Category Archives: Random Blogging

Religion, Common Sense–And Snark

Yesterday, I shared signs that the resistance to MAGA/Trump is gaining steam. Among those positive signs is the emergence of religious leaders who are now coming out in force to rebut the performative piety of the White “Christian” nationalists who make up a significant part of the MAGA cult.

The recent growth of participation by genuinely religious leaders is welcome, but we shouldn’t overlook clerics who have been addressing the evils of the administration and the hypocrisy of those “Christians” for quite some time. One of those brave souls is local Quaker pastor, Phil Gulley, who is also a noted humorist and author. (Phil now has a Substack, and if you don’t get it, you absolutely should.)

Phil is a friend, and has graciously allowed me to quote liberally from one recent essay, titled “Can I Get An Amen?”

He began by describing an incident where he was invited and subsequently dis-invited to address a Southern Baptist gathering, Gully noted that the Southern Baptist Convention “is to spirituality what Donald Trump is to education. Speaking of Donald Trump, seventy-two percent of Southern Baptists voted for him in the last election, which gives you some idea of their moral acumen.”

Gulley then turned to Trump’s “hour long dronefest” at the National Prayer Breakfast.

As rich a spiritual event as the National Day of Prayer breakfast was, I can’t help but wonder why Billy Graham, back in 1952, thought it a good idea to pray to a man who told his followers, “when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret…” Then again, religion can be a mysterious undertaking and maybe back in 1952 Jesus changed his mind and told Billy Graham to go ahead and rent out a hotel ballroom, fill it with big shots, invite the press, and have at it.

Gulley noted that Franklin Graham, Billy’s son, had skipped the event, and wondered whether

he and God might be on the outs since this past November when Graham said, “The Epstein files are nothing compared to God’s files.” I had no idea God, as Graham seems to suggest, is an even bigger pedophile than Jeffrey Epstein and I think Franklin Graham needs to tell us what he knows and when he knew it.

The essay’s conclusion is vintage Gulley.

As annoying as all these things are, what bothers me most is that the prayer breakfast was held on February 5th, my birthday, and I would have happily traveled to Washington D.C. to speak to those folks. There are things I’ve been wanting to say to Donald Trump and the Southern Baptists for some years now and it would have saved me a lot of trouble to only have to say it once, when they were all together. Since they didn’t afford me the opportunity, I’ll say it now. Do us all a favor and go into your closets, close the doors, and shut your pieholes. Leave the running of the country to those of us who still believe in the Constitution. Can I get an Amen!

I certainly say Amen!

I will also note that there is much to be said for employing humor in the face of looming disaster. (There’s a reason so many comedians are Jewish…we know a lot about disaster.) On the local level, a pundit who regularly serves up excellent–and informative–snark is Abdul Shabazz. Abdul is a lawyer; he publishes Indy Politics and serves up astute commentary with a penetrating wit as he surveys Indiana’s legislature and the Hoosier political environment.

A recent edition considered “Rino Season in Indiana.”

There’s a new sport in Indiana politics, and it’s not deer season or turkey season, or even rabbit season.

It’s RINO season.

No Quarter PAC has burst onto the scene with all the subtlety of a foghorn and the emotional range of a campaign mailer written entirely in bold. Their grievance is simple: twenty-one Indiana Republican state senators voted against a congressional map President Donald Trump wanted, and as a result, Indiana remains 7–2 instead of the allegedly holier 9–0.

Apparently, 78 percent Republican control is now considered a rounding error.

As Abdul points out, there’s nothing wrong with primaries. “If Republican voters want to replace incumbents over redistricting strategy, that’s their call. Parties have internal debates all the time…But this isn’t just a debate about maps. It’s about discipline… about turning every procedural disagreement into a loyalty test.”

As he notes, in Indiana politics, there’s apparently no shortage of hunting licenses.

If you want some excellent snark in which to marinate your daily political depression, subscribe to both of them.

Comments

Good Stuff Is Happening Too

There’s a reason “doom scrolling” has entered our vocabularies. Every day, the news is filled with incomprehensibly stupid and damaging activities of Trump and his collection of clowns, creeps, weirdos and incompetents; it’s easy to become fixated on all the chaos and destruction.

But there are encouraging signs that We the People are rapidly awakening from our civic slumber. Some examples, in no particular order: 

A Grand Jury has refused to indict two Senators (including former astronaut Mark Kelly) and four Congresspersons who’d filmed a video in which they reminded members of the armed forces that they have a legal duty to refuse illegal orders. It’s an axiom in the legal community that prosecutors can get grand juries to indict a ham sandwich, but this recent–and entirely appropriate–result follows several others in which panels of ordinary American citizens have refused to go along with bogus charges lodged against people targeted by Trumpian pique.

Despite early incidents in which institutions of higher education have “bent the knee,” universities have begun pushing back. In Red Indiana, where the current President of Indiana University has cozied up to our MAGA governor and complied with the administration’s various assaults on academic freedom, the faculty has passed a resolution urging IU to remove the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, along with its Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agencies, from the university’s list of approved employers who are allowed to advertise jobs on the IU Events calendar.  

The House of Representatives defied Trump for once, voting 217-214 against a rule that would have blocked members from voting on the president’s tariffs. The defeat means that members will be able to force up or down votes on the President’s insane, damaging global trade agenda. (The Senate had already voted against Trump’s tariffs with GOP senators siding with Democrats last year.)

ICE is leaving Minneapolis. Trump is steadily losing support on his signature issue of immigration. An NBC/SurveyMonkey poll found 49% of American adults strongly disapprove of the Trump administration’s handling of border security and immigration, compared with 34% who strongly disapproved in a similar poll last April.

An essay titled “Auspicious Omens and Excellent Insubordination” contains a lengthy list of other evidence that the resistance is making progress, and that an administration described as “weak, chaotic, and wildly unpopular” is continuing to do everything it can to make itself more so. 

There are also the slow-moving but inexorable revelations from the Epstein files, which–in addition to a reported million mentions of Trump–have ensnared people like Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and debunked Trump’s assertions that he hadn’t known about Epstein’s sexual crimes. As the essay suggests, the continuing dribble of releases, along with the obvious efforts to suppress information about “who is being protected (powerful men) and who is not (abused children)” keeps fanning the flames.

The unhinged and increasingly overt racism that led Trump to portray the Obamas as apes has generated a backlash even among Republicans. As the author notes, Trump fails to understand “that we live in a world where causes have effects.” In this case, one effect was that thousands of people praised the Obamas as gracious, dignified, and beautiful while accurately describing Trump as gross, demented and repulsive.

J.D. Vance continues to be booed–in Vermont, at the Olympics…Trump skipped the Super Bowl because his staff warned that he too would be booed. (And despite his dissing of Bad Bunny, the Super Bowl halftime show was the most widely watched in history.)

Republicans see a bloodbath coming in the midterms, which the Trumpists are already frantically trying delegitimize–a clear sign they don’t think they can win fairly. Democrats have overperformed in every special election held in 2025. Most recently, a Democrat who was outspent by twenty to one won a state senate election in Texas by 14 points–in a district Trump had won by 17 points–a 31-point shift. (A GOP operative was quoted saying, “We watered down red districts to steal blue ones, and now the electorate hates us and our turnout is collapsing.”)

High school students across the country are staging walkouts to protest ICE–and the audience at a wrestling match shouted “Fuck ICE” before the main event.

And authentic Christians have finally been showing up to oppose the psuedo-Christian nationalists. The Catholic church is speaking out for immigrants, and so are Episcopalians, Methodists, and the United Church of Christ– along with rabbis, imams, and Buddhist monks. Across the country, churches are becoming meeting places, training grounds, and organizing networks for immigrant solidarity work.

There’s much more. MAGA has lost more than Marjorie Taylor Greene. It’s lost We the (Real American) People.

Comments

Preaching To The Choir

One of the regular writers who posts at Lincoln Square is a political science professor named Kristoffer Ealy. I’ve cited him before, because I have found his posts particularly perceptive, and a recent one especially so. 

The post is lengthy, and primarily focuses on the issue of celebrity endorsements–when they help and when they don’t. (As Ealy says, he’s done his research–not “research” like the MAGA vaccine “experts” “who’ve watched three YouTube videos, misread a Facebook meme, and now think they’re qualified to run the FDA.”) If that is a subject that interests you, his observations are well worth clicking through and reading.

But along with the discourse on proper deployment of celebrities and their endorsements, one observation really caught my attention and made me feel much better about this daily blog, which–as I have long understood–is an exercise in “preaching to the choir.” (Aside from a couple of intermittent trolls, virtually everyone who visits here is anti-MAGA and horrified by Trump. I haven’t changed anyone’s mind; I may at best have amplified the reasons for our common angst and anger.)

Ely writes:

My friend Reecie Colbert’s line belongs in marble: don’t underestimate preaching to the choir, because the choir sings.

People throw around “preaching to the choir” like it’s meaningless, like the only thing that matters is converting some mythical swing voter who spends weekends reading white papers and sipping tea. That is not how elections are won. Elections are won by the people who already agree with you actually showing up. The choir is not dead weight. The choir is infrastructure. The choir is the group chat that becomes a phone bank. The choir is the “did you vote yet?” text at 7:12 p.m. The choir is the auntie who makes sure everyone in the family is registered. The choir is the volunteer who knocks doors even when it’s hot and everybody’s mad and the vibes are rancid. The choir is the person who drives someone to the polls. The choir is the person curing ballots and checking signatures and doing the unglamorous democracy maintenance that never trends. (Emphasis mine…for obvious reasons.)

Ealy is absolutely correct to say that the most important job of a campaign is to energize the choir and increase its volume–to turn passive agreement into action. And as he points out, the real problem in politics is not persuasion, but behavioral follow-through.

People say they support you and then they don’t vote. They say they care and then they don’t register. They say they’re outraged and then they don’t show up because it’s raining. The gap between attitude and behavior is where elections go to die.

This blog speaks to commenters –and the “lurkers” I frequently encounter– about matters upon which we largely agree.

I have assumed that my writing and posting here is an extension of my twenty-one years in a university classroom: to explain, to interpret, to share information that many readers are unlikely to have encountered. Ealy disagrees. He says the purpose of preaching to the choir is to motivate concrete behavior.

Just as pastors and rabbis and Imams exhort their “audiences”/parishioners to act in conformity to their religious tenets, the job of those of us who “preach” politically is to turn opinion into action.

I pondered that insight.

There is research suggesting that people who make a public vow to take a specified action are more likely to follow through. Accordingly, I would be very appreciative if those of you who read these daily rants and agree with the need to reclaim the America we thought we inhabited would make some sort of public commitment–in a comment here, or on Facebook or Bluesky, Threads, or some other place or platform. Confirm your intent to vote, to attend protests, to register or transport voters, send postcards, volunteer for a campaign…whatever it is that you are prepared to do.

A flood of such public promises to turn opinion into action and increase the choir’s singing volume– would both confirm Ealy’s observations and make me feel much less useless….

Comments

Rebutting The Big Lie–Again

America’s toddler-in-chief apparently remains consumed by his electoral loss in 2000. He continues to insist that the loss could not possibly have been legitimate–obviously, any loss or setback he experiences is clearly the result of nefarious doings on the part of his enemies. (Trump doesn’t have “opponents”–anyone who criticises or counters him is automatically an enemy to be demeaned and discredited.) Even when he wins, as–to America’s lasting shame–he did in 2024, he remains fixated on what appears to be a pathological need to erase past losses.

And so we are being treated to his continuing tantrum about the 2020 election, allied to an obvious efforts to prevent GOP losses in the upcoming midterms.

Normal people can be forgiven for finding this fixation tedious, and shrugging it off as additional evidence of Trump’s mental illness and increasing inability to conduct himself as an adult. Interestingly, however, election officials in several states have conducted studies focused on one of his most persist claims–that his loss was attributable to voting by hordes of “illegals”–and that massive voting by non-citizens continues to threaten free and fair elections.

The New York Times recently published an op-ed reporting on the results of those studies.

As the essay notes, charges that noncitizens are illegally casting ballots have become commonplace. On X, Elon Musk claims  that significant numbers of illegal immigrants vote. Rudy Giuliani charged that there were “probably about 250,000” votes from noncitizens in 2020 in Arizona–a state that requires proof of citizenship to vote. Unsurprisingly, there is no evidence to support those and similar allegations. Even the pro-Trump Heritage Foundation could come up with only 24 instances of noncitizens voting in U.S. elections in the ten-year span between 2003 and 2023.

More recently, several states have investigated these allegations of noncitizen voting by cross-checking their voter registration rolls with citizenship status. Their conclusion: non-citizen voting is virtually nonexistent.

Utah has approximately 2.1 million registered voters, among whom the study found one “confirmed noncitizen.”  “And that one noncitizen, while registered, had never voted.”

Idaho has one million voters. When the state ran a similar test in 2024, they uncovered 36 “very likely” registered noncitizens. Thirty-six!  As the secretary of state reported “out of the million-plus registered voters we started with, we’re down to 10 thousandths of one percent” of the overall count–assuming all of those registered actually voted. (Some elections are close, but hardly close enough to be affected by ten thousandths of a percent–even if one assumes that all 36 individuals voted and voted alike.)

Louisiana’s investigation in 2025 identified some 390 noncitizen registrants, “79 of whom had voted in at least one election over the last several decades (out of 2.9 million registrants).”  Montana found 23 “possible” noncitizen registrants out of the state’s 785,000 people registered to vote. And Georgia’s 2024 audit found 20 registered noncitizens out of the 8.2 million who were registered.

The Republican author of the essay writes that he spent four years overseeing voter registration in Maricopa County; in those four years, he had come across “a total of two possible instances of noncitizens voting out of some 2.5 million registered voters.”

Some politicians are trying to exploit even these small numbers. In Michigan, the Macomb County clerk, Anthony Forlini, who is running for the top election office in the state, the secretary of state, recently announced to great fanfare that he’d found 15 noncitizens on his county’s voter rolls of over 724,000 registered voters. The incumbent secretary of state, Jocelyn Benson, then tasked her team with investigating the 15 files. It found that three of the people were U.S. citizens, four were previously removed from voter rolls, four were under further investigation and four do seem to be noncitizens.

Rather obviously, these constant accusations about noncitizen voting are an effort to score political points with low-information MAGA voters. But as the author notes, these allegations come at a real cost–they erode Americans’ confidence in the integrity of elections and they are an insult to the hard-working public servants who routinely oversee and guarantee our free and fair elections.

But as he also notes, and as so many of us fear, these accusations aren’t just “part of the broader story he’s concocted to avoid accepting that he lost to Joe Biden in 2020.”  They are also a threat to this fall’s midterm elections.

That threat isn’t a miniscule number of votes cast by non-citizens. The danger comes from the craven Republican politicians bending their knees to our mad would-be King–and thereby facilitating his corrupt and fraudulent efforts to cling to power.

Good government folks are preparing to protect the midterms, but a truly massive turnout–a huge Blue Wave–is the only sure-fire way to stymie these efforts.

Comments

It Isn’t Just Trump…

It’s impossible–at least for thinking people–to live in today’s America without trying to figure out just how we got here.

Most of us start with the obvious question: how could some seventy-seven million people vote for a thoroughly despicable felon who was also a crude, bloviating, intellectually-challenged narcissist? (And yes, I’m afraid one answer to that is that he was a White male despicable felon, and therefore preferable to an accomplished, sane Black female.) But getting hung up over that question ignores another that should be equally obvious, the one with which I began this post: how did we get here? What social and political dislocations and structural problems enabled the election of this profoundly unfit individual, and what explains the millions who continue to support him?

In a recent essay for Axios, Jim Venderhel and Mike Allen offer one perspective on that question. They focus on what they identify as “three once-in-a-lifetime shifts”–the ideologies, tactics and tone of governance; the lightning-fast advancements in AI; and the rapid transformation of how our realities are shaped. They argue that all three are hitting us at once, and that  focusing only on Trump misses “the enormity of change pushing our minds and nation somewhere new, different and uncertain.”

They don’t discount the enormous damage Trump has done. As the authors concede, Trump has turned Republicans into an America First fascist movement while stretching presidential powers far beyond their constitutional limits. He has re-shaped both parties–what they stand for and who votes for them, and he has destroyed previous global respect for the United States.

When they write that “whatever politics was before, it won’t be again” it’s hard to disagree.

The essay also references the changes in American society being wrought by AI–changes that are also part of the transformation that I consider most significant and most troubling: the technological advances that have increasingly sorted us into residents of dramatically different realities.

As the authors write,

As a society, we’re breaking into hundreds or thousands of information bubbles, shaped and hardened based on our age, politics, jobs and interests.

Pick six random people (we’ve both done this at dinners). You’ll often find that most get their information from platforms the others never visit, and trust people the others have never heard of. This is a brave new world.

The common window we once collectively looked through has splintered into countless pieces. This change is accelerating with the decline of broadcast TV and cable news, traditional print and digital media, and local news.
In its place: soaring podcasters, YouTubers, Substackers, and digital and encrypted communities. With attention scattered and trust shattered, we’ve grown highly susceptible to manipulation, polarization and persistent frustration.

One of my sons is a “techie,” and in the age of AI, he now distrusts virtually every “news item” he sees online until he checks it out. That includes the “deep fakes” that perfectly mimic genuine photographs.

Whether you agree or disagree with the authors of the Axios essay on the importance of these three shifts in our social environment–or the implied suggestion that they represent something new under the sun–I think it’s impossible to discount their combined effect. (The essay unhelpfully concludes with a hope that “thoughtful people” will spend more time thinking thoughtfully. I didn’t expect them to offer solutions, but failing even to suggest at least some ameliorative actions seemed like a cop-out.)

In a very real way, the three shifts identified in the essay are really just different aspects of a single, enormously consequential change in human society: the ability to curate our preferred realities. Americans no longer have a common understanding of our physical or social environment. The ability to choose our “news”–to seek out “authorities” who will confirm our biases, to “cherry pick” from an infinite supply of facts, half-facts and outright propaganda–enable Trump and his administration to lie repeatedly, knowing that a substantial portion of the population will willingly accept and parrot the disinformation.

One answer to my original question–how could people vote for someone so obviously repulsive and unfit–is that far too many residents of those curated realities were simply unaware of Trump’s unfitness. Voters who limited their information sources to Fox News and its clones didn’t live in the same world the rest of us occupied.

I am increasingly convinced that the most pressing issue we will face if and when we rid ourselves of the MAGA pestilence will be how to reconstruct a common, factual reality. There cannot be functioning communities–local, national or global– without it.

Comments