Our lives are made up of decades, years, minutes, and seconds. The numbers vary by individual, but we are all given a limited amount of time on earth to live. The average American lifespan is about 78 years, roughly 2.5 billion seconds.

In each person’s life, there comes a time when they truly comprehend good and evil, as the conscience bears witness to the law being written on our human hearts. In God’s grace and mercy, He knows when that time is for each person. As the awareness of sin marches on, the seconds of our lives tick away. Every one of those seconds is a step on the road to eternity.

Time is an immeasurably valuable commodity, a finite resource we can spend, invest, or waste just like money. There are 86,400 seconds in each day. We will obviously spend some of those seconds sleeping, so if the average person sleeps eight hours, we still have around 56,000 seconds to fill at our discretion.

We live at a point in time when there are so many things clamoring for our attention. Just a few decades ago, we could come home after work or classes and have a refuge from the outside world; now, interruption is a constant email or text alert away. Scrolling through social media, posting on our profile, and channel surfing all chip away at the remaining seconds.

“Show me, Lord, my life’s end and number of my days; let me know how fleeting my life is. You made my days a handbreadth; the span of my years is as nothing before you.” -King David

Christians have a Biblical mandate to redeem the time, and we do this by using the seconds we’ve been given to count for God’s glory. In the scope of eternity, our life on earth is a vapor and mist compared to the ages to come, James 4:14.

Jesus told several parables about using our time wisely. In Matthew 25:14-30, He instructs us to use our time and opportunities to serve God and warns those who waste time. In Matthew 25:1-13, He warns about waiting and being prepared for His return, and that time will be up for the unprepared at His coming. Jesus told us to work while it is still day, because the time is coming when we can’t work, John 9:4. We’re instructed to pray without ceasing and make the most of our time because the days are evil, Ephesians 5:15-16.

As Christians, being good stewards of our time goes far beyond a well-managed schedule because our time doesn’t belong to us; it belongs to the Lord. He gives us time to use for His kingdom and glory. Anything that takes precedence over that is wasted time. Things like playing with your kids on the floor, taking your teen on a lunch date, or spending time with your spouse at dinner or in prayer are all honoring to God. So many people gripe that they have little or no time for prayer, Bible study, or witnessing about Jesus to others, yet they will fill hours with activities that won’t matter in eternity.

Can you imagine what would happen if true Christians started to redeem the time as though Jesus might return at any moment? Our walk with the Lord would be marked by renewed boldness for Him and love for lost souls.

As we consider the people who don’t know Jesus as their Lord, the reality that they will all soon face God’s wrath should compel us to make the most of every second we have available to share the good news with them. Many of our modern churches are swanky spiritual country clubs brimming with people who have itching ears, not broken hearts for lost souls, 2 Timothy 4:3.

There are still local churches where remnant Christians gather to make much of Jesus, not themselves, Hebrews 10:25. When we realize that the road to eternity is measured in seconds, we will have a renewed sense of biblical urgency to compel lost people to come to repentance and saving faith.

“Right now people are being swept into the vortex of a sewer of gross iniquity which ultimately will suck them down into eternal hell.” -Leonard Ravenhill

Dear Friends, if we love Jesus and lost souls, we don’t have a second to waste. Don’t put off reaching people until you feel equipped. Because the Holy Spirit lives in you, consider yourself equipped. As you plan, pray for the Lord’s will to be done and to direct you. Since the road to eternity is measured in seconds, we can’t assume that we’ll have until old age to serve God. Two dear brothers were called home to be with the Lord at a very young age, but they made quite an impact for His kingdom in just a few years.

William Borden was born in 1887 into a very wealthy family. After conversion around age 16, the young millionaire was on a trip around the world, and while in London, he felt called to foreign missions. He wanted to bring the good news to the Hui Muslims in Northwestern China, but first went to Cairo to study Islam and Arabic before going on to China. While in Egypt, he spent time distributing Christian sermons on the streets of Cairo. William contracted cerebral meningitis in March 1913; he died 3 weeks later. He was only 25 years old, but he made the seconds he was given count for eternity.

Beloved singer-songwriter Keith Green was born-again at age 19. From that point on, whether he was composing soul-stirring worship songs, providing housing for marginalized people, or preaching the gospel, Keith lived a life of no compromise. At the pinnacle of his ministry, he died in a plane crash in 1982 at the age of 28. After Keith came to faith in Jesus, he lived the remaining few years of his life for God’s glory. Both William Borden’s and Keith Green’s lives were brief, but these men stand as a vivid testimony of what the Holy Spirit can accomplish in a person who understands that the road to eternity is measured in seconds.

The longest life ends abruptly, and one is suddenly ushered into eternity. Time has vanished into the past, except as choices and words and deeds have affected eternity.” -Dave Hunt

If you are reading this article and don’t know Jesus as your Savior, I have to warn you about the eternal danger you are in. No one is guaranteed tomorrow. Approximately 150,000 die and go into eternity every day; many go there unexpectedly. Jesus said that most people would take the wide road leading to destruction. God’s wrath will soon fall on all unrepentant people, and the only way to be saved is by coming to repentance and being born again.

God does love you and demonstrated it by sending Jesus. He’s the only way to eternal life. I’m pleading with you to come to saving faith in Him while you still have time. The road to eternity is measured in seconds, and each one might be a final opportunity to have your sins forgiven.

Howard Green, Rapture Ready

In a significant shift in the Middle Eastern power dynamics, Iranian officials have admitted that their once-loyal proxy force, the Houthis in Yemen, is increasingly defying Tehran’s orders.

Reports indicate that the Houthis, who have long served as Iran’s strategic arm in the ongoing conflicts against the United States and its allies, are now acting independently, much to the dismay of their former benefactors.

A senior Iranian official disclosed that the Houthis have distanced themselves from Iran. “They have gone rogue for a while and are now really rebels,” the official stated, reflecting concerns within the Iranian regime as they grapple with a deteriorating hold over their regional proxies.

This development comes on the heels of significant military and strategic collapses for Iran, particularly following the successful operations by Israel against Hezbollah and the ongoing struggles of Hamas.

In a desperate attempt to regain control, Iranian leaders dispatched high-ranking commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to Yemen, hoping to rein in the Houthis and restore a semblance of order among Tehran’s remaining regional allies.

However, analysts suggest that the Houthis have matured into a self-sufficient force, developing their own military strategies, cultivating alliances, and securing resources beyond Iranian support. Despite facing escalating military pressure, they have learned to adapt, successfully hiding their assets and leveraging Yemen’s complex terrain for tactical advantages.

The Iranian officials’ candid acknowledgment of their waning influence highlights an alarming trend for Tehran, which has built its regional policy on cultivating proxy forces for decades. The Houthis’ revolt indicates a fracture in a strategy that once appeared robust.

This internal rift has profound implications. As the Houthis continue to assert their independence, Tehran faces the stark reality of having to confront a multifaceted crisis—both from external military pressures and internal fragmentation of its proxy forces.

The shift in control also signals a potential for increased instability, not just in Yemen but across the region, as the United States and its allies monitor the evolving landscape.

With President Trump now in office, the U.S. is likely to leverage these developments to further push back against Iranian aggression and exert pressure on Tehran’s remaining interests in the Gulf and beyond.

As Iran struggles to manage its proxies, the consequences of its diminishing power will resonate throughout the Middle East, providing the U.S. and its allies with an opportunity to redefine the balance of power in a region that has long been plagued by instability.

This moment calls for a renewed commitment to U.S. interests in the region, echoing the previous successes of the Trump administration in countering Iranian influence and supporting democracy and stability among U.S. allies.

Only time will tell if the Houthis’ defiance will lead to a stronger, more autonomous Yemen or if they will ultimately be brought back under Tehran’s thumb. However, in the current landscape, Iran’s influence is clearly on the wane.

MAGA/Red State Observer

Like a master chef promising a five-course meal in fifteen minutes, Washington’s latest promise on affordability might be biting off more than it can chew. The word “affordability” has become the political equivalent of a Swiss Army knife—everyone’s wielding it, but few seem to know which tool to pull out first.

From New York City’s mayoral race to the halls of Congress, “affordability” has emerged as the buzzword du jour, a catch-all solution to Americans’ economic anxieties. President Trump has seized on this narrative with characteristic gusto, promising sweeping changes to make life cheaper for working families. His One Big Beautiful Bill Act—now rebranded as the “working families’ tax cut” because apparently everything needs a rebrand these days—represents the kind of bold economic overhaul that helped propel him back to the White House.

But behind the fanfare and executive orders, a more sobering message is emerging from Republican leadership. The revolution, it seems, will not be televised on a rapid timeline.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, in an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital, offered what amounts to a reality check on the administration’s ambitious affordability agenda. While affirming the GOP’s commitment to reducing costs across the board—from healthcare to energy—Johnson’s words carried a notable note of caution that should give both supporters and skeptics pause.

From Fox News:

“We the people rightfully revolted against that, and gave us the power again in January. But the economy is a very complex thing, you don’t flip a switch and just change it all in one week. It takes a while.”

This admission from the House Speaker represents more than just expectation management—it’s an acknowledgment of the enormous gulf between campaign promises and governing realities. Johnson’s comment that changes will manifest “by the time we get into the first and second quarter of next year” pushes the timeline for economic relief well into 2026, beyond what many voters might have anticipated when they cast their ballots.

The Speaker’s candor comes at a particularly awkward moment. And let me tell you, the timing couldn’t be worse. Just as Johnson was tempering expectations, the White House quietly postponed its much-anticipated healthcare cost proposal, originally scheduled for unveiling this week. The administration offered no explanation for the delay, but sources suggest the complexity of reforming healthcare while avoiding the pitfalls of simply extending Obamacare subsidies has proven more challenging than expected.

Meanwhile, another signature Trump initiative has quietly faded into obscurity. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), once touted by Elon Musk as a revolutionary force for slashing federal spending, has been disbanded after just eight months. Former staffers have been reassigned to work on beautifying government websites. Beautifying websites? Really? That’s our radical restructuring?

Look, I’ve watched this movie before, and spoiler alert: it doesn’t end with rapid change. Every administration arrives in Washington convinced they can move faster, cut deeper, and deliver quicker than their predecessors. The Biden administration promised to “build back better” and ended up building back inflation. Now, the Trump administration promises affordability but asks for patience while the machinery of government slowly grinds forward.

Johnson correctly identifies the Biden-era policies as creating the inflation that sparked voter revolt. The Texas A&M analysis he references shows consumer prices consistently outpacing wage growth throughout Biden’s term. But diagnosing the disease and curing it are two different challenges entirely. The Speaker’s talk of unleashing “job creators, entrepreneurs, risk-takers, innovators” sounds promising, but these forces need time to work their magic—time that struggling families may not have.

But here’s what really got me: the most telling moment in this unfolding drama came last week when President Trump hosted New York City’s socialist mayor Zohran Mamdani for a friendly press conference, just weeks after calling him a dangerous communist. When pressed on this about-face, Trump simply shrugged: “We all change.” Indeed, Mr. President, but hopefully not on the promise to make life affordable for American families.

The truth is, Johnson deserves credit for his honesty. Better to level with the American people now than to perpetuate the cycle of overpromising and underdelivering that has defined Washington for decades. The economic mess inherited from the Biden administration won’t be cleaned up overnight, and pretending otherwise would be political malpractice.

Still, one can’t help but feel a sense of déjà vu. The “affordability agenda” risks becoming another entry in Washington’s long catalog of well-intentioned initiatives that take longer, cost more, and deliver less than originally advertised. For Americans struggling with grocery bills and gas prices, “full steam ahead” at government speed might feel more like a slow crawl.

Noah Stanton

“Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.” —Sun Tzu

You understand, don’t you, what the aim was of the “Seditious Six” politicians who made last week’s now-notorious video suggesting that US military personnel should refuse the president’s orders if they deemed them to be “illegal?” This was the old Lefty game of provoking the authorities to react intemperately so they can be labeled “fascist.” It’s like the old schoolyard game of the kid who goes I’m touching you. . . I’m touching you. . . until the touched kid explodes. . . so the toucher can then say, look, he’s hitting me!

And they certainly succeeded in pissing-off the president enough for Mr. Trump to suggest they could be hanged for their little prank — though he was probably incorrect about the legal niceties therein.

That members of the out-party in Congress and the Senate must resort to this kind of skylarking japery tells you how desperate they are. The organizer, Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin, is a former CIA officer. Is she in communication regularly with any of her former colleagues at the Agency? And did she coordinate any part of her prank with them? I bet DNI Tulsi Gabbard could find out and let CIA Director John Ratcliffe know so he can fire their a**.

The intel bureaucracy remains a hotbed of resistance to the swamp-draining project underway since 01/20/25. The swamp creatures like their swamp fecund and fetid as it has been, with the rich revenue stream it is used to feeding on, and Mr. Trump has done much to change that. Alas, the CIA remains the most implacably opaque major operation in government. It insists that its activities require secrecy, and the awful downside is that the Agency has run without real oversight since its inception after the Second World War. Gawd knows how many John Brennan clones are still lodged over in the Langley, VA, HQ.

Of all the celebrated new appointees in the agencies, Mr. Ratcliffe has been the least visible. He went into the job with very promising credentials, having served as DNI in the last months of Trump 1.0. He must know where a whole lot of bodies are buried (some of them actual bodies) but the public has heard squat from him all year.

Surely Mr. Ratcliffe must also know by now who in the CIA was scheming along with John Brennan to perpetrate RussiaGate, and who was on the leak-line to the news media. He must know how Adam Schiff coordinated impeachment No. 1 with CIA agent Eric Ciaramella, then Intel Inspector-General Michael Atkinson, Col. Alexander Vindman, and Lawfare ninjas Norm Eisen, Mary McCord, and Andrew Weissmann. He must know who in “Joe Biden’s” White House was coordinating the 92 felony prosecutions against Mr. Trump with DA Alvin Bragg and AG Letitia James in New York and DA Fani Willis Fulton County, GA.

He must know how BLM and Antifa were allowed to burn down Minneapolis in 2020, and riot in scores of other places. He must know what agencies and what persons in them coordinated the Covid-19 operation and which foreign entities were involved. (Was it the US military, as many suspect, and how, if at all, did freelance players such as Bill Gates and George Soros’s myriad organizations fit in the picture?) And how is the machinery of the Democratic Party entangled in the workings of US intel? (Prime suspects: Sen. Mark Warner and his staff.)

You can say much the same thing about FBI Director Kash Patel and his Deputy Director, Dan Bongino. They were apparently horrified by the rot they encountered there on taking office earlier this year. What is so difficult about firing people, even a whole lot of people? And why wouldn’t you say you are doing it? Likewise, Pam Bondi, at her resistance-infected DOJ?

Mr. Trump had a rough week working through his “divorce” from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Both of them behaved rather badly; he the usual name-calling; she playing up to the cluster-B ignoramouses on The View, and then resigning from Congress in a snit (walking away from Daddy). The Epstein Files legislation she was twanging on the president about got passed in a flash and signed, but it contained rules that can easily be used to keep key documents suppressed. The suspicion will linger that it’s all about protecting Israel, and thereby stir-up continued animus against the Jews.

Mr. Trump had a ju-jitsu session in the Oval Office with NYC mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, the avowed communist jihadi — putting the young insta-celebrity pol off-balance by acting all nice and accommodating. “I want him to do a great job. . . “ “We agree on a lot more than I would have thought. . .” “It was a great honor [to meet him]. . . .” the president declared on his Truth Social account. Stand by on what any of that means.

And now, as we plunge into Thanksgiving week, comes the Ukraine peace proposal. Everybody knows it is a recognition that Russia is grinding toward victory in any case, and carrying-on further slaughter and destruction on-the-ground is insane. But then, Ukraine’s ruler, Mr. Zelenskyy, is insane (probably high on drugs, too), and the EU leadership is insane seeking to start a war with Russia that it has zero ability to prosecute — and nevermind whatever the obdurate defenders of the UK’s sclerotic empire think they’re doing to keep the Ukraine War going. But, bottom line: there’s a good possibility that the war will be over before Christmas, and the world will be better off for that.

With all the above going on, America needs a break. Enjoy a turkey, if you can afford to buy one, and count your blessings — for we are still a blessed people in a blessed land, and we should all show a little gratitude for the privilege of just being here on a planet so superbly suited to our needs.

James Howard Kunstler

By now everyone is aware that six Democrats in Congress created videos in which they openly encourage members of the U.S. military and Intelligence Community to mutiny against the commander in chief.  They couched their seditious statements in the pretense that they are interested only in protecting the Constitution, but their message is unmistakable: Resist President Trump’s lawful orders, and we’ll have your backs.

Americans whose minds have not been pickled by leftism are not impressed.  The Democrat instigators have been called “TikTok Traitors,” the “Seditious Six,” the “Idiot Six,” and worse.  President Trump immediately accused the lawmakers of sedition and demanded that they be arrested and stand trial for their potentially deadly provocations.  In response, the Democrat provocateurs have pretended to be outraged that the commander in chief would correctly describe their seditious actions as seditious.

Democrat word games have become so exhausting over the last thirty years.  Remember when Bill Clinton lied about his affair with twenty-two-year-old White House intern Monica Lewinsky by telling a grand jury, “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is”?  No matter how corrupt American politicians were before Clinton’s galling equivocation, it has seemed as if rhetorical obfuscation began exponentially accelerating after that moment.  

Fast-forward to 2025, and former CIA director John Brennan is entirely comfortable going on national news shows and telling the world that he and fifty other “intelligence professionals” never lied about Hunter Biden’s “laptop from Hell” being Russian disinformation because the spies clearly stated in their 2020 pre-election op-ed defending the Bidens that the laptop’s treasure trove of criminality had merely “the hallmarks” of a Russian operation.  If Americans were confused about their attempt to blame Hunter’s crimes on the Russians, that’s because Americans are poor readers!  

Senator Elissa Slotkin — one of the “Seditious Six,” a former CIA analyst, and a protégée of John Brennan — is busy playing the same sick word games as Slick Willy and commie Brennan.  She claims that her seditious video is meant only to draw attention to President Trump’s “illegal orders,” but when she is pressed to name one such “illegal order,” she admits that she is “not aware” of any.  

If Slotkin can’t identify any of President Trump’s orders as illegal, why is she making videos encouraging rank insubordination among America’s military and intelligence personnel?  The Democrats are executing the exact same playbook that they have been using against Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.  For months, Democrat governors and lawmakers have threatened federal agents with future prosecution for doing nothing more than enforcing existing immigration law and arresting criminal illegal aliens in their states.  In order to protect millions of foreign nationals from deportation, Democrats have been obstructing law enforcement operations by promising to punish officers who do their jobs.  

Threatening ICE agents with unlawful and malicious prosecutions will inevitably get people killed, because in the real world, hesitation invites disaster.  When prominent Democrats encourage military and intelligence personnel to resist orders, the consequences are potentially catastrophic.  As one astute commenter notes, “the threat of weaponized lawfare against U.S. troops is seditious psychological warfare.  It’s seditious sabotage aimed at breaking the chain of command.  It’s a seditious plot to erode trust in leaders and it undermines the oath that keeps the military united and effective.”  The Democrat strategy is nefarious and straightforward: Induce service members to question the orders of their commanding officers.  Hesitation and delay during combat will not only get Americans killed, but also directly serve enemy 

Democrats’ attempts to confuse American service members also encourage our geopolitical adversaries to be more aggressive.  As Glenn Beck argues, “if a video like this were aimed at Putin’s military, we’d assume Russia was unstable or nearing a coup.”  Therefore, Democrats have severely “weakened America — signaling doubt to allies and opportunity to enemies.”  If you were a general in China’s military, would you be less or more willing to invade Taiwan after prominent Democrat officials encouraged division and subversion among America’s rank-and-file troops?  Public calls for insubordination make America appear destined for civil war at home and ill-prepared to defend its own interests or those of its allies abroad.

In describing his disgust with Democrats’ efforts to instigate a military rebellion against the Trump administration, Congressman Byron Donalds pulled no punches: “Donald Trump is the commander in chief, not Mr. Crow, not Senator Slotkin.  They are not the commander in chief!  And like I said before, they would not tolerate any Republican launching any video like that!”  
Can you imagine?  After patriotic grandparents and Iraq and Afghanistan War veterans protested the fraudulent 2020 election by walking through the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, Democrats (and useful RINO idiots Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger) spent tens of millions of dollars producing a theatrical congressional hearing meant to demonize all MAGA voters as “domestic terrorists” and “insurrectionists.”  If prominent Republicans in Congress had subsequently encouraged members of the military and Intelligence Community to disobey orders coming from installed-president Biden, the backlash against them would have been swift and brutal.  Not only would they have been expelled from Congress, but they also would have been arrested in the most publicly humiliating fashion.  In contrast, the “Seditious Six” sit for ego-stroking interviews during which they play victim.

This is what Republicans mean when they denounce “Democrat privilege” in the United States.  Time and again, Democrats do things with impunity that would land a normal Republican in prison for decades.  

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Brennan, and their fellow Russia Collusion Hoax co-conspirators will never be held accountable for manipulating intelligence to frame President Trump as a Russian spy.  Kamala Harris and other prominent Democrats who bailed out arsonists during the most destructive riots in American history will never be held accountable for putting violent repeat offenders back on the street.  Alexander Vindman will never be held accountable for undermining the Trump White House and triggering a farcical impeachment.  None of the conspirators who violated state election laws and used fraudulent mail-in ballots to pretend that Sleepy Joe Biden was the most popular presidential candidate in our nation’s history will ever be held accountable for stealing the 2020 election.  Anthony Fauci won’t be held accountable for covering up the laboratory origin of COVID or hiding the worst side-effects of the mRNA “vaccines.”  Social media companies won’t be held accountable for censoring Americans who protested the stolen 2020 election or the unconstitutional “vaccine” mandates imposed by installed-president Biden’s administration.  It appears that neither Jim Comey nor Letitia James will be held accountable for respectively committing perjury and mortgage fraud.  Democrat prosecutors and judges will never be held accountable for abusing the criminal justice system to railroad President Trump, his friends, and his voters.

In the United States, two-tiered “justice” protects Democrats and renders Republicans defenseless.

Now we will see whether six Democrats can actually get away with encouraging a military mutiny.  If past is prologue, the answer is surely “yes.”  

There’s a popular social media meme that succinctly describes our situation: When leftists say “our democracy,” what they mean is “our regime.”  Democrats have taken over so much of the permanent bureaucracy that even when they are out of power, they still command much of the American government.  They are emboldened to commit sedition and treason because they know that no left-leaning prosecutor, judge, or jury will hold them accountable.  This kind of in-your-face double-standard will eventually end the Union.  

Let’s hope, for the sake of our country’s future, that guilty Democrats begin to pay a price.  Forgive me for not holding my breath.

J. B. Shurk, American Thinker

President Donald Trump is delaying a planned announcement of a proposal to extend Affordable Care Act subsidies, according to two White House officials, after congressional Republicans pushed back against the president’s sudden embrace of the expiring subsidies.

Trump was expected to unveil a plan aimed at halting ACA premium spikes on Monday, as first reported by MS NOW. But the reveal has been postponed — though not canceled — said the White House officials, who were granted anonymity to discuss the internal strategy.

Both White House officials noted that Trump’s announcement — which was never officially on the schedule — would take place soon. But they acknowledged the initial plan, which would have sought to end “surprise premium hikes” for those on Obamacare programs, was being actively reworked.

“Until President Trump makes an announcement himself, any reporting about the Administration’s healthcare positions is mere speculation,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said.

While the White House sought to downplay the seriousness of the delay, Republicans indicated they were surprised and angered by a plan that would help preserve the Affordable Care Act.

“I wasn’t expecting the proposal to be Obamacare-lite,” a conservative House Republican, who requested anonymity to discuss the yet-to-be-released plan. “Absolutely not supportive of extending ACA subsidies.”

“I’ve talked to enough [Republicans] to know that people weren’t expecting this and aren’t happy about it,” this lawmaker added. “I don’t see how a proposal like this has any chance of getting majority Republican support. We need to be focused on health care, but extending Obamacare isn’t even serious.”

Another conservative House Republican, who also requested anonymity to speak candidly about the proposal, told MS NOW that lawmakers knew the White House was working on something. “But not with a primary focus on the subsidies,” this Republican said.

‘I wasn’t expecting the proposal to be Obamacare-lite,’ said a conservative House Republican, who requested anonymity to discuss the yet-to-be-released plan. ‘Absolutely not supportive of extending ACA subsidies.’

The White House appears not to have sought significant input from Capitol Hill on the plan, with Republicans who spoke to MS NOW suggesting that most lawmakers were unaware the administration’s health care proposal would include an extension of the subsidies. Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., were expected to be briefed for the first time on the plan Sunday afternoon.

The delay comes as the president — and Hill Republicans — are caught in a bind over health care. Covid-era subsidies for nearly 22 million Americans who get their health insurance through the ACA exchanges are set to lose those plans at the end of the year, a change that would cause massive price spikes in red and blue states alike.

Thune promised a vote on extending the subsidies to Democrats, who agreed to end the recent government shutdown as long as they secured a vote to extend them.

Despite the lack of an official announcement, some Republicans who were learning the broad strokes of Trump’s plan from the media were not especially happy with it.

“I would absolutely NOT be supportive of that,” Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., told MS NOW of extending the subsidies on Monday morning. “Since I last checked, Covid has been over for some time. This is definitely not the DOGE thing to do,” he added, referring to the cost-cutting agency formerly run by president adviser Elon Musk.

Other Republicans were more succinct. When MS NOW asked fellow Freedom Caucus member Greg Steube, R-Fla., if he would be supportive of the White House health-care proposal, he had a two-letter response: “No.”

Another conservative House Republican, who requested anonymity to discuss the yet-to-be-released plan, told MS NOW they were also skeptical of the idea.

“Fix health care for working Americans or don’t talk to me about subsidies,” this lawmaker said.

Trump’s proposal — whatever it may end up being, and whenever it may end up coming — would mark a significant development in the ongoing health care discussion in Washington. If Republicans suddenly relented and agreed to extend the ACA subsidies, even in a slightly modified form, that would mark a significant win for Democrats.

For weeks, Republicans have railed against extending the subsidies, arguing that Obamacare is broken and that extending the subsidies would amount to padding the coffers of insurance companies.

“I’m not putting a Band-Aid on something that’s broken,” Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., told reporters last week.

Jake Traylor and Mychael Schnell

America’s leftists have gone from a reverence for Europe’s socialist institutions to a subtle but complete nullification of the United States Constitution and American law.

Leftists always adored Europe’s soft socialism. They wanted socialized medicine, practically free pharmaceutical drugs, six weeks of paid vacation a year, one year of parental leave for both parents (not that leftists actually want people to have children), subsidized housing, etc.

Pointing out that all of this came about because of American taxpayers who funded building Europe back up after WWII, who absorbed all of Europe’s defense costs, and who pay the costs of all the research and advertising behind the drugs sold at a discount to European socialized systems fell on deaf ears. Europe was the way.  

Of course, lately, Europe hasn’t been the way. Its socialized medicine systems have fallen on hard times, with euthanasia often seen as the ultimate cost savings. Europeans aren’t having children, so parental leave is kind of a moot point. And of course, the systems are collapsing under the weight of unlimited immigration from Muslim countries—often a man, his multiple wives, and their many children—none of whom have paid into the system but all of whom get the benefits, including the subsidized housing, healthcare, education, etc.

With Europe increasingly less of a stellar example and more of a terrible lesson, Democrats have shifted to something new: International law.

The seeds of this have been there for a long time. All of you must remember in 2012, when Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who had sworn an oath to defend the Constitution, while in Egypt announced that she really didn’t like the pithy, government-limiting American Constitution. Given the choice, she said, she’d prefer the South African constitution, with its long preamble, 14 chapters, 244 sections (32 of which purport to be a “Bill of Rights”), 8 schedules, and 16 amendments. Thus, she explained,

“I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a Constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the Constitution of South Africa,” says Ginsburg, whom President Clinton nominated to the court in 1993. “That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, had an independent judiciary. … It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done. Much more recent than the U.S. Constitution.”

Even though the American Constitution advances values bestowing rights on all American citizens, for Ginsburg, it was a document fatally tainted by the Founders’ bad views about women, blacks, and Native Americans. The whole Constitution is the fruit of the poisonous Founders’ tree.

Well, if a Supreme Court justice says the Constitution is bad, you can’t be surprised to fast-forward 13 years and discover Democrat party politicians saying that international law overrides American law. Zohran Mamdani is especially fond of international law if it means destroying Israel.

To that end, he insisted before his election that, because the International Criminal Court has put out a warrant for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he would arrest Netanyahu if the latter came to New York City:

“This is something that I intend to fulfill,” Mamdani remarked, reiterating a pledge he had made earlier in the mayoral race, as the newspaper put it. “It is my desire to ensure that this be a city that stands up for international law.”

Mamdani reiterated the same point after his election:

“Being a city of international law means looking to uphold international law,” Mamdani said. “And that means upholding the warrants from the International Criminal Court, whether they’re for Benjamin Netanyahu or Vladimir Putin.”

There are two problems with Mamdani’s position:

First, the U.S. does not recognize the International Criminal Court, a virulently antisemitic, anti-American organization, and, in fact, has imposed sanctions on it.

Second, it is unlawful for an American citizen to imprison, threaten, or intimidate (among other things) a foreign official or head of state. 18 U.S.C. § 112. The penalty can be up to 10 years in prison or more if weapons are used (as would be the case if Mamdani authorized armed police to detain Bibi).

Mamdani either does not care. But it doesn’t stop there.

Last week, a huge, intimidating, anti-Israel crowd gathered around the Park East Synagogue to protest the fact that it was holding an event for Nefesh B’nefesh, an organization that helps Jews immigrate to Israel. The protest was almost an illegal activity under federal law, and Harmeet Dhillon has promised to investigate and prosecute:

Mamdani’s response was interesting. First, he issued a bland statement saying it wasn’t really a good thing to surround some unnamed type of “House of Worship” and threaten people:

“The Mayor-elect has discouraged the language used at last night’s protest and will continue to do so,” Mamdani spokesperson Dora Pekec said Thursday. “He believes every New Yorker should be free to enter a house of worship without intimidation…”

Way to keep it bland, Mr. Mayor-elect.

Mamdani didn’t stop there, though. He added this strange statement: “…these sacred spaces should not be used to promote activities in violation of international law.” In Mamdani-World, Jews immigrating to Israel is “a violation of international law.”

First, no, it isn’t (at least, not yet). Even if the world says that the settlements in Judea and Samaria, the ancient heart of Israel, are “illegal,” immigrating to Israel is not a violation of any international law.

Second, and more importantly, international law doesn’t apply in New York or anywhere in America. What happened inside the synagogue was perfectly legal and unobjectionable…in America.

Mamdani, though, isn’t the only Democrat turning to international law when American law fails to help his objectives. Mayor Brandon Johnson, the truly execrable Chicago mayor, has the same attitude. He believes that, when the President of the United States enforces American immigration law in an American city, that, too, is a violation of “international law.”

What these ardent leftists are saying isn’t accidental, and it’s not ignorant. They hate America, and they desperately want to do away with the Constitution that limits the government while extending maximum liberty to the American people—something international law definitely doesn’t do.

Related Topics: Democrats, Constitution

15

 Print

 Email

SUPPORT AMERICAN THINKER

Now more than ever, the ability to speak our minds is crucial to the republic we cherish. If what you see on American Thinker resonates with you, please consider supporting our work with a donation of as much or as little as you can give. Every dollar contributed helps us pay our staff and keep our ideas heard and our voices strong.

Thank you.$5$10$50Other

Neurologists: 1/2 Cup Before Breakfast Relieves Neurоpathy Quickly! (Try It)Health Headlines

Neuropathy is Not From Low Vitamin B. Meet The Real Enemy of NeuropathyFootRenew

View & Add Comments (15)

Around the Web

Here’s The Estimated Cost of a 1-day Walk-in Shower UpgradeHomeBuddy

Neurologists: 1/2 Cup Before Breakfas Relieves Neurоpathy Quickly! (Try Tonight)Health Headlines

Who Has the Cheapest Car Insurance in 2025?Experts In Savings

Walgreens Hides This $1 Generic Viagra – Here’s The Aisle It’s Really inFriday Plans

Here’s What Gutter Guards Should Cost if You Qualify for Senior RebatesLeafFilter Partner

Ashburn: 23 Genius Stocking StuffersTrending Daily Gadget

Restaurants in Ashburn With Good Senior DiscountsThe Consumer Guide

Hairloss After 40 Linked to 1 Common Thing (Stop Doing This)HaloGrow

Parasitologist: One Bite Will Rid Your Body of All Parasites!Para91

55 Bizarre Gadgets That Help People Over 55 Years OldUnforgettable Gadgets

If You Have More Than $1,000 in Your Checking Account, Make These 6 MovesThe Penny Hoarder

Hilarious Yet Terrifying Animal Encounters You Must Avoid!Buzzday

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com

FOLLOW US ON

Recent Articles

• The Decline and Fall of the Movie Industry
• EU States Complete Brussels’ Surveillance Network
• The Perils of our Bubblicious World
• God is Back
• Nick Fuentes Proves ‘No Enemies To The Right’ Is Suicide For The GOP
• When Joy Reid Discovers Biology — In The Locker Room
• 1950s TV Families Were Aspirational Models For A Good Society
• Please End the Abuse
• The Land of 10,000 Grafts!
• Carrots and Sticks
• To Destroy Leftism, Save Society
• The Left’s Lost Cause
• The 10 Guiding Principles of MAGA
• Is RFK Jr. Making a Difference? Ask Big Pharma …
• The Real Mamdani
• The Counterplayer: How Javier Milei Exposes German Statism
• ‘No Problem Too Large for Government to Solve’
• Time to Pass Out the Potassium Iodide Pills Again?
• All His Friends were Democrats
• A New Strategy to Promote Innovation in Education

Blog Posts

• ‘Pride’ flag flies (in victory?) over now-purple ex-Catholic church in small-town USA
• Palestinian as pariah
• Cow farts and crazy Uncle Bobs
• Terrorist designation double play
• Smiling clubs for Democrats
• Did Democrat incumbents create a vaccine against being primaried?
• Mexico’s Sheinbaum goes ‘Hugo Chavez’ on dissident TV station and its owner
• The Democrats’ backdoor nullification of the Constitution
• Vatican wakes up and smells the coffee on Christian persecution in Nigeria
• A heavily peer-reviewed report says children shouldn’t get ‘gender affirming’ care
• X revealed the fake accounts pushing anti-Israel propaganda
• ‘A Battle With My Blood’ in more ways than one
• The U.K. takes a knee
• Trump torches TPS
• Claude and ChatGPT or: how I learned to stop worrying and love artificial intelligence
• Fiddler in the Oval Office
• The Smile that Ate the City: The parable of Mamdani
• What pigs and rats taught me about human snack food
• China’s whisper war
• NYC and Seattle: they’re going to get it good and hard

Blog Archives

• November 2025
• October 2025
• September 2025
• August 2025
• July 2025
• June 2025
• May 2025
• April 2025
• March 2025
• February 2025
• January 2025
• December 2024
• November 2024
• October 2024
• September 2024
• August 2024
• July 2024
• June 2024
• May 2024
• April 2024
• March 2024
• February 2024
• January 2024
• December 2023
• November 2023
• October 2023
• September 2023
• August 2023
• July 2023
• June 2023
• May 2023
• April 2023
• March 2023
• February 2023
• January 2023
• December 2022
• November 2022
• October 2022
• September 2022
• August 2022
• July 2022
• June 2022
• May 2022
• April 2022
• March 2022
• February 2022
• January 2022
• December 2021
• November 2021
• October 2021
• September 2021
• August 2021
• July 2021
• June 2021
• May 2021
• April 2021
• March 2021
• February 2021
• January 2021
• December 2020
• November 2020
• October 2020
• September 2020
• August 2020
• July 2020
• June 2020
• May 2020
• April 2020
• March 2020
• February 2020
• January 2020
• December 2019
• November 2019
• October 2019
• September 2019
• August 2019
• July 2019
• June 2019
• May 2019
• April 2019
• March 2019
• February 2019
• January 2019
• December 2018
• November 2018
• October 2018
• September 2018
• August 2018
• July 2018
• June 2018
• May 2018
• April 2018
• March 2018
• February 2018
• January 2018
• December 2017
• November 2017
• October 2017
• September 2017
• August 2017
• July 2017
• June 2017
• May 2017
• April 2017
• March 2017
• February 2017
• January 2017
• December 2016
• November 2016
• October 2016
• September 2016
• August 2016
• July 2016
• June 2016
• May 2016
• April 2016
• March 2016
• February 2016
• January 2016
• December 2015
• November 2015
• October 2015
• September 2015
• August 2015
• July 2015
• June 2015
• May 2015
• April 2015
• March 2015
• February 2015
• January 2015
• December 2014
• November 2014
• October 2014
• September 2014
• August 2014
• July 2014
• June 2014
• May 2014
• April 2014
• March 2014
• February 2014
• January 2014
• December 2013
• November 2013
• October 2013
• September 2013
• August 2013
• July 2013
• June 2013
• May 2013
• April 2013
• March 2013
• February 2013
• January 2013
• December 2012
• November 2012
• October 2012
• September 2012
• August 2012
• July 2012
• June 2012
• May 2012
• April 2012
• March 2012
• February 2012
• January 2012
• December 2011
• November 2011
• October 2011
• September 2011
• August 2011
• July 2011
• June 2011
• May 2011
• April 2011
• March 2011
• February 2011
• January 2011
• December 2010
• November 2010
• October 2010
• September 2010
• August 2010
• July 2010
• June 2010
• May 2010
• April 2010
• March 2010
• February 2010
• January 2010
• December 2009
• November 2009
• October 2009
• September 2009
• August 2009
• July 2009
• June 2009
• May 2009
• April 2009
• March 2009
• February 2009
• January 2009
• December 2008
• November 2008
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008
• December 2007
• November 2007
• October 2007
• September 2007
• August 2007
• July 2007
• June 2007
• May 2007
• April 2007
• March 2007
• February 2007
• January 2007
• December 2006
• November 2006
• October 2006
• September 2006
• August 2006
• July 2006
• June 2006
• May 2006
• April 2006
• March 2006
• February 2006
• January 2006
• December 2005
• November 2005
• October 2005
• September 2005

Trending Topics

• Democrats
• Trump
• Politics
• Leftists
• Culture
• Zohran Mamdani
• Immigration
• Government
• Crime
• Israel
• Media
• Economy
• Islam
• Education
• Religion
• Military
• New York City
• History
• Health Care
• Justice
• Economics
• Science & Tech
• Climate
• Republicans
• Socialism

Trending

Neuropathy is Not From Low Vitamin B. Meet The Real Enemy of NeuropathyRejuvaFlow

Today is The Last Day to Register. Drivers With No DUI’s Are Getting Up To $610Experts In Savings

Here’s The Estimated Cost of a 1-day Walk-in Shower UpgradeHomeBuddy

Doctors Shocked: Natural Method Restores Hair Growth at Any StageHaloGrow

Most Read

24hr

48hr

7 Days

Carrots and Sticks

Clarice Feldman

What pigs and rats taught me about human snack food

John Klar

The Land of 10,000 Grafts!

John M. Contino

NYC and Seattle: they’re going to get it good and hard

Mike McDaniel

1950s TV Families Were Aspirational Models For A Good Society

Will O’Toole

Top Contributors

---

Last 7 Days

Eric Utter

Kevin Finn

J.B. Shurk

Silvio Canto, Jr.

Joseph Ford Cotto

Last 30 Days

Eric Utter

Silvio Canto, Jr.

Kevin Finn

Clarice Feldman

J.B. Shurk

Joseph Ford Cotto

Christian Vezilj

Thomas Kolbe

Wendi Strauch Mahoney

Noel S. Williams

nullAbout Us | Contact | Privacy Policy | RSS Syndication © American Thinker 2025

×

The Civil War as a Theological Crisis

Mark A. Noll

University of North Carolina Press

In the wake of a tsunami or a suicide attack, most religious leaders hesitate to rush in and justify the ways of God toward humanity. It wasn’t always so. As the defining crisis in American history gathered momentum and became civil war, ministers North and South spoke with authority, even defiance, about the overriding purposes of God. The impact was sobering. Precisely at a time when Protestant influence on national values had no real rivals, America collapsed into a war over the decisive moral issue of the day.

The most astute theologian of the crisis, a layperson named Abraham Lincoln, framed the issue in simple terms: “Both sides read the same Bible and pray to the same God.” And since they prayed for different outcomes, “the prayers of both could not be answered.” In an environment like ours in which the role of religion in public life is energetically debated and values such as freedom are said not to be “America’s gift to the world” but instead “God’s gift to humanity,” the Civil War provides a cautionary tale about the limits of religious belief in guiding a democracy.

In this trim volume adapted from lectures at Penn State, Mark Noll continues the argument he began in his previous book, America’s God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln. There has never been a period during which America was more unified around a core set of values, Noll argues, than between 1800 and 1860. This antebellum piety was a unique synthesis of republican ideals, Enlightenment assumptions and traditional Christian beliefs. In Europe antiauthoritarian hopes were assumed to sound the death knell of religion, but in the United States republican ideals and Protestant evangelicalism shaped and reinforced each other. That the success of Jacksonian democracy coincided with the spread of Methodism and revivalism is no accident. And yet on the eve of the Civil War, Noll shows, this evangelical consensus became “divided against itself,” fueling the larger conflict. If democracy as practiced in the nation could not work, neither could the faith that shored up its legitimacy. The political crisis, in other words, was necessarily a theological one, because theology and republicanism shared the same rhetoric.

The key to the antebellum synthesis—and, for Noll, the heart of the problem—was a widespread belief in a commonsense approach to the Bible. A faith available to all had for its authority a book accessible to all. The Bible yields its plain meaning to the believer. And so if the apostle Paul commanded, “Slaves, obey your masters,” and told a Christian slave to return to his master, no sophistication was needed to see that the Bible condones slavery. “We hold these truths to be self-evident,” Jefferson wrote of the nation’s founding ideals, and Noll sees the same democratic instinct guiding biblical understanding. No bishop or Harvard scholar was needed to tell the unordained evangelist or even the man in his cabin reading the Bible by firelight what the Bible does and does not say.

But common sense applied to morality as well as to understanding the Bible. To some, including many readers of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, the moral reprehensibility of slavery became more and more obvious, and the simplicity of an individual verse less decisive. Stowe’s novel was powerful because it showed the limits of a morality shaped by exegesis alone.

The ensuing theological crisis was in some ways, then, a battle between moral common sense and exegetical common sense. Those who wanted to criticize slavery and still honor biblical authority could separate out larger principles or themes (love of neighbor, say) and then use those principles to frame specific problem texts. But this interpretive move was usually seen either as a slippery slope (such “methods of interpretation will get rid of everything,” one observer noted), or as an undemocratic, elitist exercise (only a theologian could work out these interpretations). Religion is “too simple,” abolitionist Gerrit Smith declared, “to make the training of a theological seminary necessary for those who teach it.” Contemporary debates over homosexuality often reenact this antebellum dilemma.

For churches and theologians, then, the Civil War was an interpretive crisis. Noll frames the stand-off eloquently:

There were no resources within democratic or voluntary procedures to resolve the public division of opinion that was created by voluntary and democratic interpretations of the Bible. The Book that made the nation was destroying the nation; the nation that had taken to the Book was rescued not by the Book but by the force of arms.

More problematic in the long run than the question of slavery (what theologian today would defend it?) was the issue of providence. Religious leaders on both sides assumed that the war was God’s will. A leading northern theologian, Charles Hodge, was representative: “That it was a design of God to bring about this event cannot be doubted.” In the South, a Methodist minister rallied an audience with the claim that his region’s cause was “the cause of God, the cause of Christ, of humanity.” But as Lincoln noted as early as 1858, simply acknowledging God’s providence was the easy part: “There is no contending against the Will of God. . . . Still there is some difficulty in ascertaining, and applying it, to particular cases.” Lincoln’s uneasy approach to understanding how cataclysm could demonstrate God’s purpose forms the climax of Noll’s earlier America’s God. In The Civil War as a Theological Crisis, Noll again reveals his astonishment that Lincoln could offer such a probing portrait of an Almighty who has his own purposes while, in contrast, the country’s “recognized religious leaders offered a thin, simple view of God’s providence and a morally juvenile view of the nation and its fate.”

The Civil War showed the frailty of the consensus of antebellum Protestantism. Common sense can describe a group’s approach as long as members of the group reach common conclusions. Where there are divisions of interests and experience, however, what is plainly and obviously right to one may be despicable to another. As the U.S. became more complex, either theology could become more complex too or Christians could lash themselves to an earlier vision of simplicity that was, as Noll shows, a hybrid of republican and biblical values.

In responding to this crisis, Noll suggests, European critics of American theology acknowledged problems such as racism and economic self-interest more readily than did their American counterparts. Noll is particularly drawn to conservative Catholic critiques, which make for some jolting examples. He describes the work of one French critic this way: “The elements that set his work apart from Protestant parallels—especially the treatment of Catholicism as the long-term friend of liberty and his challenge to capricious biblical interpretation—constituted a distinctively Catholic contribution.” One waits for a polite rejoinder that doesn’t come. “Catholicism as the long-term friend of liberty”? A German critic also declares the Catholic Church a bulwark of human freedom and gets a pass. And surely Orestes Brownson confuses the usual meaning of the word liberty when he claims that “popular liberty can be sustained only by a religion . . . speaking from above and able to command.” If Catholicism’s critique of American Protestantism is important, as Noll claims, it is not because Catholicism has been a better steward of liberty but because it poses an alternative to a boundaryless individualism.

But there are other alternatives, and readers of Noll’s new volume owe it to themselves to seek out chapter 21 of his previous book, America’s God. There he presents a more searching critique of antebellum piety through the melancholy perspectives of Emily Dickinson, Herman Melville and Abraham Lincoln, a triumvirate “aloof from the organized Christianity of the United States” but attuned to the spiritual dilemmas occasioned by the war. All three present indigenous critiques of a piety that comes too easily and a knowledge of God’s purposes that comes too quickly.

One way to move on from the antebellum consensus of simplistic biblical faith is to say that uncertainty and disagreement form an occasion not for submission to some larger authority “greater than the individual interpretation” but for charity among individual interpreters. The individualistic energy of America doesn’t have to be valorized by a republican gospel, but it can be embraced as an opportunity for the development of other virtues. Forbearance in the face of disagreement makes for its own kind of unity, one worth not fighting for.

Eric Swalwell sometimes flies under the radar among members of Congress who operate daily with a double-digit IQ. Often, it’s members of the so-called Squad who earn that accolade. They get the spotlight, and rightly so.

But the congressman proves his mettle time and time again, spitting out ideas indicating he’s clearly two beers short of a six-pack.

Swalwell, the Democrat Representative who has served California’s 14th congressional district, recently announced he was jumping into the Golden State’s gubernatorial race. He announced his laughable campaign with the less humorous Jimmy Kimmel because, of course.

Things got infinitely funnier when, speaking with CNN over the weekend, Swalwell offered one of his initial brilliant ideas for the 2026 election. He wants Californians to have the option to vote by phone.

We’re not kidding.

“I want us to be able to vote by phone. I think every Californian— vote by phone, yeah, if we can do our taxes, do our… healthcare appointments… essentially do your banking online, you should be able to vote by phone,” he said.

“Make it safe, make it secure. But it’s actually already happening all over the United States. I want us to be a blue state that doesn’t do just a little bit better than, like, Georgia or Alabama, when it comes to like, voting access,” Swalwell explained. “I want us to max out democracy.”

The phrase “max out democracy” absolutely had to have been workshopped by an intern fresh out of high school. You know, high school, where Swalwell no doubt was stuffed in his locker nearly every day. I kid, I kid.

Swalwell got absolutely raked over the coals for the idea.

“Vote by phone so every 13-year-old with mom’s iPhone can pick the governor. Eric Swalwell just invented election fraud 2.0,” one X user wrote. “Genius level: room temperature IQ.”

It’s not even that warm.

“This is the worst voting idea I’ve EVER heard. That would be an abject disaster,” Eric Daugherty, Chief Content Officer for Florida’s Voice, added.

“Democrats always want more cheating in our elections,” conservative commentator Paul Szypula responded to the idea.

Fact check: True.

Currently, there are roughly zero U.S. states that allow universal voting by phone (e.g., via mobile app, voice call, or SMS) in federal, state, or local elections, primarily due to significant security, privacy, and verification concerns. Concerns that would be obvious to anybody with more than three functioning brain cells.

Some states have tested mobile or online voting pilots for specific populations, primarily for military and overseas citizens or voters with disabilities. Even then, it’s not widespread and often requires biometric verification or is restricted to specific jurisdictions.

Voting by phone fails most critically on authentication, secrecy, and verifiability. Phone numbers are easily spoofed, hijacked via SIM-swapping, or bought in bulk, making it impossible to prove that the person voting is the actual registered voter. The fraud alarms should be going off everywhere. But what is an alarm to you and me seems like a golden opportunity for Swalwell. 

Similar to efforts to allow voting without government-issued identification, Democrats are always looking to expand who has access to the ballot box. Not to “max out democracy” as Swalwell suggests, but rather to allow as many unverified people as possible access to elections to muddy the waters.

Rusty Weiss has been covering politics for over 15 years. His writings have appeared in the Daily Caller, Fox News, Breitbart, and many more. Follow him on X.

---

Photo by Ashlin Kwong / The Cornell Daily Sun

PETROVA | The Red Sun Rises: How Democratic Socialism Swept the Vote

By Mina Petrova

Nov 14, 2025 10:32 pm · Updated Nov 18, 2025 7:54 pm

Reading time: about 6 minutes

It’s Tuesday, Nov. 4: Election Day 2025. The day began with the death of Dick Cheney and ended with the election of Democrats and Democratic Socialists all over the country.

I grew up in Astoria, Queens — the heart of the NYC Democratic Socialists of America with Tiffany Cabán, Zohran Mamdani and Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez as my DSA-endorsed representatives. Ever since the Democratic primary, I had been counting down the months, days and, by 8:59 p.m., the seconds until New York City would elect a Democratic Socialist as our mayor.

At the same time as Zohran Mamdani’s campaign, here in Ithaca, Cornell’s chapter of YDSA was organizing to elect Hannah Shvets ’27 — the youngest successful candidate endorsed by DSA — for Ward 5 Common Council. 

This election cycle yielded incredible news for leftists all around the country. In New York City, Mamdani won with over 50 percent of the vote. Kelsea Bond became the first Democratic Socialist to be elected in Atlanta, winning over 64 percent of the vote. It was a victory for Democrats as well, with decisive wins for governors in Virginia and New Jersey, managing to flip a significant number of Republican voters. Here in Ithaca, DSA-endorsed candidates Jorge DeFendini and Hannah Shvets won seats in the Ithaca Common Council. 

For the first time, there was something that I was excited to vote for in US politics. As a nine-year-old, I rode the tide of Bernie Sanders enthusiasm, yelling out “Feel the Bern” with my parents at political rallies — the only time I have ever attended them. After that, it was disappointment after disappointment with Trump’s first far-right candidacy and disillusionment over Biden’s support of Israel in its genocide of the Palestinian people. With the Harris and Trump electoral race, my choice was between a center-right and far-right candidate. 

Compared to the international political spectrum, United States politics is skewed to the right. Our “left-wing” representatives, the Democratic Party, are, to borrow from folk musician Phill Ochs, “ten degrees to the left of center in good times [and] ten degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally.” In the first 2024 election debate, Kamala Harris affirmed that she was pro-military, pro-fracking and against gun control. “Radical” Democratic Socialists such as Mamdani, who Republicans have branded as “communist extremists,” base their platform on policies taken for granted in most European countries. Abroad, free public transit, universal childcare and rent freezes are programs of common sense and empathy. 

Yet, Mamdani’s victory proved that grassroots organizing can triumph over oligarchy. Andrew Cuomo’s campaign raked in $55 million from a handful of power brokers, calculating to $65 a vote. A large sum went into an Islamophobic smear campaign featuring racist AI-generated ads, including one infamous video depicting an AI-generated Mamdani eating with his hands and a Black man wearing a keffiyeh and shoplifting. 

Zohran’s campaign, on the other hand, was powered by over 100,000 unpaid volunteers. Daily, people knocked on doors, called voters and organized within their communities. Every time I went back home, I would spot “Vote for Zohran” messages written on the sidewalk in chalk. 

It was the same story for Hannah Shvet’s campaign ever since she narrowly won her primary against landlord and former factory CEO, G.P. Zurenda. After losing to Shvets, Zurenda then proceeded to pull an Andrew Cuomo by running as an independent in the general election. Like Cuomo, a small number of big corporations and property owners paid large sums of money to his campaign. Zurenda averaged $362 per donor while Shvets averaged $15.64 from 448 contributors. 

In an interview with me, Shvet’s campaign reported that volunteers knocked on 2,479 houses, registered close to 200 students to vote, tabled outside for weeks, assembled scores of buttons and made 3,670 phone calls. All this was organized by students who have their hands full with classwork in one of the most elite universities in the nation. “I think just being present around campus this month helped a lot,” said Shvets in the interview. “We got to know so many people and told them about the race, how to vote and why it’s so important for Cornell students to engage in local politics.” 

Hannah Shvets won with a staggering margin of 243 to 134 in an election with historic voter turnout. In NYC, we saw the greatest number of voters in half a century. These elections demonstrate the formidable strength of grassroots organizing. That’s certainly not a new revelation, but it needs to be said. It needs to be yelled out from rooftops and spread from city to city. Most importantly, it needs to continue to ensure that our elected Democratic Socialists can fulfill their promises. 

Although I believe that capitalism must ultimately be replaced for true liberation, these electoral wins matter right now. Rent stabilization, free child care and higher minimum wages can alleviate the symptoms of oppression and have the capacity to help millions — indisputably, an incredible victory. “We can mobilize people around these issues,” said Shvets. “Coming to public comment at City Hall, writing letters to Cornell, holding rallies, etc., are all things that go into getting meaningful legislation passed.” 

But the fight is not over. The forces of oligarchy and fascism — through real east lobbies, police unions, billionaire donors, AIPAC and conservative media ecosystems — are prepared to smother these victories. They will spend billions to undermine our elected Democratic Socialists, starve them of resources, and then proclaim that “once again, socialism failed.” 

This is why the work after election day is even more important. The real power gained from organizing to elect Mamdani, Shvets and many more, is the momentum that comes from learning how to mobilize renters, students and the community. Electoral politics will not guarantee us a new world, but these wins open up a small crack in the current system. And historically, from these cracks slip through revolutions. As Mamdani said in his victory speech, quoting Eugene Debs, “I can see the dawn of a better day for humanity.” As the Red Sun Rises on this new dawn, it is up to us to make sure it reaches its zenith in the sky.

---

Mina Petrova

Mina Petrova ‘29 is a Freshman in the College of Arts & Sciences studying English, History, and Government. Her fortnightly column ‘North Star’ studies the past and critiques the present, focusing on politics, protests and activism that strive toward a more equitable future. She can be reached at mpetrova@cornellsun.com.