Ben Sasse: What happens on January 6?
“Since Election Day, the president and his allied organizations have raised well over half a billion (billion!) dollars from supporters who have been led to believe that they’re contributing to a ferocious legal defense. But in reality, they’re mostly just giving the president and his allies a blank check that can go to their super-PACs, their next plane trip, their next campaign or project.” - Sasse
- 6 views
Ben Sasse is a disappointment. At times he is so thoughtful and correct and at other times he seems to just tow the party line even when it seems inconsistent with his previous statements. At one time I was hopeful that he would run for president. Now I doubt that I’d vote for him. I still think he is one of the better Republican politicians though.
When it comes to politicians, I’m happy to see even the smallest moments of clarity and courage. It’s got to be a hard thing to try to balance “what’s good for my constituents” with “what my constituents want.” It’s like parenting. You want your kids to not hate you but you also know they often want what isn’t good for them. So you accept their displeasure to do the right thing… but not always. Human weakness.
Kinzinger’s video is also encouraging (https://youtu.be/X8LtmYEQpuk), though he seems a bit more interested in praising his own courage. :-D But there’s something to be said for guys who are willing to take the risk of making their base angry.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
@josh p: I’m curious where you disagree with Sasse’s reasoning as he explains it? Do you think that his statement, linked to here, is an example of towing a party line? And if so, which party line?
Michael Osborne
Philadelphia, PA
@Aaron:
Whether or not it’s historically accurate, the musical 1776 portrays Dr. Lyman Hall of Georgia as conflicted about whether to vote for independence (his judgment) or against it (the prevailing opinion back in Georgia). At a critical juncture, he brings out this quotation from Edmund Burke, which strikes me as fundamentally sound:
“Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgement; and he betrays you instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”
I have no desire to go into government myself, but I think it would be intolerable for me if I had to make decisions based on the whims of the constituency. They would have every right to work to persuade me. And they would have every right to vote me out next term if they didn’t like what I did. But I couldn’t see it as good governing before God to pay attention to the brute volume of letters and phone calls, and the brute volume of demonstrators outside my office. Not when I answer to God for my decisions.
Michael Osborne
Philadelphia, PA
[M. Osborne]@josh p: I’m curious where you disagree with Sasse’s reasoning as he explains it? Do you think that his statement, linked to here, is an example of towing a party line? And if so, which party line?
Sorry I should have been more clear. I’m speaking about his career in total. At times, like his first speech, he is excellent. At other times I don’t get his allegiances at all.
But I couldn’t see it as good governing before God to pay attention to the brute volume of letters and phone calls, and the brute volume of demonstrators outside my office. Not when I answer to God for my decisions.
Yes. So, some have said that democracy is the worst form of government—except for all the others.
Elected reps have to have a supporting majority to stay in office, so there is constant pressure to pander. The leader who can balance that with doing the right thing is someone of both unusual wisdom and unusual moral courage. This is the kind of leadership Christians should pray for.
Sasse: I can’t recall specifics now but I do recall times when he seemed to cave and I was disgusted with him. But he at least seems to have a way of making good, strong course corrections from time to time. I appreciate that. I’d take him over our Ron Johnson any day. (RJ will probably never get my vote again.)
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
I can’t disagree with Sasse’s conclusion that the likely instances of illegal votes is insufficient to change the results of the election. The evidence supports the verdict that Biden won the election,
But we are left with troubling irregularities that need to be thoroughly investigated, not swept under the “it won’t make enough difference” rug. I ask, once again, why do all these irregularities favor Biden? The fact that they all seem to favor Biden is itself a very troubling pattern. It must be investigated and dealt with legally, or it will never stop. Also, if this many irregularities are known, how can we be sure there are not additional ones that are not yet known? Failing to investigate known irregularities results in failing to uncover additional irregularities. If there are more, is it possible that the results of the election have been changed?
I am disappointed with Trump for failing to address these irregularities in a sensible manner. Once again, Trump and his supporters have shot themselves in the feet. But the insistence that there is no fraud is premature. We have evidence that there are instances of genuine fraud, albeit in insufficient measures to affect the outcome. Serious investigations will either uncover additional fraud, or certify that none exists. Either way, serious investigation is the only way to bring this to a conclusion. Let the investigations begin.
G. N. Barkman
That’s not what the Sasse article says. It declares the irregularities to be too small to change the outcome, but clearly points to several instances of irregularities that could well be labeled fraud. Why are some so nervous about “barking up” this particular tree?
G. N. Barkman
[G. N. Barkman]Was there fraud large enough to change the outcomes? Take a look at this video that was presented before legislators in GA in an official hearing and keep in mind that similar things have also been documented to have taken place elsewhere:That’s not what the Sasse article says. It declares the irregularities to be too small to change the outcome, but clearly points to several instances of irregularities that could well be labeled fraud. Why are some so nervous about “barking up” this particular tree?
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/ignored-media-data-scientists-…
There were irregularities in this election. In fact, they are in every election. And every election cycle, they are investigated and corrected in subsequent election cycles. Where fraud exists people are arrested. This happens every four years. They are not forgotten. In fact, it is a big part of the work that election boards doing in between elections. I think we can legitimately say that there was no widespread fraud, and no fraud or irregularities that would meaningfully impact any of the election results. This has been proven by numerous recounts and over 60 law suits, all of which failed to show any cases of fraud or irregularities that met any form of a legal “bar”. The most interesting view is Georgia, which did two recounts to prove not only the machines were correct, but that the actual count was correct. They also did a sampling of 15,000 envelopes with the GBI and Georgia Tech to confirm that signatures were accurate. 14,998 were. The two that were not, were 1) signed on the front and not the back, but confirmed under oath with the voter, and 2) the individuals spouse signed for their spouse, also confirmed under oath with the voter. This indicated a confidence ratio of all signatures of 99.99%. Pretty good in my opinion.
The real fraud, was Trump asking Raffesberger to “find” the votes that he needed to win the election. This was not about fraud or irregularities, but overturning an election somehow so that Trump could win. This recorded conversation with Trump really shows the pathetic and said state of affairs for someone who wanted to “drain the swamp”. It is clear that he broke federal laws in this phone call and in my opinion, he should be prosecuted.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-georgi…
Yesterday, I posted the audio and full transcript of Trump’s disgraceful and evil call with the Georgia Secretary of State on social media. I said Trump was a moral disgrace.
A Christian, a former friend, then declared on social media that Trump had a “Christian worldview,” and that living in WA had turned me into a “Marxist Communist.” She then assured me “I really feel sorry for you.”
This is a mental illness. I have now blocked 10 people over the past 12 months, ALL CHRISTIANS, because they have each personally insulted me. Each insult has stemmed from their worship of Trump. This includes my own uncle, who had the nerve to declare my dead father was looking down from heaven (note: my father was an unbeliever) and was very angry with me for doubting Trump.
I repeat = this is a mental illness.
Further, any GOP politician who abets this disgrace, in any form, is a fool.
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
Trump has done more to destroy the future of the Republican party than any Democrat could have dreamed up.
It’s insane what Republicans have allowed (and continue to allow) Trump to get away with.
But, why is it anything with Trump’s name on it is released to the media, in full transcript form? Meanwhile, we are still waiting for one Democrat to rat out Bill Clinton from 20 years ago… let alone anything Obama did, or any more recent Democrat.
Does that make you curious at all?
[Mark_Smith]But, why is it anything with Trump’s name on it is released to the media, in full transcript form? Meanwhile, we are still waiting for one Democrat to rat out Bill Clinton from 20 years ago… let alone anything Obama did, or any more recent Democrat.
Does that make you curious at all?
I’m sure many rabid Trump supporters will claim a deep state conspiracy against Trump. I just think Trump is too egomaniacal / stupid to cover his tracks like other politicians. Instead, when caught, he doubles down or get others to lie for him.
Discussion