Yesterday was the final Democratic debate before the Iowa caucus. Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Pete Buttigieg, and Tom Steyer each made their pitch for why they should be their party’s nominee to take on President Donald Trump in the general election. Buttigieg’s repeated emphasis of his religious background is unique for his party: Democrats have been reluctant to speak about their faith on the campaign trail. While last night’s debate focused on foreign policy and the recent tensions with Iran, Buttigieg made a point (as he has throughout the election) to highlight the role of religion in politics. Responding to a question about his electability, Buttigieg highlighted his Midwestern roots, military service, and Christian faith. He said, “If a guy like Donald Trump keeps trying to use religion to somehow recruit Christianity into the GOP, I will be standing there not afraid to talk about a different way to answer the call of faith and insist that God does not belong to a political party.” . The comment received little public attention following the debate, but Christians should pay close attention to what Buttigieg is suggesting. He is arguing that President Trump’s relationship with the faith community is transactional and utilitarian. In Buttigieg’s view, President Trump is using religion to advance his political agenda, and Christians who support him are allowing their faith to be co-opted. This is the same argument Mark Galli made last month in his widely shared Christianity Today editorial. In Galli’s words, if Christians don’t oppose President Trump, the “reputation of evangelical religion” and “the world’s understanding of the gospel” will be harmed. Buttigieg evidentially agrees with this assessment, which is why he is proposing a “different way to answer the call of faith.” . Buttigieg’s (and Galli’s) allegation deserves a response. How should Christian voters think about Buttigieg’s call for a “different way to answer the call of faith?” Is it true that Christian leaders have sacrificed their moral witness for a seat at the table of political power? . Read further at link in bio. . blog.frcaction.org (January 2020)
| Conservatives Up in 2019 | . Conservatives sometimes feel alone, but a new Gallup poll on the ideological balance of America shows they're anything but! While the liberal media pumps out stories designed to keep us feeling isolated, the reality is, conservatives make up the biggest contingent in the U.S. America, the survey house declares, remained Center-Right, Ideologically, in 2019. After calling 29,000 adults, researchers were a little surprised to realize that not only was the country conservative, but the number had actually gone up! The percentage identifying as conservative in 2019 was up two points from the 35% measured in 2018, while the percentage liberal was down two points from 26%. These numbers, Gallup points out, do happen to be statistically significant -- but will they stay at that level? Only time will tell. Another interesting point, the report makes, is that while America as a whole is Center-Right, Republicans as a party are overwhelmingly conservative. That's a major distinction from Democrats, who have a much tighter breakdown philosophically. Liberals (49%) still make up the bulk, but at 36%, moderates are a much larger share than the media (or candidates) give them credit for. Republicans, on the other hand, are completely lopsided. Seventy-three percent call themselves conservative versus just a 21% share of moderates. Why does that matter? Well, for starters, it means that the national party is only speaking to half of its base. While the 2020 field drones on about open borders, infanticide, transgenderism, climate change, and so many other wildly extremist agendas, they're only appealing to a narrow segment of voters. When political strategists and heartland Dems worry that Trump's challengers have veered too far Left, this poll at least seems to suggest their fears are well-founded. In a party that already has an abortion problem, a socialism problem, a Green New Deal problem -- so much more -- Republicans aren't the only ones looking at this crop of contenders and thinking: Isn't anyone paying attention? Liberalism may be the majority position of candidates, but it's a far cry from the values most Americans hold.
| Never Trumpers Never Satisfied | . #NeverTrumpers are desperate to be relevant again. Subdued -- and diminished after three years of Trump accomplishments -- the wilting chorus of critics wants everyone to know, We're still here. So, to spite the headlines about their extinction, death, irrelevance, and failure, the movement concocted another plan: to stop attacking Trump and start attacking his base. You guessed it: evangelicals. It started with Christianity Today's sad publicity stunt, a swan song from outgoing editor Mark Galli, who hoped to make a splash by declaring that the president should be impeached. The article had its desired effect, creating a media firestorm and smoking out a handful of Christian figures who felt emboldened to talk about their own contempt of Trump. But if the point was to change evangelicals' minds, Galli didn't. If anything, conservatives had an even bigger platform to talk about the administration's successes. This week, the Lincoln Project is taking another pass at shaming the president's supporters. The group of anti-Trump Republicans released a video called MAGA Church that contrasts president's crasser moments with clips of him talking about faith. Beware of false prophets, the ad warns. If this is the best American Christians can do, then God help us all. Of course, the launch of this new campaign comes on the heels of a massive #EvangelicalsforTrump rally in Miami, where thousands of Americans had an opportunity to cheer the promises made and delivered by the man the resistance considers intolerable. Of course, what the media and the president's opposition doesn't seem to understand is that evangelicals have never looked at Donald Trump as a role model. They're looking at his record as president. And no one in the modern history of this country has a better one. Whether it's the sanctity of human #life or the promotion of #religiousfreedom -- here and around the world -- or the appointment of judges bound to the Constitution, there's absolutely no comparison. What this president has done matters. So shouldn't it be relevant to Christians as they vote? . Continue at FRCaction.org. . . . .
First, Democrats accuse Donald Trump of not acting presidential enough. Then, when he does the most presidential thing of all -- protecting Americans from a violent terrorist -- they complain. When the White House's air strike took out one of the biggest threats to the West, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-N.Y.) called him a monster. And she wasn't referring to dead Iranian leader General Qasem Soleimani. She was talking about Trump. Most liberals would admit the world is better off without Soleimani. The problem is, they feel the same way about Donald Trump. So when this administration pulled off one of the most successful operations of the year, putting to death a man who'd killed and maimed hundreds of Americans, Democrats weren't about to be reasonable about the threat he'd just neutralized. It's a reckless move, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) argued. Like tossing a stick of dynamite into a tinder box, insisted Joe Biden. Funny, Fox News's Dan Bongino fired back, I don't remember anyone saying that [eliminating] Osama bin Laden was... 'dangerously escalating the situation.' . Neither does Nikki Haley. The former U.N. ambassador couldn't believe the Left's hypocrisy, telling Sean Hannity, The only ones [who] are mourning the loss of Soleimani are our Democrat leadership, and our Democrat presidential candidates. Despite the fact, as our own Lt. General Jerry Boykin (U.S. Army-Ret.) points out, that #Soleimani was just about the most brutal man in the Middle East right now. He's the most powerful man [in Iran], he reminded listeners on Washington Watch. And he is also, as far as I am concerned -- and I think many analysts would agree -- the world's leading terrorist. He is a guy that introduced the enhanced IED into Iraq and into Afghanistan. That's the [explosive device] that took off the legs and the arms and body parts are so many of our American soldiers. The irresponsible decision, as far as our former special operations commander is concerned, would've been to not take him out. . Continue reading at frcaction.org .
I may not be perfect, President @realdonaldtrump admitted, but I get things done. And for many voters, including evangelicals, that's what matters. In fact, for the thousands of supporters packed into Miami's Ministerio Internacional El Rey Jesús last Friday, it was probably the best explanation yet for the strong bond between Christians and this White House. Unlike the media, who can't seem to understand the appeal of this president to his most enthusiastic base, evangelicals would say it's simple: promises made, promises kept. And they have three years of examples to prove it. To the outside world, it's a mystery. To conservatives, there's nothing baffling about it. Donald Trump won the election by offering a contrast to the Left's anti-faith, anti-family agenda. But he's won respect by acting on it. And the flocks of faithful pouring into his rallies appreciate that. There are plenty of evangelical Americans who maybe didn't support President Trump in  because they didn't believe he was a true ally, one campaign official pointed out. But those same people, he went on, are now taking a second look at him because of his record. It's that record, the one President Trump touted for the better part of 75 minutes, that the throngs of people jammed into the Florida megachurch stood and cheered. When he tweeted, in classic Trump fashion, that no president had ever done more for Christians than his administration, it was true. From the unborn to judges, international religious freedom to Israel, this White House has earned the support it's getting. Christians, the president repeated, have never had a greater champion -- not even close -- than you have in the White House right now. Look at the record, Trump urged. We've done things that nobody thought was possible. We're not only defending our constitutional rights, we're also defending religion itself, which is under siege. That's important, he argued, because America was not built by religion-hating socialists. America was built by churchgoing, God-worshiping, freedom-loving patriots. . Continue reading at frcaction.org | Washington Update | 1.6.20 . . . . . #Trump #election2020
Today’s Democratic Party is now happily supporting the dangerous do-it-yourself abortion method known as the abortion pill. When the New York Times surveyed the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates, all of them (unsurprisingly) vowed to defend abortion. However, when asked if they were in favor of lifting the restrictions on abortion pills and making them available over-the-counter (OTC), many of the candidates were unwilling to take a public position. Nevertheless, a few candidates are willing partners in the abortion industry’s strategy to deregulate the abortion pill. The candidates who answered “Yes” to OTC abortion pills were: Michael Bennet, Cory Booker, Pete Buttigieg, Tom Steyer, Elizabeth Warren, Marianne Williamson, and Andrew Yang. Those who answered “unclear” or “unsure” who are still in the race were: Julian Castro, John Delaney, Tulsi Gabbard, and Amy Klobuchar. The two candidates who provided no answer were Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders. (The New York Times survey was taken before Michael R. Bloomberg and Deval Patrick entered the race.) Another left-leaning outlet, Vice, conducted its own survey, focusing solely on support for OTC abortion pills. They asked every Democrat who qualified for the Deember. #demdebate about “expanding access to medication abortion.” Out of the seven candidates who qualified, four responded. Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, and Tom Steyer all said they support making abortion pills available OTC, while Andrew Yang only went so far as to say he supports “expanding access” to telemedicine. Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, and Amy Klobuchar did not respond to Vice’s survey. Chemical abortions, which are carried out by abortion pills, are fast becoming the new abortion battleground. The rate of chemical abortions is at an all-time high; currently, almost 40% of abortions are done with abortion pills. This rapid increase is part of the abortion industry’s long-term strategy to make abortions “self-managed” and unrestricted—despite the profound dangers chemical abortions pose to women’s health. . Continue at blog.frcaction.org . . . . . #abortion #Democrats #chemicalabortion #abortionpill
Democrats were supposed to be impeaching the president for political gain! But now, pollsters say, they can't even claim that. New numbers warn that the bottom's falling out of the Left's support -- and the battleground states are the first to go. What a difference an impeachment makes! Nine months ago, Donald Trump was trailing Joe Biden in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Today, Firehouse Strategies says, he beats every Democrat. What changed? Nothing, and that's exactly the problem. While Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and company gear up for a vote to boot the president from office, most Americans want to know when they'll get back to the country's real business. Months into the Democrats' charade, voters in purple states have had enough. In a trend that spells disaster for the 2020 candidates, clear majorities of people in these must-win states (from 50.8% to 57.9%) oppose the impeachment and removal of Donald Trump. The numbers are a frightening sign for Pelosi, who's betting her party's chances on the serious misconception that Americans hate the president as much as they do. Or at least support the idea of taking him out before he can win another term. In an interview with Axios, Firehouse partner Alex Conant warned, Democrats racing towards impeachment are at serious risk of leaving behind the voters they need to retake the White House next year. Although they differ on what Congress's priority should be (immigration for Republicans, health care for Democrats), the consensus is that it's time to focus on policy issues (59.4 percent of Michigan agrees, followed by 63 percent of Pennsylvania, and 67.2 percent of Wisconsin). Making matters worse for liberals, Firehouse is just one of the organizations tracking this trend. A slew of polls in the last week all point to the same conclusion: Democrats are in for a 2016 sequel where moderate states are concerned if they don't change course -- and fast. According to The Hill, Arizona and Florida can be added to that list, along with North Carolina. . frcaction.org | Washington Update | 12.10.19 . . . . #impeachment #poll #swingstates #POTUS #DonaldTrump
At 476 pages, the inspector general's report isn't exactly light reading. And that's just fine with Democrats, who are hoping most Americans will simply take the media's word on it. As usual, most people's opinion greatly depends, Jonathan Turley points out, on which cable news channel you watch. The Left wants everyone to believe that the Justice Department's investigation of the Trump campaign was above board. But there's a lot more to the story of who's been naughty and who's been nice. Senator @LindseyGrahamSC summed it up this way: Let's assume for a moment that it started out okay, he said of the probe. It sure didn't end that way. Maybe everyone in the Justice Department wasn't abusing power, Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) agreed, but enough were to taint the entire process. . The media, meanwhile, is only focused on a tiny part of the report, which suggested that the investigation met the low threshold it needed to be launched. (A claim both the attorney general and key Justice officials dispute.) This is akin to reviewing the Titanic and saying that the captain was not unreasonable in starting the voyage, Turley explains. But the real question, he argues, is what occurred when icebergs began appearing. [Inspector General Michael] Horowitz says that investigative icebergs appeared very early on, and the Justice Department not only failed to report that to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court but removed evidence that its investigation was on a collision course with the facts. . The reality is, there were serious performance failures, as Horowitz puts it, with how the FBI got the warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. We identified multiple instances in which factual assertions relied upon in the first FISA application were inaccurate, incomplete, or unsupported by appropriate documentation... In other words, Rep_Hice insisted, [c]ertain higher ups at the FBI and DOJ did not want Donald Trump to be president -- and manipulated the facts to fit their coup. . Continue reading at frcaction.org . . . . . #inspectorgeneral #IGreport #impeachment #fbi
It looks like the Democrats finally found some use for the Constitution -- as a convenient prop in their #impeachment charade. Thursday, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced that she was prayerfully proceeding with the formal charges, she painted herself as a modern Thomas Jefferson, insisting that it was with allegiance to our founders that she was pressing this case. Her real motives were a lot less grandiose, summed up later in the reporters' questioning, but equally applicable to Trump: Don't mess with me, she snarled. If Nancy Pelosi was trying to wrap herself in the Declaration of Independence, she failed, the Boston Herald's Joe Battenfield declares. Her speech was so silly and sanctimonious that it suggests Democrats are flailing and flailing in their bid to get the American people on board the impeachment train... President Trump is a lot of things, he writes, but he's no King George III. . Congressman Mark Green (R-Tenn.) who, like every other Republican, watched this jaw-dropping spectacle unfold, couldn't help but notice the hypocrisy. She accused the president basically of trying to be a king [while she] leveraged the entire U.S. House of Representatives for 35 days without even taking a vote. I mean, she initiated an impeachment of the president of the United States on her own, as if she was some kind of queen. . Andrew McCarthy over at NRO agreed. Democrats say Trump exploited his constitutional power for political purposes, but how is that different from what they are doing now? Then, of course, Pelosi invoked religion because she couldn't invoke proof. Democrats, too, are prayerful, and we will proceed in a manner worthy of our oath of office to support and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies foreign and domestic, so help us God. So help us God, indeed, Battenfield mused. For House members like Green, it's a frustrating situation all around. After all, this is the same Nancy Pelosi who told the Washington Post in March, I'm not for impeachment. It's too divisive, she argued. Too dangerous. And he's just not worth it. . Continue reading at frcaction.org. . . . . .