with the City of Baltimore to find a solution to the dispute, but he never received any response.

    Eventually, Roswell was issued a citation and fined $500 for his signs. Roswell appealed the citation, arguing that the City violated his constitutional rights. The hearing officer assigned to the case specifically declined to rule on the A-frame signs, but instead upheld the citation, based on that assertion that a sign that was touching a city utility pole. However, the hearing officer reduced the fine from $500 down to $10. In his federal lawsuit, Roswell is not challenging the $10 fine, but the City’s continued position that he cannot return to the public sidewalk with A-frame signs.”

    Liked by 1 person

  7. In case you didn’t figure this out for yourself….

    “She’s right about Democrats, but Tulsi Gabbard is no conservative”


    “Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is extremely likable. As a veteran and active member of the Army Reserve, it’s clear she has a deep love for her country. As a presidential candidate in 2020, she stood out among her Democratic Party peers for her knowledge and poise. She held her own with the more experienced members of the party. But this week, Gabbard announced she is leaving the Democratic Party, which she called an “elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness.”

    It’s a good thing Gabbard is rejecting many aspects of leftism. It also doesn’t make her a conservative leader.

    It’s far too easy for people on the Right to embrace those who leave the Democratic Party. Defection isn’t easy, given our intense polarization. It is certainly admirable. However, not being a Democrat doesn’t make Gabbard, or anyone else, a Republican, conservative, or like-minded when it comes to the most pressing issues. That point is often overlooked when ideological enemies lose one of their own. That Gabbard rejects the progressive mentality fueling leftist culture wars is commendable. But conservatives must remain sober in their evaluation.

    This phenomenon of embracing those who stand against Democrats or the Left is not limited to former politicians. Musician Kanye West, now known as Ye, is another example. The pull of celebrity entices conservatives to cheer on or even defend him even when he says or does the indefensible. When a critical eye is needed most, it’s discarded in favor of being noticed by someone who draws a massive amount of attention. As others have explained about Ye, that only hurts the cause.

    The news about Gabbard prompted all sorts of praise from the Right. Matt Schlapp, chairman of CPAC, tweeted, “We traded Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger for @TulsiGabbard?” Not only is this incorrect, but it also fails to measure anything beyond how Trump-critical each politician has been. Just based on votes alone, Cheney and Kinzinger rank more conservative than Gabbard. In addition, Gabbard hasn’t said she’s joining the GOP. As of now, she’s only left the Democratic Party and encouraged other “independent-minded Democrats” to do the same.

    Gabbard’s most recent endorsements and ratings reflect something other than conservatism. In the area of gun control, Gabbard has a 0% rating from both the National Rifle Association and National Shooting Sports Foundation. In recent years, she has publicly supported bans on assault weapons, among other legislation supported by the gun control lobby.

    Regarding abortion, Gabbard received a 100% rating from the Planned Parenthood Action Fund and 90% from NARAL Pro-Choice America, both in 2020. She received a 0% rating from both the National Right to Life and Susan B. Anthony list in the same year.

    When it comes to fiscal conservatism, she received an 11% rating from Americans for Prosperity, 7% from Heritage Action for America, and 9% from the Club For Growth, all in 2020.”

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Groomers.



    “I’m going to be friendly to Democrats for a second and posit that most of them don’t believe in this “pronoun/all the kids should become trans” fad engulfing their party. Then again, the people they keep sending to Congress and state legislatures appear to be all for snorting this woke powder up their noses while giving zero forethought to how this looks to average voters.

    Democrats in some very blue parts of the country are not on board with this nonsense, especially LGBT issues related to child health care. They’re leaving the party, fed up with the hyper-focus on cultural warfare instead of the issues that matter to most Americans, like inflation and the economy. You could guess why the national party abstains from commenting on these top issues. They have nothing to run on, having caused the economic recession.

    But the latest insanity from the “woke” left brings us to Virginia, where state Democrats want to change the child abuse laws to include parents who use improper pronouns, among other things. It’s being proposed in the upcoming session of the legislature (via WJLA): ”

    “Virginia parents could face a felony or misdemeanor charge if they do not affirm their child’s sexual orientation and gender identity, according to a state lawmaker with plans to introduce the legislation in Virginia’s upcoming legislative session.

    Right now, parents’ rights and LGBTQ protections are a big focus in Virginia.

    Thousands of students in Virginia have walked out of class protesting Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s newly proposed model policies on the treatment of transgender students at school.

    But Gov. Youngkin argues school districts and school administrators shouldn’t keep parents in the dark about their child’s sexual orientation and gender identities.

    “These same progressives in Fairfax County actually believe they should lock parents out of their children’s lives,” Youngkin said at a “parents matter” rally during the beginning of the school year. “They think parents have no right to know what your child is discussing with their teacher or counselor.””

    What’s perverted about this is it’s a backdoor way for Democrats to police free speech. If you say certain things in the safety and security of your own home, you can be charged with a misdemeanor. You can probably guess the longer game the left is running here. The focus is proper pronoun use for now, but what other forms of speech does the left hate where it will try to roll that into existing legislation that permits law enforcement to enter the home on health checks? “

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Another FBI scam operation is collapsing….

    “John Durham unmistakably puts FBI on trial alongside its Russian collusion informant

    With probing questions and relentless redirects, prosecutor exposes FBI for omissions, deletions, peculiar lack of curiosity and a $1 million bounty to pursue Trump.”


    “Igor Danchenko is the named defendant at this week’s trial, charged with lying as an informant in the now discredited Russia collusion investigation. But with probing questions and searing redirects, Special Counsel John Durham has turned the Russian researcher’s trial in the U.S. District courtroom in Alexandria, Va., into an expose of stunning FBI failures and omissions in its now-infamous pursuit of Donald Trump for crimes that turned out to be nonexistent.

    While the Hillary Clinton-spawned Russian collusion narrative has been the subject of a half dozen exhaustive investigations in the House, Senate and Justice Department, Durham has managed to use his third and widely assumed last trial to drop bombshell after bombshell that other inquiries failed to uncover. Even the most versed in the case have been stunned.

    The effort began during pretrial motions.

    Danchenko, the primary source for the now-debunked Steele dossier, was someone who had both lied to FBI agents and had troubling ties to Russian intelligence. But Durham revealed he was inexplicably hired by the bureau, despite that record, to be a paid confidential human source for three years.

    Durham followed that with a stunner on day 1 of the trial, getting FBI senior analyst Brian Auten to reveal that the FBI had been unable to confirm a single fact in the Steele dossier by mid-October 2016 but nonetheless grabbed some of its most sensational claims about Trump and stuck them into a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant marked “verified” that authorized spying on the Trump campaign and former adviser Carter Page.

    “On October 21, 2016, did you have any information to corroborate that information?” Durham asked, referring to the Carter Page FISA application submitted on that date.

    “No,” Auten replied.

    The bureau was so desperate to find corroboration to justify Steele’s allegations that it offered up to $1 million to former British MI6 agent Christopher Steele, a paid researcher for Hillary Clinton’s campaign, if he could corroborate his dossier. Steele did not, Auten told the jury.

    That revelation even shocked former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, who conducted the first exhaustive probe that debunked the dossier and exposed FBI wrongdoing. Nunes told Just the News on Thursday he was never told about the $1 million payment despite subpoenaing the FBI.

    “I hate to say this, but like a new shoe drops every day,” Nunes told the John Solomon Reports podcast in referring to Durham’s work. “And it’s like every day we find out something new. And I mean, look, I don’t know how you describe this $1 million payment or potential payment to Steele as anything other than what it is. It was a bounty program to get Donald Trump.”

    Kevin Brock, retired FBI chief of intelligence, told Just the News that the $1 million dangle was completely out of the norm for the bureau.

    “The Crossfire Hurricane investigative team, managed by James Comey’s headquarters executives, offered a truly outrageous sum of money to Christopher Steele as an ‘incentive’ to corroborate his own information,” Brock said. “Paying money to incentivize a source risks a corrupt outcome. Paying a lot of money risks a lot of corruption. Incentive payments are not normal FBI policy.

    “The FBI has specific required procedures for corroborating or vetting a source, especially when that source’s information is going to be used in any kind of affidavit. Having a source corroborate his own information is not one of those procedures. That’s the job of the investigator.”

    But Brock said Auten’s admission that the bureau submitted evidence to the FISA court that wasn’t at all corroborated was even more damning under the bureau’s own rules.

    “If uncorroborated information is going to be used like this, FBI policy explicitly requires the swearing agent to clearly state that it is not known if the information is accurate or not,” he said. “This wasn’t done, and it can’t be considered a mere oversight. Too many eyes all the way up the chain were laid on this affidavit. We’re left with the disappointing conclusion that it was omitted on purpose.”

    Such revelations have even changed the minds of experts like former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy who, while critical, have tried to give the FBI the benefit of the doubt that its failures in the probe were mistakes but not corrupt behavior. Durham has now delivered “utter proof the FBI framed Trump and shielded Hunter Biden,” McCarthy declared this week.

    “The trial is highlighting the FBI’s shocking malfeasance in the Trump-Russia ‘collusion’ probe,” he wrote in a New York Post column this week.””


    And there’s plenty more….

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Refusing to be a warmonger is the ultimate governmental pro-life position. Funding, instigating, promoting or otherwise participating in unjust wars is morally synonymous with abortion of an entire country or group of people. In a word, it’s murder.

    Tulsi Gabbord has flip flopped on abortion: she has been pro-life and pro-choice. She’s not pro-abortion in the same way some on the left currently are. During her time in Congress she initiated bills to guarantee health care to babies that survive abortion attempts and to prevent abortion once a baby is pain sensitive at 20 weeks. [However, recent studies indicate that pain may be felt much sooner—as early as 12 weeks, so I don’t know if she took that into account.] She also voted to use taxpayer funding for abortions.

    She’s not a conservative. But she’s honest and not a warmonger …and she knows what a woman is, for which she is to be commended. It is a sad state of affairs that this should be what makes her stand out from so many on the right and left.

    Liked by 3 people

  11. Bait much Mizzzz Pelosi?!

    In the video, an aide tells Pelosi that Trump has been told “they don’t have the resources to protect him here. So, at the moment, he is not coming. But that could change.”

    “I hope he comes,” Pelosi said. “I’m gonna to punch him out.”

    “I’ve been waiting for this… for trespassing on the Capitol grounds. I’m gonna punch him out, I’m gonna go to jail, and I’m gonna be happy,” she said.


  12. Not sure whether to share this on the daily thread or the news thread (where the matter of being winsome to unbelievers has been raised), so I’ll share it on both. This starts out seeming to argue about being winsome, but that is not his point. The point is that even when we are winsome, as we should be, we will face opposition.

    Winsomeness is a failed strategy if you think that you will stave off the attack dogs by being so.

    Does that mean don’t be winsome? No, not at all. Winsomeness is not a failed stance. As Christians we should always be winsome. But don’t expect it to be a strategy that will get you by in the increasingly hostile Sexular Age. Because it won’t. And don’t use it as a cover for cowardice. Check whose approval and blessing you really want.

    Because if you’re putting all your eggs in the winsome basket, thinking people will be reasonable with you if you are, then there’s a risk you have forgotten the words of Jesus in Matthew 5.

    “Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account.”

    The key word is “falsely”. In other words Christians have to learn to smarten up and realise that without the Holy Spirit, our opponents in these matters will be under no compulsion to speak truthfully. We’re playing the game by a different set of rules. If you think that the only difference between you as a believer and our unbelieving friends and neighbours, work colleagues and social media sparring partners, is that we are a bit more winsome than they, then you’ve got a less than orthodox view of sin and spiritual death.

    In the Beatitudes Jesus has to reiterate that we are actually “blessed” when stuff like this happens, cos it sure won’t feel like it. It will sure feel like a curse, and unfair treatment. Who likes having all kinds of evil pronounced against you “falsely”?’



  13. @8:06 — haha, I had to laugh at that one — JeremyBWhite, whoever he may be, left out probably about 100 other pages. Those are very long, word-for-word transcripts put out that include virtually everything that transpires between the president, press (of all stripes, btw), public, and local officials, from the serious to the mundane.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. DJ @6:19, he probably got it from the link below which puts out all kinds of governmental press releases. There was more to that particular press release than the presidents lunch, but not much, maybe half a page for the 2 minute interview. And 3 or 4 coherent sentences from the President, including the lunch response.

    Biden was asked about inflation and the almost $7.00gal gas in LA, and responded:

    “Well , that’s always been the case here . You know , it’s not — what — nationwide , they came down about $1 . 35 , and they’re still down over a dollar . But we’re going to work on — housing is the big — is the most important thing we have to do in terms of that .”

    Humorous maybe (or maybe not if you really are used to paying for 7$ gas), but not rambling enough to be really funny either. :–/


    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.