54 thoughts on “News/Politics 4-1-23

  1. I’m reading and studying through chapter 11 of the Book of Daniel. It gives a detailed overview of the flow of history from Daniel’s time until the end of the world, when the final conflict will end with God’s incredible victory. Such an assurance of God’s sovereign control of history would have been very relevant for Daniel’s day – Judah was about to be restored from exile, yet it was not really free. It would be subject to various foreign powers, and the Jews would be bewildered… how do these circumstances display God’s concern for his people, and how will God ever use His now-insignificant people to bring blessing to the whole world? The vision of chapter 11 would have greatly reassured the faithful.

    Likewise, as we continue to lose our freedoms in these days and evil abounds, will we trust in God’s care and concern for us? Will we be reassured by passages like this so that we will continue to be obedient to God’s Word and His Great Commission?

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Escatology is a broad and fascinating theological study, several views among good theologians on the various approaches, now and historically in the church.


  3. AJ – As for my “assuming” that your comment referring to social media was aimed at me, I was aware that you were replying to DJ, but since I had shared that piece that was about social media – and you did not address anyone specifically in your comment – I did think that you were replying to both of us. It was a reasonable assumption.

    And as for this – “Also, I’m not at all shocked you like the Dispatch. You’re a never-Trumper, so it fits for you. You read what fits your bias, as do most people.”

    Actually, I read and consider more than fits my bias, even when it is uncomfortable. Quite frankly, you are one of the most biased people I see on social media.

    Btw, The Dispatch has more news than just what’s going on with Trump.


  4. The 4 basic views for those interested from The Gospel Coalition:



    ~ Whatever view one thinks best reflects the teaching of Scripture, it must always be kept in mind that Scripture always presents the doctrine of last things as a motivation for faithful living. In the end, perhaps John Frame draws our attention to the most important eschatological point: “So far as I can see, every Bible passage about the return of Christ is written for a practical purpose –not to help us develop a theory of history, but to motivate our obedience.” ~

    Liked by 2 people

  5. I suppose we’re all “never” someone when it comes to politics, right?

    There are many folks I would not consider voting for and I take it that’s true of all of us here.

    Again, I simply don’t think Trump is good for the country. So I don’t apologize for following that conviction (from conscience) by not voting for him. It’s not that complicated.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. From my Bible study leader, as an introduction to the book of Daniel, lest anyone assume we were led one way or another:

    “Daniel is not an easy book to study. Scholars disagree on many points. Apocalyptic literature like we find in Daniel is intentionally veiled and inherently difficult. So, we may not have answers for everything we read. We will have to hold our “understanding” loosely. But there will also be much we can cling to – like the sovereignty of God!”

    I have not included a lot of the historical context and background that she wrote, but she also gave us this to help in our reading (and she expects that we will be guided by the Holy Spirit to the understanding God wants for us):

    · The sovereignty of God is a running theme in Daniel – over our circumstances, over world powers and authorities
    · Power of prayer
    · God’s long-range plan of salvation played out in the course of history
    · God’s grace”


  7. Debra – I reached out to a few on Facebook with your question. Here are some suggestions.

    Human Progress
    Our World in Data
    David Pakman on YouTube (Friend said “is less snarky than some alternatives.”)
    The Bulwark (Never-Trump conservatives with a libertarian bent)
    Bleeding Heart Libertarians (slightly left-leaning libertarians)
    The Atlantic

    More Wrong on Facebook was mentioned for emphasizing how to argue correctly.

    Unfortunately, these days too many of the sources we see online have aligned with one side or another (or Libertarianism) and it is way too popular and common for them to snarkily deride their opponents. And yes, that goes for conservative sites, too.

    There have been so many (too many) times when I have wanted to share a piece that made an excellent point with a friend but the writer (either liberal or conservative) just couldn’t resist making snide comments about the other side. Some of us can shake our heads at a poke at “our side” but still consider the merits of an article as a whole, but it is too easy for many to totally dismiss the piece because of the unnecessary snarkiness or rudeness. It is frustrating.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Debra, from last night @9:19 (?) — I like Victor Davis Hanson as well, I am not familiar with Jordan Peterson but will check that writer out.

    Hanson is among a large number of folks also featured on the WSJ’s extensive opinion page, they have a good “stable” of opinion writers.

    And, BTW, I know good people who voted for Trump, I get it and respect that.

    I couldn’t go there, but I acknowledge that there has been a growing frustration in our nation that has given rise to some more outlier candidates on both the right and left who are jockeying to become president.

    We all need to draw those lines for ourselves and we do not have to justify them to others. We vote our conscience and for the people we believe will best serve the country.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. I used to read lots of different theological reasonings on the various views of what is coming. Then I realized we can’t really know and my time is better used reading the Bible and praying.

    I used to think I needed to read lots of news from different perspectives. Then I realized we can’t really know or redirect and my time is better used in reading a few (as in about three) news sources and get back to the life I can influence. My only influences on the big scheme are prayer and how I raise my children and impact those around me.

    Liked by 5 people

  10. Janice @12:00, good points, thanks.

    Daniel is a difficult book but such soaring themes of God directing paths and people being faithful in the face of horrible circumstances.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Kizzie,

    “Btw, The Dispatch has more news than just what’s going on with Trump.”


    Their home page says otherwise. No less than 11 Trump story links on the home page.

    Obsessed is what they are, because he’s where the grifters make their money from the never-Trumpers gullible enough to pay for it.



  12. dj @11:47 Did not Pres. Trump do tremendous good for the country (esp. for those with a Christian worldview)? Isn’t he therefore good for the country?

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Mumsee, I am right there with you! But I get most of my news from the local tv news for my community since I can’t read much now. I might affect something locally with involvement, but I can’t do much otherwise (except pray, which is so downplayed in importance), and local usually makes mention of really big national and world events everyone needs to know about. Also, local does not get bogged down with political commentary.

    I have decided that if I can share the Good News that it will not return void and that is one good way to affect the larger global community. This week I shared about the prison ministry (with a few at my new church) that potentially affects lives around the world. My sharing seemed well received. So thankful that God has given me a way to be involved in an area where Hd is definitely at work transforming lives and making disciples.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. I can see why some media folks hate Twitter. They hate that they no longer control the narrative there, and that they are exposed for who and what they are on a daily basis. I’d hate Twitter now too if I was one of them.

    Lap dogs that is.

    Liked by 2 people

  15. They play along with idiocy like this too.

    And this….

    Liked by 1 person

  16. The media hates being called out.

    We see you.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Ty, he did some things I liked. I liked his court nominees, for example. And I think he had many folks around him who wisely helped guid him. His formal speeches were non-Trump like, frankly; a moderate tone and content.

    But personally, I found myself holding my breath because I still felt his underlying temperament and lack of wisdom (and character) was not a sound one for national leadership. After the election, that temperament and loss of control re-emerged, with Jan. 6, the all-night social media rants and now, we’re reminded of some of the character issues that could have sunk him in his first campaign.

    Are these charges wise or legally strong? Perhaps not, according to folks on both sides, but now we head into a legal process that must be followed and adhered to. Will Trump be able to abide by a court-imposed gag order? That will be hard.

    An interesting point, too, from an LA Times analysis today that looks at the party and upcoming election as a whole with the Trump factor now, again, front and center:


    ~ Republicans now face what may be a worst-case scenario: For at least some time, the front-runner for their nomination will be campaigning while facing criminal charges. That’s likely to strengthen him in the eyes of a significant share of the party’s voters even as a majority of Americans view it as disqualifying.

    If Trump wins the nomination, the party’s fate could be lashed to the outcome of a criminal trial. If he loses, the indictment will give him every incentive to once again cry foul and denounce whoever beat him. ~

    National leadership comes down to more than just doing some good things, it should also be a person who has an upright character (not without flaws, that’s impossible, but generally a good personal reputation in his or her dealings).

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Remember, too, Trump was a longtime registered Democrat before he decided to jump into politics as somewhat of a novice. He found a “theme” that played well in 2014-15 and followed it.


  19. dj @11:43 I would say that | believe in pre-millennialism with a mid-Trib Rapture, but as you indicate, no matter what our eschatological beliefs, our focus should always be on obedience to Christ and the urgency of sharing the Gospel with as many as possible so that they, too, can be forgiven and experience eternal life.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Self awareness level: Zero

    “NPR layoffs: employees blame racism and transphobia”

    Or your product sucks, but you just double down on the stupid instead of looking at why people think that.


    “You have to hand it to the Left. No matter what happens they have an all-purpose way to whine about it.

    Bloomberg has a story about the layoffs at National Public Radio, and in particular the all-hands Zoom the executives held with the staff of their current and soon-to-be former employees.”

    It didn’t go well. It turns out that NPR is a racist, sexist, and transphobic hellhole.

    Honestly, if it is so bad then it should be fully shut down. I strongly hope it is. We must promote diversity, after all.

    Last week, NPR laid off 84 people and stopped production on four seasonal podcasts, including Invisibilia, Louder Than a Riot and Rough Translation. The company warned in February those cuts would be coming after it projected a $30 million sponsorship shortfall this year.

    That shortfall isn’t a small one. For the first quarter alone the shortfall is 25% less than last year. That is a huge chunk of change, and NPR was facing going bankrupt within 3 years if the trend continues. They had to do something.

    Sad. Very sad. I weep.

    NPR’s Zoom call had over 800 people, and it was the culmination of a series in which smaller groups were briefed and allowed to kvetch about everything.

    I don’t mean to sound uncaring; I would be devastated to be laid off, and my readers even more so. I can’t imagine your pain at the prospect, but mine would be substantial.

    But the complaints at the meeting were…unusual. One would expect the concerns to be about support, future potential layoffs, and similar practical issues.

    They were not. They had to do with diversity and inclusion. How many Blacks will remain? Why the big cut in trans people?

    Among the requests: employees wanted to see more specific breakdowns around the number or percentage of employees of different races and identities who were laid off, rather than those of the remaining employees.

    Uh, what? Really? This is your major concern? It wouldn’t have even occurred to me.

    As of March 24th, for example, NPR had booked $28.9 million in sponsorship revenue for the first quarter, compared to $41 million the year prior. The team highlighted that diversity levels remained roughly consistent before and after the cuts, though trans people in the programming department dropped, going from 2.5% of the workforce to 1.2%.

    Layoffs occur; trans people are hit hardest. Just for context, 0.45% of working-age adults identify as transgender, which suggests that even after the layoffs the group will be overrepresented by nearly 300%.”



    Whatever could be the problem….?

    Liked by 2 people

  21. Great job idiots…. Lol.

    “Trump raised millions in the hours after he was indicted”


    “Unless you get all of your news from MSNBC and some (though not all) of the people at CNN, you’ve already seen what a walking disaster the case being brought against former President Donald Trump is shaping up to be. Legal experts from both the left and the right have opined that the “zombie case” would have virtually no chance of moving forward and obtaining a conviction anywhere outside of a Manhattan courtroom and it may not even survive there. Even the editorial board of the Washington Post was forced to concede that the case looked totally dodgy. However, the intention on the part of District Attorney Alvin Bragg and his supporters was clear. This was never about any sort of violation of the law. The intention was to derail Trump from running for and possibly winning the presidency. So how is that working out for them? Well, a lot of Americans responded, but not in the way the liberal mob probably hoped. Trump raised more than four million dollars in the first 24 hours after the indictment was announced. (NY Post)

    Former President Donald Trump raised more than $4 million toward his presidential run in the 24 hours since he was indicted by a Manhattan grand jury, his campaign announced Friday.

    “This incredible surge of grassroots contributions confirms that the American people see the indictment of President Trump as a disgraceful weaponization of our justice system by a Soros-funded prosecutor,” a press release from the former president’s campaign read.

    The campaign noted that more than 25% of the donations came from first-time Trump donors, and the average contribution was $34.”

    Give yourselves a hand….

    Liked by 2 people

  22. Ty, agree there (with the backside of your post — I’m more a- or post- mill, though hold that somewhat lightly as all of the views should be held). But obedience, perseverance in the faith, and sharing the gospel fit into all of that and should be our focus.

    Back to what is a big presidential election coming up, I would hope there are better options for conservatives than the leading one we have now, both in light of nominating someone who can win a general election (which will require some appeals to moderates, nonpartisans and even some more centrist Democrats?) and for the moral and overall health of the nation, in my view.

    Living in a secular, pluralistic society does require at least some wiggle room allowed on both sides.


  23. But no mean tweets, right?

    That’s what’s important.

    “America Lost $276 Billion to Fraud and Wasted Pandemic Relief Funds, Inspectors General Estimate”


    “The federal government has lost at least $276 billion in taxpayer money that was designated as “COVID-19 relief funding,” according to the estimates of inspectors general.

    The funds were lost due to “fraud” and “waste,” according to cumulative estimates from the inspectors general of the Labor Department, Treasury Department, and Small Business Administration (SBA).

    The revelation was revealed during recent testimony before a House Oversight and Accountability subcommittee in Washington, D.C.

    Larry Turner, inspector general for the Labor Department, estimated that $76 billion slated for “unemployment insurance” was deployed via fraudulent claims.

    He described the $76 billion fraud assessment as “on the low end” given that it did not include an analysis of money deployed via the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance program established in 2020.

    Turner expressed skepticism on recovery of misappropriated funds after Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX) considered a net revenue benefit to the government via the possible pursuit of “fraudsters.”

    “You expect that the investments we make in pursuing that kind of fraud, we’re going get more than that amount of money back,” Casar stated.

    Turner replied, “I can’t say that.

    “Once fraud goes out of the door, it’s hard to get it back.”

    Sheldon Shoemaker, the SBA’s inspector general, estimated that $86 billion had been misappropriated via fraud and waste.”

    He shared his expectation that his future revised estimate would grow, given that the $86 billion total did not yet include an analysis of the SBA’s Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) launched in 2020.

    He predicted a future estimate of $100 billion or higher in losses via fraud and waste through the SBA’s “COVID-19 relief” measures, including the PPP and COVID-19 Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) program.

    “It will be more than $100 billion,” Shoemaker predicted of the SBA’s future and final estimate of money lost to fraud and waste via his agency’s “COVID-19 relief” spending.

    Shoemaker described it as “the biggest fraud in a generation.””

    Liked by 3 people

  24. dj: Fair enough, and voting one’s conscience is very important, but I don’t see any other candidate who would be able to withstand the constant and vicious attacks of the Left. Pres Trump has been tested like no other candidate/President in history.

    Liked by 2 people

  25. He has been tested but that’s also as it should be, to a large extent.

    But he offered a lot of very real character weakness to feed on throughout that campaign, unfortunately .

    Once he was elected, Trump wasn’t covered very fairly during his term, I agree with that point. Reporters need to be tough but fair. That’s the plumb line and it’s not always met.

    (And like Kizzie, back to that earlier topic, I also read the Dispatch.)

    Liked by 1 person

  26. And I’ll put in another plug for The Journal Editorial Report Saturdays on Fox News (at “noon”) for smart panel discussions on various issues.

    Today’s offering included discussions on the upcoming Chicago race for mayor (which I haven’t been keeping up with, so quite interesting to me) and (naturally because of the personal link to them) the recent abduction of the WSJ reporter in Russia …. along with, of course, the Trump indictment and impacts on the presidential race.

    There are decent news sources out there, some tilting right or left (I’ll tune in to CNN panel shows as well from time to time), but offering some decent back-and-forth discussions.

    But we truth-seeking (or just fair information-seeking) news consumers have our work cut out for us these days, to be sure.


  27. AJ (re: your 1:42 post) – With Trump’s recent indictment and being the leading Republican candidate, he is indeed news for any news site. But even so, I do not usually go to their site, as I get their daily newsletter in my email. In those newsletters, there are links to various articles, and most are not related to Trump.

    As for this – “the never-Trumpers gullible enough to pay for it” – well, I don’t pay for it. But you didn’t know that one way or the other when you wrote that. 😦


  28. Yes, much of Dispatch is free via the newsletter.

    I will read reasoned arguments on both sides and Dispatch often offers that on a conservative side, some writers I like more than others.

    Trump doesn’t “own” conservatism, remember. The ideas are much bigger than he is or one person ever will be.

    Remember, there are all the rest of us who also will potentially be participating in a primary and looking for someone else to support.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. DJ,

    Again, Luke Kizzie, of course you do. It’s one of the go to sites for never-Trumpers.

    I read it as well,just to see what Goldberg and the faux conservative grifters are saying.

    Opo research. Know your enemies.


  30. Yes, indeed you are. 🙂

    Sorry DJ, but I question the “conservativism” of any group or individual who claims the moniker, yet then tells Republicans to vote for Joe Biden, as most did last time around. Or better yet tell people to “vote their conscience” knowing full well this also led to the election of Joe Biden.

    We see the results of people falling for this stupidity.

    Perversion and perverts are everywhere in Biden’s admin. They push everything that is against God and his teachings. They do things like recognize trans people who slaughtered Christians while ignoring the victims. They only mention them when trying to grab guns as a result, but even then only mention they’re victims, but not that they were targeted for being Christians.

    Bidden has destroyed the economy, inflation thru the roof, our enemies laugh at us and Biden, we’re no longer energy independent, and I could go on and on.

    The idiots at the Dispatch, the Bulwark, and other never-Trump outlets cheered this on. People fell for their schtick too. We see the results. Now they seek the same outcome again while still claiming they stand for conservative principles. They’re liars. They want Trump because he let’s them sell what makes them money. But then they tell you to vote Biden. It’s a grift, and it looks like the same people will fall for it all over again.

    I’m amazed that folks will stand by and watch their country be destroyed from within while they claim their “principles” won’t let them vote Trump. Well here’s a newsflash, you’re principles are causing the expansion of perversion in the public square. Everything that’s happening is the result of people who couldn’t do what was right because they don’t like the guy. So we all suffer, and the country degrades. Their conscience isn’t clean, quite the contrary, but they refuse to see the truth. Evil wins when good people do nothing.

    Do you honestly think that’s OK, as long as you didn’t have to vote for the Bad Orange Man?



  31. Yet another example. This doesn’t happen under Trump, neither would the debacle in Ukraine, but hey, at least your conscience is clear, right?

    No, not really. This is kinda on you guys too. This is the result. Evil won, ad elections have consequences.


    “It’s getting difficult to conclude anything but that the West is being run by a pedophilic grooming clique.

    Yes, it sounds insane. It IS insane. But how else can you explain this?”

    Each of those sponsors is a government or government agency, whose job is supposed to include the protection of children.

    Instead of doing that they are sponsoring a summer camp for children as young as 7-year-olds that exists to teach children how to dress provocatively and dance in sexually suggestive ways for the entertainment of adults.”

    “Regardless of whether the contact takes place at a government-sponsored event, the governments in question are promoting the sexualized grooming of young boys. They portray it as an innocent way for children to express their inner creativity, but that is utterly ridiculous. It’s not like there aren’t a million other ways to accomplish the same task, and none of the creative summer programs until recently have included getting young boys to dress in skimpy women’s clothes and dance for adults.”

    Elections have consequences. This is the results when folks sit on the sidelines and clutch their pearls over Trump.


  32. We’re not laughing with you Glenn, we’re laughing at you.


  33. Glenn’s just one clown among many at the WaPo.


  34. Again, elections have consequences, and so does sitting on the sidelines and not playing the game.


  35. Remember, this is the admin the Dispatch and their ilk endorsed.


  36. My take on media –

    News outlets are a business owned by corporations whose shareholders demand profits. They will skew the news so it appeals to their target demographic. Bias in news isn’t the journalists bias or the owners personal views but omission. News is covered or omitted depending on what the corporations and their advertisers deem as a demand from their viewers.

    For this reason, the best source of news is the BBC. It’s a non-profit arms length crown corporation. It has a tendency to cover news from former British colonies but its coverage of world events is the best in the English language world.

    As far a credible left wing view – the Guardian is the best.

    I tend not to take most American news seriously so I watch late night monologues on youtube. The news is usually depressing so you might as well have a laugh.

    “alternatives” to mass media are for the most part a joke. By trusting twitter, blogs and other sites you are simply exchanging one bias for another. I don’t use twitter but when AJ posts a tweet I tend to scroll down until I find somebody who corrects the post – it doesn’t take long.

    Common sense and logic usually allow an individual to discern between fact and bias. However, people have said I have too much faith in human nature.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. AJ – Do you believe that God is sovereign over our elections?

    This kind of reminds me of a story in Corrie Ten Boom’s “The Hiding Place”. Although she felt that it was not a sin to lie in order to protect the Jewish people in her care, her sister, who was also hiding some Jews, thought differently.

    When the Nazis came to the sister’s house and asked her where she was hiding the Jews, she reluctantly answered that they were under the table. Peeking under the table and seeing no one, the Nazis laughed at her and left. (They were hiding beneath the floor of the table.)

    I don’t recall the exact details of this story, but I vaguely remember hearing of a man in the custody of an enemy who told a truth that should have gotten him killed, because his conscience would not let him lie. His honesty struck this enemy (a soldier, perhaps?) as so odd that he asked him why he didn’t lie. He ended up leading this other man to Christ, and was not killed.

    Those stories may not seem related to voting, but they are related to Christians not going against their conscience, even when it might have been fine for another Christian to make a different decision. Scripture says that to do so is a sin. Our duty as Christians is to act in faith and leave the results to God. He is sovereign over all of this, and His will is not always what we think or want it to be.


  38. For the record if anyone cares, I really don’t think the Manhattan indictment matters much. A grand jury thought the prosecutor had enough evidence to proceed; rule of law is being followed. Is the prosecutor cherry picking cases? Probably but that’s the norm everywhere – usually prosecutors pick on the poor and the defenseless – easy conviction, so it’s refreshing to see a member of the rich elite getting picked on. But from a historical/political perspective, I’m more interested in the Georgia investigation.

    One of the tenets of fascist ideology is the leadership principle which claims a strong leader is needed for a nation-state. Conservative Catholics who first made the claim also thought leadership should come from a traditional sources – aristocracy, the church , the military; but secularized fascism would put up as Il Duce, Generalisimo, or Fuhrer anyone who appealed to the masses.

    In the modern context we have a more sophisticated version than the 30s and 40s. Putin, Erdogan, Orban, etc go to great lengths to justify their hold on power but it’s essentially the leadership principle (Orban calls it illiberal democracy) When people dissent from the leader on the basis of principle or their own view of an ideology, they stray from the leadership principle. When a party endorses the leadership principle – I start to cringe and worry, watching Republicans proclaiming the end of the world at the Turmp indictment is cringe worthy. A conservative (or to use the European term, a classical liberal-conservative) sees beyond the leadership principle and moves past Trump.

    Liked by 1 person

  39. To vote or not to vote, that is the question. For the purely simple-minded whose vote hinges on one issue, to vote Republican means to vote against abortion. To either abstain or to vote Democrat means to vote for abortion. Dolts Unite for Life!😃
    I am ducking now. I think it is past my bedtime actually😃 Yes, it is!


  40. When the latest school shooter was revealed to be trans, you could almost hear the right side of the internet breathe a huge sigh of relief; “It’s not one of ours”. And now they preface every description with “trans”… However, this didn’t change the fact that a mentally unbalanced person was able to get a hold of a semi-automatic assault rifle and kill six people. Republicans have long called trans mentally ill, would they not now support gun control on mentally ill individuals.

    I disagree with many gun control advocates in that I don’t think gun control will stop all the mass shootings (it will limit it – the stats before and after the repeal of the assault rifle ban demonstrates this). I agree with Michael Moore that it’s more than gun possession. Although the US is off the charts in terms of guns per person, Canada is 5th and Finland is 8th yet even on a per capita per gun basis Canada and Finland don’t come close to the same rate of mass shootings.

    Moore points to the rhetoric of fear and media. However, common sense regulations – red flags rules on mentally ill, felons, and domestic abusers, rifle types, etc would go a long way. Just because it’s not “one of yours” this time doesn’t mean there aren’t more dead kids and more evidence for common sense regulations.


  41. I always vote my conscience regardless of what anyone says. If I want to vote for a Democrat or independent or not at all that’s the privilege God has granted me by virtue of being born in this country. Individuals voting their conscience is one thing. But group advocacy is another I pretty much agree with AJ about Bulwark and Dispatch. They have an interest in Trump not being elected . And that interest has nothing to do with anyone’s conscience.


  42. Always vote. Sure sometimes it has no meaning especially in a first past the post system but voting asserts your right to a process and voice. In the end, we need to accept the results, for the most part the western democracies have enough checks in place that the winner actually is the winner. When a person goes on a post election rant and whines, he only discredits the democracies and emboldens the authoritarians. Erdogan, Orban, and Putin have all used Trump’s post election meltdown to enhance their own “election”.

    Abortion is an interesting political issue. For the most part, pro-life won the moral debate and pro-choice won the legal/philosophical debate. Most countries with very lenient policies have lower abortion rates than the US. Given this, legalities attached to abortion are not effective. Look at motivation for abortion and vote for canidates who will alievate this – age, income, health care costs, genetic malformaties, etc. You can ban abortion in a state but if you do nothing to alievate those concerns, pregnant women will just goe elsehwere. As my Polish friend remarked about their country’s near zero abortion rate; everyone has an aunt in Sweden.


  43. Somewhat apropos to the unrest in our culture today (from our sermon):

    “The types of revolution people feel are justified to exterminate marginalization (or various people groups) appeal to the most angry, vindictive, spiteful, proud and cruel passions of this fallen race. People feel justified in hating their oppressors. And it is a short trip down the stairs to shoot them and all their children. …

    “… Maybe there’s a long game that so well hidden, that everybody’s missing it, but the movers and shakers, seeking to set their people free, appear to be accomplishing the opposite.”


    Sermon also cautioned us to “be careful who you team up with.”

    “Do not be governed by anger. The Scriptures do speak of a righteous indignation. Jesus clearly demonstrated a holy anger in His clearing of the temple (Matt. 21:12, 13). The accusers of Jesus had such hardness of heart that Mark records that Jesus looked around them in anger (Mark 3:5). Paul writes that Christians can be angry, yet not sin (Eph. 4:26). …

    “But we need to be very careful here. We need to be careful that our anger is tempered. We need to be careful that we are angry because there is an affront to God rather than an affront to us. It is neither Christian nor beneficial to anyone for a people to become an angry mob.”

    “You shall not follow a crowd to do evil; nor shall you testify in a dispute so as to turn aside after many to pervert justice (Ex. 23:2).”

    Liked by 1 person

  44. And what political coalition doesn’t have advocacy groups? (Re Dispatch and Bulwark).

    Pray, reead (yours and others) views, vote — or don’t vote, as conscience dictates — and leave the rest in God’s hands (where it always is anyway).

    Don’t give in to anger, it seems we’re seeing some crazy-scary, high-volume levels of that in our culture right now. Some easily-agitated people don’t need much to push them over the line into violence.

    Always beware of big, emotional, agitated crowds (that often morph into mobs rather quickly, the examples are too numerous). This was a warning I received early on from a Christian mentor whose past experience had been seeing mainline churches become too attached to liberal “street” actions in the 1960s-70s. The causes may have seemed worthy, but were one step away from turning into something regretful and even dangerous far too often.

    We on the blog are headed into a long, hyper-intense political season. As believers, let’s maybe accept, without anger, that we don’t all agree on everything. Neither do our blog guests whose participation is much appreciated. And that’s OK.

    Or it certainly should be OK.

    Tolerance, patience — and remembering to Whom we all belong should help, going forward, in how to interact? I hope so, anyway.

    Peace. Patience. Quick to hear, slow to speak.

    Let’s love our brothers and sisters — and, yep, even our enemies.

    Liked by 2 people

  45. DJ, “And what political coalition doesn’t have advocacy groups? (Re Dispatch and Bulwark).
    Pray, reead (yours and others) views…”

    OK. I must not have communicated very well. Of course people have advocacy groups. The Dispatch and Bulwark ARE advocacy groups. They would not support Trump if he had a pristine character and floated down from heaven on angel wings, because for them it’s not about personality or character; it’s about POLICY.
    I guess maybe I should ask if you agree with the policies they promote?


  46. Kizzie,

    So it’s God’s will that you sit home and don’t do your part. Got it.

    That seems a convenient way to shirk your civic responsibilities.

    Do you ever think God allows Biden because you don’t care enough to do the right thing, so He gives you what you deserve?


  47. Debra, while I follow some of their articles I do not know all their policies. I also get their free newsletter.

    AJ, I believe Kizzie did cast a vote, just not for Trump or Biden. And neither of us where “shirking” our “civic responsibilities.”

    The last two national election cycles have been painful and required some very tough decisions that were not easily come by.

    I know a number of folks who voted for Trump, some reluctantly, others with more support. I have not criticized those decisions.

    *** However.

    *** I (and Kizzie) have consistently been personally attacked here — and assigning the worst possible motives to us — for decisions to either vote for a 3rd alternative or to abstain.

    Liked by 1 person

  48. As for reading different articles, just because I read something — or even subscribe to something — doesn’t mean I agree with everything every writer expresses on a particular site. That would put us in quite the exclusive bubbles, wouldn’t it?

    Liked by 1 person

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 )

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.