The Pentagon’s NATO Option (2005).
Public memory is short.
Category Archives: Propaganda
Jeff Rense Link
Jeff Rense, the conspiracy site (which also retails “aliens” and other sci-fi stuff) has linked my piece on Merkel’s Ashkenazy and communist affiliations. I thank him heartily, but warily, since when one gets attention from bigger sites, it often ends up in the services of other agendas, some hostile.
Is November slated for some big-time shake-up (ala the Million Mask March in London) that the powers-that-be have planned and every little dissident voice must be roped in….or not?
No idea. But I see the same link showing up on some fairly racialist/racist sites, below which Indian immigrants are characterized as “shit-skins,” among other epithets.
I suppose it’s all the anti-migrant feeling being fanned by the NWO-orchestrated migrant/refugee incursion into Europe.
To be expected.
Meanwhile, I’m watching that one piece get more hits in one morning than my whole blog sometimes gets in a couple of weeks.month.
Why Christians Must Defend Their Traditions
The argument is made that Christians best imitate Jesus by not taking offense at insults and attacks on their traditions and icons.
There are many reasons why this is false.
There is the obvious one that Jesus himself did not tolerate the desecration of the Temple.
He actively threw the money-changers out of its precincts, over-turned their tables, chased away their animals, and put them out of business.
Then, there is the invective Jesus used – “serpents,” “devils,” “liars,” “hypocrites.”
Is this Jesus meek and mild?
No.
There never was a Jesus meek and mild.
That is a concoction of well-bred, middle-class Sunday School misses.
They cannot be blamed for knowing nothing about real men, but we can.
Jesus slept out in the open, with only stones for his pillow.
He went for days without food or sleep.
He preached and healed in sun and rain on the hills and on the lake-shore, in front of sweaty, restless crowds of thousands of peasants.
He worked and lived with illiterate fishermen and carpenters, who drank and swore.
He routinely castigated the lawyers and scribes and the powerful members of the Sanhedrin.
Indeed, the entire Gospel story is the story of the relentless persecution of Jesus by the religious “mafia” that had an iron grip on the spiritual life of the Judeans.
That was the iron grip that Jesus broke on the cross.
So, using Jesus as an excuse for our cowardice doesn’t work.
But there are other reasons.
As the symbols of a tradition are denigrated with impunity, they lose their power over the minds of the young.
Young people don’t yet have the experience or discernment to filter out the abuse and distortion.
The young go by what they are told, not so much in words as in deeds, by their elders and their peers.
When the adults around do not respond to the tidal wave of filth and abuse directed at the Christian tradition, the young do not take Christianity seriously.
They see it only as the butt of jokes. The punch-line of comedy routines.
Faith flourishes with physical persecution. The shedding of blood creates martyrs.
But faith is hard-pressed to survive Saturday Night Live and a moral martyrdom of unending, undefended humiliation.
Jesus Christ will survive it. So will his saints.
But the rabble who perpetrate this barbarism and the cowards who countenance it will not survive with their humanity intact.
Semitic Semantics
The word Jew is a very protean term, referring at times to race and at times to culture or religion. The correct term today should be Judaic or Judaist.
This leads to constant confusion, misdirection, and contradiction, to the advantage of the ruling class, which claims the mantle of ancient Israel.
But what we call Jews today are a mixed race people quite different from the Hebrew Israelites, who are now, retroactively and erroneously, equated with them.
The correct term for today’s “Jews” should be Judaics or Judaists.
ASHKENAZY JEWS
Most of the people who call themselves Jews today have partial descent from converts from Khazaria, a medieval East European kingdom wedged between the Muslim and the Christian world, which chose the Hebrew faith as a way to survive.
The Khazarians intermingled with Eastern European people in the surrounding regions and later moved into Germany, becoming today’s Ashkenazy (European) Jews.
The Ashkenazim constitute much of modern Jewry (Khazarian Judaists), it is said.
This may or may not be true, because statistics about Jews (Khazarians of Judaist culture) seem to vary wildly.
The Khazarian theory of Ashkenazy origin has been vindicated, according to some people, by the research of Israeli geneticist Elhaik, but it has its detractors.
They claim it is simply an anti-Semitic canard.
Even critics of the theory, however, admit that there is ample European (in the maternal line) and “non-Semitic” Middle-Eastern blood (in the paternal line) in modern Ashkenazy Jews (Khazarian Judaists).
But, shockingly, their maternal descent from Europeans means that the Ashkenazim are irrefutably not ethnic Jewish (Judahites), according to Jewish (Judahite) law.
I repeat, the DNA evidence proves that according to Jewish law, Ashkenazim are not of Jewish (Judahite) descent, because Jewish (Judahite) law requires the mother to be Jewish.
SEPHARDIC JEWS
The rest of the modern Jews (Judaics), a far fewer number, is descended from the Edomites (Idumeans) who were living in Judea at the time of Jesus.
That is why they were called Jews, to begin with.
Jew is simply the short form for the word, Judean or “of Judea.”
The word Judean/Jew thus had nothing to do with race or ethnicity.
It referred simply to people living in the region of Judea.
The Idumeans/Edomites living in Judea were forcibly circumcised and incorporated into the Israelite (Hebrew) religion under John Hyrcanus, in the 2nd century BC.
Their numbers included many of the Pharisees who lived in the time of Jesus, most of whom were killed in the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
This was the fate of most of the male population in Jerusalem.
The females were enslaved by the victorious Romans.
The Jewish men who survived the destruction lived on in the land, converting to Christianity and then Islam.
Eventually, they became the people we know today as Palestinians, who are thus also a mixed race, although probably less so than the dispersed Edomites.
The converted Idumeans (including, probably, some Idumean-Israelites) living in Judea were the people whom Jesus claimed in Revelation 3:9 were of the “synagogue of Satan” and were not really Jews (Judahites).
To be clear, in saying this, Jesus was not really referring to the Idumean ethnic heritage.
Some of the Idumeans had mixed with the native Israelites around them by then, so that some of the converts may actually have been partly descended from the northern Israelite tribes that had been conquered by the Assyrians in the 8th century BC (722 BC) and then dispersed in Assyria, Babylon, and in Israel and Judea.
Credit: keyway.ca
These dispersed tribes were the so-called Lost Tribes.
That suggests that some of the Idumeans too probably had some Israelite or even Judean blood in them.
But Jesus was really talking about the beliefs of the Idumean converts, not their genes.
They followed a mixture of the pure faith taught by Moses and the Prophets with the pagan beliefs of the Canaanites and Hittites, with whom the Edomites, since the days of Esau, had intermarried.
The Idumean (Edomite) converts to Israelite faith were after all descended from Abraham, as they claimed.
But, they were not – and never had been – descendants of Judah (Judahites).
As I noted earlier, Judahite is one of the two origins of the abbreviated term, “Jew.”
The other is Judean – referring to the area, Judea.
The Idumeans/Edomites did not follow Jewish customs fully but added pagan beliefs.
These semi-pagan mixed Idumean-Israelites in Judea, along with other Idumean-Israelites in the surrounding regions and in the Hebrew or Israelite diaspora that was settled in Babylon and in Egypt, supposedly emigrated all over the Middle East and into regions of Europe (Spain, Italy, Germany, England) in the centuries immediately after Christ. These dispersed tribes became what we call today Sephardic Jews. Sephardic is derived from the old Jewish name for Spain, Sefarad.
Some claim that the Jews were scattered because the Romans dispersed them, although exiling conquered people was not characteristic of the Romans, who usually left some of the vanquished to till the soil.
Of course, is always possible that the Romans made an exception for the Jews, in response to the ferocity with which they resisted conquest.
More likely, the Jews who intermarried with European women in the first and second centuries after Christ were traders who were Levantine converts, rather than original Israelites of any kind.
In any case, it is a fact that the maternal stock of current Sephardic Jews is European, not Near Eastern, and dates back to this Jewish diaspora.
To repeat, Jewishness is traced through the maternal line, and since these diasporic Idumean-Israelites spawned what we call the Sephardic Jews, they too, by Jewish law, are not Jews.
Like the Ashkenazy, but even more so, the Sephardim took with them the pagan lore of Babylon and Egypt.
This religion contradicted the Torah teachings of the Israelites.
It was replete with astrology, gnosticism, ritual practices, esoteric texts, angelology and demonology.
TALMUDIC JEWS VERSUS TORAH JEWS
Now, the Hebrew Bible of the Ashkenazy and Sephardic Jews is called TaNaKh and it includes the Law, the Prophets, and other writings.
But these are not held in as much veneration as the interpretations of the TaNaKh by the Jewish sages (Rabbis).
The Rabbinical interpretations were codified in the centuries after 200 AD and form the written text (Talmud) of what in Jesus’ time was still oral and referred to as the Tradition of the Elders.
IDUMEAN JEWS OF JESUS’ TIME VERSUS ASKHENAZY JEWS OF TODAY
Jesus felt that the Elders had subverted the original faith in Yahweh with a ritualistic, formulaic legalism that killed the spirit of true faith and substituted notions of racial purity for purity of faith.
Jesus denounced this perversion of the Hebrew faith in the strongest possible terms.
But since the current crop of Ashkenazy Jews is most likely unrelated to the original Idumean-Israelite Judeans whom Jesus denounced, it is quite incorrect to claim that animosity by non-Jews toward the Ashkenazy leadership today (the Rothschild financial cabal) has anything whatsoever to do with the enmity between the Idumean-Edomite Judeans and Idumean-Israelite Judeans, on the one hand and Jesus, on the other.
In short, the accusation that the Gospels are the origin of current “anti-Semitism” is bogus and an anti-Christian slander.
The current Jews are not the descendants of the Israelite-Idumean mixture whom Jesus cursed.
They were utterly destroyed in 70 AD.
Moreover, the genealogical records necessary to prove genetic descent from any of the tribes of Israel, were destroyed with the Temple at the time.
Without these, any subsequent claims of descent are either tenuous or completely specious.
What Jesus said then to the Judeans and Judahites of his time does not and can not automatically attach to the Ashkenazy and Sephardim today, on the grounds of genetic descent.
Contemporary Judaists are mostly a Euro-Turko-Mongolic people, with, at most (although not certainly), some small admixture of the original Israelite blood.
This is true also of the Sephardic Jews, who have a better claim to a partial descent from the Idumean-Israelite mixture.
They too cannot be blamed for deicide, as it used to be called.
According to the Gospel, in the final destruction of Jerusalem, all of Jesus’ enemies during his ministry were judged for the blood they had shed in their own life-times.
They were judged, as well, for the blood-shed of all past history, from the archetypal crime of Abel’s murder onward to the death of Jesus.
That chapter in history was closed on the cross.
It is finished, as Jesus said.
Neither the current Ashkenazy Jews nor the current Sephardic Jews have anything to do with it.
But, in so far as they adopt attitudes and beliefs that resemble those of the Pharisees, they, as well as all other people of any or no faith, are culpable for their own wrong beliefs and actions.
To sum up, there is very little or no genetic descent of current Jews from the ancient Idumean-Edomites (and Idumean-Israelites) who persecuted Jesus.
There is only the possibility of spiritual descent.
And that possibility is shared equally by Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus and anyone else who hurls curses at Jesus Christ.
Spiritual descent is a matter of choice and belief.
It comes about when people adopt the attitudes and beliefs of the Pharisaic persecutors of Jesus.
TALMUDIC JUDAISM AND KABBALISM
The writings of the Elders were codified in the Talmud in 200 AD and 500 AD, and thereafter, and to them were added, in the later middle ages, texts like the Zohar and Kabbalah.
The Talmud, Zohar, and Kabbalah explicate, in sometimes mystic, sometimes racial, sometimes moral or legal terms, the TaNaKh, formulated in writing some thousand years earlier (approximately 500 BC) by the Hebrew-speaking people that constituted the ancient nation called Israel.
The Talmud, Zohar, and Kabbalah also add completely new teachings, esoterica, occult texts, and mysticism, some of which is deeply antagonistic to the austere spirit of the Torah.
Some of the Talmud’s and Kabbalah’s teachings are truly amoral and perverse.
Others are profoundly wise and could have been spoken by Jesus himself.
The ancients Israelites included both the Judeans (the Israelite tribes living in Judea, descended from Judah and Benjamin) and the northern tribes (the descendants of the other sons of Israel/Jacob:- Reuben, Naphtali, Dan, Gad, Manasseh, etc.).
Is any of this Hebrew stock to be found among contemporary Jews?
Surely there could be some genetic ties, or, at least, similarities, between both groups.
But, equally surely, these genetic markings are mingled with the genetic markers of many other groups, because of centuries of intermarriage.
Race-mixing was always in the history of the Israelites.
EDOMITES, HITTITES, AND MOABITES
Esau, the brother of Jacob in Genesis, who is the forefather of the nation of Israel, intermarried with the pagan Hittites.
But, so did Jacob’s own descendants, the Israelites.
So did the sons of Judah or the Judahites (Jews, in short form).
Ruth, the ancestress of Jesus, belonged to the Moabites, one of the deadliest enemies of the Israelites and Judahites.
ABRAHAM’S SEED IS JESUS
Given this history, how can anyone claim that Israelite or Judahite is a term for a pure genetic stock?
Yet, they do.
Many naive Jewish people today – and Christian dupes – consider modern Jews both a pure ethnicity and a unique religion.
A people set apart and a culture set apart.
The Bible states otherwise.
Abraham and Isaac were counted as righteous, long before Jacob was called Israel and long before Judah sired Judahites and before Israelites ever set foot in Judea.
Righteousness preceded both Israel and Judea, both Judah and the Judahites.
The seed of Abraham in whom the whole world was blessed was not any supposed Master Race of Israelites or Jews, with genetic superiority to the rest of mankind.
This is a toxic carnal and ethnocentric revision of the Hebrew scriptures.
The blessed seed (singular) of Abraham was not a people, but a person – a unique prophet, like Moses.
He was the uniquely begotten and uniquely sacrificed “son,” like Isaac.
The blessed seed was Jesus, to whom all nations were to be gathered, according to the divine covenant with Abraham.
As a matter of record, people of all nations have been gathered into belief in Jesus.
The moral reign of Jesus Christ is visible all around us, despite all the blood-shed and mayhem wrought by those who would erase God from the history of man.
The Good Shepherd who gave his life for his flock is a figure beloved all over the world. 
Christ’s moral reign does not offend anyone but reprobates, no matter what their religion.
Muslims and Hindus accept Jesus as a divine messenger.
Righteous Jews have seen through the calumnies of the Rabbinate and accepted Christ’s moral status.
But there is no nation in the world that would accept without a fight the divine right of a Master Race of Jews to rule as overlords of the earth.
Is Pope Francis Practicing Talmudism Covertly?
Why did Pope Francis mention Moses and not Jesus in his addresses to the White House and the UN?
Is it because he wanted to cite a figure that would not “offend”?
But Muslims venerate Jesus, even if they do not regard him as the Son of God. They would not be offended.
It follows that Francis avoided Jesus, to avoid giving offense to religious Jews.
Historically, many – but not all – Jews have regarded Jesus as a blasphemer and apostate.
But, if interfaith peace is the goal, why not mention Abraham, who is the fountain-head of all three faiths?
Why Moses?
The answer lies in looking at Jewish texts.
Moses is held up as the greatest of the prophets by Maimonides, one of the most authoritative of Jewish rabbis and the codifier of the Shloshah Asar Ikkarim (“Thirteen Fundamental Principles”), a distillation of the Taryag mitzvoth (613 regulations) binding on orthodox Jews.
From Chabad.org:
1. Belief in the existence of the Creator, who is perfect in every manner of existence and is the Primary Cause of all that exists.
2. The belief in G-d‘s absolute and unparalleled unity.
This would conflict with the doctrine of the Trinity in orthodox Christianity – that is why Francis praises Chagall’s White Crucifixion – because it effaces the divine Jesus and substitutes the human Jewish rabbi, thereby erasing the core of Christianity.]
3. The belief in G-d’s non-corporeality, nor that He will be affected by any physical occurrences, such as movement, or rest, or dwelling.
[Again, this conflicts with the doctrine of the Incarnation most fundamentally.]
4. The belief in G-d’s eternity.
5. The imperative to worship G-d exclusively and no foreign false gods.
[Maimonides and many great Rabbis saw Jesus as a heretic, sorcerer, and blasphemer.]
6. The belief that G-d communicates with man through prophecy.
The belief in the primacy of the prophecy of Moses our teacher
[This diminishes Jesus, who is superior to all the prophets, according to Christian teaching.]
8. The belief in the divine origin of the Torah.
9. The belief in the immutability of the Torah.
[Jesus taught that the Mosaic law was given because of the degradation of the people and that it did not fully reflect God’s law, as his perfection of it did.]
10. The belief in G-d’s omniscience and providence.
11. The belief in divine reward and retribution.
12. The belief in the arrival of the Messiah and the messianic era.
[Christians believe that the Messiah has already arrived. As for the Messianic era, some Christians regard this as heresy and others as true.]
13. The belief in the resurrection of the dead.
Edward Snowden’s Twitter Account
A Christian blog had an interesting observation:
Edward Snowden just started Twitter 7 hours ago and he already has over 749K followers, what does that mean?
Howard Zinn: Card-Carrying Communist
One of the things you can learn from M. Stanton Evans’ recent book on Joe McCarthy’s investigations, Blacklisted by History, is how deeply the FBI had penetrated CPUSA. One reason that McCarthy’s was sometimes unable to publicly substantiate his accusations was that he relied on secret information passed along by the FBI. McCarthy couldn’t identity the source of his information without compromising the FBI’s investigations, so when his critics tried to make it appear that McCarthy’s suspicions were without merit, McCarthy couldn’t simply say, “Here is the FBI file.”
As we see from this file, the FBI had access to the CPUSA mailing list, which is not the same as a membership list, but is certainly strong evidence when combined — as in Zinn’s case — with admitted high-level involvement in a slew of front-group activities.
UPDATE III: Even if all the other FBI files proved nothing, this 1957 memorandum based on information from a former CPUSA member would seem rather conclusive:
So, according to the informant, Zinn appeared to have been a member of the Brooklyn section of CPUSA before the informant joined that section in 1949 — tending to corroborate information previously developed by the FBI.
Here is something very interesting: George Kirschner is named as co-author of Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States: The Wall Charts. Whether this is the same person as the George Kirshner who reportedly hosted CPUSA meetings in Brooklyn in 1952 might be a subject worth researching.
At any rate, the fact that “Informant T-1” was “brought up on charges of ‘white chauvinism’ by the CP” is also very interesting. This was the kind of “thought-crime” inquisition to which CPUSA members were sometimes subjected. Certainly an avid Communist like the informant, who had been a Party member since 1948, could not have been an outright racist, so we don’t know why he would have faced such an accusation. But it should be kept in mind that Stalin purged and executed many of the original Bolsheviks on fabricated pretexts of “deviationism,” and a similar Stalinist impulse might have made “T-1” a scapegoat.
This would seem to be the clincher: “T-1” is reported to have taken a photo of Zinn teaching a class on Communist doctrine in 1951, and to have provided the photo to the FBI in 1956. Zinn reportedly “took the position [in the 1951 class] that the basic teachings of Marx and Lenin were sound and should be adhered to.”
In May 1955, the FBI had de-activated its “Security Index” card on Zinn, who at that time was working on his Ph.D. at Columbia University and teaching at Upsala College in East Orange, N.J. Zinn’s file was re-opened by the FBI’s Atlanta office in 1957, after Zinn joined the faculty of Spellman College in Atlanta. A few years later, during the Kennedy administration, Zinn wrote an article in the Sunday edition of the Daily Worker disparaging Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and the FBI for their supposed failure to protect civil rights — without ever acknowledging that Zinn himself had been interviewed a decade earlier by the FBI for his own Communist activities.
UPDATE IV: A little more Googling turns up George Kirschner’s December 2008 obituary in the New York Times, with commenters memorializing his association with Zinn:
KIRSCHNER–George. Beloved grandfather and greatgrandfather, father, husband, teacher and friend will be remembered for his contagious smile and energy, unwavering principles, profound sense of justice, unequivocal commitment to activism, and open and welcoming heart. Born in New York City, George served in the US Coast Guard during WWII. He began as a brewer, later went to college, and found his professional love as a teacher of history at the Walden School in New York City.
His age and biography as a longtime New Yorker would lend credence to the suspicion Kirschner was the same as the “Kirshner” listed in the FBI files as hosting Brooklyn CPUSA section meetings. So we may therefore presume that Kirschner is, like Zinn, now the only kind of good Communist.
UPDATE V: FBI files from the 1960s connect Zinn to a Who’s Who of the New Left anti-war radicalism:
In 1966, the main publication of the Socialist Workers Party, the Militant, reported Zinn joining with then-SDS president Carl Oglesby on a committee to defend a South African activist. After the SDS split in 1969 that led to the formation of the Weather Underground, Oglesby subsequently became a JFK assassination conspiracy theorist.
Zinn participated in a 1967 anti-war “teach-in” at Harvard, sponsored by SDS in cooperation with the American Institute for Marxist Studies, an organization founded by historian Herb Aptheker, chief theoretician of CPUSA.
At an MIT teach-in, Zinn was joined by Noam Chomsky.
In one of Zinn’s most infamous exploits, he traveled to Hanoi in 1968 with the radical priest Daniel Berrigan, an event hailed at press conference involving Tom Hayden (SDS co-founder and principal author of the “Port Huron Statement”) and socialist/pacifist Dave Dellinger, subsequently of “Chicago 7” notoriety.
What we see in all this, then, is how Zinn’s career forms a major thread in a rope that connects ’60s radicalism back to the Stalinism of the 1940s and ’50s. Zinn was a consistent advocate of Marxist-Leninist doctrine throughout his career, and it is amazing that his teachings — his anti-American history — are so popular nearly two decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
America won the Cold War, but the Communists won the campuses.”
Did America win the Cold War? Or was that victory simply a propaganda coup?
Dorothy Day: Catholic Saint?
Pope Francis recently paid his respects to four “great Americans.”
They were Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Dorothy Day, and Thomas Merton.
I was disappointed but not surprised, as this pope seems to be very much in step with the spirit of the times, something one neither wants…nor expects…from the leader of a two thousand-year-old religious tradition that claims eternal validity.
The pope’s picks are all very political ones.
ARE there no “great Americans” among the millions who lead lives in the private sector, uninterested in politics?
Lincoln was a president; King was a political activist; Day was very political, indeed, a former communist; Merton was the conscience, so it is said, of the non-violent civil rights movement of the 1960s.
I find it disquieting that the Pope could not find at least one great contemplative or visionary or healer or scientist or businessman or scholar or artist outside the realm of politics, among the tens of thousands of Americans born since the inception of the republic.
People like
and Walt Disney.
I fell under the influence of Hegel and (for about 6 weeks) Marx when I was around 12. Then I went to a cartoon festival. The Russian cartoons, if they can be called that, were a revelation.
What kind of a system killed man’s sense of humor so thoroughly?
I was converted to “free markets” by Tom & Jerry, Mickey Mouse, Beep-Beep, Sylvester & Tweetie bird.
At the very least, Pope Francis shows questionable judgment.
It is poor judgment for someone in such a profoundly influential position to pick political sides and make the Catholic church, which he represents, a partisan actor.
I read that Dorothy Day is being considered for canonization.
Perhaps she deserves it. I don’t know.
But there are some things that need to be considered first:
Day might have converted to Catholicism, but she openly admired the most blood-thirsty communists.
I don’t know how representative these statements are.
It’s something to think about though.
Given Pope Francis’ economic and political activism, it is a good guess that there is more to Dorothy Day than meets the eye.
Lebanese Minister: 2-3% Of Refugees Are ISIS
A Lebanese minister that ISIS fighters constitute 2-3% of the numbers at refugee camps in Lebanon, as well as of those entering Europe:
The Mirror:
At least 20,000 bloodthirsty jihadis have infiltrated Syrian refugee camps and are plotting to enter Europe, a senior official warned tonight.
Lebanese Education Minister Elias Bou Saab said he fears Islamic State radicals make up at least 2% of the 1.1million Syrians living in camps across his country.
And he warned of a covert jihadi “operation” to get across the Med and into Europe. His warning came as David Cameron made a whistle-stop tour of refugee camps in Lebanon and Jordan yesterday to try to win back public support on the Syria crisis.
“My gut feeling is they (IS) are facilitating such an operation. To go to Europe and other places… From Turkey to Greece,” Mr Bou Saab said.
“You may have, let’s say, 2% that could be radicals. That is more than enough. We have had that also with our camps here – you find 2-3% of them.”
What makes this claim plausible is the number of accounts of rapes being reported among the migrants, for instance, in Germany. These rapes are not only migrant-on-migrant, but are migrant-on-native.
Some people are even calling it a rape epidemic. I haven’t looked into it enough to know if that claim is hype, propaganda, or cold fact.
Whatever it is, it is added evidence that the migrants are not solely refugees.
Is ISIS behind the rape? Or are there Muslim gangs infiltrating the refugees? Are they mercenaries? Is this Operation Gladio all over?
Media Using Trump To Bash Evangelicals
While the media claims that evangelicals are a large part of Trump’s massive popularity, the statistics show otherwise.
The numbers show that Trump is actually much more popular with over-sixty unchurched voters, many of whom fall into the category of working-class.
That would explain why Trump’s distinctly secular and hedonistic attitudes have not put a dent in his support. Most of his supporters are not conservative/evangelical Christians at all.
They are disenfranchised older male working-class stiffs.
Evangelical populists, the bloc once labeled the Religious Right, are frustrated by a GOP establishment that has frittered away this summer’s anti-Planned Parenthood moment. They are frustrated that party bigwigs spent much of the past few years calling for the party to “rebrand” and downplay social issues. They are frustrated by a Supreme Court that redefines marriage, lets Obamacare survive, and reigned by Justice Kennedy’s Humpty Dumpty jurisprudence. Evangelical populists are not just animated by social issues, but by generalized frustration with the ever-expanding, unconstitutional reach of big government. In Pew’s Political Typology, evangelical populists are “Steadfast Conservatives.”
Trumpian populists, in contrast, are frustrated by China “killing us in trade,” by hedge-fund managers who “pay no tax,” and, of course, by the bipartisan collusion of the Washington elite on immigration. In many ways, these sorts of complaints traditionally resonated with the white, working-class voters of the Democrat Party. Many of the same themes animate Bernie Sanders’ insurgent candidacy. Per Pew, Trumpian populists are “Hard-Pressed Skeptics.”
But while evangelical and Trumpian populism are distinct, there is obviously the potential for some overlap. For instance, despite Russell Moore’s efforts, I think a majority of evangelical populists are immigration hawks. Still, the overall thrust and tenor of these two groups differs widely.
So if evangelicals do not form the backbone of Trump’s support and are instead the religious subgroup least excited about him, how can we explain the media’s behavior over the past two weeks?
Many of these pundits are merely looking for any way to bash the evangelical piñata.Some of it is the fault of our reliance on polls that don’t differentiate between evangelicals who go to church and “evangelicals” who never go to church. It’s a garbage in, garbage out process when pundits premise their analysis on fundamentally defective statistics. Public Policy Polling’s latest national poll found that 53 percent of GOP primary voters were evangelical Christians. That’s a pretty dramatic overstatement.
But I think there’s something more systematic going on. Many of these pundits are merely looking for any way to bash the evangelical piñata, and associating this disfavored demographic with the Donald’s degeneracy is simply too tempting to pass up.
For one journalist, supporting the twice-divorced Trump might prove the rank hypocrisy of evangelical voters. Frank Bruni’s column laid this charge on particularly thick:
If I want the admiration and blessings of the most flamboyant, judgmental Christians in America, I should marry three times, do a queasy-making amount of sexual boasting, verbally degrade women, talk trash about pretty much everyone else while I’m at it, encourage gamblers to hemorrhage their savings in casinos bearing my name and crow incessantly about how much money I’ve amassed?
Seems to work for Donald Trump… proving, yet again, how selective and incoherent the religiosity of many in the party’s God squad is.”
It’s all about bashing a(ny) religion that demands standards of behavior with which the thought-leaders of today no longer want to comply.