Focus on the Trump Family...

[Haruo]

I hear Dobson is on board for Trump. Bizarre year. My hat is off to Cruz and Kasich.

[William Thornton]

[Tim Bonney]

I'm surprise you think so WIlliam. Maybe if Trump actually would release his tax returns you might see something different. What about he lawsuits over Trump University? What about Trumps constant shifting on what he says he supports? I understand Trump got multiple "pants on fire" ratings his conventions speech.

I'm even more concerned about Trump now that it appeared that Russian intelligence might by trying to influence the US to elect him. He has already praised Putin. I see Trump as the scariest man to ever be at the top of the ticket.

[Dave Roberts]

There are lots of negatives about Hillary, but at least she understands our nation's role in the world, something Trump obviously does not in his statements that the NATO alliance is meaningless, a statement that supports Putin's Russian Empire building.

[Tim Bonney]

[Haruo]

[Sandy]

The Clintons are aggressive politicians, no question about that, and they're not perfect. But the image of their corruption is mostly exaggerated propaganda. Their political opponents have taken charge of a whole host of investigations, and generally wind up with nothing. If your political allies were in charge of investigations, that would be one thing, and you could say that they were protecting her, but every investigation involving either Bill or Hillary during their political careers has been conducted by their opponents, and they still found nothing. So either the claims are exaggerations, or Republican investigators are incredibly inept.

Trump has a long trail of bankruptcies, frauds, and corrupt real estate deals, and has admittedly made campaign contributions because he "might need them" later on. He makes things up about his political opponents, including the birther crap, the newspaper photo he allegedly saw of Ted Cruz's father having breakfast with Lee Harvey Oswald, the litany of lies he told about Jeb Bush. He also knows that a lot of Americans are bottomlessly naive and stupid, knowledge gained from experience in reality tee vee, which is why he can claim to "shoot someone in the middle of fifth avenue, and people would still vote for me." A few weeks ago, I had Facebook friends raging about the bathrooms that transgendered persons can use, now they're cheering Trump's statements in his nomination speech that indicate he's for that, as well as same-gender marriage. The Clintons put up their tax returns. He won't. And now it appears that the Russians are trying to influence the election to get him in there.

It's been disappointing to see that many Evangelical Christians really don't stand on the convictions that they once claimed were important to them in electing a President. That's been a major shift, and if you don't think that's going to have a major effect on church growth and the expansion of Christianity in this country, guess again. They've replaced Jesus with the idea that Donald Trump is the only man who can save America.

[ET]

[Sandy]

Those are lots of "if's".

Falwell Jr. spoke on his behalf at the convention, and sold his soul in his endorsement. Dobson's running around the country trying to convince people that the man has had a conversion experience. Both are very wealthy men whose financial status and business interests stand to benefit greatly from a Trump presidency. I believe that a Trump presidency will be what he himself embodies, and what he has always come back to when he hasn't had to worry about getting votes, and that is the creation of an oligarchy of the wealthy.

There's no self interest in Mohler and Moore taking their position. They could win the accolades of Trump admirers within the SBC and merrily go along their way, but they've chosen to speak their mind, which could be dangerous, given the vindictive, vitriolic, hate-filled rhetoric spewed by Trump supporters against anyone who chooses to speak the truth. You might not like their theology, but give them credit, they are putting what they claim to belief ahead of politics.

The idea that Trump would appoint originalists to the Supreme Court is laughable. Most of what he proposes, especially related to foreign policy and business practices, are not consistent with an originalist perspective, and would require more executive orders than legislation. Certainly he is not familiar with the constitution's provision of religious freedom, nor of its interpretation. He's never mentioned a pro-life perspective, unless he is pandering for votes and stroking "the evangelicals". But it seems beyond him to understand the social agenda of the Christian right, especially in the applause lines he made about same-gender marriage and bathroom choices in his acceptance speech. Most of my facebook friends seem to glide right over those parts of his speech, and glide over the implications of his policy, which will undo thirty years of hard work on their part.

His boast about being the guy to restore America's standing among its friends as a world power doesn't square up with the reactions of our closest allies in NATO, in fact, after finally getting back some of the respect we lost under Cowboy George, most of our close friends and allies are quite concerned and fearful of an America under Trump, and conservatives should note that Israel is among them. The Russians and Chinese, on the other hand, are looking for resources and means to help influence the election.

[Tim Bonney]

ET, I don't think Evangelicals can at all count on what kind of Scotus appointments trump will make. They'd be darned lucky if he doesn't change his mind six times before he makes his first appointment and then pick someone they don't like. After all, he previously was a supporter of Clinton himself. Who knows what he will say/believe/do next week, much less after he is President.

Thanks for the overview of the conflicts between evangelicals over Trump. I've not been in that camp for so long that I really don't hear much news any more though I had heard the Russ Moore was standing against Trump.

[Ed Pettibone]

[Ed Pettibone]

[ET]

[Tim Bonney]

[Sandy]

[Tim Bonney]

[Ed Pettibone]

[ET]

[Dave Roberts]

With corporate personhood, I must start praying for the salvation of corporations so they will do the common good, not just pad the pockets of those at the top. Didn't Jesus have something to say about a life not consisting of the abundance of things possessed?

[Sandy]

[ET]

[Dave Roberts]

[Sandy]

[ET]

[Sandy]

The whole context of the Bill of Rights is individual rights, from the preamble. There's a litany of historic Supreme Court and federal court rulings which solidify this perspective. It's only been in recent history, when corporate wealth has gotten to the point where it can buy legislative and legal influence, that rulings have even considered the idea of corporate "constutitional" rights. That is exactly the kind of thing that the founding fathers were trying to prevent. So if you genuinely consider yourself an "originalist," or a "strict constructionist," then the idea of corporate rights is equal to bribery and corruption.

Of course, ET is going to go to the totally opposite extreme to point out why the concept won't work, and therefore justify continuing in the wrong direction. I think it was Hillary Clinton who said, in her nomination speech the other night, that you can protect gun owners rights and keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them at the same time, that you can protect protesters and police officers at the same time, that these ideas are not mutually exclusive. Contrast that with the NRA position that since you can't resolve every illegal use of a gun, or every shooting, you should resolve none of them. Individual rights simply mean that corporations must operate within the law, and operate with respect for individual rights. As long as they don't cross those boundaries, there's no problem.