Now that the 2020 Election is over....

[peter_speckhard]

For that reason, I tend to trust Project Veritas because their m.o. us to go under cover and get real recordings, which they then share. That having been said, i would be surprised (but not stunned) if it turns out Trump won the election.

As I recall, they edited their recordings to make sure they said what they wanted them to say.

You recall wrongly. They edited their recordings because they were many hours long since they came from people wearing a wire, and most of those hours featured nothing relevant happening. When the same sort of people who claim that the postal worker recanted when he didn't recant said that the tape was edited, they were referring to the fact that the released portions were only the actual conversations, not the waiting around, using the restroom, etc. In response, Project Veritas released the entire recording (I believe they were something like 9 hours' worth) to prove that it wasn't deceptively edited, but that didn't stop the press from reporting that the tapes had been discredited because they were shown to be deceptively edited. Which is why you recall things that aren't true. You, like Charles, are far too credulous when it comes to your favored sources and far to cynical when it comes to alternative views.

[D. Engebretson]

I wonder, Pastor Fienen, how it was with call committees or interviews for perspective pastors in your synod for the 5, 10 or 15 years following the schism of the 1970s. Don’t you think candidates might’ve been asked where they were and what they did from 1969 to 1975? I know some Seminex graduates got calls within the Missouri Synod. I know some were refused calls. Isn’t where one was and what one did during a certain period of time relevant for employment?

So, Seminex is not quite forgotten yet.


You make the comparison of those who walked out of the seminary which had called them to teach or in which they had enrolled in defiance of the administration that had been properly and legally established to govern that institution and in defiance of the the church body and its teachings which had established the seminary and administered it and the properly elected administration of that church body to form a rogue seminary that claimed governance independent of the church body and sought to prepare pastors for that church body independent of the church body and not subject to that church body's supervision to those who worked for the Trump administration.

Those who attended Seminex (and those who taught there) were in open defiance of and rebellion against those who had been duly placed in authority over them. You may or may not agree that rebellion was justified and necessary but that is a different question. Surely, after such rebellion questions are in order.

Are you claiming that Trump was not the legitimate president or that he was not legally elected to that office and that those who worked in that administration were working for an illegitimate government? Do you claim that those who worked in or supported his administration were in rebellion against the duly authorized administration of our nation?

Would it have been legitimate for Trump's administration to have asked a "ton of questions" before hiring people who had worked in the Obama administration? What sort of questions?

You remember the history a bit differently than I do. As I recall, it was much like the present situation. When the synod president couldn't get the seminary board (the ones who are in charge of the seminary) to do things his way, he worked at getting them replaced with people who would do his bidding. (Sound familiar?) There was rhetoric about heretical professors, but besides Tietjen, no names nor evidence was presented about who were heretical and who were not. (Does making claims without names or evidence sound familiar?)


If the students didn't know which classes they should take and which to avoid, they decided to avoid all the classes to make sure that they weren't being taught by heretics.

I do not want to further derail this thread on Seminex history issues, but might I recommend purchasing and reading Dr. Paul Zimmerman's book A Seminary in Crisis- The Inside Story of the Preus Fact Finding Committe (CPH, 2007)? Dr. Zimmerman was a member of my previous church in Michigan when I served there in the 90s.  He is not only a man of great integrity, but truly in the know on this matter. I was pleased that he finally wrote the book, late in life (well into his 80s), to fill in the gaps of this important period of history in the LCMS. 

[Dan Fienen]

Groups on the left wing of the Democratic Party like the Sunrise Movement and Justice Democrats are offering their proposals for people to be included in the Biden administration and policy proposals. All of these are, no surprise, on the left wing of even the Democratic Party and if enacted would reinforce the Biden administration as very if not extremely Progressive. Is this a problem? Not really. As Biden and his closest advisors working on the transition consider the make up of his administration and their initial policy and program agenda he will receive advise and suggestions from all sorts of people. Those on the left should have their voices heard. Nor does their pushing a very left wing agenda means that Biden will not reach out also across the aisle and work with the Republicans who are a part of our government and the American people. What will matter is not all the talk that is now taking place, but what Biden actually does later when he is in office.


Biden himself is formulating his "wish list" of what he wants to accomplish. And it is, especially in contrast with Trump, a rather liberal and progressive list. Again, at this point it is talk, it is a starting place for negotiation. At the beginning of a negotiation it is helpful for each party in the negotiation to make a "here I stand" statement to define themselves and what they hope for. Then the work of people having a meeting of minds, working out what the priorities are, where they can give and where they need to hold firm. The time for Biden and Republicans to each give some to reach consensus is later.

[Dan Fienen]

I wonder, Pastor Fienen, how it was with call committees or interviews for perspective pastors in your synod for the 5, 10 or 15 years following the schism of the 1970s. Don’t you think candidates might’ve been asked where they were and what they did from 1969 to 1975? I know some Seminex graduates got calls within the Missouri Synod. I know some were refused calls. Isn’t where one was and what one did during a certain period of time relevant for employment?

So, Seminex is not quite forgotten yet.


You make the comparison of those who walked out of the seminary which had called them to teach or in which they had enrolled in defiance of the administration that had been properly and legally established to govern that institution and in defiance of the the church body and its teachings which had established the seminary and administered it and the properly elected administration of that church body to form a rogue seminary that claimed governance independent of the church body and sought to prepare pastors for that church body independent of the church body and not subject to that church body's supervision to those who worked for the Trump administration.

Those who attended Seminex (and those who taught there) were in open defiance of and rebellion against those who had been duly placed in authority over them. You may or may not agree that rebellion was justified and necessary but that is a different question. Surely, after such rebellion questions are in order.

Are you claiming that Trump was not the legitimate president or that he was not legally elected to that office and that those who worked in that administration were working for an illegitimate government? Do you claim that those who worked in or supported his administration were in rebellion against the duly authorized administration of our nation?

Would it have been legitimate for Trump's administration to have asked a "ton of questions" before hiring people who had worked in the Obama administration? What sort of questions?

You remember the history a bit differently than I do. As I recall, it was much like the present situation. When the synod president couldn't get the seminary board (the ones who are in charge of the seminary) to do things his way, he worked at getting them replaced with people who would do his bidding. (Sound familiar?) There was rhetoric about heretical professors, but besides Tietjen, no names nor evidence was presented about who were heretical and who were not. (Does making claims without names or evidence sound familiar?)


If the students didn't know which classes they should take and which to avoid, they decided to avoid all the classes to make sure that they weren't being taught by heretics.

Let me point out that my memory also includes observing the whole mess as it unfolded from the vantage of the Senior College where I was a senior that year, hearing and observing representatives from all sides of the conflict who came to talk with us. I heard all the talking points of the students who walked out and their professors.

[Charles Austin]

Peter, I make no "claim" about the president being sick or not being sick. I was just noting, as I am sure you agree, that a lot of off-beat things are "out there." Social media takes some of these things and magnifies them by the millions.
And the angst which I may have, but which is now mostly ebbing, is that I believe this president to be so egotistical, so corrupt, so immoral, so dictatorially ambitious, so dismissive of our sacred governing documents that he and his people (who may actually be controlling him) would stop at nothing, even attempting to find reasons to call upon the military to keep him in office. The parallels between us and Germany in the 1930s are there.
He would stay in office claiming the election was rigged against him, but if he did, you would see trouble in our streets that would make anything previous look like a sandbox tussle. And that would be a real tragedy.
But, hey, maybe he'll appoint some judges that will rule your way on a couple of issues.

[John_Hannah]

Nonetheless Trump's behavior is contrary to what every Republican candidate has done before in losing. It is just another example of the "cancel culture" spreading every where today.

An example of the cancel culture? How so?

"contrary to what every Republican candidate has done before in losing."   

Peace, JOHN

[Pr. Don Kirchner]

Nonetheless Trump's behavior is contrary to what every Republican candidate has done before in losing. It is just another example of the "cancel culture" spreading every where today.

An example of the cancel culture? How so?

"contrary to what every Republican candidate has done before in losing."   

Peace, JOHN

Oh, you were being whimsical ... 

[D. Engebretson]

I hear distant echoes of Nixon's famous quote from 1962 (which proved later to be premature) when he told the press: "you don't have Nixon to kick around anymore..." I'm wondering what the press and many in the Democratic party will do once Biden has taken up occupancy in the Oval Office, and when Pelosi is still in control of the House, and, if it works out, McConnell is no longer in charge of the Senate.  Who will there will be "kick around"? 

[Richard Johnson]

Why were ballots mailed to her both at her Oregon residence and 2 ballots to a out of state address where never lived after registering to vote in Oregon?

Rather than hyperventilating about it, why don't you call the county clerk and ask? That's what I did when my son received election information after he had moved to a different state.

[John_Hannah]

Nonetheless Trump's behavior is contrary to what every Republican candidate has done before in losing. It is just another example of the "cancel culture" spreading every where today.

An example of the cancel culture? How so?

"contrary to what every Republican candidate has done before in losing."   

Peace, JOHN

Oh, you were being whimsical ... 

No. Not al all. Presidential protocol is an important part of our culture even though it is not specified in the Constitution. Perhaps it is the wave of the future for presidential elections. If so, there's nothing I can do about it. I do hope it is not.   

Peace, JOHN

[Richard Johnson]

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/11/11/easy-breezy_biden_ignores_transition_drama__144639.html

I think this article should help everyone simmer down about the transition. Biden seems unconcerned. As does Trump. Trump is clearly playing it as though he knows something most people don't. If he is bluffing just for the sake of leaving open the possibility of a 2024 rematch, so be it. If not, so be it. He can't hold his cards forever; there is a deadline for laying the cards on the table. So wait for the deadline.

Here's an interesting historical perspective from four years ago:  https://time.com/4566735/obama-trump-presidential-transition-history-origins/

[Richard Johnson]

Would you be willing to accept the same level of cooperation and chaos free transition that the outgoing Obama administration officials up and down the ladder gave to the incoming Trump administration in 2016-2017?

Probably so.

[D. Engebretson]

As Biden prepares to recommend sweeping tax increases on corporate America, it is interesting that some of these firms are already making choices in terms of relocation due to state taxes.  Some of the larger population centers, such as New York and California, may continue to lose businesses as they levy harsh taxes.  These areas are also Democratic strongholds as shown in the election just past.  I wonder how that loss of revenue will impact areas already suffering economic downturns.  And long term, now it may impact future elections.  Have no idea. But it will be interesting to watch.

[peter_speckhard]

Peter, I make no "claim" about the president being sick or not being sick. I was just noting, as I am sure you agree, that a lot of off-beat things are "out there." Social media takes some of these things and magnifies them by the millions.
And the angst which I may have, but which is now mostly ebbing, is that I believe this president to be so egotistical, so corrupt, so immoral, so dictatorially ambitious, so dismissive of our sacred governing documents that he and his people (who may actually be controlling him) would stop at nothing, even attempting to find reasons to call upon the military to keep him in office. The parallels between us and Germany in the 1930s are there.
He would stay in office claiming the election was rigged against him, but if he did, you would see trouble in our streets that would make anything previous look like a sandbox tussle. And that would be a real tragedy.
But, hey, maybe he'll appoint some judges that will rule your way on a couple of issues.

I believe your beliefs to be nonsense. The parallels between here and now and 1930’s Germany are laughable and serve mainly to endow “the resistance” with the glow of moral rectitude in breaking the law.

Let’s just pretend that the FBI is conducting a sting operation. They infiltrated some states that do mail in voting and secretly monitored the process in order convict people engaged in fraud. If that happened, then in order to garner convictions they’d need to see those votes counted. In that case, wouldn’t the aftermath of the election look the way it looks now? I’m not saying that is happening, I’m just positing a hypothetical.

Now say they reveal their findings and it turns out several states counted fraudulent ballots. Indictments ensue. The election flips to Trump. Would you take that lying down? Would you trust the investigation? Or would suddenly every deep state conspiracy start to sound plausible to you? My guess is the latter. You’d want some transparency. And nobody could blame you for that.

Until you learn to see the mainstream media as a partisan player (not in any official capacity, but de facto, like Hollywood) you’ll never understand the people you disagree with.

[Pr. Don Kirchner]

Nonetheless Trump's behavior is contrary to what every Republican candidate has done before in losing. It is just another example of the "cancel culture" spreading every where today.

An example of the cancel culture? How so?

"contrary to what every Republican candidate has done before in losing."   

Peace, JOHN

Oh, you were being whimsical ... 

No. Not al all. Presidential protocol is an important part of our culture even though it is not specified in the Constitution. Perhaps it is the wave of the future for presidential elections. If so, there's nothing I can do about it. I do hope it is not.   

Peace, JOHN

Fair enough. But it is not an example of cancel culture. Unless you're into the Stoffregen style of making up your own definitions.