...on being logically consistent

Since the Supreme Court just overturned Roe v Wade, I thought I'd share my thoughts on this era-defining decision and explain why I oppose this ruling despite being pro-life.

My stance on abortion has evolved and moderated over the years.  I see and empathize with good arguments and good people on both sides.  Unfortunately, arguments on both sides are seldom logically consistent across issues.  Take the recent vaccine mandates for example.  The conservatives who opposed them ("My body, my choice!") support the state's ability to restrict abortion for women.  Conversely, liberals who supported the enforcement of vaccine mandates are now screaming, "Hands off my body!"

I'm becoming less concerned with where a person falls on the issues as I am with whether they are logically and morally consistent.  I try to keep my own views consistent:  I am moderately pro-life and was pro-vaccine mandates...until I no longer was.  The common thread for this position is that I seek to protect life, even if it's not my own, and especially if it can't protect itself.

In the case of abortions, I see a fetus as a life.  And my tendency is to protect that life.  In the case of vaccinations, I believe they save lives, especially the lives of those who are vulnerable to disease.  And my tendency is to protect those lives. 

Are there exceptions?  Sure.  Once vaccines proved effective, were generally available and vaccination rates were high, I stopped supporting mandates.  Those who wished to protect themselves could do so.  The anti-vaxxers were now only putting their own lives at stake, not somebody else's.  

Likewise with abortion, my thought is to protect vulnerable lives that cannot protect themselves.  But in the exceptional cases of rape, incest, danger to the mother's life, severe diagnosable birth defects, etc. I support the choice to abort.  Otherwise, I generally oppose it...with an asterisk.  

I understand that there are good, legitimate and unique arguments in favor of abortion.  I realize that in most cases where a woman seeks an abortion there are good reasons; that outlawing abortion is forcing women to carry and give birth to a baby against their will and despite all good reasons not to.  In many cases, babies will be unwanted and poorly cared for.  They'll often be born into very difficult socioeconomic circumstances, and force their mothers into very difficult circumstances from which they may never recover.  A woman's entire life may be sacrificed by being forced to have a baby.  In short, the position in favor of making abortion illegal is as serious as it gets, and the only valid reason I can imagine for doing so is to save a life.  

That's where the rationale ends for most pro-lifers.  But now a baby is born into the world.  What's going to happen to that life that was so valuable and precious that it was worth denying its mother some very basic rights of self-determination?  The prognosis is grim.  In my younger pro-life life I held up adoption as the solution.  There are about 135,000 adoptions in the United States each year, but only about half of those are American babies.  There are nearly a half-million children in foster care in the United States, far outstripping adoptions.  

In my younger life, I was a veritable inspector Javert, with legalist tendencies and a lack of empathy for all criminals.  Unfortunately, these tough-on-crime views place me on the virtual jury for countless souls whom I fought to protect while they were in the womb, but whose post-womb circumstances predicted their criminality.  That which was once sacred is now vile and deserving of prison.  Throw the grown fetus away!  After all, they CHOSE to commit those crimes.  Never mind that they came from an uneducated single mother who didn't want them, who didn[t know how to care for them, from grinding poverty, hunger, familial instability, poor educational opportunities, desperation, need, powerlessness and on and on.  Never mind that had I come from the circumstances that this person came from, the odds are almost overwhelming that I would have ended up in a courtroom alongside them.  No, never mind.  It was a choice, however forced and predictable.  

First a few thoughts:

• How absolutely ironic that Trump, a man who was a pro-choice Democrat for most of his life and serial adulterer who almost certainly paid for multiple abortions over the course of his philandering life, is primarily responsible for the overturning of Roe.  The three Anti-Roe justices that Trump appointed finally got it done.
• Ginsberg bears some responsibility here:  She could have retired and allowed Obama to appoint a liberal justice.  Instead, she rode her justiceship to the grave and Trump replaced her with a Roe opponent.

...on being a gadfly

So the other day I was involved in a conversation that turned political.  It was with some church friends, so I figured that they were probably Republicans, if not outright Trumpists.

One began by mocking Biden as a feeble, senile geezer.  "Is that all you got?" I thought, but smiled and said nothing.  But when the claim came that Biden would be voted out in 2024 (a very distinct possibility), those present began weighing in on who his replacement might be. 
The consensus was that it could be a lot of people but it was going to be Trump.  I jumped in, saying (honestly) that I was horrified at the possibility that Trump might be reelected.

"Why?" came the almost incredulous rejoinder.

After sifting through an extensive list of reasons in my mind, I selected one that I felt my entire churchgoing audience must certainly get behind:  "Because I refuse to rationalize pussy grabbing." 

Eyes rolled and one of my friends shot back, "I didn't realize that was one of Trump's policies."  

Another chimed in, "Yeah, I like Trump because of his policies, not his personal life.  He had great policies."

"Well there you go," I said. "That was easy.  I guess I'm just not trying hard enough."

Then I added, with my usual dry delivery and mischievous eyes, "You like Trump because of his policies.  And I read Playboy for the articles."

Uncomfortable chuckles all the way around.  Next topic.

In retrospect, the conversation might have lasted longer and been more productive had I said, "Because I'm pro-democracy."  

.....on being ineligible for the cancel cult

The older I get, the more liberal my philosophies and politics seem to become.  Combine that with the fact that the Republican party has become an authoritarian, anti-democracy cult, and you have a guy that should be running straight into the arms of the Democrats.  And yet, despite the fact that I voted for Biden and will continue to vote for moderate democrats over right-wing nationalists and authoritarian demagogues, I'm not a Democrat and wouldn't fit well in the party.  Here's why:

• I'm not woke.
• I believe that the "woke" movement is less about awareness and sensitivity than compliance.
• My opinions and positions are nuanced.
• I reject cancel culture.
• I don't believe that cancel culture is about accountability.
• I believe there is a BIG difference between calling out problematic, deeply hurtful, damaging behavior and canceling someone.
• I believe in allowing individuals to learn from their mistakes rather than canceling them.
• I believe in forgiveness and that people can change.
• When someone says they've changed, I try to assume they are telling the truth.
• I don't believe in turning history into a game of guilt by association.
• I believe that political correctness has run thoroughly amok and is no longer about kindness, respect or understanding.  
• I believe in equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome.
• I'm moderately pro-life and willing to negotiate policy and legislation.
• I understand why small-town people distrust/dislike government and vote Republican.
• I'm not outraged by cultural appropriation.
• I don't believe that being offended makes you right or virtuous.
• I advocate for a dialogue with those whose views I find offensive.
• When people with whom I disagree change their minds and agree with me, I don't call them a hypocrite for past comments/positions or shame them as a flip-flopper.
• I don't advocate public shaming as a primary agent of change.
• I don't want to live my life being perpetually outraged.
• I prefer facts over feelings.
• I agree with Dallin H. Oaks that, "the first amendment guarantee of free speech has sometimes been diluted by suppression of unpopular speech."
• I disagree with the claim that gender is strictly a social construct.
• I believe in acknowledging that those who oppose a position that I hold may have a valid concern.  And I'm willing to discuss it with them.  And I'm willing to learn and potentially be wrong.
• I believe “defund the police”, besides being a bad idea, is the shortest path to alienating and angering voters that I’ve ever heard.

"We're basically goldfish.  Except instead of discovering a new castle in our bowl every nine seconds, we find something new to be outraged about online."  - John Oliver

...on being able to pick just two

The Iron Triangle

Project management popularized the idea of the "iron triangle." The basic idea is two-fold: First, that, given a set scope of work, there are three unavoidable constraints on any project: Time, Cost and Quality.  And second, that you can choose any two combinations of these constraints, but not all three. Thus, the old saying, "You can have it fast, cheap or good. Pick two."

In other words, if you want it fast and cheap, it will almost certainly be low quality.  If you want it fast and good (i.e. high quality), then it won’t be cheap.  And if you want it cheap and good (high quality) then it won’t be fast.

I believe that this same construct can be effectively applied to Trumpism (and perhaps to contemporary Republican partisanship in general).  I call it the Trumpian Triangle.  Here's the way it works:

You can support Trump, be a good person, or be well (accurately) informed.  Pick two.

If you're a good person AND are well informed (from multiple non-partisan, fact-based sources), being a Trump supporter becomes intellectually and morally impossible.

On the other hand, if you're a good person AND a Trump supporter, the chances that you're well informed (with reliable, fact-based information) are exceedingly remote.

Finally, if you a Trump supporter AND well informed, then you're knowingly choosing to support pussy-grabbing, authoritarianism, casual racism, xenophobia, white nationalism, demagoguery, demonstrably ridiculous conspiracy theories, and a host of other intellectual and moral nastiness, all of which makes the chances of you being a good person impossibly small.  

I could be wrong.  But I strongly suspect that the Trumpian Triangle is accurate far more often than not.

.....on being ineligible for the authoritarian cult

"If I can't look at evil and recognize it for what it is, how can I claim to recognize good?  And if I can rationalize belief in an overtly bad man like Trump, how can I trust that any/all of my beliefs are not also rationalized fictions?"  -Shane Watts

I'm sickened by the Republican party's shift away from constitutional democracy, abandoning both principle and platform for the populist allure of terminally ill Trumpism. Our nation needs a strong second party to check power, contest ideas and have critical conversations. But the Republican party, in a state of spiraling radicalization and moral free fall, is no longer that voice. 

A lifelong Republican until 2012, I remember what and how the party used to be before Donald Trump's hostile takeover.  I supported a party that espoused and defended a conservative, principle-based platform. Now there literally is no platform, only the shifting whims of one man and endless culture wars to fabricate, fight and leverage for fundraising. Reagan's Republicanism was optimistic, with America a city on a hill and the future bright. Now anger and grievances animate the party and its view of America as a "cesspool of ruin." The Republican party of my youth stood for limited government, not the naked authoritarianism with which they now flirt.  I remember Reagan saying, "we do not shirk history's call that America is not tuned inward but outward toward others...still willing to stand by those who are persecuted or alone."  No more.  Now isolationism is the order of the day among Republicans.  Not so long ago, democracy was an untouchable, indispensable, foregone conclusion for any Republican; now it's an open question, as is conceding electoral defeat when defeated.  When I ran for president of the College Republicans my freshman year of college, the GOP focused on winning more votes than the other guy; now they're all about suppressing--or if that doesn't work, invalidating--the other guy's vote.  Back then an inclusive "big tent" platform was the goal; now even mildly dissenting voices are publicly excommunicated from the ever more extreme cult of personality.     

Today, as Matt Dowd said, "the Republican party has become a toxic waste dump of Big Lie autocracy and denialism." I'd add to that Kurt Bardella's observation that, "This is a party that believes in absolutely nothing except trying to obtain power, and then weaponizing that power to control other people."

I empathize with Rusty Bowers--a member of my faith who was the Republican Speaker of the House in Arizona until he refused to help Trump overturn Arizona election results--when he lamented, "The constitution is hanging by a thread.  The funny thing is, I always thought it would be the other guys.  And it's my side.  That rips at my heart: that we would be the people who would surrender the constitution in order to win an election.  That just blows my mind."

I'm no longer a Republican.  But even if I wished to rejoin their ranks, I couldn't.  I would be labeled a RINO and quickly canceled.  Here's why:

• I categorically, unequivocally reject Trump and Trumpism.
• Likewise, I reject autocrats and authoritarianism.
• I reject the thoroughly discredited lie that the 2020 presidential election was rigged or stolen.
• I'm focused on winning the next election, not the last one.
• I believe in counting votes, not "finding" them.
• I didn't vote for Trump. Not even once.
• I agree with Trump being impeached (both times) and believe that he should have been convicted (both times).
• I reject Donald Trump's assertion that I and half of my fellow Americans are "vermin" who should be "rooted out" and "crushed" because of our political views.
• I reject the assertion that the Constitution can be suspended when a president deems it politically expedient.
• I'm not OK with representatives of my party advocating secession from the union.
• I believe that the Civil War was fought primarily over slavery.
• I’m pro-democracy.
• I view constitutional democracy as the non-optional foundation of the United States of America. 
• I believe that democracy means sharing power and playing by the same rules. 
• I understand and accept that being pro-democracy requires me to sustain and protect democratic institutions.
• I understand and accept that being pro-democracy requires me to accept the results of elections that my preferred candidates lose.
• I understand and accept that being pro-democracy requires me to live in a society with people with whom I disagree. 
• I believe in the rule of law, not the law by those who rule.
• I fly my American flag right-side-up.
• My slogan for the January 6 insurrection is, "Never Forget" not "Never Happened."
• I consider "Heads we win; tails it's rigged" a joke, not an election strategy.
• I'd rather lose an election than vote for an unapologetically immoral (or amoral) candidate.
• I refuse to rationalize pussy grabbing.
• I refuse to accept or normalize sexual predation.
• I still believe that character counts.
• I lack a furtive fondness for fascism.
• Objective reality matters to me.  
• My reality comes from sources other than Fox News and social media.
• I make a distinction between news I don’t like and fake news.
• I make a distinction between declaring victory and actually winning.  
• I make a distinction between claims and evidence.
• I also make a distinction between skepticism and denialism.
• I don't believe that the ends justify the means.
• I don't start with the conclusion Trump is right and then work backward to prove it.
• I don’t do cults of personality. 
• I'm unwilling to invoke God or my religion to justify my political ideologies or the way I vote.
• As a devout Christian, I oppose weaponizing Christianity and view Christian nationalism as a threat to both the nation and Christianity.  
• I believe in the Christian ethic of loving both neighbors and enemies.
• I don't think that every governmental policy I dislike is socialism.
• I believe that intra-party cannibalization aimed at enforcing loyalty to a failed former president is idiotic and backward-thinking.
• I accept that rights are inseparable from responsibilities, and I'm willing to be responsible.
• I'm a moderate who believes in mutually beneficial legislative compromise.
• I vote for moderate candidates who are willing to reach across the aisle and negotiate deals, not uncompromising ideological zealots.  
• Mitt Romney, John McCain, Liz Cheney and Rusty Bowers are my political heroes.
• I like American soldiers who were captured.
• In the Russia-Ukraine war, I support Ukraine, not Putin.
• I try to understand the perspective and reasoning of those with whom I disagree.
• I'm happy to talk to and be friends with people whose political views I oppose.
• I don't think that people with whom I disagree politically are "the enemy within."
• I am neither defined nor driven by grievances.
• Revenge is not my life philosophy.
• I refuse to entertain or even wink at conspiracy theories and the fever swamps that breed their dark fantasies.
• I oppose the alt-truth movement, no matter how often its fabricated "facts" are repeated.
• I believe that gaslighting is a depraved form of revising history, not a legitimate political tactic.
• I refuse to be a propagandist or simp for aspiring dictators.
• I don't want to belong to a party of extremists, militias and QAnon kooks.
• Nor do I want to belong to a party of racists and xenophobes.
• Nor do I wish to belong to a party of the perpetually aggrieved. 
• My primary reasons for voting are not fear, hate and vengeance.
• I agree with the leaders of my church that, "principles compatible with the gospel may be found in various political parties." 
• I agree with the leaders of my church that, "our loyalty is to the Constitution and its principles and processes, not to any officeholder.”
• I agree with the leaders of my church that autocratic ambitions corrupt democracy.
• I agree with the leaders of my church that, "we should never assert that a faithful Latter-day Saint cannot belong to a particular party or vote for a particular candidate.”
• I agree with President Joe Biden that, "You can't love your country only when you win."
• I see the irony in MAGA supporters holding "Stop the Steal" signs.
• I despise demagogues, bullies and sycophants. 
• I believe the burden of proof falls on the party making the accusation.
• I believe that evidence, not allegations, leads to credibility.
• I believe that legislators should focus on legislating rather than performance art on cable news shows and social media.
• I’m not a culture warrior. To me culture wars have become, "tales told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
• I actually support law enforcement, even when they’re guarding the building I’m storming.
• I believe in law and order, even when the violent mob is white.
• I refuse to downplay, excuse or flirt with white nationalism for the sake of votes.
• I reject Trump's racist claim that immigrants are "poisoning the blood of our country."
• I take narcissistic personality disorder seriously.
• I’m concerned with the growing national debt—even when a Republican president is running it up.
• I can see the pros of globalism and the cons of nationalism.
• I oppose tariffs as an economic policy because they result in a tax on American consumers, unemployment and recessions.
• I oppose efforts to make voting more difficult for minority and low-income Americans.
• Likewise, I oppose gerrymandering.
• I believe that Jim Crow-esque  "voting protection" laws being passed by Trumpist state politicians are disingenuous solutions in search of a problem.
• I oppose book bans and read banned books.
• I favor common-sense gun control legislation.
• I realize that the vast majority of "the government" are regular people like me and my neighbors, not sinister men in black suits and sunglasses.
• I believe that cozying up to dictators and authoritarian strongmen is bad foreign policy.
• I believe that insulting and alienating our global allies is bad foreign policy.
• I believe that isolationism is a moronically, demonstrably bad foreign policy.
• I believe that voting against one's own policy goals in order to make legislating more difficult for the other party is asinine.
• I'm an opponent of anti-intellectualism, and do not believe that democracy mandates that one person's ignorance is just as good as another person's knowledge.
• I believe in science.
• I believe that denying climate change is a tragically short-sighted environmental policy. 
• I willingly got vaccinated (and boosted) for Covid-19.
• I believe wearing masks, getting vaccinated and social distancing during a global pandemic are public health issues, not political positions.
• I'm horrified that the anti-vaxx movement--once on par with the Flat Earth Society--has now expanded to encompass more than a third of the Republican party.

Any one of these reasons would disqualify me from being a member of the modern-day, MAGA Republican party.  And that's just fine because as long as the unctuous Trump-enablers, party-over-country politicos, red state secessionists, wild-eyed conspiracy theorists, unabashed bigots, spineless lickspittles and authoritarian-strongman-wannabes remain at the helm, I will actively oppose the Republican party every chance I get.

_______  _  _______

"If you say it enough and keep saying it, they'll start to believe you." -Donald Trump, July 3, 2021

"We will root out the communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country."  - Donald Trump

"A massive fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations and articles, even those found in the constitution."  - Donald Trump, December 3, 2022

“Welcome to the end of democracy! We’re here to overthrow it completely. We didn’t get all the way there on January 6th, but we will endeavor to get rid of it and replace it." - Jack Posobiec, CPAC 2024

"A leader has more power if he is in any part successful at making truth irrelevant to his followers. This is a core operating principle of Trumpism. If you constantly attack objective reality, you are left as the only trustworthy source of information, which is one of Trump's goals for his relationship with his supporters — that they should believe no one else but him."
                                                                                          - Timothy L. O'Brien (Trump biographer)

"In the span of a single election cycle, white evangelicals have gone from being the group in America that is most likely to say that a politician's morality matters to the group that is now least likely to say that.  Atheists in America think that a politician's morality matters more than white evangelicals in American do."  - Reza Aslan

Skepticism is a questioning attitude or doubt towards one or more accepted instances of knowledge. Denialism is a person's choice to deny reality as a way to avoid a psychologically uncomfortable truth.    -Wikipedia

Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental condition in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, troubled relationships, and a lack of empathy for others.  -Mayo Clinic

A demagogue is a political leader in a democracy who gains popularity by arousing the common people against elites, especially through oratory that whips up the passions of crowds, appealing to emotion by scapegoating out-groups, exaggerating dangers to stoke fears, lying for emotional effect, or other rhetoric that tends to drown out reasoned deliberation and encourage fanatical popularity.  -Wikipedia

Christian nationalism is the belief that the American nation is defined by Christianity, and that the government should take active steps to keep it that way. -Paul Miller, Christianity Today

"We need to take control of the media, take control of the government and force the people to believe what we believe. White people got to make the right decision, and then Trump's got to get in there and never leave.  It's time to shut up, elect Trump one more time and then stop having elections."  - Nick Fuentes

“The political path to galvanize American authoritarianism is well-worn and documented. First, purveyors of the paranoid style conjure an “other.” Second, this other is described as different from mainstream Americans, and identified as a clear and present threat to majoritarian values and traditions. Third, the paranoid leader stokes fear that a hidden conspiracy to undermine mainstream values is afoot and alleges that the other is behind it. Finally, in its most virulent manifestation, growing fear of the other is manipulated to rationalize actions that violate fundamental values, norms, laws and constitutional protections guaranteed to all Americans.”                                                                                                                  -Matthew C. MacWilliams

"Free and fair elections, the very mechanism designed to peacefully resolve disputes in a civil society, are themselves now at the center of a society-splitting dispute. And at the core of that row is something even more fundamental, the failure to agree even on incontrovertible facts - in this case the objective truth that Biden won. How can there be unity, in a country stewing in misinformation and conspiracy theories, when there is no longer a shared sense of reality? Truth is usually a prerequisite of reconciliation." -Nick Bryant

“Every one of us – Republican, Democrat, Independent – must work and vote together to ensure that Donald Trump and those who have appeased, enabled, and collaborated with him are defeated. This is the cause of our time.” - Liz Cheney

“I think a lot of people in this country are out of touch with reality and will accept anything Donald Trump tells them. You had a jury that said that Donald Trump raped a woman. And that doesn’t seem to be moving the needle. There’s a lot of things about today’s electorate that I have a hard time understanding,”

- Senator Mitt Romney

 

...on being able to see that the emporer has no clothes

 

    So off went the Emperor in procession under his splendid canopy. Everyone in the streets and the windows said, "Oh, how fine are the Emperor's new clothes! Don't they fit him to perfection? And see his long train!" Nobody would confess that he couldn't see anything, for that would prove him either unfit for his position, or a fool. No costume the Emperor had worn before was ever such a complete success.

"But he hasn't got anything on," a little child said.

The Emporor's New Clothes 
By Hans Christian Andersen

I'm an independent voter, having walked away from the Republic party in disgust several years ago.  My views are mostly moderate-conservative, though I do break progressive on issues like climate change, public lands, etc.  That said, I've never voted for a Democrat presidential candidate.  Until this year.  

Four years ago, I wrote-in Mitt Romney for President, rather than voting for either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump.  Living in Washington state, this was an easy decision.  Washington's electoral votes always go to the Democrat, no matter the candidate.  So my vote, one way or the other, was immaterial to the outcome.  

I still live in Washington and could write-in Romney again this year.  After all, I don't agree with some of Joe Biden's policy positions.  But I'm voting for him anyway.

Here's why:  I am so thoroughly disgusted and repulsed by Donald Trump that I want to run up the popular vote score against him.  Trump is a bully, and I despise bullies!  He is a remorseless, serial adulterer and womanizer.  He is a godless, amoral flimflam man who has conned his Christian base into a Faustian bargain.   He is a narcissistic, manipulative sociopath--made all the more dangerous by his laziness, unwillingness to take expert counsel, and wanton disregard for both facts and context.   But arguably worse than all these, he is a divider with authoritarian aspirations, who convinces his base that their fellow Americans (who have different ideas, perspectives, skin color or backgrounds) constitute a dangerous, loathsome 'other' that's out to get them and must be suppressed, if not destroyed.  

So no, throwing away my vote is not good enough this time--not even close.  I'm voting to remove Trump from an office that he's wholly unfit to occupy.  If the Democrats were running a dented can of tomatoes for president, I'd vote for it.  Optimistically, I hope Biden can begin to heel the social fabric of our nation, patch-up foreign relations, and restore dignity to the presidency.  But even if he can't, Joe Bidden will at least do much, much less damage than Trump.

The Mormon Vote

I'm disturbed and discouraged that so many members of my church are willing to plug their nose and vote for Trump.  And absolutely perplexed by church members--and there are many--who enthusiastically support Trump.  I'm sure they would be shocked to know that I'm anti-Trump.....and therefore an apostate, socialist, baby-killer.

As a disciple of Jesus Christ who strives to follow his example and teachings, I honestly can neither support nor rationalize a man like Trump.  Granted, none of us is perfect (least of all me), but Trump is a prolific sinner who is brazenly proud of his wicked ways and shows no inclination at all towards repentance.  If I can't look at evil and recognize it for what it is, how can I claim to recognize good?  And if I can rationalize supporting an overtly bad man like Trump, how can I trust that any/all of my beliefs are not also rationalized fictions? 

After much thought--and taking insanity off the table--I see four reasons that a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (or any person of any faith) would support/vote for Donald Trump.

1) Identity - They identify so strongly with being a Republican--it's who they are, as a person and as a member of the church--that they are actually voting for themselves and their church when they vote Republican.  Many believe erroneously that the church tacitly endorses the Republican party. Voting any other way would mean going against the prophet of God, deconstructing their persona and shattering their self-image.

2) Gullibility - They've bought the snake oil Trump is hawking, cash in hand, "Trump that bitch!" t-shirt on their back, no questions asked.  Due to a diet of 100% Fox News, conservative talk radio, pro-Trump social media feeds, and a dose of QAnon, they sincerely believe even the most absurd lies. And they think most other Americans believe them too.  There are no dissenting voices in the echo chamber they've built for themselves. 

3) Character - There are undoubtedly a few persons of faith who are just rotten human beings.  They lie, they cheat, they say horrible things, and treat people they don't like in ugly ways.  These folks correctly perceive a kindred spirit in Donald Trump.  Birds of a feather flock together.....especially at Trump rallies and Klan meetings.

4) Practicality - They believe that, despite being a bad man, Trump promotes religion-friendly policies and appoints judges who will strike down laws with which they disagree.  If I were to vote for Trump, this would be my reason.  So I guess I get it.  But I also see that the bad far outweighs the good in Trump's case.  Especially since the good is more perceived than actual.  

Take, for example, an issue like abortion.  Many church-going Republicans hope that rulings like Roe v. Wade will be overturned if they can just get enough conservative justices on the Supreme Court.  This despite the fact that every year since 1969 the Supreme Court has been controlled by a majority of Republican-appointed judges.  In fact, Roe v. Wade was decided by a 7-2 decision, where six of the seven justices in favor of legalizing abortion were Republican-appointed.  If the Republican majority wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade any time since 1973, they had the votes to do it.  So, a majority conservative court is not the panacea that many Republicans perceive.  And even if it were, Donald Trump will leave office (even if voted-out) with a Supreme Court that is 6-3 conservative (and 7-2 Republican-appointed).  How much more of a majority is needed to satisfy the demands of practicality?

The Dead Cat's Tale:  A Satirical Parable

Note:  This story is only partially fictional, but wholly political.

As a teenager growing up in the farming country of Southeast Idaho's Snake River Valley, I joined every other teen with a pulse in working the potato harvest.  This annual two-week break from school allowed area farmers to hire the cheap labor they needed to harvest their extensive potato crop.  And it allowed said labor to get rich.

I always worked for Dean Wood on his potato combine.  Basically, a potato combine is a huge harvester, pulled behind a large tractor, that excavates 6-8 rows of potatoes at a time from the fields, separated them from the dirt, rocks, and other debris, then deposited them into a truck for transport to either a processing plant or storage facility.   

This separation process is largely automated today, but back then it required 3-5 humans (usually local teens) to stand on a platform overlooking a conveyer belt and pick-out the dirt clods, rocks, and damaged/rotten potatoes.  If all went well, only good potatoes would be deposited into the trucks.

Days on the combine were dusty, 12-14 hour affairs with a 30-minute break for lunch, so fatigue was inevitable, and friction between the workers on the combine was common.  

One year I was working on the potato combine alongside three other teens from my high school, one of whom was named Mark.  My problem with Mark was that he was lazy and let squishy, damaged potatoes go, rather than throwing them out.  Now, I wasn't a perfectionist when it came to potato harvesting, but I did my best to do the job and earn my money (a slave wage that seemed like a fortune back then).  

So Mark and I would often get into it over bad potatoes that he let pass and which I had to hustle to pick out of the endless conveyor flow.  "Quit letting the bad ones go!"  I'd say.  

"Looks good to me."  He'd counter.  "It's just a little soft, but still edible."  

"Soft?  It's oozing for crap's sake!"  

"Well if you're so picky, you throw it out!"  

And so it went, hour after hour, day after day until...

I'm not sure how the dead cat got into the field.  Maybe it died there.  Maybe it was a pet some kids had buried there.  In any case, it had been dead and decomposing for quite sometime before the potato combine excavated it and sent its rigid, flattened corpse up the conveyer belt along with the potatoes.   

I saw the cat corpse coming up the belt before it reached us and was relieved that it would pass Mark before it got to me.  And sure enough, seconds later it reached Mark and he saw it.  He picked it with his gloved hand and inspected it briefly.  Then, a matter of factly, he tossed it back on the belt and let it go.  

"Seriously?" I said, removing the cat corpse from the belt and holding it aloft.  

"What?" he replied defensively.  

"It's a frickin' dead cat, Mark!"  

He looked at the mangled corpse in my hand and shrugged.  "Looks like a potato to me."  

Just then the tractor pulling the potato combine stopped to allow an empty truck to pull up, at which point we had a few minutes respite.  By this time I was pissed-off.  "Come on man!  It's a disgusting, decomposed corpse, and you know it!  You're gonna let that go into the truck?"  

He shot me a fiery, defensive glare, looking first at the cat, then back at me.  "Of course I'm letting it go.  It's a potato."

I asked the other two teen pickers if they thought it was a potato.  They didn't really want to get involved, but reluctantly conceded that it was not a potato.  

"See, it's a dead cat" I said somewhat triumphantly, which only made Mark more defensive.  

"Is not!" he cried.

"Are you blind or crazy?" I asked.  

"Shut up!" he screamed, his voice shaking with anger and tears forming in his eyes.  "You think I'm crazy?  Well you're crazy!  It's a dang potato!  A perfectly good potato!  You wanna throw out a good potato, you go for it.  But you won't last long around here when Dean finds out you're throwing out his cash crop."

I was stunned.  I didn't believe for a second that the dad cat was a potato.  But I was now convinced that Mark believed it.

"Look Mark," I said, trying to deescalate the situation, "we can argue about potatoes being rotten, or cut-up or squishy or whatever.  That's fine.  At least they're potatoes.  But this...this isn't even a plant, much less a potato.  Why can't you see that?"  

"I see just fine," he seethed, "and that potato's going into the truck."  

"Nope," I replied, and turned to toss the hairless corpse onto the ground below.  That's when Mark lunged at me, quick as a (live) cat, and plucked the corpse from my raised hand.  Before I could react, Mark turned and side-armed the petrified remains of that cat like a frisby towards the bed of the empty truck that had just pulled up.  Almost in slow motion, the disfigured corpse arced towards the truck.  It looked like it was going to come up short, but maybe not.  It was going to be close.  Maybe...maybe...

It's been so long ago that I can't remember if that dead cat went in or not.  I hope not.  But I've never forgotten that story.  And even today, I refuse to willingly allow a dead cat to make its way into the food chain.  And even today, I'm stunned and deeply troubled by people who insist that a dead cat is in fact a perfectly good, edible potato.  A person that can't distinguish a dead cat from a potato should just stop eating potatoes.

 The Republican Party I Knew

The Republican party I knew no longer exists. Republicanism has sold-out to Trumpism, which is a thinly veiled mix of populism, white nationalism, and authoritarianism.  The ease and speed with which Republicans abandoned their platform and values lead me to believe that they'll do it again for the next wingnut they manage to get elected.  BTW, I believe the same thing about the Democrats.  Nearly all politicians sell-out to power.

So--assuming a Trump defeat in the upcoming election--even if Republicans distance themselves from Trump and Trumpism, I'm not going to welcome them back.  No, with a few exceptions, like senator Mitt Romeny, these were Trump sycophants.  Yes men.  Drummers for a demagogue.  Toadies to an authoritarian party leader rather than representatives of the people and conservative values.  For me, there can be no reconciliation with the Republican party until they've purged the fawning lickspittles of the Trump era. This should be their first order of business.  It won't be.  

"When someone has a long record, an ugly record of racism and of bigotry, that record simply cannot be erased by the glib rhetoric of a political campaign. So I believe David Duke is an insincere charlatan. I believe he's attempting to hoodwink the voters of Louisiana, I believe he should be rejected for what he is and what he stands for."  -President George H. W. Bush on Republican candidate for Louisiana Governor, David Duke 

Lessons Learned

Although I don't expect either party to learn a thing from the last four years, I've certainly learned a few things and made some resolutions:

1.  I will always vote for the person, not the party.  

2. Likewise, I will remain unaffiliated with any party and not vote a straight ticket except by coincidence. 

3.  I will always prioritize character over policy.  This is in large part because, when it comes to actually legislating (as opposed to talking), policies don't really vary much between the parties.  Example:  Every for years we've been told that the Democrats will take our guns away.  And yet here were are, many Democratic presidents later, with more guns than ever.  Character, on the other hand, is king.  The damage inflicted by an influential reprobate can take years, even decades to reverse.  Indeed, it may become a permanent scar on the social fabric of our nation.

4. I will consistently favor political moderation over partisan extremism.  Neither left-wingers nor right-wingers will get my vote.  Moderate candidates of character from both parties will.

5.  I will vote for candidates who are willing to reach across the aisle, build coalitions and negotiate win-win compromises.  

6.  I will be more data-driven in my political views.  Anecdotes are often compelling but just as often misleading.

7.  I will actively look for and find ways to expose the misguided notion that good members of the LDS church must be/vote Republican for what it is:  Utter nonsense.  

Where I Stand on the Issues

I recently took one of those online political typology quizzes that tells you where you fall along the political spectrum (Democrat-Independent-Republican) and it was terrible.  Each question offered two diametrically opposed choices, neither of which fit me well most of the time (Do you think that armed militias should be allowed to roam our streets and murder people, or do you think that the government should take everybody's guns away and then use the military to enslave a defenseless citizenry?).  My ideology is filled with nuance that does not lend itself to either/or categorization.

The following represents where I currently stand on several major issues that typically differentiate Democrats from Republicans.  Note that the older I get, the more liberal I become.  Then again, after four years of Donald Trump, I'm likely leaning a bit further to the left than I normally would.  In any case, my views used to be much more dogmatically conservative/Republican than they are now.

Military

I'm pro-military and moderately pro-military spending, though I'm against war if at all possible.  Diplomacy is inevitably easier when you carry a big stick.  It's also better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.  I also think military R&D and spending contribute to the economy.  

Gay Rights/Marriage

My views are very nuanced on this issue, but I am pro-gay rights.  I recognize that there is a lot that I don't know, and I'm willing to learn.  I also recognize that my church may or may not change its policies regarding gay marriage in the future.  In either case, I believe that God loves ALL his children and requires me to do the same.  And that I can and will do.

Abortion

I'm pro-life, with caveats.  I believe that a baby is a living human being before it's born.  I support a woman's rights over her own body...I just don't believe the baby inside her is the same as her body.  I'm open to compromise here.  I'm open to discussion and learning.  But I just can't support late-term elective abortions just because somebody changed their mind.  That said, I recognize that late-term abortions are rare and usually precipitated by difficult, extenuating circumstances that are not likely to be made better by the government getting involved.  

Society

I believe that societies derive their strength from virtuous individuals and that families, not communities, are the basic unit of society.  I see individual morality and building strong families as the most important prerequisite to strong communities.  Morality, of course, requires a definition of what is moral, which opens the door to religious beliefs.  That said, I believe that, "the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil."

Death Penalty

I'm not strongly opposed to it, but I do favor punishment that does not kill.  Oddly, part of my rationale is that a quick, painless death seems like an easy way out for some people.  

Taxes

I'm usually an advocate of low taxes...when paired with reduced spending so that a balanced budget is the result.  Trump-style tax cuts paired with runaway spending is neither fiscally conservative nor sustainable.

Government Regulation

Generally, I'm wary of too much government regulation, but I'm also (and increasingly) aware of its need to prevent abuses brought on by unscrupulous, corner-cutting greed.  So it's situational with me at this point, but moderation seems to be key.

Healthcare

I'm a proponent of private health insurance with lots of options and across state lines...if insurance companies would do it fairly and effectively without prioritizing profits over people's health.  And since they generally do not do this, I'm open to an affordable public option, but not in favor of the public option being the only option.  I believe that insurance policies should protect people with preexisting conditions in most cases.

Immigration

I'm pro-immigration and anti-illegal immigration.  Honestly, I think most illegal immigrants are not fans of migrating illegally.  Given a reasonable option, they'd come here legally, but legal immigration is so difficult/restricted that they see crossing the border illegally as their best option.  If we need 2 million workers to do the back-breaking, low wage-earning jobs that American citizens are not willing to do, then by all means let's bring them in--legally.  Don't make them sneak across the border, then exploit them.  I want to know who's coming into the country and be able to control it.  Those with a criminal background (on either side of the border) should not be allowed.  But those willing to work hard, keep the rules and add to our economy should be given some type of work visa and be treated/paid fairly.  

Race/Gender Equality

I favor equality of opportunity, but not equity of result.  Laws should protect against discrimination of people based on race, gender, religion, nationality, nationality, etc.   That said, I chafe at contemporary societal pressures on people to be a certain way.  For example, if a woman chooses to be a stay at home mom, she should not be looked down upon.  That's discrimination.

Foreign Relations

I'm a moderate globalist and believe that good foreign relations, treaties, trade agreements, alliances, etc. are in the best interest of the United States (and every other country).  Although I am not a fan of the United Nations (hypocrisy, poor execution), I'm intrigued by the idea.  I believe that rising tides lift all ships (the converse is also true).  I think Trump's nationalist "America first" policy is short-sighted and will backfire in the long run.  

Environment

I believe that global climate change is a scientific reality and that humans play a significant part in it.  This is based on empirical evidence and an overwhelming consensus in the scientific community.  I understand that regulating carbon emissions will have a significant cost, but I also believe that it will prompt innovation that will drive a win-win (economy-environment) scenario.

Public Lands

As an avid hiker/backpacker/mountain biker, I'm an advocate of public lands.  The role of the bureaucratic federal government should be to keep beautiful places out of the hands of those private interests who will absolutely exploit them (destroy them) for monetary gain.

_____

Once more he stept into the street;

   And to his lips again

Laid his long pipe of smooth straight cane;

   And ere he blew three notes (such sweet

Soft notes as yet musician's cunning

   Never gave th'enraptured air)

There was a rustling, that seem'd like a bustling

Of merry crowds justling at pitching and hustling,

Small feet were pattering, wooden shoes clattering,

Little hands clapping, and little tongues chattering,

And, like fowls in a farm-yard when barley is scattering,

Out came the children running.

All the little boys and girls,

With rosy cheeks and flaxen curls,

And sparkling eyes and teeth like pearls,

Tripping and skipping, ran merrily after

The wonderful music with shouting and laughter.

The Mayor was dumb, and the Council stood

As if they were changed into blocks of wood,

Unable to move a step, or cry

To the children merrily skipping by —

Could only follow with the eye

That joyous crowd at the Piper's back.

The Pied Piper of Hamelin 

By Robert Browning

...on being monetized

"Thou great Judge of the nations...we humbly plead with Thee, asking that Thou will forgive our arrogance, pass by our sins, be kind and gracious to us."  -Gordon B. Hinkley

In a poignant scene from the movie Unforgiven, set beneath an overcast sky on a windswept hillside, the teary-eyed "Kid" sits with his back against a solitary pine tree and tells Clint Eastwood's character, William Munny, how he shot a man to death who was sitting with his pants down in an outhouse.  This despicable act was his first kill, a far cry from the guns and glory outlaw life he imagined and something that now fills him with disillusion and regret.   

"It don't seem real.  How he ain't gonna never breathe again.  Ever.  How he's dead.  And the other one too.  All on account of pulling a trigger."

Then, taking a deep swig from his whiskey bottle, in a sorry attempt to assuage his guilt, he quips, "Well, I guess they had it comin'."   To which William Munny delivers the devastating moral of the entire film in one terse line:  "We all have it comin' kid."

But surely we don't all have it coming.  Only those who, like outlaws before them, seek gain through wicked deeds.  In modern vernacular, we might call this monetizing evil, if the notion of evil weren't too religious for contemporary sensitivities.  

Take pornographers.  They monetize lust.  They're pretty open about their business model and are therefore shunned (at least publicly).  We point to them as an example of societal corrosion.  

Illicit drug dealers exploit human addiction and the need to escape stress.  But they're amateurs compared to pharmaceutical companies (doctors peddle their drugs), Big Tobacco and alcohol vendors.  

The ten giant companies that control almost every large food and beverage brand in the world not only promote gluttony, they formulaically ensure it with the sugary, fatty, addictive poison they pay to be placed at eye level in grocery store aisles.

Like any business, the news media has always been about making money, but the original idea was to monetize information.  Now they've discovered it's much more lucrative to monetize anger, outrage and tribalism.  

Of course, politicians have stoked the fires of rage to great effect for ages.  But their real forte is fear.   Pair the two and you've got a fundraising juggernaut.   

Many religious institutions play on the sinner's fear of judgment while simultaneously stoking the choir's pride and righteousness indignation.

And institutions of higher learning appeal to ambition and greed on one hand and the middle-class insecurity of being left behind on the other.  They'll take your money either way.  

Businesses--from seedy used car lots to glass towered corporate leviathans--are relentless students of human weakness and know exactly which triggers to pull to exploit it.  Their hedonistic sales pitches pander to greed, discontent and ambition rather than true need.  

Big Tech are especially shrewd marketers, unscrupulously leveraging data to turn their customers' inadequacies, vulnerabilities and hedonism into profit margins.  

Social media giants simultaneously create and prey on the vanity, envy and insecurities of their own users, all the while serving up algorithm-driven content calculated to fan the flames of division, righteous indignation and hate.  

And the list goes on.....

So who's left?  Is there a profession out there that doesn't have their finger on the trigger of a gun aimed at a society in the proverbial outhouse with its pants down?  Maybe.  And maybe we, like the Kid, can renounce our lives as professional gunfighters who exploit their fellow man for a paycheck.  

Or maybe Will Munny was right.  Maybe we all have it comin'.