Kamala Harris is clearly not an upgrade from Joe Biden. I think of her as Jezebel, the wicked wife of King Ahab. Oh, Jezebel’s dad, amongst other things, was the high priest of Ba’al. The “bel” part of her name is related to Ba’al. In the case of Harris, I think of her more as the Molech type due to her single-minded advocacy of unlimited abortion, the sacrament of Liberals everywhere.
The Democratic Party has fully embraced murder and mutilation of children as the social cornerstones of their platform. Harris was being honest when, at one of her campaign rallies, she told those proclaiming that “Christ was King” that they were at the wrong political event. Clearly Jesus and God are not welcomed in Democratic circles.
The Democrat Party’s economic ideas are not rooted in the real world but in the sin of envy. Envy, per the dictionary, is defined as “A feeling of discontent and resentment aroused by and in conjunction with desire for the possessions or qualities of another.” Another definition is “Malevolence.”
It’s no surprise that this is a direct violation of the Tenth Commandment.
“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.” — Exodus 20: 17.
Oh, coveting someone’s ass has nothing to do with sexual desire, but I can see why Democrats might think that given their embrace of sexual perverts and perversions. Actually, it might be better to think of the “ass” mentioned in this Commandment as your mode of transportation, while “ox” is your job, work truck, or equipment. i.e. your vocation.
Jealousy and ingratitude also come to mind when listening to Democrats whine about economic issues.
During his campaign, Donald Trump was rather quiet about details of what he would do when elected. Oh, I know he promised some tax cuts and things like that, but I don’t recall him presenting another list of potential Supreme Court nominees or specifics about Cabinet appointments. Other than promising Elon Musk and Senator Kenedy a job, much was kept under wraps.
We all know that he will unleash hell on the swamp rats once he takes office, but details are scarce as of now. What has been foreshadowed since his election is that he will go after those in the government that coordinated with big tech and private companies to debank, cancel, silence, or otherwise impede the exercise of free speech. He also promises to crackdown on those that violated immigration law. Other than those breaking our laws by committing criminal acts within our borders, I think he can’t do very much unless Congress gets involved; something they have not done in any meaningful way since Ronald Reagan was President.
Speaking of Reagan, Trump will end up butting heads with the unions representing government workers. Reagan’s ability to fire the air traffic controllers will loom large as a precedent for Trump as he tries to fire folks in the bureaucracy. Reagan’s situation was different in that the air traffic controllers were on strike and thus Reagan could appeal to public safety. The bureaucracy is largely controlled by the Executive Branch (President) but is it really? Do union contracts trump (pardon the pun) the Constitutional power of the President? If Congress authorizes money to be spent, is the Executive Branch obligated to spend it even if they don’t want too?
Also, the recent Supreme Court ruling on the Chevron Doctrine might be a tool that Trump can use to roll back the power of various agencies. Were the Democrats in power, the ramifications of this ruling would take years to work their way through the courts, and in reality, little would change; however, with Trump at the helm, Chevron might be the most effective lever that Trump has to change the overreach of government agencies.
Whatever Trump does, he needs to get Congress to adopt his programs. Governing via Executive Orders is unconstitutional. Trump needs to codify whatever changes that he makes as law. It might not make them immutable, but it will make it harder to undo. He needs to start by making his tax cuts from last time he was in office permanent.
If I could caution Trump on anything, its keep Congress out of any legislation dealing with In Vitro Fertilization (IVF). IVF is eugenics and morally something that should not be enshrined into Federal Law. Hard as it may sound, some things need to be kept at a state level even if the result is “messy” and inconsistent from one place to another.
Lastly, Congress needs to find a way to fix our elections and voter rolls without federalizing the election process. Maybe mandate paper ballots and a national holiday on election day. The postal service is a Constitutionally created agency so placing rules on vote by mail would be within their power. Outlawing ballot harvesting by requiring vote by mail ballots to be postmarked on or before election day might be a good start. (The merits of this being a state or federal will be debated, I’m sure, but you get where I’m going with this.)
The answer is simple but also complex. I will try to break it down for you as only I can. It’s wild, Kamala is the farthest left politician ever nominated and has a douche bag of a running mate. Polling has shown a tie, or maybe a 1 percent edge either way. Its close.
1. He isn’t likable. Trump is very polarizing, you either love him, hate him, or live under a rock.
2. He keeps spewing rhetoric no one wants to hear. Rigged elections, voter fraud, mass deportations. Stop it! The election was 4 years ago, he lost. Granted their were shenanigans but folks don’t want a January 6 redux if he loses again. The deportation thing should be softened to be we are going to deport criminals here illegally. We are a nation of immigrants, I have no issue with the hard working folks, the criminals I do. However you cannot vote if you are illegally here.
3. Kamala is focusing on her agenda??? LOL sure. The media has done a good job of not asking her hard questions. However Harris is staying positive people like to hear that. Again, we are not fans of her agenda, but positivity compared to Trump is helping her.
4. Name calling, insults and personal attacks are juvenile. Its childish, you are running for President of the US. Not in a comment section of a right/left wing website. Act Presidential, you will win.
There you have it. Trump likely loses the popular vote, NY, CA and IL are too populated and any Democrat will win. The Democrat will win big. The individual swing states are what I am blogging about. I think it s odd such a liberal nominee can be tied in pretty much each swing state.
Folks its going to be close, very close. If you live in a swing state; make sure you are registered to vote. Vote! Its sounds dumb but i know of 3 republicans who either have never voted, or never registered to vote. Yup, all 3 have Trump memorabilia on their vehicles/person.
When you ponder Kamala Harris, the lyrics to “She Works Hard for the Money” must be the first thing to pop into your head. Kamala got her start sleeping with Willie Brown, the former Speaker of the California Assembly and ex-mayor of San Francisco. Oh, King Willie was married at the time. He was 60 and she was 29.
Per her scrubbed Wikipedia article, “In 1994, Speaker of the California Assembly Willie Brown, who was then dating Harris, appointed her to the state Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and later to the California Medical Assistance Commission.”
Kamala had a different set of patrons than Gavin Newsom, but both were involved in San Francisco politics at the same time. As Gavin was maneuvering for the Governor’s chair, Kamala was following the track to a different statewide office, the Attorney General.
(Gavin put his gubernatorial ambitions on hold for eight years because Jerry Brown outmaneuvered him. Gavin cooled his jets as Lieutenant Governor until Brown was term limited out.)
Harris refused to be the chief law enforcement officer of California and instead only enforced laws with which she personally agreed. Most notably, she refused to defend voter approved Proposition 8 which amended California’s Constitution stating that marriage was only between one man and one woman. Harris also used the power of the State of California to prosecute “an antiabortion activist who had made secret recordings and then accused Planned Parenthood doctors of illegally selling fetal tissue.”
Harris moved from the AG Office to the US Senate.
Harris has been called the “Whore of Babylon.”
… we might just be witnessing her grand entrance on the world stage in the form of Kamala Harris – “sex-worker” to the elites – whose payment wasn’t money (so far as we know) but political advancement. It’s pretty much common knowledge that Kamala “sex-worked” her way up the political ladder from total obscurity to where she currently has a reasonable chance of becoming the most powerful political figure in the world.
Frankly, it’s a bit shocking to watch the dramatic implosion of radical feminism that Kamala’s ascendency as the world’s top woman represents. All of the relentless and passionate work women across the globe have done for decades to promote women as equal in all ways to men based upon merit is going up in flames before their eyes.
“Kamala Harris — she’s the original ‘Hawk Tuah’ girl — that’s the way she got where she is. And the party’s going downhill if it’s in her hands,” Lace said.
His comment refers to a viral TikTok clip in which a woman is asked the question, “What’s one move in bed that makes a man go crazy every time?”
“You gotta give ’em that ‘hawk tuah’ and spit on that thang,” the woman replies, alluding to oral sex.
If Kamala rose thru the “glass ceiling” it was on her back.
Even Democrats don’t like Kamala
Biden’s out, Kamala is in. Don’t be fooled: policies won’t change. Just like Biden wasn’t the one calling the shots, Kamala Harris won’t be either. She is the new figurehead for the deep state and the maidservant of Hillary Clinton, queen of the cabal of warmongers. They will continue their efforts to engulf the world in war and taking away our liberty.
Editor’s note: this post was submitted to me just hours before Sleepy Joe Biden withdrew from his re-election bid.
Trump has had a good couple of months. To be honest I had tired of Trump’s self-serving act and supported Ron DeSantis during the short-lived primary. The name calling, personal attacks, and insults are petty and come off as childish. It was funny with crooked Hillary, but I think this is what caused his defeat in 2020.
Blogger note: I will be supporting and voting for Trump in November.
Then I saw a different Trump; with the exception of him going after Nikki Haley pretty hard. He acted like a former president who wanted his job back. At the first debate, he never attacked Biden, just made a couple comments about his speech and him not making sense. It was brilliant…. now the democrats are the party of chaos. Then Trump was shot by a left-wing whacko. He survived and he gave a great speech. I was sitting here thinking aloud he may get damn near 400 electoral votes.
Then the old Trump once again re-appeared.
His selection of JD Vance told me what I feared most. Vance is a Trump loyalist. He will not have much of any role. He will be a yes man and a cheerleader. This was done because Mike Pence didn’t step in and try to overturn the election. Vance also called Trump a Hitler and a couple other choice words. I am sure they mended fences, but I don’t like what I see. Sometimes it’s good to hear other ideas, not close yourself in an echo chamber.
I didn’t need to hear about prime time speaking slots from Eric and Don Jr. but this is typical that family makes everything all about themselves.
I did watch Trump’s speech, it started beautifully with him telling the story about the assassination attempt and honoring the man who was killed. He told us he would do a tax cut, close the border with a fence, end the wars in Russia and Gaza, and get inflation down and interest rates down. He gave no substance, but no candidate really ever does anymore. Then Trump went full Trump talking about the stolen election and voter fraud 4 years ago.
Blogger note: Yes, I believe there was quite a bit of shenanigans that election night, from “broken water mains” to “every major swing state city stopping their count” but can we be honest, it’s been 4 years, get over it.
The worst part of this is the hair on fire conspiracies that come from it. They will say Trump will end abortions via executive order, he will stack the Supreme Court, and overturn more protections for marginalized groups, and he will overturn the constitution and become a dictator. None of this is true but our whack jobs bring out theirs.
For all the MAGA groupies: Trump is running against likely the second worst president in our history and one who appears frail, pale and lacks the ability to put together a sentence. Trump is only beating Biden by about 4-5 in each swing state. Trump is so hated by a large part of the population that even this matchup could come down to the wire. If Biden is replaced, all bets are off, anything could happen. Also vote for the entire GOP ticket, this included senators and congressman, Trump is going to need about 55 senators to get what he wants. Recall his own party fought with him a lot during his first term. It’s disturbing. I’ve seen polling where Trump is up 4-5% yet our challenger trails a far left democrat by the same margin.
Editor’s Note: This was submitted to me a few days before Trump was shot in Pennsylvania.
Hear me out on this. Face it, you know Biden is toast when David Axelrod, a group of senators, governors, and congressman are saying, “drop out, you cannot win” that it’s over.
Let Trump win.
This economy is teetering, the inflation is not stopping, Trump claims to have an answer…let him own it.
Let Trump win.
Interest rates are sky high, home prices, and car prices are insane. Americans are draining savings, and looting retirement accounts to fund basic needs. Trump says he can fix it…let him own it.
Let Trump win.
Again, I know you don’t want to hear this….
When he gets elected, don’t impeach him. You are just giving him what he wants….it’s been proven that your continued indictments and arrests of him failed to move public perception. He will be there 4 years…let it go. No 25th amendment BS either.
Let Trump win.
You are so concerned he is an agent of Russia….when Ukraine is out of soldiers…let Trump cut them off. If Ukraine falls to Russia…say you told us so!
Democrats heed my words here.
You know what is going to happen with Trump, his own party doesn’t like him. They fought him in term 1, they will fight him again. His own party wanted a brokered convention to pick between Kasich and Lyin Ted….
Let Trump win.
Trump = Chaos he is going to fire multiple cabinet members and call any and anyone a name. Be the adults in the room…get out your popcorn and enjoy the moment. Trust me, the GOP is loving you all attacking Biden 4 years after gas lighting all of us about his mental state.
Run Gavin, Whitmer, or some other far left folk in 2028….it’s likely you will win the White House. People like me grew tired of Trump. His act grates on people. He is mentally exhausting to deal with.
Change your rhetoric. Quit supporting BLM protests, protests against Israel on college campii, and general lawlessness. Drop this transgender nonsense from your platform. Once you turn 18, hell go for it….make yourself into a science project or a real life Mr. Potato Head for all I care….knock this crap off in the schools. You look like a kook fringe party with these platforms…
Speaking of kook fringe….
I honestly do not recognize the GOP anymore. To me they have become hijacked by hair on fire conspiracy theorists, election deniers, and whack jobs. If Trump were to somehow lose, the party could become a regional party only, such as the CA GOP very quickly.
Some person identified as a conservative journalist named Daniel Greenfield just called for the extermination of everybody in Gaza. He is from Israel of course.
Greenfield further hashes this out, saying, “There are no civilians in Gaza. The vast majority of the population supports Hamas or some Islamic terrorist movement. Only a tiny minority opposes Islamic terrorism and wants peace.” He concludes:
“Hamas can’t be defeated by waiting until its terrorists take off their civilian clothes and put on uniforms. Hamas are the civilians. They are the ones holding the hostages. The only way to free the hostages and defeat the terrorists is to destroy the terror culture in whatever form it takes.”
As stated previously on this blog, the land area known as “Gaza” will be depopulated, the only question is will: “The West” take in two million refugees or will Israel just level the place?
If Trump wins, will it matter? Could it be over by then?
With Joe Biden in charge, look for this to be described by the American media as a mostly peaceful final solution.
In photo above, Mike Franco hurls cell phone at Spencer Hutchings.
Post election consequences.
Just when you thought it was safe to resume your life again, things take a turn into the Twilight Zone.
Enter one, Mike Franco. Mike is a member of PAC PAC. PAC PAC is the Politically Active Christians PAC. PAC PAC is the same group that I blogged about last week that did the seminar on Christian Nationalism not being Christian.
It seems that Mike was not happy that Spencer Hutchings and Jane Sauter split the conservative vote. Their combined vote total was more than incumbent Mark Sauter got in Tuesday’s election. So, Mike went to Spencer’s place of business and proceeded to assault him and some guy named Dan Rose.
The best part is that it was captured on video.
Today, a man that is reportedly a member of the Politically Active Christians (PAC PAC) entered a local gun shop bitter and enraged over the election results from earlier this week.
Mike Franco has been arrested by Bonner County Sheriff’s office pending multiple charges, including assault, battery, destruction of property, and likely more charges.
Two victims were taken to the hospital, including Spencer Hutchings, owner of Sheepdog Supplies Gun Store, and Dan Rose, currently an independent candidate for State Senator. Hutchings is a former candidate against Franco’s chosen candidate, another PAC PAC member.
You can’t help but wonder if Republican candidates would be less inclined to split the vote if more people like Mike gave them a piece of their minds.
Oh, both PAC PAC and Bonner Votes (Bonner is the county just south of mine) are run by the same group. Both URLs are linked to the same PAC PAC video.
Please note that the assault shown above was at a gun store. I don’t know if that’s a criminal enhancement in Idaho but I’m sure it would be in Elk Grove.
Before getting to the results, I need to recount the Stolley campaign’s last round of dirty politics.
Travis Stolley
Last Sunday (05/19/24), Travis Stolley’s minions dumped another set of documents as a hit piece against Dave Schuman. This trove of goodies was literally twenty years old. Like a good media report, they not only gave you the goods but then told you what you were supposed to glean from the information. They allege that Dave once had a drug dog. Said dog, failed his certification in sniffing out street pharmaceuticals in 2004. Supposedly the dog was used two years later in relationship to an arrest. They claim this was illegal.
Please note once again that whoever was Sheriff at the time kept Dave on the payroll. Folks, based on all the information that has come out in this race, it has never been the Sheriff’s policy to keep good records of law enforcement activity. This begs the question as to whether it is standard operating procedure to not enforce the law or is there an expectation that some families get preferential treatment in this county?
Another thing repeatedly mentioned at the debate and subsequent candidate forums is that drugs are a big problem in the county; however, nobody can recall the last time anyone was arrested for dealing drugs. Is law enforcement here just expected to look the other way? Our county is on the border with Canada and has two different border crossings. Don’t you think it would be in some criminal enterprise’s best interest to have a friendly Sheriff in their pocket? Just wondering.
Anyway, Tuesday was the election. Dave Schuman came in dead last. Second place went to John VanGesen. Travis Stolley—who hasn’t been at a campaign event in a good six weeks—came in first with over fifty percent of the vote.
Locally, three candidates put their names on the ballot and then hid in Joe Biden’s basement until the election was over, all three won. Travis Stolley for Sheriff, Jim Woodward for State Senate, and Mark Sauter for State House of Representatives. Woodward beat a first term incumbent that had defeated him in the previous election.
In the next week I will be getting my hands on the voter rolls and expect to find that the Democrats (Democrats here run as Republicans) have been ballot harvesting absentee ballots. This is illegal in Idaho, but the ends justify the means as long as the right guys win; just ask any Democrat.
In the only open seat for State office, Cornel Razor beat Chuck Lowman. Cornel owns the Army Surplus Store in Sandpoint.
Folks Dave Schuman issued a press release yesterday. Here it is in its entirety. Please note that I’m not putting this in block quotes because it’s too darn long. FYI I’ve also seen it online as a three-page Word document.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE MAY 19TH, 2024
FROM THE DESK OF DAVE SCHUMAN:
Shortly after I announced my candidacy a complaint was lodged questioning my integrity based off of statements made during my political campaign. That in itself should tell you that the complaint is politically motivated.
Majority of those very same statements, made during a previous campaign 8 years prior were not complained about then. You might want to ask; “Who would benefit by shaming Dave Schuman”?
The complaint ranged from my job descriptions listed on my resume for my assignment with the Boundary County Sheriff’s Office. A job description that I copied and pasted, written by the county. The fact that the present administration opted not to use me to the fullest definition of that job description does not make the job description invalid, or shows any misconduct on my part.
I quoted statements passed onto me from a past supervisor of mine, Undersheriff Tim Day, as to the success of the Drug Task Force that I worked in for a number of years. Again, not an issue on me.
Every part of the complaint would be first line supervisor corrective actions needed, at best. That was never conducted.
Instead the complaint was sent to Idaho P.O.S.T (police academy) launching an investigation, also causing a personnel action.
Based on the investigation being initiated the current Sheriff did the proper thing and placed me on administrative leave.
Being a county employee on administrative leave undergoing a personnel action, disclosure of all the facts were limited. A step that often is used to stiffel the truth
Given the fact that I met my requirements for retirement and I am a candidate for Sheriff that supports clarity and the U.S & Idaho Constitution, I retired, last day being 31 March 2024. My highest certification I obtained in Idaho is a Masters level.
My retirement gave me the ability to clarify a lot of things. The only thing I cannot comment on is the P.O.S.T Investigators final report. My retirement is also in line with the motto I have conducted throughout career. That being “Do The Right Thing, Even When Not Popular. “
The reasons I can’t comment on the final report are:
* I don’t know all steps taken.
* I am not the author of the report.
The timing of this complaint is very suspect, especially when I have never been counseled for such actions in an 44 1/2 year career.
I have a proven track record in regards to sound Constitutional decisions resulting in zero payout. Both as a line officer and a leader. It is not buzz words to me. The Constitution’s core promises of equal protection under the law to all.
Depending on the outcome of the election on 21 May 2024 will dictate what further action is required in regards to the complaint.
Recently a local news outlet published 1/2 of this story after telling me that they wouldn’t do such a thing without the complete facts being presented. We are still awaiting a final report from the Idaho Police academy. Due process is a must. That’s not happening here. No criminal acts were depicted in the complaint, but those that are jumping on the bandwagon sure are trying to paint a different picture without facts. Some might call that slander.
I have a long history of protecting others. It feels very different to be viewed that I need to defend myself. Fact is I have done nothing wrong, this is an attempt to slime me and torpedo our campaign.
In regards to past leadership facts that are conveniently omitted by my some are:
* By the command structure of the Boundary County Sheriff’s Office there are only 5 , on paper Supervisory positions. Being:
– Sheriff
– Undersheriff
– Patrol Sergeant
– Detention Sergeant
– Dispatch Supervisor
Additional information omitted is:
My past duties makes me tailored made to be Sheriff of Boundary County.
My, on paper, leadership experience shows in excess of 17 years with U.S Army, supervising U.S.A Citizen & Foreign Citizens, U.S.A military & Foreign military. In both combat and non-combat situations. I received many accommodations and decorations, ranging from a Meritorious Service Medal down to a Service award.
As a Platoon Sergeant for the majority of my military career I directly lead 32 Military Police Service members, very similar to the size of BCSO. Primarily taking care of military installations, population equal to that of Boundary County.
I have managed multi millions dollar plus budgets and multi millions dollars plus accountability and serviceability of equipment. But that is played down by some.
Not being a bean counter or Commander of my own desk and being an active participant of the day to day line officer activities in Boundary County is what the role of an effective Sheriff is for our community.
I accept the fact that not everyone shares my vision, but I will not accept a person or persons that insist on trying to con our community.
I might not always make you happy, but you will always receive the truth.
It is unfortunate that the ridiculous political actions being conducted at a National level have trickled down to our County.
I know Boundary County. I have lived it, worked it, protected and fallen in love with it and hope as Sheriff I will be able to help make our County shine in a positive light and the undignified actions of others are decreased.
I have have a proven history of honesty and integrity. I have never violated anyone’s civil or constitutional rights.
My name is Dave Schuman, and I am running for Boundary County Sheriff.
End of press release quotation.
Folks, tomorrow is election day here and this race is looking to be a barn burner.
Note: in the ten minutes (or less) that it takes you to read this, I saved you from wasting an additional two hours of your life watching the video that I reviewed. My notes were made as I watched this video, so they are jumpy.
Here in north Idaho, there is a church that is preaching against Christian Nationalism. This is not too remarkable to me since many claiming the name of Christ are not really Christians, but this instance is different. Why? Because this congregation controls a political action committee. This PAC has been a tool wielded against conservative Christian candidates. Since they have interjected themselves into the public square, I had decided to critique their claims.
Before I begin, I have a few comments.
First, there is no such thing as Christian Nationalism. This term is a strawman constructed by the Left to hammer conservatives and Christians. There is no leader of Christian Nationalism because there are no dues, membership, or anything else. It’s just a label that Liberals use to pigeonhole folks that they don’t like. Christian Nationalism is a category of people that the Left wish to dismiss in much the same way as dog excrement on the bottom of their designer shoes.
That being said, many conservatives and Christians have decided to “own” the label. For those ignorant in history or who spent too much time in public school, the name “Christian” was coined by the opponents of Jesus as a way to insult and belittle His followers. Instead of fighting the label, the Church decided to own it and thus were OK to be called something intended as an insult.
Anyone can claim to be a Christian Nationalist or called that by anyone that wishes to belittle them or be dismissive of their views of a conservative. The term itself has little to no context or content. However, why let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory?
Lastly, some folks call themselves Christian Nationalists just to get a rise from the Left and folks at places like the Southern Poverty Law Center and Anti-Defamation League.
Some Christians don’t like the label because it is an inaccurate summary of their beliefs.
Anyway, The Berean Church in Sandpoint Idaho has managed to construct a two-hour presentation on the evils of Christian Nationalism. What follows will be a few comments on their presentation. The video is bookmarked in two locations.
The presentation is given by three individuals. Parts I and IV are by a black gentleman that is not identified, the next portion is given by the pastor, Michael Kohl, and a third part is by another fellow. Parts of the audio are faint and hard to understand. The video was posted to YouTube on Jan 19, 2024.
Kohl graduated for Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia which is Presbyterian and also attended the Reformed Episcopal Seminary (Philadelphia). He was in the Presbyterian Church In America (PCA) a somewhat liberal Presbyterian denomination, and has also worked in Brethren and independent Churches. The church’s statement of faith is the Five Protestant Solas with no elaboration.
Part I
This presentation begins with a PowerPoint slide Understanding the backdrop.
The four bullet points which are explained in more detail later are:
What is the term Christian Nationalism?
Who are the thought leaders of modern Christian Nationalism?
Mapping out the Christian Nationalism operation
Discovering how it matters to Idaho
First up is a video clip which is a promo for Rob Reiner’s movie attacking Christianity, God and Country. By-the-way, this turkey really bombed at the box office so don’t feel bad if you never saw it. Oh, Reiner hates Christians and always has.
My Comment on God and Country
The Hollywood reporter says of the film:
And, as the film points out in exhaustive detail, Christian Nationalism is very much a political, rather than religious, movement. The movement posits that America is a Christian nation and that the founders intended it as such. It seeks to roll back feminism, LBGTQ rights and abortion, and to either introduce Christianity to public schools or substitute them with private Christian schools funded by vouchers.
Any rational Christian believes all the things lamented by the Hollywood Reporter.
Back to the presentation
The presenter then critiques the Reiner promo and then steers people to Wikipedia for a definition of Christian Nationalism. He says he doesn’t like Liberals critiquing Christian Nationalism but then uses them as a source to do so. This is circular reasoning. He then keys on the names Andrew Torba and Nick Fuentes because they are mentioned by Wikipedia.
First up is a critique of Nick Fuentes. The clip shown is Fuentes talking of tearing down inclusive forces and kicking the Republican Party in the butt. I can tell you what’s probably coming next because Nick mentioned the word “white” and that is the racism card. In the context of DEI, Nick is right to say white people, and doubly so if they’re male, get screwed by the Democrat quota system.
I resumed the clip and Fuentes says he wants to drag the Republican Party back inside the doors of the church. FYI in the early years of the Republican Party, the Republican Party was called the Episcopal Church at prayer. The anti-slavery movement was largely a Christian one and was instrumental in the foundation of the Republican Party.
Then the presenter goes to Vincent James Foxx. Online, he goes by Vincent James. Vincent is a Republican and a self-identified Roman Catholic.
My comments on Vincent James
Vincent spends most of his podcasts talking against illegal immigration, discrimination against white people—a rection or pushback to those pushing DEI—and he points out the part played by prominent Jewish people in promoting the tearing-down of our institutions. He is not anti-Semitic, but against Jewish people born in America that have more allegiance to Israel than America. He makes it clear—if you listen—that he doesn’t hate Jews as a group be disagrees with wealthy Jewish people that teardown others to get special advantages for themselves and their allies. Rarely does he talk of Christianity except as it is affected by things like the recently adopted federal bill which gives special protections against anti-Semitic speech. This bill adopts language defining anti-Semitism which was written by a Jewish special interest group. It prohibits speaking against Zionism and makes the biblical account of Jesus’ crucifixion illegal. Yet, it got the full support of Zionist Christians but makes essential parts of the Gospel illegal to say. I think we will have more to say about Dispensational, premillennial theology before this presentation is concluded but we will see.
Back to the presentation.
The presenter plays a clip of Vincent being sarcastic and over the top talking about Christian Nationalism rolling back liberal social policy. Oh, but the presenter doesn’t really acknowledge that James is being sarcastic but takes him literally which in reality is taking him out of context. Folks, you don’t get thousands of followers online without some showmanship in your presentation. Vincent James has about 70 thousand followers on his Bitchute channel. He is on Rumble and several other places as well.
After a quick clip of James, the presenter goes on to some guy named Dave Reily. Dave Reily was recently hired by the Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF). IFF is not a part of Christian Nationalism they lean libertarian, so I don’t know why it matters.
Somehow some of these guys are Facebook friends or something like that or they reposted a meme that someone put online so now they are all part of some great conspiracy. This is really a stretch.
Switching gears slightly we then go to Andrew Torba of the website Gab. Gab is a site dedicated to free speech. It is intended to be a safe haven for Christians and other that don’t wish to be censored by BIG Tech. Vincent James has a page on Gab which is where I first come across him. Torba wrote a book on Christian Nationalism that sounds like mash-up of parts of How the Irish Saved Civilization and Christian Reconstruction.
In this book, Torba has a recommended reading section. The presenter cherry picks three guys, Doug Wilson and two of his fellow travelers in Moscow Idaho. Please note that he ignores everyone else on the list.
My Comments on Berean’s Treatment of Andrew Torba
This entire presentation of over two hours never once quotes from Andrew Torba or his book on Christian Nationalism. Nor does it quote from anyone else writing on the topic. I suspect because Torba is repackaging Theonomy and Christian Reconstruction, whereas Stephen Wolfe’s book is on political theory. Political Theory is what should be but normally omits how to get there. The reader is left with the challenge of how to implement the ideas presented.
Back to the presentation
Also, please note that we have crossed the line from Roman Catholic to Protestant people. Torba, Wilson, and others have a much more biblical and higher view of Scripture and how it should be applied to public policy than Vincent James and others.
Wilson then gets attacked by the presenter for one line in one book that Wilson wrote. Folks Wilson has written hundreds of books, articles, and other documents. Look, He is a prolific writer. I know that Wilson has many supporters and detractors but to dismiss him outright on the basis of one sentence is sloppy and disingenuous.
Oh, here is the offending statement.
But breaking covenant occurs because of unbelief, lack of faith, and because of lack of good works.
Whether this is related to James and the faith and works debate is not stated since we are denied context for the quotation.
Then the presenter goes after Peter Leithart for this quote which is never put into context.
Salvation must take a social form, and the Church is that social form of salvation, the community that already (though imperfectly) has become the human race as God created it to be, the human race that is becoming what God intends it to be. The Church is neither a reservoir of grace nor an external support for the Christian life. The Church is salvation.
This sounds like a variation of St. Cyprian, “No one can have God for his Father, who does not have the Church for his mother.”
Whatever larger point Leithart is making is never given. As Walter Martin famously said, “A text without a context, is a pretext, usually for error.”
On the basis of this quote, the presenter expects us to dismiss Leithart too.
Stephen Wolfe wrote “The Case for Christian Nationalism.” Many of their PowerPoint slides have the first name spelled a “Steven” not “Stephen.”
Drum roll, and the single pull quote from his book is:
I am not calling for a monarchial regime over every civil polity, and certainly not an autocracy, though I envision a measured and theocratic Caesarism—the prince as world-shaker for our time, who brings a Christian people to self-consciousness and who, in his rise, restores their will for good.
Again, this quote is presented without context. I can think of several possible and contradictory understandings of this quote but without context, we don’t know what the point of it really is. However, it really begs the question as to whether civil government should be based on God’s law or men’s. Ultimately these are the only two possibilities.
Wow. Surprise. We actually get a second quote from Wolfe. Presented again without context or elaboration.
Many claims in the book will worry many American conservative Christians. I’ve said that political governments can suppress false religion, establish a church, even require people to attend church. I also wrote about a ‘Christian prince,’ which is not the sort of political title one would find in America. I will not walk back those claims.
The presenter expects us to be shocked at the quote but should we really? First, we have no context for the above statement. However, I know that parts of it are easily proven true. Let’s look at a few parts of the above.
Politics can suppress false religion. Two examples. The United States outlawed the Mormon practice of polygamy. Currently, many are trying to outlaw displays of Satanic worship in public schools—especially as clubs on elementary campuses—and displays in public places. Plurality does have limits; especially, in a nation founded on Christian values. Oh, and don’t forget that all law is moral and an establishment of someone’s religion.
A State can establish a church. Yep, this is also a true statement. The majority of the 13 colonies had state sponsored churches when they ratified the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution only prohibits establishing a national church. Ditto for test oaths. Tax money also went to state sponsored churches to pay their clergy and other church expenses.
Requiring church attendance by citizens might be more problematic; however, it would not surprise me if the Pilgrims and other early settlers had such a requirement. Again, what is the context?
As for the “Christian Prince.” We are not given any context, however, my first thought is of Machiavelli’s book “The Prince.” Other ideas might include Constantine or a Trump-like figure that used Scripture as his guide to rule.
The presenter does not analyze this statement, just mocks it and dismisses it out of hand.
Congratulations. You have now endured about 38 minutes of this presentation.
Part II
With a horrible, stutter of the video, we then get a new presenter, that I assume is Pastor Kohl.
We will now get a theological critique of Christian Nationalism… well maybe.
Rev Kohl starts with a definition of Christianity or says he will, then takes a detour of sorts thru the book of Romans. He tries contrasting the Apostle Paul versus Stephen Wolfe, but Wolfe is not given in context, just one sentence, again without context. Then he goes back to Genesis and talks about Abraham.
At this point Kohl slaps Doug Wilson on a quote dealing with baptism. Again, there is no context. I wonder if Wilson advocates infant baptism while Kohl does not. And who cares? What does this have to do with Christian Nationalism? Probably nothing.
On one of the slides, Kohl has Abraham’s son Isaac spelled as “Isac”. Another minus point for Kohl.
Then he jumps to Wolfe again with a series of quotes on nationalism that seem varied. As usual, they are presented without context. Then he jumps to Moses and quotes some stuff about his wife who may have been black. I’m not sure of his point. I think that Kohl is trying to build a foundation that Christian Nationalists are all racists. Hope he’s better than that. He is on a rant about groups and factions. I will wait and see where this goes.
Now he pulls a quote from Wolfe that says the invisible church and the visible church are the same group. Again, no context so I don’t know if there is more to this than stated. We also don’t know what Wolfe’s church affiliation is so we don’t know if we are defining terms the same way or differently? Lastly, as a practical matter, we don’t know the difference between the visible and invisible church, God is the one that sees men’s hearts and knows who is truly save not us.
The next Wolfe quote is:
But public heresy has the potential to harm other’s souls by causing doubt or distraction or by disrupting public peace. The magistrate, who must care for the souls of his people, may act to suppress that heresy.
In my mind, I think of claims that homosexuality, abortion, or transgenderism are biblically ok. This would be heresy that casts doubt and disrupts the public peace.
Kohl mocks this whole statement but by what standard does he expect us to be government if not the Bible?
Kohl rants on about the visible vs invisible church and that Christian Nationalists have this wrong as a way for them to lord power over the rest of us. He states this as fact but never proves it. The scholarship used to construct this presentation is really poor.
As I stated at the first, there is no leader of Christian Nationalism. It is a strawman invented by liberals. Some of us are ok to own the label instead of demanding a new or different one.
Kohl tries to make out fellow believers as Judaizers. He again spanks Doug Wilson on baptism. Based on the quotes cited, Wilson believes that baptism is membership into the covenant and thus a sign of one’s salvation. This is not a radical Christian view unless maybe you are a Baptist which Kohl doesn’t appear to be. Children that are baptized are treated as believers as long as they walk in the faith. Baptized children are presumed saved. They have covenant membership and should be allowed access to the Lord’s Table, Holy Communion, or whatever you want to call it. As they get older it is assumed that they will make the faith their own via a decision, confirmation, or some other act. If they don’t then a time may come when they are not longer covenant members in good standing.
There it goes, “Judaizers were the original Christian Nationalists.”
Kohl says, Christian Nationalists believe in Jesus plus something else as the basis of salvation and that is why they are wrong. I find this troublesome because he has produced zero quotes that this is the case. He hasn’t tied salvation to any sort of political movement. It’s all smoke and mirrors.
Kohl’s Three Card Monty lost the pea a long time ago, but his listeners are supposed to be in awe because the cups are still being shuffled about.
This presentation is empty of substance. The only point he has made so far is that there is a difference between the visible and invisible church and Mr. Wolfe might be shaky on that point. To me it’s a secondary issue.
I’m an hour and twenty minutes into this thing and I have yet to hear what Christian Nationalists want to do in a political way that is at variance with the Bible or why they are objectionable. Furthermore, what is the Berean Christian Fellowship’s more biblical alternative?
Mercifully it is intermission. I’m taking a pit stop. We have one hour remaining in this presentation.
This section is presented by a third person. Again, none of the speakers have been introduced.
The presenter is promising to give a history of Christian Nationalism. He references the Roman Church and pulls a quote from Leithart that sounds rather Roman. I quote only the latter part:
… so there can be no Church without sacraments. Since there can be no salvation without the Church, since indeed, the Church is salvation, there is no salvation without the sacraments.
I can see why some might object to this statement, but what does it have to do with Christian Nationalism? The Church is the Bride of Christ so there is a sense in which this is true. Also, the Church is charged with administering the sacraments. Yes, technically salvation is thru the sacrifice of Christ but all those saved by Him are part of His Bride the Church. Again, without context, I feel that this quote is being manipulated by the presenters.
The next section is some history on the Reformation. In the midst of this topic, the presenter interjects another quote by Wolfe. Again, without context. The word “who” in this quote (below) could refer to God or the prince. I can’t tell which, but it makes a huge difference in the meaning of this sentence.
The prince enlivens laws not as an agent of coercion but as the divinely sanctioned vicar of God who binds conscience to just applications of natural law, as one who directs public reason.
The reoccurrence of “the prince’ makes me harken back to Machiavelli. It is worth asking if Wolfe believes Machiavelli’s The Prince was a serious treatise of politics or a satirical document. The former is the view of most academics, but the latter is my position on this work.
The presenter bashes the idea of the prince also being the spiritual leader of the nation. Whether Wolfe advocates this or is just mimicking Machiavelli or this is in a different context altogether is unknown. I think the presenter is trying to equate Wolfe’s ideas with an Anglican view of Christianity where the king is both political and spiritual head of the nation. The U.S. Constitution prohibits this from happening by outlawing a national church. King Saul (and later David & Jesus) exercised the offices of prophet, priest, and king at the same time. This is not the American system but is clearly a biblical idea.
The presenter then quotes some fellow named Dan Fisher for writing,
“[preachers] had been laying the groundwork for the [American] revolution by preaching for years that believers could not separate their religious convictions from their political positions and actions.”
Folks isn’t that what Christian Nationalists are advocating? Religious convictions should not be separated from their political positions and actions. In other words, your faith should be reflected in how you live your life the other six days of the week. What’s wrong with that?
Oh, the last sentence of the pull quote by Fisher is:
It was clear they saw no contradiction in mixing politics and religion.
The presenter keeps going back to Wolfe’s book and contrasting his view with other writings. Folks, it’s really dumb to do this. Who says they are followers of Wolfe? I’ve never met anyone who even knows who he is. I have looked at lots of videos by Vincent James and read stuff by Torba and Wilson and never heard of Wolfe or his ideas mentioned. This is a longform strawman presentation where we get to spank Wolfe like a piñata.
Finally, he gets to his point, “the American Revolution was a violation of Christian Nationalism.”
His thesis is that King James of England was a Christian Nationalist, and the Pilgrims were fleeing to American to escape Christian Nationalism. To these guys at Berean, Christian Nationalists want to destroy our country and establish a monarchy in its place. Sorry, I only met one guy in my life that ever wanted a monarchy in the United States, and he died last year.
Now the presenter is claiming to go to the Bible to see what it says about government. Oh, the time counter is at one hour, 47 minutes. Wanna bet they call themselves a Bible church?
Their first assertion is, “Political power comes ultimately from God but practically from the will of the people.” The presenter goes to the writings of Moses where Moses sets up the rulers of tens, hundreds, and thousands. Then to Saul and then David. He is trying to claim that the Old Testament political system was a republic like ours’.
He then goes to quotes, again and again by Wolfe, concerning the prince. I think it’s clear that Wolfe is not talking specifically about America and how it should be governed but it is an update to The Prince or written in much the same style as a political theory book.
Finally, two hours in, we get to Romans 13, a favorite home to heretics and antinomians that really believed the two-weeks-to-flatten-the-curve BS. After a cursory mention of the passage, we go to secular political theory with Hans Eysenck’s Theory of Government. Oh, another misspelling on their PowerPoint slides as his last name was spelled “Eyseneck”.
In the name of fairness, I went to the fount of all authority in political matters, at least for these presenters, Wikipedia. There I learned that Eysenck forged much of the data used on his work, and no one has been able to replicate key parts of it. The data used for his political information was manipulated as well. Then the presenter goes to several other charts on politics in rapid succession. A biblical model of how we should be governed or what the rules should be followed is no where to be seen. With ten minutes remaining, he gets to a model of American government that emphasizes four points: the rule of law, limited government, government does not control access to God, and salvation is individual.
Part IV
Wow, with eight minutes left we get another part and another presenter. (same guy as Part I.)
Christian Nationalism in not Christian or American
Christian Nationalism is not the answer to our problems.
Christian Nationalism is just another flavor of tyranny.
Have an answer based on biblical principles on which our nation was founded.
Berean Church has carefully cherrypicked Christian Nationalism to make a case that can’t really be made. If they were honest then they would have dealt with Torba’s book on Christian Nationalism as well as Stephen Wolfe’s. Dominion is not mentioned at all in this presentation even thought it is found from the earliest pages of Genesis to Revelation.
Berean Church says that Christian Nationalism is not the answer, but they never offer any alternatives. They are silent on what the Bible says a civil government should do. Should we infer that God doesn’t care?
Again, Berean Church uses pull quotes from one book to try to make their case about all Christian Nationalists. Their claim that all people calling themselves Christian Nationalists advocate for tyranny is ridiculous. Even the things that they quote from Wolfe don’t support that claim. If the Biden and Obama administrations prove anything, it’s that you don’t need a monarchy to live under tyranny. Ditto for Canada and Australia.
Knowing biblical principles on how our nation was founded are great but when folks around us deny the authority of Scripture and the church is silent on today’s social and cultural issues then what good is that? How does the Bible speak to our problems now? Again, Berean Church is silent.
The words of Gary North, R.J. Rushdoony, and others are echoing in my mind, you can’t beat something with nothing. Or if you prefer, the question posed in the 1970’s and 80’s by Francis Schaffer, How Should We Then Live?
Sorry, but I don’t see Christian Nationalism as a quest to force a monarchy onto the United States. I see it as a call for Christians to bring biblical answers to bear on the real world instead of Christians hiding it their pews hoping to be raptured so they won’t have to reap what they have sewn. Christian Nationalism is a call for the Church to get off its butt and redeem the time because the days are evil.
Andrew Torba signs every email that he sends with the words “Christ is King.” He does not advocate for the United States to be ruled by a king because we already have a king, and his name is Jesus. Torba does want Christians to be free from being cancelled by the Left and advocates that we have parallel structures that are truly free of censorship. This is similar to what Saint Patrick did to evangelize Ireland.
Vincent James does not advocate for a monarchy in the United States. However, he does advocate for people to have the same rules for their friends and enemies. He despises double standards; especially, when he is a member of the group being singled out for discriminatory treatment. I think he would agree that men should be judged by the content of their character.
I have read the Boniface Option. It is short, whitty, and has a large dose of sarcasm. It calls for men to be men and laments the societal decay of our nation.
I’m not a follower of anybody critiqued in this presentation except Jesus and they didn’t have much to say about him which is sad. My views on the Bible were formed before there was such a thing as Christian Nationalism and, in some circles, they are even more controversial. The Bible says, “For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.” Let’s start with that statement and work together as we are able instead of trying to manufacture new ways to unchurch each other.
