Newt Gingrich explains the Trump phenomenon with a clarity I haven't heard before.
And when you hear people purporting to be conservatives attack Trump, you realize they are on a different team.,
There's also this:
Venezuela had weaponized Smartmatic.
Venezuela had weaponized Smartmatic.
I seldom agree with much of what Newt says but he hits the nail on the head with the tribal phenomenon.
ReplyDeleteYep.
DeleteWell that's clear. Amazing speed and mental sharpness for a man in his 80's.
ReplyDeleteBAYSIDER
Matthew 25 has no place in MAGA. If Jesus were here today, they would absolutely call Him a “commie libtard”.
ReplyDeleteMAGA hypocrites have been afraid to debate this issue because Trump is their false messiah and his word is their gospel.
I expect them to DELETE this and try to bury their shame along with their conscience.
31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
it's hard to argue with Scripture.
DeleteIt's not hard argue with it's interpretation.
I must assume your comment is to support a socialist position of free stuff for everyone.
Myself, I think the characteristic of a Christian Nation is that it's people would support the poor via charity.
Oh! Son of a gun! We do!
Convoy of Hope, Samaritan's Purse, local food banks, etc.
I don't see what Trump or MAGA has to do with this, but then again I don't suffer from TDS.
Thank you for your almost kind response, Ed. Your assumption is incorrect. "Free stuff for everyone" is a favorite trope used by the far Right to falsely accuse Democrats of being socialists and commies.
DeleteI know, I know. You people don't do nuance.
I DO support constitutional regulation of capitalism, constitutional taxation for corporations and the rich, fair pay and safe jobs for everyone who is able, AND constitutional public support for those in need. Is that what you'd call "socialism"? Blame the founders.
I’m pleased that you are the charitable sort of person. It seems we still have a lot of people in need of food and healthcare despite all the charities you cite. Charities are vital, but they ALL FALL SHORT. Who else but the government could provide for the rest of the people in need? Seriously. I’d love to hear your solution.
I don’t recall Jesus mentioning anything about governments not feeding the poor. (Rome actually did that.) Would he REALLY have condemned that as evil? He did not.
I think what you’re saying is you don’t want the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, or the Federal Government to govern like Christians.
No provision for the general welfare, just police to control the population and a military to take oil from other countries or to occupy states that didn’t vote for Trump. Oh, and a party that will do everything Trump commands it to do. I would suppose oversight and checks and balances would be a “socialist position”.
Freedom means Trump may dictate what colleges can teach and who they should fire, what museums may display, and what journalists may report as news. (Anything that flatters him.) The rest is all “fake news” because Trump never lies and anyone who thinks Trump would lie suffers from “derangement”.
Say, isn’t that a Stalinist tactic? Disagree with him and be sent to Siberia for “treatment” of such a “mental derangement”.
I apologize for digressing. I’ll just make it clear I strongly oppose communist dictatorships. Or any dictatorship. I’m sure we agree on this.
OK. You want a "Christian Nation", but you don't want a Christian government.
You don’t want it providing constitutional general welfare for the people through Christian based values and works for the sick, poor, and hungry.
I think I get it now. Trump should run the world based solely on his “morality”. That’s what he just told us. The poor shouldn’t have public assistance for food and healthcare, but oligarchic servants of mammon should get huge taxpayer subsidies and MORE tax cuts because they help make us such a Christian Nation with a government that has no Christian values, or any moral or ethical values at all.
Who needs them, anyway?
And to be clear, this means the Congress, the courts, and the DOJ must be loyal to Trump. Or else.
Indeed, one would have to be deranged to think Trump and MAGA have anything to do with that.
Thank you for helping me to understand.
Dave, I don't know you well enough to know if we are that far apart.
DeleteAs for a Christian Government? That would be by having Christians in government.
It's the left that's always uses the "Wall of Separation" trope.
I don't see Democrats as Christians with their insistence on killing babies, surgically mutilating kids or locking "God" out of their platform.
"falsely accuse Democrats of being socialists and commies."
Mamdani, Cortez, Sanders, et al.... the cutting edge of the Democrat party.
I've made the argument before that a Christian Nation would have a charitable aspect to it.
That does not include a SNAP lifestyle or unlimited Somali piracy.
But that's what it always devolves to.
"The poor you will have with you always." doesn't mean not to help the poor, but it also doesn't mean to subsidize poverty.
I've been poor and it looks like I may be so again.
I empathize.
And before I say good night, you and I have a different Constitution in mind, given your examples.
And rest easy. I haven't heard a case made for sending TDS victims to Siberia.
Ed,
DeleteThank you again for you thoughtful words. I’d like to believe we both want what we think is best for the American people.
Nobody wants to “subsidize poverty”. No Democratic Socialist or Democrat I know wants to kill babies or mutilate kids. We have laws against that and I oppose those crimes. You clearly see Democrats as monsters. Perhaps that could be called “Democrat Derangement Syndrome”?
“God”, “Christian Nation”, and “Christian Government” are NOT in our Constitution but the following words are.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” and “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States”.
Also, in the Preamble, “provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”. And in Section 8, “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes… and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States…To regulate Commerce”.
This is the Constitution I was referring to. What are you referring to?
What you call a "Wall of Separation trope” are the words of radical Leftist Thomas Jefferson.
To be clear, Democratic Socialists are the fringe minority of the DEMOCRATIC Party. None of them are legislating laws from the bench and they write far less legislation than corporate lawyers and Christian Nationalists.
Maybe you choose to believe the deranged LIES from Trump and his toady Republicans that Democrats are “communists and terrorists who hate America”. These LIES sink to a neo-Nazi level of hate, vile smears, and demonization. This is the rhetoric that leads to murder and assassination. Trump had zero words of sympathy for the Minnesota Democrat Melissa Hortman and husband murdered by a Republican dressed as a cop.
He DID post this evil BS: “Did Tim Walz Order the Assassination of Melissa Hortman?”
Is this what “Christian Government” looks like? No thanks.
Maybe you believe Trump’s LIE that “Christopher Wray, Deranged Jack Smith, Merrick Garland, Lisa Monaco, and other crooked lowlifes from the failed Biden Administration…cheated and rigged the 2020 Presidential Election”. (Trump held power in 2020, and sent a violent mob to overturn the fair election he lost and LIED about being “rigged”. He would then PRAISE and PARDON those thugs who desecrated our Capitol, terrorized Congress, and beat cops bloody after watching them for HOURS on TV.)
Facts:
Trump lost, lied, and criminally tried to steal the election.
By ALL counts, recounts, certifications, audits, Trump’s DOJ & Homeland Security, and 61 courts:
Biden 51.3%
81,283,501 Popular votes 306 Electoral
Trump 46.8%
74,223,975 Popular votes 232 Electoral
You’re entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.
I also have empathy for the poor, including you should you find yourself there again. I hope it’s not due to medical issues. I want my government to be “my brothers keeper”. A right to healthcare as provision for the general welfare is sort of what Democratic Socialism is about.
Good luck and good health to you, sir.
I respectfully disagree, but I don't want to carry on a protracted argument. Thanks for commenting.
DeleteOf course we disagree on a lot of issues, Ed, but thanks for the civil dialogue. It's refreshing to not be accused of being a "communist who hates America".
DeleteMay your circumstances take a turn for the better.
Dave Dubya's Parents must have been German Nazis for him to be so acquainted with all of their abilities and their Cultural Heritage, traditions, values , ancestry, family stories, and ethnic roots.
ReplyDeleteAnd there it is. Thanks for proving my point. The historical ignorance from Anonymous can't stand facts and evidence.
DeleteHe is TERRIFIED of addressing my point.
This is the brain rot that infects anyone who takes Trump's words as gospel.
If Jesus were here today, they would absolutely call Him a “commie libtard”.
MAGA hypocrites have been afraid to debate this issue because Trump is their false messiah and his word is their gospel.
Anyone else care to support, or even discuss, my point?
Self-righteous arrogance doesn't mix well with hate and ignorance. In fact it's dangerous for human lives.
I welcome any intelligent discussion on the subject, but MAGA World isn't the place to find it.
There's nothing Christian about their lily white "Christian nationalism".
So naturally I expect only hate in response.
A little miscellany reading down the comments:
ReplyDeleteInteresting discussion, Ed. Jesus' mission was not to comment on the political or social structure of empire* but the spiritual needs of its subjects. He led by teaching and example and ultimately sacrifice of his life for which I am eternally grateful. I find nothing about his life that would lead a person call Jesus a commie or a libtard.
And BTW, I'm surprised that there is anyone left that does not know that "wall of separation trope" is used in the manner as we commonly understand trope -- a phrase to convey a meaning other than its original one. And indeed every use I've seen of this term does precisely that, attempting to impose the opposite meaning.
It is embarrassing that the administration is throwing the word "terrorist" around carelessly. I'm very disturbed by that. Just because Biden started it in force is no excuse for Trump to continue it.
* And especially not programs that did not exist until a century after his birth. Fun fact unrelated to this post, Julius Caesar cut over half the people off the bread roll once he established a means test for need. This seesawed back and forth with different emperors until it became hereditary. We ah headed that way.
Just one more thing:
https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!m5gZ!,w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F29c97cf5-128c-41e7-80fe-f687a45ea4bf_1032x718.png
BAYSIDER
Love that meme :)
DeleteAnd the 2020 election was stolen. Georgia recently admitted that.
Danbury Baptists wanted guarantees that the government would not persecute them, not that they couldn't be Christians in government, as you know.
Prayers for you and your hubbie.
What evidence is there of "Georgia admitting the election was stolen"?
DeleteOr just assertions from Trumpists that count as "evidence" to MAGA?
No "Christian Nation" mentioned or advocated here:
" I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature
should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State." T. Jefferson
Bayside's deflections are noted, but he also didn't dispute my claim.
DeleteMatthew 25 has no place in MAGA.
It has been admitted here that MAGA government shouldn't provide any public services related to food and healthcare to the poor.
The only strangers welcome in MAGA Land now are white people. Just as MAGA Jesus would want, I'm sure..
Thank you for helping me settle this matter, gentlemen.
Baysider,
DeleteI understand why you people have no use for evidence because you operate on believing Trump, or preferred biased sources, over facts.
If I may address your remarks:
A little miscellany reading down the comments:
With non-MAGA Gospel and my (commentary)
Interesting discussion, Ed. Jesus' mission was not to comment on the political or social structure of empire* (as He did on religious authorities, the rich, and rendering unto Caesar.) but the spiritual needs of its subjects. He led by teaching and example and ultimately sacrifice of his life for which I am eternally grateful. I find nothing about his life that would lead a person call Jesus a commie or a libtard. But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation... It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” (COMMIE libtards HATE the rich!)
Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: (Sorry, MAGA DEI only accepts white people now!)
Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. (That’s for BLEEDING HEART LIBRULS, NOT TRUMP!) To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either. ON A COLD DAY IN HELL! Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. COMMANISM! And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them. (BUT NOT THEM COMMIE DEMOCRATS WHO HATE AMERICA AND SAY TRUMP’S A LIAR! )
Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. (Not counting the non-violent, hardworking immigrants, along with their children, who we want to punish. They are LESS than the LEAST of us. And Somalian Americans! They are even LESSER than the least of us. We can treat them any way we want. And don’t get me started on those Haitian immigrants! Are they STILL EATING THE DOGS IN SPRINGFIELD? Trump said so, they must have! And protestors! They DESERVE to be SHOT! Can I get an Amen!)
And BTW, I'm surprised that there is anyone left that does not know that "wall of separation trope" is used in the manner as we commonly understand trope -- a phrase to convey a meaning other than its original one. And indeed every use I've seen of this term does precisely that, attempting to impose the opposite meaning.
(Cain’t be a lettin’ them thar edjacatid commies a quotin’ Jefferson and OUR Constitution. They was good with slavery and just white men votin’. The South’s gonna rise agin!! Yeee, Haaw!)
It is embarrassing that the administration is throwing the word "terrorist" around carelessly. I'm very disturbed by that. Just because Biden started it in force is no excuse for Trump to continue it. That started out sane but went off the rails with the typical false accusation against Biden.
* And especially not programs (“grain dole”) that did not exist until a century after his birth. Fun fact unrelated to this post, Julius Caesar (Died in 44 BC) cut over half the people off the bread roll once he established a means test for need. This seesawed back and forth with different emperors until it became hereditary. We ah headed that way. Um, “Bread and Circuses”? (By 58 BCE, the populist tribune Publius Clodius Pulcher passed a law making grain distributions completely free for eligible citizens.) https://www.historyskills.com/classroom/ancient-history/grain-dole/?srsltid=AfmBOoqICl7Caa_NrQxKe0DCB1qZTZEf2qzAFQMkHOUNsUDIVE-MRj2m
This was a turning point in Roman politics, (but not as significant as assassinations of emperors. and over-extension of the empire) ) as food distribution became a permanent entitlement rather than a temporary relief measure.
BAYSIDER
(Now THAT’S how you DEFLECT from “Matthew 25 has no place in MAGA”.)
"I don't see what Trump or MAGA has to do with" it either, Ed. So why is one person harping on Matt 25? Off point ... unless there is a point buried under all that verbiage.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I think we'd all agree that Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists assuring them they were safe from government interference in the practice of their religion represents a core tenet of our system even if the letter is not enshrined in legal documents. The inquiry was understandable considering his former enthusiasm for the French revolution. Jefferson also leaves us with this: "the Christian religion ... is a religion of all others most friendly to liberty, science, and the freest expansions of the human mind."
So how is it Jesus "hated" the rich when he died for them too? As the poster notes He accurately observed that rich people, who may feel more more self-reliant because of their wealth (and no kidding - wealth cushions many of life's woes), will find it harder to humble themselves and submit to God's way. Angry bluster is not a path there either.
BAYSIDER
Baysider,
DeleteNo, we don't "all agree" with your version of Jefferson's response to the Danbury Baptists.
From the Danbury Baptists to Jefferson:
"Our antient charter, together with the Laws made coincident therewith, were adopted as the Basis of our goverment, At the time of our revolution; and such had been our Laws & usages, & such still are; that religion is consider’d as the first object of Legislation; & therefore what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the State) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights: and these favors we receive at the expence of such degrading acknowledgements as are inconsistant with the rights of freemen. It is not to be wondred at therefore; if those, who seek after power & gain under the pretence of goverment & Religion should reproach their fellow men—should reproach their chief Magistrate, as an enemy of religion Law & good order because he will not, dares not assume the prerogative of Jehovah and make Laws to govern the Kingdom of Christ."
Jefferson's response included, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between church and State."
He's NOT agreeing with them that our government is based on their religion, but is saying the opposite with the words "separation between church and State".
You're hiding the context in Jefferson's quote. No wonder you twist the words "
"The Christian religion, when divested of the rags in which they [the clergy] have enveloped it, and brought to the original purity and simplicity of it's benevolent institutor, is a religion of all others most friendly to liberty, science, and the freest expansion of the human mind."
Jesus, yes. Christianity as preached, not so much.
https://monticelloshop.org/products/the-jefferson-bible-smithsonian-edition?srsltid=AfmBOopIxK2ID6xKJBYOwzVg5uGcr329M3y1cMHO_3arm4pltefK1Qg8
"The Jefferson Bible, or The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth as it is formally titled, was Thomas Jefferson's effort to extract what he considered the pertinent doctrine of Jesus by removing sections of the New Testament containing supernatural aspects as well as perceived misinterpretations he believed had been added by the Four Evangelists."
And still, Matthew 25 has no place in MAGA government. Democratic Socialism is more Christian than MAGA when it comes to Matthew 25.
Question:
ReplyDeleteTruth or lies?
"the woman driving the car... violently, willfully, and viciously ran over the ICE Officer, who seems to have shot her in self defense. Based on the attached clip, it is hard to believe he is alive, but is now recovering in the hospital. The situation is being studied, in its entirety," DJT
==
We saw the clip. The agent was not hit, fired from the side, and was quite able to walk over to where the woman's car crashed.
The shooter was whisked away and ICE blocked an MD from checking on the victim. The feds refuse to cooperate with state law enforcement investigators, while effectively shutting down an impartial FBI investigation, because Dear Leader has pronounced his infallible judgment by blaming the murdered victim.
If I am mistaken, please show me the evidence that would correct my view. Or I'm sure it would it be much easier to TELL me what I saw or to just parrot "TDS".
And Gingrich is a liar. Obama didn't engage in a "methodical government conspiracy" to undermine Trump. Investigating the Trump campaign's unreported contact with Russian agents was valid and legal.
And there are no polls that say "Trump's tribe is between 50 and 55% of the country". That is another lie. His approval rate is around 42%. Disapproval is around 54%
An amalgamation of all polls:
https://www.natesilver.net/p/trump-approval-ratings-nate-silver-bulletin
Again, I welcome evidence that would set me straight.
And while we're at it, Can anyone teach me how to trust in Trump's "morality" as the guiding light of our nation?
I'm having a very difficult time being assimilated. Is critical thinking a handicap?
I'll leave you with this.
ReplyDeleteAttorney for DC Pipe Bomb Suspect Say He Voted for Trump Twice — and Entitled to Full Jan. 6 Pardon
Of course he is. Laws are for OTHERS to obey, NOT MAGA.
"He's NOT agreeing with them that our government is based on their religion, but is saying the opposite with the words "separation between church and State." OK. We're saying the same thing. But then I never said Jefferson claimed our government is "based on their religion." You made up those words. Thank you for the clarity of a classic straw man effort.
ReplyDeleteThe attorney for the pipe bomber said that? OF COURSE HE DID! Must have a weak case.
This post is not about the ICE action in Minn. I refer anyone to Nate the Lawyer's balanced review of the law and the 3 videos available at the time. No homicide, no terrorist. Both are ridiculous, overblown language. Both sides need to knock it off. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDda-L_ZOE8
The officer's ability to walk over to her car looks on par with my ability to walk over to my school after being hit and suffering whiplash. But not the next day! Common in injury.
BAYSIDER
Thanks for that viewpoint.
DeleteHere's another perspective. It was homicide by definition, justifiable or not.
The woman shouldn't have placed her car there.
Why? Two reasons. She intended to illegally obstruct the officers.
The second reason she shouldn't have been there would be her understanding from many previous incidents that many ICE officers are undertrained brutal thugs, eager to beat or chemical spray people who annoy them, even just for taking video of them, which is legal.
What would be a normal reaction in a person who sees such an officer pulling his weapon on them? To flee in fear for their life.
This is more than understandable considering he had his weapon drawn BEFORE contact, indicating he was prepared or intending to shoot her. There's every natural reason for her fear and evasion at this point.
She was fleeing for her life, but it was taken anyway. The second and third shots at point blank range through the side window became excessive force and therefore a crime.
It was then retaliation, retribution, and summary execution.
A case for manslaughter under Minnesota law could be made.
609.20 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE FIRST DEGREE.
Whoever does any of the following is guilty of manslaughter in the first degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 15 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $30,000, or both:
(1) intentionally causes the death of another person in the heat of passion provoked by such words or acts of another as would provoke a person of ordinary self-control under like circumstances.
It was a tragedy born of both parties showing poor judgment.
The officer with the weapon didn't de-escalate, which is his responsibility when out of danger. He was out of danger when he shot her through the side window with the clear intention of killing her. She clearly had NO intention of killing him. HE decided to step in front her vehicle as she was clearly intent on leaving.
We can blame both sides all we want, but dispensing with an investigation of a such a homicide is morally inexcusable and probably legal malpractice.