WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 11, 202\
But also, Warnock in Georgia: Every county in Texas shifted blue last week.
Meanwhile, Kansas, home of Democratic (lady) governors, decided to let a Democratic senator escape the borders of the state.
In those two states, religious messaging was suddenly back in the year's election campaigns—religious messaging from Democratic candidates! Also, God had a plan in Texas, the governor-elect has said:
“I am a daughter of the Rio Grande Valley, where the people embody the work ethic and values of our great state, where no one would have imagined that one day, a little girl from the RGV would stand before you here as the next governor of the greatest state, Texas. But God had a plan, and the people of Texas had a plan, too.”
In terms of straight-ahead Americana, that was straight-ahead American speech. When Lauren Jackson sought to explain in the New York Times, she moved it on over to Georgia:
The Bible Chapter That Helps Explain the New Christian Left
Senator Raphael Warnock, a pastor from Georgia, has called himself a “Matthew 25 Christian” for years. It’s his boilerplate, invoked in response to questions about health care, immigration and even Fidel Castro.
In the New Testament’s book of Matthew, chapter 25, Jesus tells his disciples that if they offer care to the most vulnerable in society, they are also offering devotion to him. “For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,” Jesus said, according to Matthew’s author. “I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.”
It’s a famous passage of scripture...
In the recent political context, it starts with Senator Warnock, she says. That takes us over to Georgia, home state to Dr. King, who filled his first book, Stride Toward Freedom, with references to his devotion to "the love ethic of Jesus."
Democrats have sometimes been a bit stand-offish with respect to these realms. More than once, it could be that Blue American eyes have rolled in the face of such testimony.
In this way, denizens of Blue America have sometimes looked for ways to encourage political defeat. As she continues, Jackson starts to describe what the heck she's talking about:
(Continued from above)
It’s a famous passage of scripture. It’s also a favorite reference for the new wave of religious Democrats heading to Washington. James Talarico of Texas, Adam Hamilton of Kansas and Sarah Trone Garriott of Iowa all wove the verses into their campaigns—and won.
If Christian nationalism is a shorthand for the dominant religious politics of the right, Matthew 25 may be the key to understanding the new religious left.
[...]
Several of the new Christian Democrats regularly cite scripture, and Matthew 25 in particular. Talarico used it to argue “that health care is a human right.” Hamilton applied it to make the case for welcoming immigrants.
And so on from there.
Jackson is citing "the new religious left" which helped the Democratic Party romp to a 12-point win in deep red Texas, along with a 5-point win in a state which hadn't sent a Democrat to the Senate in almost a hundred years. This suggests that there may be electoral power in Matthew 25.
Lauren Jackson's role at the New York Times is a bit hard to define. Officially, she herself is "a deputy editorial director for newsletters and the host of Believing."
In turn, Believing is "a weekly newsletter about how people live religion and spirituality now." As for Jackson herself, she's a former Rhodes scholar who grew up Mormon in Arkansas, as we Americans sometimes do.
On its face, Talarico's win in Texas may have been most surprising of all the wins last week. He hardly looks the part of the giant-slayer who could subdue that big, brawling, deep red state.
In this second report in the New York Times, Ruth Graham starts to explain the power, the force, of the messaging—messaging which comes live and direct from long American experience:
What Talarico’s Win Reveals About Christianity in Texas
James Talarico, a onetime Sunday school teacher, opened his acceptance speech on Tuesday night with a Bible story.
“I’m reminded of that story from Scripture of a shepherd boy who goes up against a giant,” he told an ebullient crowd in Austin, Texas. In the end, of course, the shepherd boy defeats the well-armed Goliath with only a slingshot.
Mr. Talarico slew his own giant this week, ending decades of Republican control in Texas with a decisive win that carried multiple other Democrats in the state to victory. He did it in part by speaking easily and openly about how his Christian beliefs inform his politics, starting with the biblical command to love God and “love thy neighbor,” as the sign on his lectern read on Tuesday night.
Talarico is only 37, but he plainly knows his brief. By all accounts, he was able to speak to many different people in Texas—people who fit within a complex cultural framework.
"More than a quarter of adult Texans are self-described evangelicals," Ruth Graham notes in her report. But then again, also this:
[T]he state is also home to progressive Protestants like Mr. Talarico, millions of Catholics, and politically active Black congregations, including one in Dallas whose pastor was elected to Congress as a Democrat this week.
Mr. Talarico, an eighth-generation Texan and onetime seminarian, understood all that. His own grandfather, once a Baptist preacher, found himself on the “moderate” side when conservatives took over the Southern Baptist Convention in the 1970s and ’80s, a move masterminded in Texas. Mr. Talarico was raised in a church that has been known locally for its progressive activism for decades.
In a town hall hosted by CNN in October, a voter from his hometown of Round Rock, Texas, pressed him “Christian to Christian” about provocative past statements like “God is nonbinary.”
“Do you believe that the Bible is the absolute source of truth and God’s final authoritative word, even when our culture says otherwise?” she asked.
“Yes,” Mr. Talarico answered.
We ourselves don't understand the cosmos that way. As a matter of fact, we can't say that we understand the cosmos at all! But should it bother us here, on this sprawling campus, if someone can preach the virtue of kindness the way this young candidate did?
We Americans! Our three Great Awakenings don't get discussed much, but they're stone-cold Americana. Religious belief has worked in various ways over time. With Talarico from Texas joining Warnock from Georgia, is a new morning upon us?
We see a well-known Texan, online in today's Times, offering this overview about such matters. Try to ignore that headline:
You May All Go to Hell, and Tommy Lee Jones Will Go to Texas
[...]Jones’s sense of humor reveals itself unexpectedly. Asked what he made of the dispute over a border wall in the Big Bend region, where Jones has spent considerable time both filming and living, he offered a characteristically terse, diplomatic response: “I don’t like bigotry, and I love people.”
No.
ReplyDeleteSomerby is using the word Americana when he means simply American. He should stop doing that because it diminishes religion to reduce it to Americana when it occupies a greater place in the lives of people who are religious. It is disrespectful to do that.
ReplyDeleteYou are imbecilla.
DeleteGo be an asshole somewhere else.
DeleteIt is disrespectful to do that. How else should one respond when Hinojosa says something as dumb as that her election was part of God's plan?
DeleteThe NY Times has a staff member who encounters the world in religious terms. Does that mean the rest of Democrats are doing so? Not necessarily. Somerby doesn't bother researching the percentages of people on the left who are religious and what their faith might be. He grabs Texas and uses it to support a thesis that there is a new religious fervor on the left. Without evidence. Of course, that will appeal to those who are religious, but it doesn't get at the reality of what happened in TX or elsewhere in the Democratic party or the left more generally. Lazy as usual.
ReplyDeleteStill, Matthew 25 is a heck of a read.
DeleteThe term Goats and Sheep is used in psychology to classify people by their religious beliefs. It is unfortunate that the Bible itself assigns non-believing to the left, as it calls left-handed people possessed by Satan because lefties are devil-worshippers. That is ancient superstitution expressed in the bible but persists in things like Somerby's claim that lefties mock religion and cannot be religious as Talarico and Warnock are obviously. That encourages the right's attacks on left wing believers, which is as unfair as many of their other attacks. It is obvious why Somerby is writing this shit today.
DeleteGoats and sheep are caprinae.
DeleteThe devil has been depicted as a goat in religious art. What have goats ever done to deserve that?
DeleteWhat has the devil ever done to deserve that?
DeleteAs an lefty atheist I approve their message - actually quoting Christ's teachings instead of only dwelling in the Old Testament like creepy ass hateful Republicans. There are no quotes of Christ condemning gays or Drag Queens. No hate directed at the others. Republicans are so screwed up on Religion, getting it totally backwards, that of course it is easy for a real Christian to connect with both the Religious and the progressive. Go team kindness. I also like that the Christian Right hates the last two Popes for their kindness. WTF? Republicans are fake Christians who will not repeat Christ's kind words. For an insightful and fun explanation of this, without the we blues sometimes do this that and the other bullshit of Somerby, try reading this: "Separation of Church and Hate" Book by John Fugelsang.
ReplyDeleteIs this comment "mocking" religion? I don't think so. It is complaining about the hypocrisy on the right, not their religiosity. This is not the example of mocking that Somerby claims exists among us blues. It is a non-believer explaining his own objections to religion as practiced by the right wing.
DeleteThe Trump right wing does not follow the teachings of Jesus, it's leadership can't even begin to deal with the Ten Commandments let alone the teachings of Christ. Take Trump and Paxton, please...
DeleteThere is self-mockery in the right's use of religion to justify things like banning drag queen story hours and furries.
DeleteWe find that this entire column was written to justify Somerby's coy name-drop of his ex college room-mate Tommy Lee Jones, who doesn't mind religion.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is this sentence, which is repeated in Somerby's essay:
"We Blues! We've sometimes mocked religious people. On the extremely rare occasion, We Blues can almost seem to have tiny small shortcomings too."
Where is any example, much less an analysis, of the extent to which we blues mock religion or religious people?
And when Somerby refers to blue shortcomings as "tiny small" in his ironic voice, it is still a criticism of the left. It is his ritual criticism with which he ends nearly every essay he writes at his blog. All people have shortcomings, depending on what measuring stick is used, because people vary. Christian religion itself does not advocate for human perfection but for forgiveness and God's mercy. So why is Somerby constantly chiding blues in this non-specific broad-spectrum way? Because his mission is to blame blues and excuse and promote reds. Today it is Lauren Jackson being promoted to the left, as if we were not the ones protesting the assault on Muslim candidates in the midterms, by those good Christians on the right.
ReplyDelete"Every county in Texas shifted blue last week. "
Nonsense. Rs were disappointed by their party's performance, and they didn't come out to vote, that's all.
If you think the people of Texas now believe in 69 genders and in women trapped inside men's bodies, you're even more retarded than the average Dumbocrat.
Liberals don't believe in all those genders either. This comes from a Facebook set of options for self-describing one's gender, many of them overlapping or talking about the same thing (trans man, trans male for example). That got exaggerated into a Republican talking point ridiculing the concept of non-binary gender, using made up numbers. This fabrication of unlikely numbers is something Trump does routinely, a form of lying.
DeleteSpeaking of dum, I give you the loser at 11:12. Haha loser. Learn how to spel the way Dear Leader taught you jagoffs and weirdos or get out.
DeleteNonsense is all you got 11:12. Why don't you nominate good candidates in the primaries and go out and vote for them in the general, instead of nominating shitty disgusting God awful corrupt sex offenders that force you to stay home?
Delete"Nonsense. Rs were disappointed by their party's performance, and they didn't come out to vote"
DeleteIn other words, every county in Texas shifted blue, idiot.
The way you judge whether a county shifted blue or not is if more voters turned out to vote blue than red, for whatever reason.
And as a follow-up to 12:27, trumptard is, as always, factually wrong here. It wasn't that Republican turnout in Texas was low, but that:
Delete"A surge in voter turnout along the Texas-Mexico border and in the state’s most populous counties carried Democrats to an astonishing sweep in Tuesday’s election and broke a decadeslong exile from statewide office in Texas, preliminary data show."
This as well: “ partial results in Texas showed that voters flipped their ballots more than expected; 45% of Democratic gains there came from voters switching away from Republicans.”
Delete
Delete"The way you judge whether a county shifted blue or not is if more voters turned out to vote blue than red, for whatever reason."
I don't think so, Dumbocrat. To turn "blue" one would have to convert to retarded Dumbocart religion, with its 69 genders, women trapped inside men's bodies, and on and on and on.
That's what "blue" is, my friend. The fact that some Rs decided to teach their pols a lesson doesn't make anything "blue". In my humble opinion.
Still an idiot loser, in my most unhumble opinion. Suck on it, Trumptard.
DeleteSo you're sticking to your belief that low Republican turnout was the deciding factor even though you got educated at 12:37 and 12:41.
DeleteCarry on, trumptard.
These are the people Somerby thinks we should emulate:
Delete"retarded Dumbocart religion"
Understanding is not emulation.
DeleteDuh. Dogs are not cats. Ice cream is not yogurt. Rain is not snow.
DeleteWe definitely should not emulate someone who spells Democrat as "Dumbocart," calls religion retarded, and seems to exist only to annoy others.
Dogs and cats are Carnivora.
DeleteHaha losers: "But it was also men, who swung 28 points, and women, who swung 26 points, and young people, who swung 56 points in the James Talarico race." The problem is you all have sucked so bad for so long nobody likes you anymore.
DeleteSomebody somewhere must like a Republican.
DeleteJust checked the polls, it's down to a couple of idiots on this here blog clinging to their Trump and his lickspittles.
Delete202\ ???
ReplyDeleteToday is Veterans Day. It might have been a good day to discuss issues relevant to veterans, such as the impeachment vote and whether Mike Johnson obstructed Democrats caught in traffic, or the war itself and the under-reporting of casualties by the Pentagon, or the large number of Democrats elected who were female veterans.
Here in CO, Eileen Laubacher defeated Lauren Boebert in a supposedly safe red district. Here is her bio:
"Eileen Laubacher is a retired two-star United States Navy rear admiral who served on the National Security Council under President Joe Biden."
A bit overqualified for the office she just won, but that may be what it takes to oust entrenched Republicans in red areas. But overqualified is certainly better than the under-qualified red incumbents like Tuberville and Constantino who have made a mockery of our system of government.
Yay women! Yay veterans! Boo Somerby.
Constantino is not an incumbent. He is a former white rapper and bigot, a true asshole in the right wing mold. Talk about a mockery of our system of government! Why would Republicans vote for someone like that? Somerby keeps urging us to respect red voters, but how can we when they elect someone like that jerk?
DeleteObviously Bob should submit his planned post content ahead of time to every bozo like you who has an opinion.
DeleteShorter 12:29: don’t criticize Bob.
DeleteIt should be obvious to every American that today is Veterans Day. We acknowledge the sacrifice of those who fought for our country by honoring them on this day. Somerby was a draft dodger who evaded service, but that doesn't excuse him from talking about the current abuse of veterans by the President, who appointed an incompetent poser to conduct an avoidable war, throwing away the lives of those who have died to date, while the end of the war is not in sight.
DeleteIf Somerby cannot recognize what is important, that is not our fault. Comments are the right place to note Somerby's failure as a citizen. The resemblance between Somerby's lack of concern for our veterans and that of the right wing is also obvious. So yes, obviously, Somerby should have paid better attention to the issues the rest of the nation considers important.
But you go right ahead and defend him.
I'm not defending Somerby so much as attacking the stupidity that says if it's Veterans' Day, then every blog post must acknowledge that fact, or else be jabbed by the haters.
DeleteWhat is stupid about suggesting that we remember our Veterans on Veteran's Day?
DeleteIt wasn't a suggestion, it was a criterion established by 11:50.
Delete"It might have been a good day to discuss..." is a suggestion not a demand.
DeleteVeterans? Jesus was not a veteran.
DeleteTell Hegseth
DeleteSomerby is implicitly questioning the religious beliefs of Democratic candidates and suggesting that perhaps we Dems must become more like red America in order to win (even though we already won without doing that). Meanwhiile Tiedrich exhorts the right to take governing seriously, something they are clearly not doing and will not do:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.jefftiedrich.com/p/house-republicans-reveal-their-2027
How can Trump be the only problem when there are so many imbeciles and clowns up and down the Republican party?
DeleteThis was Hegseth's gift to veterans (via Tiedrich today):
Delete"Now let’s move on to this asshole, Piss-Drunk Pete Kegstand.
Pete weaseled out of getting impeached yesterday, but not before holding some yappy little vanity press conference during which he preened, defiantly flapping his gin-soaked gums in defense of his own lawless self.
“Was die Artikel selbst betrifft: Iran, die Kartelle, Maduro, Jemen. Jede einzelne Operation war rechtmäßig und wurde vom Führer angeordnet.”
In case you don’t speak German, I should probably provide an English translation.
“As for the articles themselves. Iran, the cartels, Maduro, Yemen. Every one was a lawful operation ordered by the Commander-in-Chief.”
Got that? Piss-Drunk Pete was just following orders. Huh. Now, where have we all heard that excuse before?
Oh, right—
At the Nuremberg Trials."
I'm so old I remember how the Nazi administration reacted to Dem leaders advising troops not to follow illegal orders:
Delete"Administration reaction: President Donald Trump and administration officials accused the lawmakers of "seditious behavior" and insubordination, leading to Pentagon reviews, Department of Justice/FBI inquiries, and efforts by the administration to explore potential legal action or prosecutions. A federal grand jury subsequently halted those administration pushbacks, and a federal judge blocked certain retaliatory measures."
Creeps. Fuck 'em.
"Somerby is implicitly questioning the religious beliefs of Democratic candidates and suggesting that perhaps"
Delete"Implicitly." "Suggesting that perhaps."
In other words you're making shit up about Somerby.
No, I am describing how it appears to me. The perhaps comes from Somerby, not me. It was part of what he suggested, not my suggestion. Misleading editing there. Implicit means he didn't come right out and state his questions. We all know that Somerby is seldom direct in his writing.
Delete"Implicit" definition: "An implicit meaning is something that is suggested, hinted at, or understood without being directly or plainly stated. You have to "read between the lines" by using context, tone, or underlying assumptions to grasp what is truly being communicated."
Those of you who refuse to consider what is between the lines are being excessively literal.
When someone says "he is batting for the other team" or "he's a sworn member of the Friends of Dorothy" there is no explicit statement that someone is gay, and yet readers will know that was being implied, thus implicit in the statement. This is how Somerby works.
Delete"Those of you who refuse to consider what is between the lines are being excessively literal."
DeleteOkay. Then what is the single most suggestive or implicit-rich statement in Somerby's post today that supports your contention? Because I don't find anything that is at all suggestive of or implicitly criticizes the religiosity of Democrats.
Then you have not been reading and thinking about the comments today. They already explain why they object to Somerby's trivialization of religion, his implication that religion has not been a long time part of Democratic politics but is something Republicans invented, so that when Democrats are religious it is borrowing from Republicans. Go back and read what others have been saying here today.
DeleteRight. I ask you for a single sentence from Somerby to back up what you say and you refer me to other commenters.
DeleteSo you got nothing.
“Somerby is . . . suggesting that perhaps we Dems must become more like red America in order to win”
ReplyDeleteThis is false. What Somerby suggests in this post is that we should love our neighbor.
Meaning what, precisely, in political terms?
DeleteJesus. What deeper meaning do you need? He pointed out yet another false criticism of Somerby.
DeleteIn other words, DG cannot answer the question. (I wouldn't be surprised if @12:52 is DG, defending himself as a sockpuppet.) DG has been known to "forget" his vaunted nym from time to time.
DeleteWhy do you insist DG's comment has a "meaning" in "political terms"?
DeleteBecause politics was being discussed by Somerby and others here. Somerby discussed Talarico's religion quoting the religion writer of the NY Times. Talarico is a politician now elected to political office. Note the word "political".
DeleteI’m not 12:52, and I read Somerby as suggesting that we Blues would do well to appreciate the many and varied strands of the American experience, including those deeply rooted in religion.
DeleteGreat. More relevant to note is that the quote actually in dispute, which is actually the subject of this thread, is about the truth or falsity of a specific comment that doesn't mention James Talarico.
DeleteSee how logic works?
Democrats have not newly become religious. What is new is that a few religious leaders have run for office as Democrats. That has happened many times before. It is one form of leadership that people recognize as a qualification for office. Others include military service, academic expertise, public health (Amy Acton & El-Sayed), community activism (Obama), business experience, and so on.
DeleteSomerby seems to be claiming that religious leadership is something new to Dems, a right wing domain that Democrats should adopt (as if we hadn't done so this time around), a uniquely winning approach to gaining red votes. I find that fatuous because it assumes that religion is Republican and not Democrat when in black and Latino communities religion is an organizing point (including in resistance to ICE, sanctuary programs, aid to immigrants).
It isn't clear what more Somerby thinks Democrats should do to mobilize religion on the left, but given the long tradition of church involvement in civil rights, feeding the poor, and so on, I think Somerby has not thought this through and thinks the left is imitating the right when it is relying on a longstanding approach to involvement on behalf of the people (as opposed to those oppressing them).
This essay strikes me as exemplifying idiocracy in blog writing. The most irreligious man in the country is Trump but Somerby writes today to chide us blues again! I am tired of this garbage. We won the midterms big but Somerby is trying to teach Dems how to suck eggs. Get real!
I’m just wondering if somerby is setting the stage to criticize democrats for not loving their neighbor if they investigate or impeach or otherwise try to hold Trump and his admin to account. Wouldn’t be out of character for him.
DeleteSomerby could be "setting the stage" for lots of things.
DeleteWhy don't we wait until he actually says something, rather than engaging in what can only be described as "pre-criticism."
2:11: If history is predictive, Somerby will attack Dems for “going after” Trump et al. He did it relentlessly in Trump’s first term. Just giving you a heads up. He has already warned democrats about “backsliding” (a religious term).
DeleteWhy wait when we can wager on the prediction markets?
Delete"What Somerby suggests in this post is that we should love our neighbor."
DeleteSomerby's calls for open borders are brave in the face of the current political climate.
"He did it relentlessly in Trump’s first term. Just giving you a heads up."
DeleteThanks Nostradamus. His complaint was the inordinate amount of time spent going over and over the same criticisms to the point where it was a little weird.
It will be more repetitious this time because Trump has now committed so many more crimes. Someone who finds that weird shouldn't have voted for Trump to begin with. I find it weird that someone wouldn't want the checks and balances inherent to our Constitution to be exercised for the benefit of the governed.
Delete"AMERICANA: Love thy neighbor, the Texan said!"
ReplyDelete"TEXARKANA: Love thy neighbor, the Texan said!"
FTFY
Religion is not part of Americana because it is not specific to America, nor does it characterize Americans as a people, nor is it a symbol of our national character. Read the Constitution. We have no national religion. People in American practice a wide variety of different religions, or none.
So this is a stupid affectation of Somerby's based on a misunderstanding of what the word "Americana" means. He doesn't read his comments, so he will go on abusing this term for another few weeks then drop it, if we are lucky.
Maybe that is representative of America -- the propensity for talking without listening (as Somerby does daily), displaying stupidity with pride, advocating views without evidence, and non-specific chiding of designated enemies (in this case, us blues). That is Somerby-ana.
"Diplomatic, or inscrutable? Each reader gets to decide."
ReplyDeleteHow about uninformed? Building the wall in Big Bend National Park was about destroying a national park and ecosystem for political gain. That wall doesn't have any impact on illegal immigration but it affects the animals who live there, cost a bunch of money to no good purpose. Tommy Lee Jones should know that -- he lives in Texas. The opposition to the wall had nothing to do with immigration and everything to do with conservation. Somerby appears to be just as clueless as he writes the above question.
And you interpret the quote from TLJ to suggest that he supports the Big Bend wall construction? Is it part of a larger quote? Because nothing in that quote suggests that he supports wall construction at that site.
DeleteNo, I didn't say that. I consider the answer by Jones to be non-responsive to the question about Big Bend National Park. I explained my reasons for thinking that.
Delete" Asked what he made of the dispute over a border wall in the Big Bend region, where Jones has spent considerable time both filming and living, he offered a characteristically terse, diplomatic response: “I don’t like bigotry, and I love people.”
We went to Big Bend with the kids. It was one of the most beautiful places in the world we have ever been to, and we have been blessed to see a lot of the world. Who the fuck could conceive of building a fugly useless wall there. Fucking sick fucks.
Delete"Americana refers to artifacts, cultural symbols, creative works, and traditions that represent the history, geography, folklore, and everyday life of the United States."
ReplyDeleteIn other words, Coca Cola signs, Burma shave signs, Coors beer neon and traditions like church suppers and BBQ, TV trays and doggie doors.
It does not refer to historical periods of religious awakening in the American timeline. That is considered social history or religious history. Religon is not a cultural artifact.
Why does this bother me? Because it seems to trivialize religion by reducing it to something people have made to decorate their spaces, when religion means so much more to the people who practice it and use it to guide their lives. Being raised Catholic, Somerby should understand the role of religion in community life, so why does he go out of his way to misrepresent what it means to people?