"Christian Right" Resorts to Dangerous Rhetoric in Supporting Trump

As regular readers know, in my view, the "Christian Right" has sold its soul to Donald Trump in exchange for promises of special rights for Christofascists which would in essence exempt religious extremists from the laws that bind other citizens.  Now, these zealots, particularly those that I refer to as "professional Christians" who use religion as a guise for enriching themselves and seizing political power are engaging in dangerous rhetoric that could well prompt extremists and the mentally unstable to resort to violence against those being depicted as enemies in a religious war.   History is full of examples of the horrific consequences of fusing religion with a self-serving political agenda: the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre in Paris when thousands of Protestants were murdered by Catholics, the wars of religion in Tudor England, the Thirty Years War in 17th century Europe that claimed 8 million lives, the persecution of "Old Believers" in 17th century Russia, the years of religious based violence in Northern Ireland, and, of course the violence and murder done by Islamic fundamentalists and ISIS. Just as disturbing is the statements of U.S. Attorney General William Barr - a strident opponent of LGBT rights - that appear aimed at inciting religious extremists.  A piece in LGBT Nation looks at this dangerous development:  

Religious right leaders, struggling to maintain power and influence – even in the chaotic White House – have been avowing lately that anyone who opposes Donald Trump is in league with the devil—literally.

In a conversation with fellow evangelical Eric Metaxas, Franklin Graham said that resistance to Trump was “almost demonic,” to which Metaxas replied, “It’s not almost demonic. You know and I know, at the heart, it’s a spiritual battle.”

Graham and Metaxas are hardly alone. Lesser known, but just as dangerous figures like Stephen Strang and Frank Amedia are making the same claim.

It’s easy to brush these claims off as the usual hysterical claims from the religious right. But in fact they represent a new—and dangerous—escalation in rhetoric. Saying you’re waging a culture war is one thing; but to say we’re locked in a battle between the forces of heaven and hell sets the stakes at the highest possible level. It makes sense that the same people who have unequivocally worshipped Trump, are doing whatever it takes to keep his affection – even if that means mimicking his incendiary words.

Moreover, it’s not only religious right leaders who are making this argument. No less a figure than Attorney General William Barr is echoing the sentiment . . . Barr went on a tear about “militant secularists” who are destroying society by removing religion from the public square.

Even worse was a speech that he subsequently gave to the Federalist Society . . . After claiming that Trump’s opponents — which Barr calls the “Left” —are “waging a scorched earth, no-holds-barred war of ‘Resistance’ against this Administration,” Barr accuses them of essentially worshipping a false god.

Barr then goes on to say that conservatives haven’t responded in kind, which puts them “at a disadvantage when facing progressive holy war.”

When the nation’s lead attorney says that the nation is engaged in a holy war and anyone opposed to the president is on the wrong side, we have entered into frightening territory – and just to be clear, Barr likens to cite LGBTQ progress as an example of secular assault.

Barr, Graham and the other would-be warriors are essentially using their increasing influential beliefs to suggest to conservatives that the political stakes are so high that only a nuclear, violent response will suffice.  

The logic of a holy war leads to the inevitable conclusion that any means are acceptable to stop the assault on God’s side. Trump’s violations of practical every political norm is not seen as a sin. It’s a virtue. He’s trying to save the Republic (or at least the Republicans) from the heathen barbarians who are fighting on Lucifer’s side.

This apocalyptic belief is going to be the main theme of the right’s leading into the 2020 election. Instead of trying to adjust to the Modern Age so that they can recruit new members, conservative evangelicals (and their Catholic counterparts, like Barr), prefer to circle the wagons and start shooting.

It’s a losing battle, because their numbers keep shrinking,which will only make them fight harder. After all, it’s a fight to the death.

As the exodus of younger generations - and even some older age groups - from religion accelerates, expect the vitriol of these modern day Pharisees and hate merchants to increase.  Sadly, sooner or later people will lose their lives or suffer serious harm because of  this rhetoric which is really about retaining political power and not furthering Christ's gospel message.

Right-Wing Extremists Threaten Violence Over Democrat Wins

According to the FBI, since the launch of the Trump presidential campaign in 2015, hate crimes have increased every year, increasing 17% last year.   [T]he most common bias categories in single-bias incidents were race/ethnicity/ancestry (59.6) percent - principally, anti-black, religion (20.6 percent) -Jews being the favored targets, and sexual orientation (15.8 percent) - namely gays, lesbians and transgender individuals.  Many attribute the increase to the Trump/Pence regime's racist, nativist message and outright calls to violence at Trump rallies. Now, with Democrats winning control of the House of Representatives and underscoring the contempt that a majority of Americans hold for Trump/Pence regime and its racist and religiously extreme base, some right wing extremists are threatening violence.  A piece in the Washington Post looks at this very real threat.  Here are highlights:

Seeking a more lenient sentence for Patrick Eugene Stein’s plot to murder hundreds of Somali immigrants in a small Kansas town, Stein’s attorneys turned to a novel strategy: They blamed the inspiration for his actions on Donald Trump.

“The court cannot ignore the circumstances of one of the most rhetorically mold-breaking, violent, awful, hateful and contentious presidential elections in modern history, driven in large measure by the rhetorical China shop bull who is now our president,” the lawyers wrote.

Stein and his two cohorts planned their attack to take place the day after the November 2016 election. Anticipating a Hillary Clinton victory, the three Kansans wanted to make a violent first strike against her presidency by setting off a set of Timothy McVeigh-style truck bombs at a Muslim immigrant community in Garden City, then gunning down survivors as they fled.

The plot had been exposed, and the men arrested, a few weeks before they intended to carry it out. It took place amid a national environment in which far-right militiamen had been vowing a violent resistance to a potential Clinton administration. That resistance was, at least temporarily, mooted by Trump’s victory.

But those same rumblings can now be heard from the very same far-right factions, likewise threatening violence, in response to this month’s takeover of the House of Representatives by Democrats. There is legitimate reason for concern that right-wing terrorist violence will continue and perhaps increase — and that extremists could soon begin targeting politicians in office, especially if Trump singles them out for scorn.

The question of whether Trump’s rhetoric is inspiring acts of political violence now echoes nationally. Acts of violence in Florida and in Pittsburgh in the run-up to the midterm elections have already been inextricably linked to Trump’s hyperbolic language.

According to Chip Berlet, an expert on the populist right, the phenomenon we’re watching unfold is known to sociologists as “scripted violence.” “If a very popular leader who is high up — it doesn’t matter if it’s political or a political or a movement leader — basically alleges that some group of people is conspiring against the common good, and they harp on that for a long time, it’s only a matter of time before people get killed,” he recently explained.

There’s a long history of this kind of violence, dating from well before the Holocaust and continuing well into recent decades and even the present. In 1990s Rwanda, for example, thousands were massacred when radio talkers targeted communities for lethal violence as part of a tribal/ethnic cleansing campaign.

Trump has tacitly endorsed the tactic.  His rhetoric at home is part of the same violence for which he is writing the scripts.

“Trump clearly isn’t going to tamp this situation down, and he will likely escalate his anti-immigrant and extremist rhetoric as we move toward 2020,” says Heidi Beirich, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project. “Since the GOP is becoming a bastion of older, white males who are angry, that’s the base they will be moving to turn out. This just follows a trend of more than a decade of increasing numbers of terror plots from the far right.

When confronted by reporters about the connection of his rhetoric to this violence, Trump has denied and deflected, accusing the media of fomenting violence instead for their “fake news” . . . . His true believers notwithstanding, the public likely takes a different view: One poll, taken before the mail-bombing attempts and the synagogue shooting, found that a majority of Americans already believe that he enables white supremacists and that many have come to see him as a “legitimizing force” for hate groups.

Critically, those hate groups themselves appear to feel empowered by Trump, in no small part because of his propensity to hesitate to criticize them, embodied by the president’s description of white-nationalist Charlottesville protesters as “very fine people.”

Trump’s far-right devotees, including the white nationalists who have both marched in his name and have used his name while committing hate crimes have taken the example of his bellicose rhetoric and expanded on it in extremists’ inimitable fashion. As they did in the weeks before the 2016 election, militiamen across the nation have referenced violent uprisings and civil war in defense of Trump around the election.

At Gab — the white-nationalist-friendly social media platform allegedly used by Pittsburgh shooting suspect Robert Bowers — speculation about civil war has been part of its site-wide discourse since this summer, . . . . Two young neo-Nazi activists who associated online with Bowers, Jeffrey and Edward Clark of Washington, allegedly planned to follow in the killer’s footsteps, or at least fantasized about it on Gab. Edward, 23, killed himself shortly after the Pittsburgh massacre, reportedly because news reports indicated Bowers was cooperating with police.

Jeffrey Clark, 30, was arrested Nov. 9 after family members warned authorities of his increasingly violent behavior and rhetoric. The brothers had long fantasized about killing Jews and blacks in a “race war,” police say. On Gab, Jeffrey had praised the Pittsburgh killings as a “dry run for things to come.”

Both militiamen and other far-right factions, including white nationalists and street-brawling “Proud Boys,” have been ginning up rhetoric about a “civil war” — depicted, in their telling, as a coming armed struggle between rural conservatives and urban minorities and liberals.

In addition to white supremacists, “Patriot” militias also have been spurred to action by Trump’s demonizing rhetoric targeting Muslims, the press and liberal Democrats.

Acts of domestic terrorism such as those in Pittsburgh and elsewhere in recent weeks come amid a rising tide of hate crimes and bigotry-fueled violence generally. Gutting of anti-terror efforts by the administration, recently reported by NBC News, bode ill for efforts to prevent this kind of violence from spreading.

This is especially so when the president himself is throwing rhetorical lighter fluid on his political targets. He [Trump] , and we, can’t be shocked when someone else provides the match. Indeed, it’s becoming clear that’s exactly the script he intends.

Trump's Psychology Of Hate Has Unleashed Violence

In the wake of the arrest of the MAGA Bomber a Neo-Nazi interrupted services at a synagogue in Pittsburgh and killed 11 worshipers.  Reportedly the shooter - yet another angry white male - shouted all Jews must die.  The trigger for the slaughter?  Anti-Semitic hatred, of course, but per the shooters online rants, also anger at Jewish charities aiding refugees who the shooter deemed as invaders of "his country."  One doesn't have to ponder long before realizing the shooter was perhaps emboldened by the worse immigrant/refugee hater of them all, the occupant of the White House.  Specifically, the Pittsburgh shooter blamed Jews for aiding the immigrant caravan about which Trump has been lying for days.Attempted political assassinations of individuals demonized by Trump and a mass shooting of a members of a religious minority targeted seemingly for aiding refugees - a favored target of Der Trumpenführer -all in one week.  Try as Trump and his bigotry filled supporters might to shirk any responsibility, only the delusional do not to see any correlation between violent rhetoric from the White House and the actions of those who feel their actions have been legitimized.   A piece in Forbes by a clinical psychologist lays out why Trump cannot disclaim responsibility.  Here are excerpts:  

Make no mistake, President Trump is responsible for the MAGABomber. Not directly like he told him to do it. But still fully responsible. I write that knowing that doing so increases the chances that the next Trumpian stirred-up by [Trump’s] the president’s unprecedented incendiary rhetoric who happens upon my writing might try to hurt me. And I know that because that’s just how the psychology of hate works.

Trump has, intentionally or not, hit a trifecta of hate that foments terrorism, in this case domestic terrorism. At rallies and speeches his incendiary eloquence identifies opponents as enemies then motivates hatred and sanctions violence against them. Facts no longer matter. Nor do values shared with those he sees as horrible, terrible people. What matters is that it’s us versus them. And we can’t let them win. Never apologize, never back down.

The trifecta is important, central in fact. . . . when right wing apologists start defending President Trump, as they will, by pointing to sharply critical things people like Maxine Waters or Bernie Sanders may have said they will be missing the point. And if they’ve read this piece they will be willfully trying to deceive. The psychology of hate shows you need Trump’s trifecta to be responsible. So let’s look closer. 

For a leader to be responsible for the terrorism he incites they first have to identify opponents and critics as an enemy, an other. They are not just reasonable adversaries, a loyal opposition. They are a hostile enemy. And President Trump amply checks this box. Whether it’s the fact-based press, oppressed people of color, “globalists” (usually an anti-semitic code word), Hilary or Democrats in general, Trump brands critics and opponents as an enemy other, not “one of us.” 

Second is taking these outsiders and making them objects of hatred, people against whom rage should be directed. It’s not enough to scorn, ridicule or shame them. They deserve your rage. And first as a candidate and now as president, Trump has shown a remarkable talent for making people feel good about hating others. . . . . If you need evidence look no further than things like the naked fury directed towards the press at his rallies or the gleeful foot-stomping chants to imprison a political opponent. 

Third is where most enlightened leaders stop:  sanctioning violence. After creating a sense of belonging to a special group by emotionally positioning himself as an object of identification—be like me if you also want to be a rich pussy-grabber who only wins and never loses—Trump then takes the next step to license violence. In one infamous example he fully supported a rageful supporter sucker-punching a protester. An early version as president was his tepid response to Heather Heyer’s murder by a supporter in Charlottesville in 2017. Just a few days ago was a rally where he endorsed a congressman who had attacked a reporter saying “Any guy who can do a body slam … he’s my guy.”

Like in the myth of Pandora who released evil out in the world, the fires of hate are hard to extinguish. . . . . By leading with this trifecta of hate, President Trump is responsible for the pipe bombs sent by a supporter. Yes, early reports clearly show the MAGABomber was vulnerable to these messages of hate. But if someone throws a lit match into a vat of gasoline, they should not be surprised at the resulting fire. And they should be held responsible

Don't Tell People Not to Be Alarmed by Trump/Pence

As noted in the prior post, the weekend has been difficult as the husband and I try to continue relationships with "friends" who voted for Donald Trump.  Among the things we have been told is that none of the things Trump pledge to do to win the Christofascist vote will happen.  We have also been told by individuals that "they've got our back."  Of course, all of those making such statements are white, heterosexual Christians who have no clue as to what it is like to be gay and to know what it is like to face open animus.  I take no comfort in any of these platitudes and attempts to assuage the speakers' own uneasiness that just maybe they should have done their homework and that perhaps they may have made a horrific mistake.  A piece the Times of Israel makes the case that I and others may not be over reacting or being melodramatic.  And even if we are, no one should be telling us to "get over it" and "move on."  Better to prepare for the worse and hope for the best than to stick one's head in the sand.  Here are article excerpts:

Georg [my grandfather] was Jewish. Elsa [my grandmother] was half-Jewish. The family was not religious in the slightest; they were fully assimilated to the cultural life of the glittering Austrian capital.

When Hitler came in, my grandfather shook his head. “There have always been anti-Semites,” he said. “We’ll stay quiet, and things will get better.”

Georg was an optimist. Hitler was just another colorful rabble-rousing politician. Things would settle down.

Elsa knew better. She knew what was coming, even if she couldn’t fully name it. Within a few weeks of Hitler’s takeover she was working to get the family out of the country. She tried contacts in the US, New Zealand, France, and even India. They all came to naught — until she learned of a special program in the UK that would allow Jewish doctors and engineers to emigrate with their families.

Georg didn’t want to go. Elsa told him she was taking my father (then 3) and my aunt (then 6) and going, and he could stay behind and look for another wife if he liked. My grandfather, protesting all the way that my grandmother was overreacting and having delusions, reluctantly sold his [medical] practice.

My family settled in England, first near Manchester and later in rural Oxfordshire. As you might guess, nearly all the rest of my father’s extended family perished in the Holocaust.

My grandmother’s fear saved the family. My grandfather’s sweet confidence and optimism would have killed them.

So when you tell me, a noted soother and calmer of others, that I should tell Muslims and women and people of color that they have nothing to fear from Trump, I think that perhaps you want me to be like my grandfather.

People are scared. They have every right to be. Trump’s words speak of an intent to violate fundamental liberties; Trump’s words inveigle violence; Trump’s words abrogate a social contract that says that we should quietly respect election results.

Perhaps Trump will be a better leader than we thought. The burden is entirely on him to prove that his campaign was an act, and that he and his followers pose no threat to women and minorities. Until then, suspicion. Until then, fear. Until then, anger.  Until then, I’m thinking like Elsa, not Georg.

Trump in Trouble Over "Second Amendment" Threat to Hillary Clinton

As I write this post, Rudy Giuliani is mouthing a bullshit explanation for Trumps remark seemingly encouraging his NRA extremist supporters to use violence against Hillary Clinton in order to stop her from winning the presidential election in November.  If one watches the video clip of Trumps remarks, it is beyond clear that Trump was NOT saying what Giuliani is now trying to put in Trump's mouth.  If suggesting the assassination of one's opponent isn't the final straw for the Republican Party to remove Donald Trump from the position of its standard bearer, then the GOP truly deserves to die and die quickly.  First these highlights from Politico:

Donald Trump on Tuesday said "the Second Amendment people" may be the only way to stop Hillary Clinton from getting to appoint federal judges if she wins the presidential election in November.

“Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish, the Second Amendment,” he said as an aside while smiling. “By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know. But I’ll tell you what, that will be a horrible day.”

Trump was speaking at a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina, where he repeated his regular claim that Clinton intends to “abolish” the Second Amendment, presumably by appointing liberal justices to the Supreme Court. But Trump punctuated that line with an aside, suggesting that Second Amendment supporters might be in a position to stop her even if she’s elected.

The Trump campaign rejected the notion that Trump was inciting violence against Clinton or anyone else with his aside at the Wilmington rally. Instead, the campaign said the Manhattan billionaire was simply appealing to the collective political muscle Second Amendment supporters possess.

Clinton did not take any questions after her event in Miami on Tuesday, but reached for comment, Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook condemned the comments. "This is simple—what Trump is saying is dangerous. A person seeking to be the President of the United States should not suggest violence in any way," he said in a statement.

Following Trump's remark, the main super PAC supporting her, Priorities USA Action, immediately circulated the clip with the subject line, "Donald Trump Just Suggested That Someone Shoot Hillary Clinton."

Congressional Democrats piled on. Sen. Elizabeth Warren tweeted that Trump "makes death threats because he's a pathetic coward who can’t handle the fact that he’s losing to a girl."

Rep. Eric Swallwell, a California Democrat, called on Twitter for the Secret Service to investigate. “Donald Trump suggested someone kill Sec. Clinton. We must take people at their word. @SecretService must investigate #TrumpThreat,” he wrote.

Sen. Chris Murphy, a Democrat from Connecticut, launched a series of tweets criticizing the comments: "Don't treat this as a political misstep. It's an assassination threat, seriously upping the possibility of a national tragedy & crisis," he wrote. "This isn't play. Unstable people with powerful guns and an unhinged hatred for Hillary are listening to you, @realDonaldTrump."

A column in Esquire takes a look at the larger issue of FTF is wrong with the Republican Party that no one has the spine to do an intervention and strip Trump of the GOP presidential nomination.  Here are column excerpts:

OK, is hinting that maybe your political opponent should get shot The Line?

If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know.

Is that The Line?  You know, The Line, the one that He, Trump has to cross before the entire Republican Party, not to mention a good portion of the human race, finds him too revolting for their delicate stomachs? What say you, Paul Ryan? Is that the line? John McCain? Mitch McConnell? All you clowns in the tricorns and the Watering The Tree Of Liberty tank tops? What say you all? Do you stand by this?

How about the elite political press? Is this enough to push you over the line to admitting every day in your coverage that this is not a normal election because the Republican Party has nominated a public sociopath for President of the United States?

What he said on Tuesday is something Donald Trump does every day of his life, on purpose, as a matter of policy and a perfect expression of everything he stands for. It seems one could stoop even lower than Nixon to be president. 

If that isn't The Line, then what in the hell is The Line? Actually doing it?

The Growing Menace of Right Wing "Patriots"

The left has its extremist, but seldom do they seem to embrace the love for violence and every insane conspiracy theory imaginable that permeates the far right - which nowadays seems to encompass half of the Republican Party base.  The GOP and its Christian Taliban cadre are hysterically screaming about the danger that transgender folks comprise in rest rooms, yet they are turning a blind eye at the frightening lunacy that is going on among elements of the GOP base.  A piece in the Washington Post looks at these self-styled "patriots" who are living in an even greater fantasy world than most Christofascists.  Here are story excerpts (Note how Trump is viewed as legitimizing these nutcases):

B.J. Soper took aim with his AR-15 semiautomatic rifle and fired a dozen shots at a human silhouette target. Soper’s wife and their 16-year-old daughter practiced drawing pistols. Then Soper helped his 4-year-old daughter, in pink sneakers and a ponytail, work on her marksmanship with a .22-caliber rifle.

Deep in the heart of a vast U.S. military training ground, surrounded by spent shotgun shells and juniper trees blasted to shreds, the Central Oregon Constitutional Guard was conducting its weekly firearms training.

“The intent is to be able to work together and defend ourselves if we need to,” said Soper, 40, a building contractor who is an emerging leader in a growing national movement rooted in distrust of the federal government, one that increasingly finds itself in armed conflicts with authorities.

Those in the movement call themselves patriots, demanding that the federal government adhere to the Constitution and stop what they see as systematic abuse of land rights, gun rights, freedom of speech and other liberties.

Law enforcement officials call them dangerous, delusional and sometimes violent, and say that their numbers are growing amid a wave of anger at the government that has been gaining strength since 2008, a surge that coincided with the election of the first black U.S. president and a crippling economic recession.

Soper started his group, which consists of about 30 men, women and children from a handful of families, two years ago as a “defensive unit” against “all enemies foreign and domestic.” Mainly, he’s talking about the federal government, which he thinks is capable of unprovoked aggression against its own people.

The group’s members are drywallers and flooring contractors, nurses and painters and high school students, who stockpile supplies, practice survival skills and “basic infantry” tactics, learn how to treat combat injuries, study the Constitution and train with their concealed handguns and combat-style rifles.

LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS and the watchdog groups that track the self-styled “patriot” groups call them anti-government extremists, militias, armed militants or even domestic terrorists. Some opponents of the largely white and rural groups have made fun by calling them “Y’all Qaeda” or “Vanilla ISIS.”

Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors extremism, said there were about 150 such groups in 2008 and about 1,000 now. Potok and other analysts, including law enforcement officials who track the groups, said their supporters number in the hundreds of thousands, . . .

a “Second Wave” is spreading across the country, especially in the West, fueled by the Internet and social media. J.J. MacNab, an author and George Washington University researcher who specializes in extremism, said social media has allowed individuals or small groups such as Soper’s to become far more influential than in the 1990s, when the groups would spread their message through meetings at local diners and via faxes.

Stephanie Douglas, who retired in 2013 as the FBI’s top official overseeing foreign and domestic counterterrorism programs. “Free speech doesn’t make you a terrorist just because you disagree with the government. But if you start espousing violence and radicalizing your own people toward a violent act, the federal government is going to take notice.”

Shortly after the Bundy ranch confrontation, two of Bundy’s supporters who had been at the ranch, Jerad and Amanda Miller, killed two police officers and a civilian and also died in a Las Vegas shooting rampage. Police said the couple left a note on the body of one the officers they had shot point-blank.  It said: “This is the beginning of the revolution.”

Critics say such talk is naive nostalgia for a 1950s America that wasn’t ever really such a homespun paradise in the first place. And they say the groups that have sprung up in response are far more dangerous than Soper and others want to make them seem. . . . Soper’s research also led him to some of the Internet’s favorite conspiracy theories, including a purported U.N. plot to impose “One World Government.” And Soper, like most in the patriot movement, became a believer.

He suspects that the United Nations, through a program called Agenda 21, wants to reduce the global population from 7 billion to fewer than 1 billion. He said the federal government may be promoting abortions overseas as part of that plot, and also may be deliberately mandating childhood vaccines designed to cause autism because autistic adults are less likely to have children.

Soper said he could not rule out the possibility that the U.S. government was behind the 9/11 attacks. He suspects that the government and the “medical community” have had a cancer cure for years but won’t release it because cancer treatment is too profitable for pharmaceutical companies.

MacNab, the George Washington University researcher, said Trump has been a powerful recruiting tool for groups angry at the government. “The tea party built little bridges between the fringe and the mainstream,” she said. “With Trump, it’s an 18-lane superhighway. He’s literally telling them they’re right.”

One of the men indicted in the Bundy ranch case is Gerald DeLemus, who was New Hampshire co-chair of Veterans for Trump and was named by the Trump campaign as a New Hampshire alternate delegate to the Republican National Convention in Cleveland.

Be afraid, and not of the government.

The Decline and Fall of Bernie Sanders

I have been truly dismayed with the rise of Donald Trump and the complete hijacking of the Republican Party by those most motivated by hate, bigotry and a under current of greed.  Over the last month or so, I have likewise grown increasingly dismayed by Bernie Sanders and the worsening conduct of his followers.  In some ways, Sanders is trying to ride a wave of resentment akin to Donald Trump.  Worse yet, he is proving to be just as big of egomaniac as Trump.  He once boasted that he had never lost and election and the fact that he is losing to Hillary Clinton appears to be more than his psyche can handle.  He seems only too willing to trash the Democrat Party and throw the election to Trump simply to appease his damaged vanity.  What respect I once had for the man is gone and he needs to get out of the presidential contest.  A piece in Mother Jones echos my concerns.  Here are excerpts:

So tonight's Democratic primaries basically ended in a tie. There's really nothing of interest left anymore: Hillary Clinton will win the nomination, as we've all known she would for at least the past month.

The one thing I do keep wondering about is what happened to Bernie Sanders. Before this campaign, he was a gadfly, he was a critic of the system, and he was a man of strong principles. He still is, but he's also obviously very, very bitter. I wonder if all this was worth it for him? By all objective measures he did way better than anyone expected and had far more influence than anyone thought he would and he should feel good about that. Instead, he seems more angry and resentful with every passing day.

I know this happens all the time in presidential primaries. Everyone starts out promising to run high-minded campaigns, but the attacks always come sooner or later—and the targets inevitably believe the attacks are unfair and slanderous. As a result, the losers develop a deep personal disdain for their opponents.

That's what's happened this time, and I suppose there's nothing unusual about it. I don't even blame anyone in particular. Maybe Hillary's team played too rough. Maybe Bernie's team is too thin-skinned. I just don't know. But it's sort of painful to see a good person like Bernie turned into such a sullen and resentful man. And doubly painful to see him take his followers down that path too.

Usually these things fade with a bit of time. Politics is politics, after all. But for Bernie, it's always been more than politics. I wonder if he's ever going to get over this?

As for the behavior of Bernies' followers - which he has yet to adequately condemn - a piece here from the Nevada Democrat Party underscores that Sanders is by default condoning behavior akin to the mobs at Trump rallies.  It is ugly, disappointing, and speaks very badly of Sanders.

Trump Refuses To Denounce His Racist Neo-Nazi Supporters

Perhaps being gay and having been on the receiving end of name calling and threats - and even harassment by some Norfolk police officers roughly a decade ago - I am perhaps extra sensitive to the dangers of those who seemingly get their thrills by threatening others and and venting their anger at those deemed "other," but one of the frightening things about Donald Trump's candidacy - there are sadly, so many to choose from - is his coddling of and tacit approval of white supremacist and neo-Nazi aggressiveness and threats of violence.  Instead of acting presidential as his apologists claim, he looks more akin to Hitler encouraging his brown shirts to engage in violence against enemies of his foul and ultimately murderous regime.  A piece in Media Matters looks at Trump's ongoing refusal to condemn some of his most frightening supporters.  Here are highlights:

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has thrilled and emboldened his racist online neo-Nazi supporters with his refusal to denounce them in a recent CNN interview.

Reporter Julia Ioffe recently wrote a profile of Melania Trump for GQ which was criticized by Melania Trump for purportedly being unfair. The Daily Stormer, a neo-Nazi website that’s endorsed Trump, responded to Ioffe’s piece by directing followers to “go ahead and send her a tweet and let her know what you think of her dirty kike trickery.”

What followed was a barrage of anti-Semitic messages and death threats against the reporter. Ioffe told CNN that Trump fans have been sending her “the most obscene, anti-Semitic stuff I have frankly ever seen directed at me in my life.” She “also received a call from someone claiming to be from a company called ‘Overnight Caskets.’ ‘We got an email with your phone number saying you'd need our services,’ Ioffe detailed in a post on her Facebook page.”

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer interviewed Trump on May 4 and asked if he would denounce the anti-Semitic death threats against Ioffe. Trump refused to condemn the threats, saying he was unaware of them and adding, “I don’t have a message to the fans. A woman wrote a article that was inaccurate.”

Trump’s refusal to condemn their behavior has thrilled Trump’s neo-Nazi fans. Daily Stormer editor Andrew Anglin responded to the interview with the headline, “Glorious Leader Donald Trump Refuses to Denounce Stormer Troll Army.” He began:

Asked by the disgusting and evil Jewish parasite Wolf Blitzer to denounce the Stormer Troll Army, The Glorious Leader declined.

The Jew Wolf was attempting to Stump the Trump, bringing up stormer attacks on Jew terrorist Julia Ioffe. Trump responded to the request with “I have no message to the fans” which might as well have been “Hail Victory, Comrades!”

The pro-Hitler writer explained that “we are his most ardent supports. We will be on the ground, getting him elected. By the way: You all need to get ready to volunteer. We’re going to need a lot of boots on the ground to ensure the evil bitch Hillary is vanquished from the realm.”

Anglin -- an ally of fellow Trump supporter David Duke -- then turned his attention to Blitzer, directing followers: “Tell the dirty Jew Wolf Blitzer (זאב ברק) what you think of his diabolical agenda against us and Our Leader: @wolfblitzer.” (A separate Anglin post about the Blitzer interview was headlined, “Glorious Leader Holocausts Filthy Kike Wolf Blitzer.”)

Trump's campaign has received support from numerous white nationalist groups and leaders, who have used Trump's campaign to recruit followers, fundraise, and spread their message.

 To those I know who are flirting with supporting Trump, are these the types of people with whom you with to associate?  If not, perhaps you ought to reanalyze your pro-Trump leanings. If they are, then shame on you!

Survey: Trump Supporters Most Threatening and Aggressive

I have at times compared Donald Trump's supporters to the thugs that rallied to support of Adolph Hitler in the early 1930's.  Now, a survey has confirmed that when it comes to being threatening and aggressive, Trump's supporters are indeed prone to threats and would be violence (as a side note, in California, Bernie Sanders supporters shut down a rally for Hillary Clinton by emulating the behavior of Trump supporters).  America has for years been notable for the lack of violence on the election front, but now demagogues on the right and left are stirring their followers to make the nation look like some third world country).  Politico looks at the survey findings.  Here are excerpts from the article:

Donald Trump’s supporters are viewed as the most aggressive or threatening online, a new survey as found found.

The survey, conducted by the RAD Campaign, Lincoln Park Strategies, and Craiglist founder’s Craig Newmark’s initiative craigconnects, found that 57 percent of those surveyed said that Trump supporters are “very aggressive and/or threatening online”.

The issue of a candidate’s online supporters has come to the forefront in this election cycle, as supporters for both Bernie Sanders and Trump have come under the spotlight for their aggressive behavior.

Even 35 percent of self-identified Trump supporters said Trump supporters are very aggressive and/or threatening online.

And though Trump said this week he doesn’t "have a message for the fans” who send anti-semitic threats online, the survey found 54 percent of respondents think presidential campaigns should take more of a stand against the aggressive behavior of their supporters.

"We were noticing … a rise in aggression and hostility (online), so we wanted to find out if that was just happening in small, politically engaged circles or was that happening across America."

Trump Supporters Make Death Threats Against Delegates

Donald Trump has pandered to some of the ugliest elements in the GOP base: white supremacists, open racist, and misogynists in general.  Now, some of those same Trump supporters are reported to be making death threats against delegates who fail to support their new fuhrer.  Meanwhile, Trump is on a charm campaign seeking to calm fears of the GOP elite.  Personally, I wonder if Trump can control the hate and discord that he has deliberately cultivated.  Politico looks at the death threats. Here are excepts:

First it was an email warning Steve House, the Colorado GOP chairman, to hide his family members and “pray you make it to Cleveland.” Then there was the angry man who called his cellphone and told him to put a gun down his throat.

“He said, ‘I’ll call back in two minutes, and if you’re still there, I’ll come over and help you,’” House recalled.

Since Donald Trump came up empty in his quest for delegates at the Republican state assembly in Colorado Springs nearly two weeks ago, his angry supporters have responded to Trump’s own claims of a “rigged” nomination process by lashing out at Republican National Committee delegates that they believe won’t support Trump at the party’s convention — including House.

The mild-mannered chairman estimates he’s gotten between 4,000 and 5,000 calls on his cellphone. Many, he says, have ended with productive conversations. He’s referred the more threatening, violent calls to police. His cellphone is still buzzing this week, as he attends the RNC quarterly meetings in Florida, and he’s not the only one.

In hotel hallways and across dinner tables, many party leaders attending this week’s meetings shared similar stories. One party chairman says a Trump supporter recently got in his face and promised “bloodshed” if Trump doesn't win the GOP presidential nomination. An Indiana delegate who criticized Trump received a note warning against “traditional burial” that ended with, “We are watching you.”

[A]lthough the harassers are typically anonymous, many party leaders on the receiving end of these threats hold Trump himself at least partly responsible, viewing the intimidation efforts as a natural and obvious outgrowth of the candidate’s incendiary rhetoric.

The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

The party chairman who said a Trump backer threatened "bloodshed" at the convention also said the man told him he would "'meet me at the barricades’ if Trump isn't the nominee.” The chairman spoke on condition of anonymity.

Trump’s campaign has never explicitly encouraged violence. But it has promoted tactics that have contributed to delegates’ fear. Earlier in April, a top Trump adviser posted online the cellphone number of Tennessee state party chairman Ryan Haynes, along with a message accusing the state party of trying to “STEAL your vote TODAY.”

Haynes told POLITICO at the time that he nearly canceled the party’s delegate selection meeting after a barrage of vitriol and the specter of violence.

The fears expressed by party leaders are bubbling up at a time Trump is facing internal pressure to rein in his confrontational inclinations too. Paul Manafort, Trump’s GOP convention chief, who is in Florida to attend the RNC meetings and assuage the concerns of the GOP establishment, has encouraged the candidate to temper his bombast.

But even if Manafort is able to nudge Trump toward a more traditional presidential bearing, the hostile energy his campaign has already whipped up among some supporters has left a trail of anger and intimidation that is likely to linger when the convention comes in July.

Religious Extremist Rally for Davis

click image to enlarge

UPDATED: As blogger friend Joe Jervis reports, the group rallying in support of Kim Davis not surprisingly included a rabid white supremacist.  Highlights from Joe's post:

Yesterday notorious white supremacist Michael Peroutka spoke at the rally outside the jail holding Kim Davis. Peroutka is a former leader of the League Of The South, which recently “celebrated” the 150th anniversary of the assassination of “tyrant” Abraham Lincoln. 
 
The SPLC calls Peroutka “an avid Southern secessionist and radical Christian Reconstructionist.” According to Wikipedia, Christian Reconstructionists call for overthrowing the US government and replacing it with a “biblical theocracy.” The new Christian theocracy would then reinstate Mosaic penal laws under which “the list of crimes which carried a death sentence would include homosexuality, adultery [KIM DAVIS!], incest, lying about one’s virginity, bestiality, witchcraft, idolatry or apostasy, public blasphemy, false prophesying, kidnapping, rape, and bearing false witness in a capital case.”

As I have said, this folk are pushing treason.

ORIGINAL POST: The image above pretty sums up the mindset of the extreme Christofascists who rallied in support for jailed law breaker Kim Davis.  To say that they hold the religious freedom of others in contempt is an understatement.  Even more frightening is that at least half of the Republican presidential nominee candidates are actively prostituting themselves to these people.  The Lexington Courier-Journal has more on the gathering of those who ultimately seek to subvert the U.S. Constitution - which once upon a time was called treason .  Here are highlights:

Hundreds of people gathered outside the Carter County Detention Center on Saturday and prayed for jailed Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, who was locked up just a few hundred feet away.

"She won't bow, I promise you," her husband, Joe Davis, told the crowd while dressed in overalls and a camouflage ball cap. He said he talked to her the morning she was put in jail and the two of them decided not to give in.  "I'm just an old, dumb, country hillbilly, but I know God," he said.

People came from as far as Wisconsin and North Carolina to attend.  "This is as grass roots as it gets," he said.

Some speakers took a more prayerful tone while others got political — one ordained minister and insurance agent from Morehead told the crowd that it needs to send Gov. Steve Beshear, who he blames for Davis' jailing, by voting against his son, Andy, who is running for attorney general.

"Make sure we hold Beshear responsible for his inaction," Randy Smith exhorted the crowd.

Smith also attacked Democratic Attorney General Jack Conway, who is running for governor, accusing him of violating the law when he did not appeal the original judicial ruling striking down the state's gay marriage ban — and Beshear for letting him.

The crowd and the speakers didn't have kind words for Bunning, either.   One man held a sign that said "Judge Bunning is an abomination."

Flip Benham, an evangelist from North Carolina, praised Bunning's father, former U.S. Sen. Jim Bunning, as a staunch conservative but ended his kind words there.  "His son is working against the will of God," said Benham, who carried a white cap with the name "Jesus" on it. "He's being used by the devil to park Kim here."

These people are clearly crazy.  The only question is that of when some will resort to violence as they fight against modernity itself and anything that threatens the fantasy world in which they live.  

Swiss Gay Group Files Criminal Complaint Against Catholic Bishop for Bible Based Hate Speech

Get ready for shrieks and howls from American Christofascists as they point to a criminal complaint filed against a homophobic Swiss Roman Catholic Bishop who quoted the passage from Leviticus approving death as the penalty for gay sex and gay relationships.  I can already hear the claims that Christianity is being criminalized.  The gay rights group filing the complaint stated that  Bishop Vitus Huonder's statements amounted to incitement to violence against gays.  Just as disingenuously as a Republican presidential candidate claiming the his remarks were "misunderstood" Huonder issued a mealy mouthed "apology".   Newsweek has details.  Here are highlights:

A gay rights group has filed a criminal complaint against a Roman Catholic bishop after he quoted Bible verses calling for gay people to be killed and said the passage made clear what Church policy was on homosexuality.

Vitus Huonder, the Catholic Bishop of the city of Chur in eastern Switzerland, made the speech on 31 July, during a debate on marriage and family organised by the German Catholic Forum in Fulda, Germany.

His reading was followed by applause, before Huonder continued: "Both of these passages alone suffice to clarify unambiguously the church's position on homosexuality," according to a statement released by Pink Cross, an umbrella association for Swiss gay groups that is filing the complaint.

Pink Cross, supported by the Swiss Lesbian Organisation, argues that these comments amount to "inciting people to crime or violence," and handed a lawsuit to the public prosecutor of Canton Graubünden in eastern Switzerland on Monday. If found guilty, Huonder faces up to three years in prison.

Huonder has since issued an apology, saying his comments were misunderstood. "I am sorry if my 50 minute lecture in Fulda on 2 August 2015, which dealt with the biblical basis for marriage and family, was understood as diminishing homosexual people," 

Baumann says the group does not accept the bishop's apology. "There is no question in this case of what he was talking about—there was no misunderstanding. We don't need charity or mercy from the Church at all, we don't accept his apology."

It is not the first time Huonder's comments have landed him in trouble. Earlier this year he called for a priest in Switzerland to be sacked for blessing a lesbian couple, according to the UK-based online newspaper Pink News.

Pat Robertson: Obama Inciting 'Black-On-White Violence'

Regional embarrassment and racist Pat Robertson has let off another explosion of verbal diarrhea.  This time he is blaming Barack Obama for "inciting black-on- white violence."  The data to support this claim?  There is, of course, none.  And its all an delusion in the mind of a man who seems increasingly out of touch with any kind of objective reality who daily panders to the sense of outrage of the white supremacists of the GOP and conservative Christian groups.  These people just cannot get over their hate and bigotry and go off every time they remember a black man is in the White House.  As I have said before, it's a wonder that today's GOP city and county committee meetings don't start with all attendees donning white robes and hoods. And for non-Virginians, it is important that they remember that Robertson is historically the largest GOP donor in Virginia.  Right Wing Watch has these details:

Pat Robertson today, while discussing the shooting of an Australian baseball player in Oklahoma by three teenagers, two of them black and one white, accused President Obama of inciting anti-white violence. The 700 Club host said, “We are having a tremendous amount of this black-on-white violence and I have a feeling that instead of bringing racial harmony, having an African-American president has exacerbated the problem.”
“He seems to be wanting to bring division among people instead of bringing them together; he is one of the most divisive leaders this country has ever had,” Robertson continued. “It just seems he wants to rub the edges raw every chance he gets.” Robertson argued that Obama is trying to divide people by race and class: “There’s always something there to stir up controversy.”
- See more at: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/robertson-obama-inciting-black-white-violence#sthash.InZVuMwo.XNB1TTht.dpuf

Pat Robertson today, while discussing the shooting of an Australian baseball player in Oklahoma by three teenagers, two of them black and one white, accused President Obama of inciting anti-white violence. The 700 Club host said, “We are having a tremendous amount of this black-on-white violence and I have a feeling that instead of bringing racial harmony, having an African-American president has exacerbated the problem.”

“He seems to be wanting to bring division among people instead of bringing them together; he is one of the most divisive leaders this country has ever had,” Robertson continued. “It just seems he wants to rub the edges raw every chance he gets.” Robertson argued that Obama is trying to divide people by race and class: “There’s always something there to stir up controversy.”

 

As Blue Virginia reminds us, some of Robertson's other statements include:

Of course, this is the same top Virginia GOP donor who has said: Gays Destroy Society, Want Christians in Jail; that gays are really straights with "chromosomal damage", that Planned Parenthood backs genocide and inspired Hitler, that "Wild" Liberals Support "Society of Death" 

For the record, back in my GOP activist days I got to meet Robertson in person.  In my opinion, he is an arrogant egomaniac who is having a tempestuous love affair with himself.  Obnoxious doesn't even begin to describe him. His mere presence - not to mention Regent University and CBN - are a huge negative for Hampton Roads.