I think anti-Catholicism is pretty much a dead political force in the USA, even on the right. JD Vance was a Catholic by the time he ran for veep in 2024, and I doubt it cost the ticket very many votes at all.
Yeah, you have some fundy dead-enders who yell about Coney Barrett's RCism when she joins a decision they don't like, and Hegseth's Reconstructionist pastor likely hates Catholics. But it's not influencing the way any significant blocs of voters behave.
(And before someone brings up "But look how much they hate Pope Leo!!", yes, but they hate him because he's made a few statements against Trump. Not because he's Catholic.)
I'll be interested to see if or when the right-wing Catholic/evangelical/LDS alliance falls apart. In the US those groups historically despise each other, but since the late 70s they've had enough common interests (specifically Dead Horse issues) to cooperate on political projects.
Now that religiosity and church membership are declining quickly here, I wonder if they're less likely to split from each other - they need the numbers.
Only about 40% of Utah is actually Mormon, . . . .
Per some surveys. Other recent and reputable surveys put the LDS population of Utah at around 60–65%.
Right wing leaders set out to create wedge issues that would push evangelicals to the right and were aided by conservative Catholic bishops, and Mormon leaders saw an opportunity to pass themselves off as Christian by aligning with the evangelicals.
A lot of it is centred on abortion. While conservative Catholics, Evangelicals and Mormons agree on a lot of social "dead horse" issues generally speaking this is the one they most agree on wanting to use the State to enforce.
According to Fred Clark evangelical opposition to abortion post-dates the formation of the religious right coalition. Acceptance of abortion and contraception used to be one of the ways evangelicals differentiated themselves from those Catholics. Cue Monty Python's Meaning of Life Protestant sketch.
Jerry Falwell's book Listen, America! from 1980 contains a chapter attacking abortion, including a passage saying "...Catholics have been alone for too long" on the issue. I think that's the earliest I've seen an anti-abortion position from an American evangelical. Woodward and Bernstein's 1979 book The Brethren includes second(third...?)-hand reportage of certain protestant denominations criticizing Roe v. Wade when it came down.
I think anti-Catholicism is pretty much a dead political force in the USA, even on the right. JD Vance was a Catholic by the time he ran for veep in 2024, and I doubt it cost the ticket very many votes at all.
Yeah, you have some fundy dead-enders who yell about Coney Barrett's RCism when she joins a decision they don't like, and Hegseth's Reconstructionist pastor likely hates Catholics. But it's not influencing the way any significant blocs of voters behave.
(And before someone brings up "But look how much they hate Pope Leo!!", yes, but they hate him because he's made a few statements against Trump. Not because he's Catholic.)
I'll be interested to see if or when the right-wing Catholic/evangelical/LDS alliance falls apart. In the US those groups historically despise each other, but since the late 70s they've had enough common interests (specifically Dead Horse issues) to cooperate on political projects.
Now that religiosity and church membership are declining quickly here, I wonder if they're less likely to split from each other - they need the numbers.
Only about 40% of Utah is actually Mormon, . . . .
Per some surveys. Other recent and reputable surveys put the LDS population of Utah at around 60–65%.
Maybe 40% is the number for Salt Lake City? It's sometimes cited as being the least Mormon part of Utah, though I'm not sure if that's from a listing of counties, cities, regions, or what.
I think anti-Catholicism is pretty much a dead political force in the USA, even on the right. JD Vance was a Catholic by the time he ran for veep in 2024, and I doubt it cost the ticket very many votes at all.
Yeah, you have some fundy dead-enders who yell about Coney Barrett's RCism when she joins a decision they don't like, and Hegseth's Reconstructionist pastor likely hates Catholics. But it's not influencing the way any significant blocs of voters behave.
(And before someone brings up "But look how much they hate Pope Leo!!", yes, but they hate him because he's made a few statements against Trump. Not because he's Catholic.)
I'll be interested to see if or when the right-wing Catholic/evangelical/LDS alliance falls apart. In the US those groups historically despise each other, but since the late 70s they've had enough common interests (specifically Dead Horse issues) to cooperate on political projects.
Now that religiosity and church membership are declining quickly here, I wonder if they're less likely to split from each other - they need the numbers.
Only about 40% of Utah is actually Mormon, . . . .
Per some surveys. Other recent and reputable surveys put the LDS population of Utah at around 60–65%.
Maybe 40% is the number for Salt Lake City? It's sometimes cited as being the least Mormon part of Utah, though I'm not sure if that's from a listing of counties, cities, regions, or what.
Salt Lake County is 49% LDS, per statistics I’ve seen. It has hovered around 50% for at least 20 years or so.
I think anti-Catholicism is pretty much a dead political force in the USA, even on the right. JD Vance was a Catholic by the time he ran for veep in 2024, and I doubt it cost the ticket very many votes at all.
Yeah, you have some fundy dead-enders who yell about Coney Barrett's RCism when she joins a decision they don't like, and Hegseth's Reconstructionist pastor likely hates Catholics. But it's not influencing the way any significant blocs of voters behave.
(And before someone brings up "But look how much they hate Pope Leo!!", yes, but they hate him because he's made a few statements against Trump. Not because he's Catholic.)
I'll be interested to see if or when the right-wing Catholic/evangelical/LDS alliance falls apart. In the US those groups historically despise each other, but since the late 70s they've had enough common interests (specifically Dead Horse issues) to cooperate on political projects.
Now that religiosity and church membership are declining quickly here, I wonder if they're less likely to split from each other - they need the numbers.
Only about 40% of Utah is actually Mormon, . . . .
Per some surveys. Other recent and reputable surveys put the LDS population of Utah at around 60–65%.
Maybe 40% is the number for Salt Lake City? It's sometimes cited as being the least Mormon part of Utah, though I'm not sure if that's from a listing of counties, cities, regions, or what.
Salt Lake County is 49% LDS, per statistics I’ve seen. It has hovered around 50% for at least 20 years or so.
Trump is getting desperate. Promising $5,000 checks for all voters (not going to happen), Promising a 'UGE steel mill in Iowa (not even near the resources needed for a mill). Using government funds to show his image in all American TV audiences. Getting the major countries to agree to reduce their strategic oil reserves to lower fuel prices temporarily.
If a copy of the Statue of Liberty really is to be placed upon trump's monstrous erection, will there also be a copy of the now brutally profaned poem that is still at the base of the original?
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
I think anti-Catholicism is pretty much a dead political force in the USA, even on the right. JD Vance was a Catholic by the time he ran for veep in 2024, and I doubt it cost the ticket very many votes at all.
Yeah, you have some fundy dead-enders who yell about Coney Barrett's RCism when she joins a decision they don't like, and Hegseth's Reconstructionist pastor likely hates Catholics. But it's not influencing the way any significant blocs of voters behave.
(And before someone brings up "But look how much they hate Pope Leo!!", yes, but they hate him because he's made a few statements against Trump. Not because he's Catholic.)
I'll be interested to see if or when the right-wing Catholic/evangelical/LDS alliance falls apart. In the US those groups historically despise each other, but since the late 70s they've had enough common interests (specifically Dead Horse issues) to cooperate on political projects.
Now that religiosity and church membership are declining quickly here, I wonder if they're less likely to split from each other - they need the numbers.
Only about 40% of Utah is actually Mormon, but the state is still run like a theocracy. There are a LOT of Mormons in the higher military ranks and in the US government, especially in the three-letter orgs - I realise this sounds a bit conspiratorial, but it's actually simply because Mormons are particularly less prone to be a problem for security clearances due to general "clean living" and are also particularly good at obeying authority. Obviously lots of religious groups fit that bill (I believe that SDA adherents are also overrepresented for those reasons), Mormons just tend to score particularly highly.
Mormons were also heavily represented among the people working as Howard Hughes' personal assistants during his most eccentrically reclusive period. Which might raise some ethical questions, depending on how you view Hughes' psychiatric state at the time.
Very short piece from TIME Magazine, 1976, about the "Mormon Mafia"...
The Nation: The Keepers of the King
Sounds like a somewhat colourful crew, if in a Mormon sorta way. Apparently, one of them did indeed have some qualms about accommodating their master's chosen lifestyle to the fullest.
One year, the Republican ran a Mormon as their candidate …Mitt Romney.
Yes, and he was hugely unpopular amongst the Republican rank-and-file. Not just for the Mormon thing, but that was a notable controversy.
According to Pew, Romney got 79% of the "white born again/evangelical" vote in 2012, which was six percentage points better than what McCain got for the same demographic in 2008.
Someone called him 'Nappy Donald trump' as he seems to keep falling asleep.
Narcolepsy?
Sleep deprivation?
Sleep apnea?
Exhaustion?
Just old age?
My brother sleeps a lot and drops off when he's bored. He's younger than trump - but he's not POTUS! He retired ten years ago so his sleepiness doesn't affect anyone.
In a crisis, would you rather Trump was asleep or awake?
Who's calling the shots if he's asleep? Vance? Hegseth? If it's the latter there's every chance of everyone on the planet getting an early invitation to meet their maker.*
Paraphrasing Blackadder: for everyone else that's God; for Trump, Vance and Hegseth: God knows.
Has any shipmate any idea why the USAF B-2 bombers at RAF Fairford hightailed it back to the USA?
Abortive terror attack apparently, though our police have bailed the suspects which is unusual.
It's still something of a mystery, according to the Guardian - what does the US know (or thinks it knows) about a possible threat? IOW, was the threat real, or is the withdrawal in some way political ?
The suspects' bail conditions will be pretty stringent, I guess, but one assumes that there was simply insufficient reason to keep them in custody. Trump may not like it, but our legal system is not the same as his...
Paraphrasing Blackadder: for everyone else that's God; for Trump, Vance and Hegseth: God knows.
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
The television comedy Blackadder featured a conversation between the titular character and his sidekick Baldrick that included the line: Unless I think of something, tomorrow we go to meet our Maker: in my case God, in your case God knows.
I was obliquely suggesting that one might conclude that a benevolent deity could not be responsible for the three I named.
Paraphrasing Blackadder: for everyone else that's God; for Trump, Vance and Hegseth: God knows.
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
The television comedy Blackadder featured a conversation between the titular character and his sidekick Baldrick that included the line: Unless I think of something, tomorrow we go to meet our Maker: in my case God, in your case God knows.
I was obliquely suggesting that one might conclude that a benevolent deity could not be responsible for the three I named.
Thanks. I think I missed the semantucal flow between the two paragraphs.
Paraphrasing Blackadder: for everyone else that's God; for Trump, Vance and Hegseth: God knows.
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
The television comedy Blackadder featured a conversation between the titular character and his sidekick Baldrick that included the line: Unless I think of something, tomorrow we go to meet our Maker: in my case God, in your case God knows.
I was obliquely suggesting that one might conclude that a benevolent deity could not be responsible for the three I named.
Thanks. I think I missed the semantucal flow between the two paragraphs.
My fault, there was meant to be an asterisk to link the two.
I saw it in today's UK Guardian, without the video (can't find it now), but including strong criticism from a great many angry people. Someone said that Trump is 'dangerous and deranged', which pretty well sums him up.
News here is rather dominated by party conferences, the civil unrest in France, and the Green Party's possibly rash policy on Zionism. One cartoon did show the US planes (disguised as Trump balloons!) leaving Fairford, with a passer-by looking up and saying 'Thank God for that!'. The US personnel may have been amiable neighbours on the personal level, but I suspect that there is a growing feeling here that the US is not a Good Thing any more...
Trump's spokespeople are claiming that he meant that if Iran develops a nuke it will let them take out LA and San Diego, IOW he was implicitly saying that would be bad. But that's not usually how "Let them_____" is used, but rather to indicate that we don't care if someone does some supposedly bad thing to us, eg. "If my company wants to fire me, let them! I can get a job anywhere."
I think he was more likely saying it would be bad for Iran to nuke America, and then seguing that into a joke about how it wouldn't matter if the bombs hit Democratic cities. Which really isn't much worse than Ronald Reagan's "We begin bombing Russia in five minutes", except that Reagan didn't know anyone outside the studio could hear him, and he wasn't talking about his own country.
Fair comment. The loathsome man is still accurately described as 'dangerous and deranged', though.
No argument from me on that one. It was definitely an ill-advised statement, to say the least. Kinda like if Barry Goldwater had combined his non-chalance about nuclear war with his professed desire to see the entire eastern seaboard severed from the USA and floated off to sea(*).
(*) YouTube: "LBJ Eastern Seaboard" for the Democratic ad about that quote. I assume the ads about AuH2O's nuclear policies are well enough known.
Although, by using the "Let them..." phrase, Trump reinforces the suggestion that Iran had the capability to do that (Were It Not For Our President And Savior Donald Trump). The fact that Iran does not have nor is anywhere reasonably close to having a nuclear weapon gets lost amongst the fluster that Petulant Trump suggested blowing up two American cities. And then he can go on selling the lie that the Iran War is "to keep them from having a nuclear weapon."
Although, by using the "Let them..." phrase, Trump reinforces the suggestion that Iran had the capability to do that (Were It Not For Our President And Savior Donald Trump). The fact that Iran does not have nor is anywhere reasonably close to having a nuclear weapon gets lost amongst the fluster that Petulant Trump suggested blowing up two American cities. And then he can go on selling the lie that the Iran War is "to keep them from having a nuclear weapon."
Yes. I think the main point of the statement was that he was heroically stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons, with "Let them bomb LA" being a joke situated within the hypothetical of a world where Iran does have nukes. Like...
If it wasn't for me working so hard to bring in the bacon, my whole family would have starved to death by now. On the other hand, if that included my jerkrag son-in-law, might not be so bad. Ha ha ha!
And it fits in with what I've long noted to be the odd phenomenon of Trump simultaneously being called a reckless warmonger AND an irresponsible appeaser. A few days ago I saw a political cartoon with Trump being walked like a dog, on three leashes. The holders of each respective leash were..
- Putin, wearing a t-shirt with RUSSIA written on it...
- Netanyahu, wearing a t-shirt with ISRAEL written on in, and...
- Xi Xinping, wearing a t-shirt with I LOVE IRAN written on it.
But the idea that Trump is a stooge of Netanyahu is usually thought to imply that he's warmongering against Iran on behalf of Israel. Which kinda doesn't square with the idea that China is dictating pro-Iranian policies to him.
Who can say with any certainty what China might be doing or planning?
Certainly not me. Point is, though, if one thinks that Trump is a craven traitor being puppeteered by foreign powers against America's interests, it contradicts the idea that he's a jingoistic warmonger bullying foreign countries on behalf of America.
I guess you could try and square the circle by saying Trump is so erratic and so scatterbrained that he unwittingly ends up being a jingoist AND a traitor at the same time, because he has no clue how to implement whichever agenda you think he is actually trying to implement. But that's not quite messagebI get from eg. that cartoon I referenced above.
Has any shipmate any idea why the USAF B-2 bombers at RAF Fairford hightailed it back to the USA?
To dangerous here now for the mighty US Air Force?
The best I've seen to explain the withdrawal is a photo of a white rabbit.
There have also been comments from veteran peace protesters along the lines of "why did we spend years camped outside military camps calling on the withdrawal of weapons of mass destruction, when all we needed were a couple of white transits and some jerry cans?"
Who can say with any certainty what China might be doing or planning?
Whatever it is, their plans are much longer-term than any our glorious leaders are making. Although that's a low bar, when policy is dictated by the orange-faced one's nocturnal ramblings on social media (or, on this side of the pond, by the headlines in the Daily Mail).
I am directing the State Threat Assessment Center to actively monitor the situation in the event that foreign actors interpret the president's remarks as an invitation to target California
.
I can 100% believe that this could be a prudent move in protecting the geostrategic security of California. However, I also think that if that were the case, it would be the best-practice NOT to announce the decision to the whole world(*).
(*) Unless it's the sorta info that really DOES deter the enemy? "Boy, Newsom's bringing in STAC, we better re-think our plans for a dirty bomb in LA."
Comments
Jerry Falwell's book Listen, America! from 1980 contains a chapter attacking abortion, including a passage saying "...Catholics have been alone for too long" on the issue. I think that's the earliest I've seen an anti-abortion position from an American evangelical. Woodward and Bernstein's 1979 book The Brethren includes second(third...?)-hand reportage of certain protestant denominations criticizing Roe v. Wade when it came down.
Maybe 40% is the number for Salt Lake City? It's sometimes cited as being the least Mormon part of Utah, though I'm not sure if that's from a listing of counties, cities, regions, or what.
Thanks.
Meanwhile he cannot keep his eyes open,
🤮
If it is his, then it may have the effect of Medusa.
True.
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
The tragic irony of the poem is not lost.
Mormons were also heavily represented among the people working as Howard Hughes' personal assistants during his most eccentrically reclusive period. Which might raise some ethical questions, depending on how you view Hughes' psychiatric state at the time.
Sounds like a somewhat colourful crew, if in a Mormon sorta way. Apparently, one of them did indeed have some qualms about accommodating their master's chosen lifestyle to the fullest.
Yes, and he was hugely unpopular amongst the Republican rank-and-file. Not just for the Mormon thing, but that was a notable controversy.
According to Pew, Romney got 79% of the "white born again/evangelical" vote in 2012, which was six percentage points better than what McCain got for the same demographic in 2008.
Narcolepsy?
Sleep deprivation?
Sleep apnea?
Exhaustion?
Just old age?
My brother sleeps a lot and drops off when he's bored. He's younger than trump - but he's not POTUS! He retired ten years ago so his sleepiness doesn't affect anyone.
trump on the other hand ...
Who's calling the shots if he's asleep? Vance? Hegseth? If it's the latter there's every chance of everyone on the planet getting an early invitation to meet their maker.*
Paraphrasing Blackadder: for everyone else that's God; for Trump, Vance and Hegseth: God knows.
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.
Abortive terror attack apparently, though our police have bailed the suspects which is unusual.
It's still something of a mystery, according to the Guardian - what does the US know (or thinks it knows) about a possible threat? IOW, was the threat real, or is the withdrawal in some way political ?
The suspects' bail conditions will be pretty stringent, I guess, but one assumes that there was simply insufficient reason to keep them in custody. Trump may not like it, but our legal system is not the same as his...
The television comedy Blackadder featured a conversation between the titular character and his sidekick Baldrick that included the line:
Unless I think of something, tomorrow we go to meet our Maker: in my case God, in your case God knows.
I was obliquely suggesting that one might conclude that a benevolent deity could not be responsible for the three I named.
Thanks. I think I missed the semantucal flow between the two paragraphs.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/oct/05/no-10-says-raf-fairford-safe-us-withdraws-bombers-from-base
My fault, there was meant to be an asterisk to link the two.
To dangerous here now for the mighty US Air Force?
Seems more likely that someone had a hissy fit because they didn't think we were taking the (alleged) terror plot seriously enough.
There are reports today that he is, in effect, inviting Iran to 'take out' Los Angeles and/or San Diego, so he must be even more cross with them...
More than reports. You can see the video.
News here is rather dominated by party conferences, the civil unrest in France, and the Green Party's possibly rash policy on Zionism. One cartoon did show the US planes (disguised as Trump balloons!) leaving Fairford, with a passer-by looking up and saying 'Thank God for that!'. The US personnel may have been amiable neighbours on the personal level, but I suspect that there is a growing feeling here that the US is not a Good Thing any more...
I think he was more likely saying it would be bad for Iran to nuke America, and then seguing that into a joke about how it wouldn't matter if the bombs hit Democratic cities. Which really isn't much worse than Ronald Reagan's "We begin bombing Russia in five minutes", except that Reagan didn't know anyone outside the studio could hear him, and he wasn't talking about his own country.
No argument from me on that one. It was definitely an ill-advised statement, to say the least. Kinda like if Barry Goldwater had combined his non-chalance about nuclear war with his professed desire to see the entire eastern seaboard severed from the USA and floated off to sea(*).
(*) YouTube: "LBJ Eastern Seaboard" for the Democratic ad about that quote. I assume the ads about AuH2O's nuclear policies are well enough known.
Yes. I think the main point of the statement was that he was heroically stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons, with "Let them bomb LA" being a joke situated within the hypothetical of a world where Iran does have nukes. Like...
And it fits in with what I've long noted to be the odd phenomenon of Trump simultaneously being called a reckless warmonger AND an irresponsible appeaser. A few days ago I saw a political cartoon with Trump being walked like a dog, on three leashes. The holders of each respective leash were..
- Putin, wearing a t-shirt with RUSSIA written on it...
- Netanyahu, wearing a t-shirt with ISRAEL written on in, and...
- Xi Xinping, wearing a t-shirt with I LOVE IRAN written on it.
But the idea that Trump is a stooge of Netanyahu is usually thought to imply that he's warmongering against Iran on behalf of Israel. Which kinda doesn't square with the idea that China is dictating pro-Iranian policies to him.
Certainly not me. Point is, though, if one thinks that Trump is a craven traitor being puppeteered by foreign powers against America's interests, it contradicts the idea that he's a jingoistic warmonger bullying foreign countries on behalf of America.
I guess you could try and square the circle by saying Trump is so erratic and so scatterbrained that he unwittingly ends up being a jingoist AND a traitor at the same time, because he has no clue how to implement whichever agenda you think he is actually trying to implement. But that's not quite messagebI get from eg. that cartoon I referenced above.
There have also been comments from veteran peace protesters along the lines of "why did we spend years camped outside military camps calling on the withdrawal of weapons of mass destruction, when all we needed were a couple of white transits and some jerry cans?"
Whatever it is, their plans are much longer-term than any our glorious leaders are making. Although that's a low bar, when policy is dictated by the orange-faced one's nocturnal ramblings on social media (or, on this side of the pond, by the headlines in the Daily Mail).
.
I can 100% believe that this could be a prudent move in protecting the geostrategic security of California. However, I also think that if that were the case, it would be the best-practice NOT to announce the decision to the whole world(*).
(*) Unless it's the sorta info that really DOES deter the enemy? "Boy, Newsom's bringing in STAC, we better re-think our plans for a dirty bomb in LA."