The fate of the nation (A topic as serious as female lectors or gay clergy)

[Dave Likeness]

Eileen Smith is Poster Of The Year For 2019.   And it is not even close.....Her integrity and character are noteworthy.

[Charles Austin]

Pastor Fienen, you continue to accuse me of "contempt" despite my explanations. Please stop it.
I do not hold those who voted for the current president in contempt. I contend that many of them were misguided and ill-informed. I contend that many of them bought into his frequent lies and misleading, distracting statements.
And it now seems clear that some of those who voted for him are having second thoughts.
Apart from the man, consider what has happened under his presidency.
And yes, dammimt!, I contend that if people understand reality, have accurate information and are able to set aside some favored prejudices, they will agree with me that Trump is a bad president. What the heck is wrong with that?
If they don't agree, I do not hold them in contempt; I do not think they are automatically bad people. I think that better information, better education, better understanding will actually help them.
You call that "contempt"? Why?
Also, forget whether Mrs. Clinton was a bad candidate who made bad choices. That was then. This is now.
Education. Healthcare. Geo-politics. Global warming. Racial division in our society and the world.
The current administration undercuts pubic education, tries to demolish what healthcare we have, ruins our relations with longtime allies and virtually ignores the threats posed by climate change. The president never speaks of those things, and uses inept language to talk about racial division. (Whether is a racist or not, Peter, is not the issue.) His energy is focused on things relating to his own ego and tweeting how much he is better than anyone else or mocking his opponents.
It is almost impossible to separate The Man, his ego and self-serving bluster from government policies. And that alone is a good enough reason to defeat him.

[GalRevRedux]

Pastor Fienen writes:
Let's not forget that until the night of November 8, 2019 just about everyone figured that Hillary Clinton was a shoo-in for the next president. It was so certain that she didn't bother to campaign much in several of the meaningless Midwest states that would have little or no effect on the election anyway. There was absolutely no way that buffoon Donald Trump could possibly win. Politics is unpredictable.
I comment:
The concern was not the candidate. Almost everyone knew he was an immoral, lying fool. Even many of those who voted for him knew that.
But we underestimated the hatred some have for the Clintons and/or “liberals.”
We who were disappointed Nov. 8 also over-estimated the common sense, intelligence and decency of the general population, and the power of a shameless demagogue to affect that population. We did not think we were 1930s Germans, falling victim to the blandishments of someone telling them how miserable they were, how bad their country was and picking someone to blame. Then there was the racism and sexism too.
But that was long ago.

When the Forum was being upgraded I took it as a sign that I needed a mental health break, quite honestly from this topic.  When someone told me it was back up resolved not look at this topic but in a weak moment I did.

Pastor Austin, this post is, for me, as unacceptable as Sam Donaldson's remarks citing that the 30% of Americans who backed Trump are ignorant.  According to Donaldson, they don't know or understand or even want to know the issues.   This is what the progressive edge of the Democratic party needs to understand:   they not any more intelligent than the rest of the country.   They're elitists who seem to think they're right and not only is everyone who disagrees wrong, but they're ignorant. 

We need a new ism in our vocabulary.   We need an ism to define those who are, perhaps, uneducated, who work in a blue collar job, who work in a mine, who enjoy all sorts of sports, who cling to guns and religion, who speak with a twang, who don't have the gift of living on one of the elite coasts of this country.  If among primarily conservative Republicans we have misogynism, racism, and the host of other isms, we need one to define progressive Democrats who seem to hold contempt for those who them deem inferior in intelligence.   

We also need an ism for what I see as hypocrisy of the left.  Hillary Clinton didn't win the election and the analysis of the left holds that while sexism apparently must have played a role so did the hatred of the Clintons. No!  It was Hillary who did this to herself.  A lackluster candidate who went in knowing this was her entitlement.  It was her casting aside the basket of deplorables.  It was her policies (or lack thereof).  It was her purely amoral character, the sense that she can do anything and get away with it.   Yet when we say that those who resist Trump hate Trump (and practically cite the same rationale) well, no, they simply see the light -- his policies, all that he's taken away from us, his brashness, his business dealings.  But no hate there.

I did vote for Trump in 2016 (and I’m not ignorant).  After the final debate I could not have cast a vote for Clinton.  About a year ago I told my husband that even thought I agreed with some of Trump’s policies I couldn't vote for him again in 2020.  Then came the field of Democratic hopefuls.  Once again, unless this changes, I will be voting for Trump.  I will, as my husband said in 2016, hold my nose and cast that vote.

This country and our legislators have spent almost four years doing absolutely nothing but hating Trump and resisting him.  In church terms it is extraordinarily poor stewardship of time and talents.  People weren't served.  Issues that needed addressing went by the wayside as the resist movement took hold of the House. 

Quite a few posts back we were derailed and moved back to issues of sexuality.  Pastor Austin you reminded us of the title of the thread and wrote "Focus!"  I'd say that was focused. Trump isn't going to undermine this country nor the fabric of our society.  The fate of our nation doesn’t lie in Trump’s hands. Nor will the right nor will the left.  We stand on our morality.   A society that turns its back on babies being aborted, that teaches children from pre-K on up the LBGTQ+ agenda as acceptable even holding up a transgendered child star as an icon of acceptance, that puts assigned gender aside to the point of allowing a child to take hormones to become the gender they wish, that seeks to undermine the role of parent in these issues, that has so little regard for marriage that the divorce rate is over 50%, where sexual immorality is portrayed in all forms of media as acceptable behavior so that we become inured to it -- that is where the fate of our  nation lies.  That is where we are unraveling.  Trump?   He'll be a figure in history some day just as other presidents and leaders are today - some of whom we thought would tear about our country and destroy it -- both on the right or the left.    We change our language to make life palatable in our never ending enforcement of politically correct speech and yet we cannot honor one another’s differences when they are in opposition of the progressive agenda.  A supporter of Trump may go against all that progressives hold dear, but that person is equally integral to the fabric of our society and the opinions of each of us holds worth and merit.

Eileen, I would like to sign up for your newsletter!

Donna

[The Yak]

Pastor Fienen writes:
Let's not forget that until the night of November 8, 2019 just about everyone figured that Hillary Clinton was a shoo-in for the next president. It was so certain that she didn't bother to campaign much in several of the meaningless Midwest states that would have little or no effect on the election anyway. There was absolutely no way that buffoon Donald Trump could possibly win. Politics is unpredictable.
I comment:
The concern was not the candidate. Almost everyone knew he was an immoral, lying fool. Even many of those who voted for him knew that.
But we underestimated the hatred some have for the Clintons and/or “liberals.”
We who were disappointed Nov. 8 also over-estimated the common sense, intelligence and decency of the general population, and the power of a shameless demagogue to affect that population. We did not think we were 1930s Germans, falling victim to the blandishments of someone telling them how miserable they were, how bad their country was and picking someone to blame. Then there was the racism and sexism too.
But that was long ago.

When the Forum was being upgraded I took it as a sign that I needed a mental health break, quite honestly from this topic.  When someone told me it was back up resolved not look at this topic but in a weak moment I did.

Pastor Austin, this post is, for me, as unacceptable as Sam Donaldson's remarks citing that the 30% of Americans who backed Trump are ignorant.  According to Donaldson, they don't know or understand or even want to know the issues.   This is what the progressive edge of the Democratic party needs to understand:   they not any more intelligent than the rest of the country.   They're elitists who seem to think they're right and not only is everyone who disagrees wrong, but they're ignorant. 

We need a new ism in our vocabulary.   We need an ism to define those who are, perhaps, uneducated, who work in a blue collar job, who work in a mine, who enjoy all sorts of sports, who cling to guns and religion, who speak with a twang, who don't have the gift of living on one of the elite coasts of this country.  If among primarily conservative Republicans we have misogynism, racism, and the host of other isms, we need one to define progressive Democrats who seem to hold contempt for those who them deem inferior in intelligence.   

We also need an ism for what I see as hypocrisy of the left.  Hillary Clinton didn't win the election and the analysis of the left holds that while sexism apparently must have played a role so did the hatred of the Clintons. No!  It was Hillary who did this to herself.  A lackluster candidate who went in knowing this was her entitlement.  It was her casting aside the basket of deplorables.  It was her policies (or lack thereof).  It was her purely amoral character, the sense that she can do anything and get away with it.   Yet when we say that those who resist Trump hate Trump (and practically cite the same rationale) well, no, they simply see the light -- his policies, all that he's taken away from us, his brashness, his business dealings.  But no hate there.

I did vote for Trump in 2016 (and I’m not ignorant).  After the final debate I could not have cast a vote for Clinton.  About a year ago I told my husband that even thought I agreed with some of Trump’s policies I couldn't vote for him again in 2020.  Then came the field of Democratic hopefuls.  Once again, unless this changes, I will be voting for Trump.  I will, as my husband said in 2016, hold my nose and cast that vote.

This country and our legislators have spent almost four years doing absolutely nothing but hating Trump and resisting him.  In church terms it is extraordinarily poor stewardship of time and talents.  People weren't served.  Issues that needed addressing went by the wayside as the resist movement took hold of the House. 

Quite a few posts back we were derailed and moved back to issues of sexuality.  Pastor Austin you reminded us of the title of the thread and wrote "Focus!"  I'd say that was focused. Trump isn't going to undermine this country nor the fabric of our society.  The fate of our nation doesn’t lie in Trump’s hands. Nor will the right nor will the left.  We stand on our morality.   A society that turns its back on babies being aborted, that teaches children from pre-K on up the LBGTQ+ agenda as acceptable even holding up a transgendered child star as an icon of acceptance, that puts assigned gender aside to the point of allowing a child to take hormones to become the gender they wish, that seeks to undermine the role of parent in these issues, that has so little regard for marriage that the divorce rate is over 50%, where sexual immorality is portrayed in all forms of media as acceptable behavior so that we become inured to it -- that is where the fate of our  nation lies.  That is where we are unraveling.  Trump?   He'll be a figure in history some day just as other presidents and leaders are today - some of whom we thought would tear about our country and destroy it -- both on the right or the left.    We change our language to make life palatable in our never ending enforcement of politically correct speech and yet we cannot honor one another’s differences when they are in opposition of the progressive agenda.  A supporter of Trump may go against all that progressives hold dear, but that person is equally integral to the fabric of our society and the opinions of each of us holds worth and merit.

This forum needs a "Like" button.

[Dan Fienen]

Pastor Fienen, you continue to accuse me of "contempt" despite my explanations. Please stop it.
I do not hold those who voted for the current president in contempt. I contend that many of them were misguided and ill-informed. I contend that many of them bought into his frequent lies and misleading, distracting statements.
And it now seems clear that some of those who voted for him are having second thoughts.
Apart from the man, consider what has happened under his presidency.
And yes, dammimt!, I contend that if people understand reality, have accurate information and are able to set aside some favored prejudices, they will agree with me that Trump is a bad president. What the heck is wrong with that?
If they don't agree, I do not hold them in contempt; I do not think they are automatically bad people. I think that better information, better education, better understanding will actually help them.
You call that "contempt"? Why?
Also, forget whether Mrs. Clinton was a bad candidate who made bad choices. That was then. This is now.
Education. Healthcare. Geo-politics. Global warming. Racial division in our society and the world.
The current administration undercuts pubic education, tries to demolish what healthcare we have, ruins our relations with longtime allies and virtually ignores the threats posed by climate change. The president never speaks of those things, and uses inept language to talk about racial division. (Whether is a racist or not, Peter, is not the issue.) His energy is focused on things relating to his own ego and tweeting how much he is better than anyone else or mocking his opponents.
It is almost impossible to separate The Man, his ego and self-serving bluster from government policies. And that alone is a good enough reason to defeat him.

I am reminded of a number of conversations which we have had in this forum about the LCMS policy of Close Communion. We explain our position and you insist that what we are really saying is that we are better Christians than other Christians, that we by our policy are excommunicating everyone else, that we believe nobody else is saved. We carefully explain why that is not so and you simply say that no matter how we explain it that is what we are saying. Or at least, that is how it is going to be understood. When we talk about the importance of correct doctrine we are told that our basic motivation for pure doctrine is either arrogance or fear. I guess we are just too dumb, too stupid, too ignorant to understand our own motivation and we need you to explain to us what we feel and why.


You say that those who voted for Trump are just like the Germans in the 30s who voted in Hitler and the Nazis. That, of course makes Donald Trump Hitler. You may, no, you certainly do believe that to be the case. But apparently you have no idea why we would read that as, among other things, showing contempt for those who don't vote the way you do. I'm just calling it as I see it.


That certainly leaves very little room for anyone to disagree with and still find a way for us to reach across the political divide. You portray a political landscape with the good guys, i.e. progressive, liberal Democrats probably leaning toward some form of socialism, the bad guys, evil Trump and ;his followers, and the stupid, anyone who may not be actually evil but is too dumb to join your good guys.


If you do not mean to sound contemptuous of those who do not agree with you, perhaps you should reexamine what you say and find a way to respectfully disagree.

[Charles Austin]

Pastor Fienen persists;
You say that those who voted for Trump are just like the Germans in the 30s who voted in Hitler and the Nazis. That, of course makes Donald Trump Hitler.
I comment:
Some arE. , But not all. And it does not make him Hitler. I mean the people are buying into the same kind of blandishment that Hitler presented.

Pastor Fienen:
You may, no, you certainly do believe that to be the case. But apparently you have no idea why we would read that as, among other things, showing contempt for those who don't vote the way you do. I'm just calling it as I see it.
Me:
Well, you see somethings wrongly.

Pastor Fienen:
That certainly leaves very little room for anyone to disagree with and still find a way for us to reach across the political divide.
Me:
With candidates, we do not “reach across the political divide.” We pick one or the otheR.

Pastor Fienen:
You portray a political landscape with the good guys, i.e. progressive, liberal Democrats probably leaning toward some form of socialism, the bad guys, evil Trump and ;his followers, and the stupid, anyone who may not be actually evil but is too dumb to join your good guys.
Me:
Wrong again. wrong again. With your usual oversimplification. But get this straight. There are stupid people. And there are evil people. There also those who are greedY, incompetent or criminal, including Trump aides doing time in prison or facing prison. They are bad guys. And I don’t apologize for saying so.
On a related topic, CIA and military people say the president pulling troops out of Syria put in peril the plans to capture or kill the Isis bad guy. He actually made the mission more dangerous. And the critical intel came from the Kurds, according to the CIA and military people involved.So who got thanked first? The Russians, of course.

[D. Engebretson]

I voted for Trump.  I consider myself a fairly well educated person and informed on the issues of the day.  When I saw the choice I faced in 2016 I realized I could not vote for Clinton. That does not mean I was enamored with Trump.  But the ideological divide was so great as to leave me little choice other than voting for an independent.  If I voted that way I feared that I was only throwing a vote in Clinton's direction. Clinton represented a very progressive and liberal agenda, one that I do not relate to or agree with.  Like a lot of conservative Christian voters I was concerned about the future of certain rights I now enjoy.  We have a huge division between the right and the left and I sense it will only grow wider with time.  The direction I see is where a privileged minority is allowed to dictate the practices of our society with legal consequences attached. I do not begrudge certain 'civil' rights to all.  I do not believe that those with different sexual and gender convictions should be persecuted or degraded.  But I also do not appreciate being degraded and attacked for holding moral views that are contrary to theirs.  I do not appreciate the now rather overt social engineering that is attempting to overhaul the way we speak and the way we choose to do business.  Beto O'Rourke may have little chance of winning this election, but I have a hard time believing his views are not held by others in his party, although they are kept 'under wraps' for political expediency.  He is predictably 'walking back' some of his more extreme comments, but I believe he said what he believed and now is tempering it because of the blow back.  We can no longer have measured and informed debates on the issues of the day.  We simply lob grenades over the political fence and watch the explosion.  I live in the midst of the 'fly over' country where that "basket of deplorables" make their living in the fields and factories. As I watch them scramble hour after hour to survive the changing weather and bring in their crops I sense that discussions on gender mean little to them.  They are close to the earth.  They value family.  They hunt and own guns and are far from mass shootings.  If they are the ignorant and misinformed, I guess this degreed person can count himself among their ranks. 

[Brian Stoffregen]

I voted for Trump.  I consider myself a fairly well educated person and informed on the issues of the day.  When I saw the choice I faced in 2016 I realized I could not vote for Clinton. That does not mean I was enamored with Trump.  But the ideological divide was so great as to leave me little choice other than voting for an independent.  If I voted that way I feared that I was only throwing a vote in Clinton's direction. Clinton represented a very progressive and liberal agenda, one that I do not relate to or agree with.  Like a lot of conservative Christian voters I was concerned about the future of certain rights I now enjoy.  We have a huge division between the right and the left and I sense it will only grow wider with time.  The direction I see is where a privileged minority is allowed to dictate the practices of our society with legal consequences attached. I do not begrudge certain 'civil' rights to all.  I do not believe that those with different sexual and gender convictions should be persecuted or degraded.  But I also do not appreciate being degraded and attacked for holding moral views that are contrary to theirs.  I do not appreciate the now rather overt social engineering that is attempting to overhaul the way we speak and the way we choose to do business.  Beto O'Rourke may have little chance of winning this election, but I have a hard time believing his views are not held by others in his party, although they are kept 'under wraps' for political expediency.  He is predictably 'walking back' some of his more extreme comments, but I believe he said what he believed and now is tempering it because of the blow back.  We can no longer have measured and informed debates on the issues of the day.  We simply lob grenades over the political fence and watch the explosion.  I live in the midst of the 'fly over' country where that "basket of deplorables" make their living in the fields and factories. As I watch them scramble hour after hour to survive the changing weather and bring in their crops I sense that discussions on gender mean little to them.  They are close to the earth.  They value family.  They hunt and own guns and are far from mass shootings.  If they are the ignorant and misinformed, I guess this degreed person can count himself among their ranks.

I’ve lived in the rural Midwest. Yes, they value family, but I saw divorces and affairs happening in those communities, too. I saw children of farm families come out of the closets, but long before that everyone thought they were a bit strange. While they don’t like big government, they happily accept government subsidies. They participated in set-aside programs sponsored by the government.


In Wyoming it seemed like everyone owned guns and drove four-wheel drive vehicles. Most were responsible hunters and complained about poachers and other illegal activities with firearms. They could be the first ones to take away a gun from a drunken hunter.


I just shake my head at a friend, a Trump supporter, very vocal against creeping socialism among Democrats, but for most of his adult life, he’s been supported by government disability checks - a social system. He doesn’t seem to be able to make the connection that it is a form of socialism and big government that’s supporting him. He’s not dumb. I don’t know what to call this type of disconnect between an ideology that is in conflict with his real life.

[D. Engebretson]

I voted for Trump.  I consider myself a fairly well educated person and informed on the issues of the day.  When I saw the choice I faced in 2016 I realized I could not vote for Clinton. That does not mean I was enamored with Trump.  But the ideological divide was so great as to leave me little choice other than voting for an independent.  If I voted that way I feared that I was only throwing a vote in Clinton's direction. Clinton represented a very progressive and liberal agenda, one that I do not relate to or agree with.  Like a lot of conservative Christian voters I was concerned about the future of certain rights I now enjoy.  We have a huge division between the right and the left and I sense it will only grow wider with time.  The direction I see is where a privileged minority is allowed to dictate the practices of our society with legal consequences attached. I do not begrudge certain 'civil' rights to all.  I do not believe that those with different sexual and gender convictions should be persecuted or degraded.  But I also do not appreciate being degraded and attacked for holding moral views that are contrary to theirs.  I do not appreciate the now rather overt social engineering that is attempting to overhaul the way we speak and the way we choose to do business.  Beto O'Rourke may have little chance of winning this election, but I have a hard time believing his views are not held by others in his party, although they are kept 'under wraps' for political expediency.  He is predictably 'walking back' some of his more extreme comments, but I believe he said what he believed and now is tempering it because of the blow back.  We can no longer have measured and informed debates on the issues of the day.  We simply lob grenades over the political fence and watch the explosion.  I live in the midst of the 'fly over' country where that "basket of deplorables" make their living in the fields and factories. As I watch them scramble hour after hour to survive the changing weather and bring in their crops I sense that discussions on gender mean little to them.  They are close to the earth.  They value family.  They hunt and own guns and are far from mass shootings.  If they are the ignorant and misinformed, I guess this degreed person can count himself among their ranks.

I’ve lived in the rural Midwest. Yes, they value family, but I saw divorces and affairs happening in those communities, too. I saw children of farm families come out of the closets, but long before that everyone thought they were a bit strange. While they don’t like big government, they happily accept government subsidies. They participated in set-aside programs sponsored by the government.


In Wyoming it seemed like everyone owned guns and drove four-wheel drive vehicles. Most were responsible hunters and complained about poachers and other illegal activities with firearms. They could be the first ones to take away a gun from a drunken hunter.


I just shake my head at a friend, a Trump supporter, very vocal against creeping socialism among Democrats, but for most of his adult life, he’s been supported by government disability checks - a social system. He doesn’t seem to be able to make the connection that it is a form of socialism and big government that’s supporting him. He’s not dumb. I don’t know what to call this type of disconnect between an ideology that is in conflict with his real life.

I think we need to differentiate social aid programs from socialism as a political philosophy and practice. One does not assume the other.  Socialism in its broader form assumes government ownership and control of a great deal of the societal structure.  It also assumes more power to a national government vs. local governmental systems.  Admittedly some who might decry "creeping socialism" abuse social aid programs and fail to appreciate the temporary nature of the aid. But the more conservative heartland is suspicious of governmental overreach that attempts to exert increasing control over their work, their businesses, and their places of faith.  Again, accepting some social aid such as subsidies or even social security does not automatically translate into acceptance of a socialistic structure.

[Nurseken7]

i voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and with each passing day the current presidents ignorant behavior and statements make me more and more proud of having voted for her.  To me it is way way beyond absurd to claim Trump has been a better president than she would have been.  Is Hillary Clinton a criminal?  I don't know, maybe but she has not been found in a court of law.  You say she's bmeing shielded by democrats.   Where is your evidence?  Just because Rush Limbaugh says so?  Trump has absolutely proven that he is a bigot and a sexual harrasser and a bully and a whiner and a cry baby.  Wake up! He does not deserve to be the president. 

[Nurseken7]

I think the word "racist" gets thrown around way too much these days.  A better word for Trump is bigot.  His public statements about Mexican people begins murderers, rapists, African countries being shithole countries, Muslims should all be banned from entering the united states absolutely prove that he is indeed a bigot.

[D. Engebretson]

I don't think the conversation is furthered either by trashing Clinton or Trump.  We all have our opinions of them, positive and negative.

If one wants to put forward a future agenda that improves on what we are doing at present, especially as that agenda would be promoted by the president, then for Democrats that means promoting a strong candidate that has a chance of winning a sufficiently large enough share of the electorate and can appeal to both sides and broad sections of the country, thus winning both the popular vote and in the Electoral College. Which candidate seems to fit that description as the field stands at present?

[Steven Tibbetts]

Apart from the man, consider what has happened under his presidency.

How many "Never Trumpers" on this forum/topic have told you this is precisely why we expect to vote for the President's re-election?

For the republic,
Steven

[Steven Tibbetts]

On a related topic, CIA and military people say the president pulling troops out of Syria put in peril the plans to capture or kill the Isis bad guy. He actually made the mission more dangerous. And the critical intel came from the Kurds, according to the CIA and military people involved.So who got thanked first? The Russians, of course.

Since the topic is "The fate of the nation," seems to me the CIA and military intelligence served the nation better when they actually kept national secrets secret and the daily headlines weren't filled by their leaks. 

[mj4]

... more and more proud of having voted for her.

You're the first person I've heard express that sentiment.