Florida and Vaccinations: Balancing the Common Good and Personal Freedom

Last Wednesday, Dr. Josepf Ladapo, Florida’s Surgeon General, together with Governor Ron DeSantis, promised to repeal a half-dozen vaccine mandates controlled by the Florida Department of Health and Governor Ron DeSantis and that the Florida Legislature would work to repeal other vaccinations required by state law such as polio, diphtheria, rubeola, rubella, pertussis, mumps, tetanus and other communicable diseases. I watched Dr. Ladapo give his announcement on television and at first, I was impressed. He said, “Every last one of them [the mandates] is wrong and drips with disdain and slavery. Who am I to tell you what your child should put in their body? I don’t have that right. Your body is a gift from God.”

I am a strong believer in individual freedoms, and his message resonated with my beliefs…, at first. Upon further reflection and research, I now believe Dr. Ladapo is making a serious mistake for the following reasons.

Every state in the nation requires children to receive vaccinations before they can attend public school. There needs to be a high rate of compliance in order to guarantee public safety (above 90% to provide “herd immunity” against measles). Nevertheless, states (including Florida) already provide parents the option to apply for a vaccine exemption based on a variety of reasons (religious, philosophical, etc.). These exemption applications are almost always approved. Today, 5.1% of school age children in Florida are exempted from receiving the mandated vaccinations. Far from being “slavery” as Ladapo claims, these vaccination mandates are a reasonable balance between the common good and personal freedom.
Even though he is a medical physician, Dr. Ladapo does not seem to understand his role very well. Most medical doctors do, in fact, tell their patients what they should put in their bodies. Every time a doctor writes out a prescription, the patient has the option to follow or not to follow the physician’s recommendation. (There is an important semantic difference between “should” and “must”. “Should” is usually used when appealing to a person’s conscience. “Must” usually involves laws and potential punishment.)
A helpful parallel can be seen in the issue of drinking alcoholic beverages and driving a car. I am of legal age where I have the freedom to drink alcoholic beverages, even to the point of getting drunk…in my house. I also have the freedom to drive my car on public streets because I have a valid Illinois driver’s license. But I DO NOT have the freedom to drive if I am at the same time under the influence of alcohol. There is a reasonable restriction of my individual freedoms if my abuse of those freedoms present a danger to the common good.
A reputable study from last year showed that infant mortality rates have dropped over the last 50 years and access to vaccines brought those rates 40% lower than they would have been otherwise. Surely Florida, and the rest of the nation, can find a way to balance the common good of vaccine mandates and individual freedoms of exemptions. The current vaccine policy in Florida does NOT to be repealed.

Jesus and Immigration: Would He be Welcomed into the USA?

Most of us are familiar with the Biblical narrative of the Wise Men (or Magi) who journeyed from the East to worship baby Jesus with gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. We are not so aware of important ethical, political truths in the narrative. I find at least three important lessons in this passage (based on the verses in bold type).

Matthew 2 After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem and asked, “Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.”When King Herod heard this he was disturbed, and all Jerusalem with him. When he had called together all the people’s chief priests and teachers of the law, he asked them where the Messiah was to be born.“In Bethlehem in Judea,” they replied, “for this is what the prophet has written:“‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you will come a ruler who will shepherd my people Israel.’” Then Herod called the Magi secretly and found out from them the exact time the star had appeared. He sent them to Bethlehem and said, “Go and search carefully for the child. As soon as you find him, report to me, so that I too may go and worship him.” After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen when it rose went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was. When they saw the star, they were overjoyed. On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshipped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh. And having been warned in a dream not to go back to Herod, they returned to their country by another route. When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. “Get up,” he said, “take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.” So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.”

Here are three important truths from this passage:

Herod the Great, like many politicians today, combined lies with false piety.
The Wise Men practiced civil disobedience and did not return to Herod when they became aware of his deceit and his desire to kill Jesus.
Egypt had an immigration policy sufficiently benevolent to welcome the refugee family of Joseph, Mary and Jesus.

In this post, I would like to hone in especially on immigration policies. On the one hand, every country has the “right” to establish and implement their policies regarding immigrants and refugees. Nevertheless, I believe this is a qualified “right” with ethical dimensions. If there if is a just God, along the lines of the Judeo-Christian traditions, both individual and national actions (including immigration policies) will be evaluated according to God’s justice. Even in secular societies, immigration policies are treated as serious ethical decisions. Our nation’s history reveals both welcome and rejection of immigrants and refugees. At times, we have lived up to Lady Liberty’s call, “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.” Sadly, there have been stains on our past when we have closed our doors to foreigners, or worse, oppressed and scapegoated them (the Irish, Jews, Africans, Mexicans, Chinese, etc). We are currently living in a difficult time for immigrants. Millions are leaving their home countries in search of a better life, peace, religious or political freedom. Many are fleeing persecution, war, or famine.

I urge all people of good will to raise their voices in defense of immigrants. This is especially relevant for those who claim to follow Jesus. If Mary, Joseph, and baby Jesus made their way to our southern border, would they be welcomed? I would hope that, at the very least, they would be given the chance to explain to an immigration officer why they are seeking asylum.

Last week, a former student sent me the following poem penned by his father, Don Bemis. His poetry vividly portrays our current challenging situation.

Once in Donald’s royal city stood a lowly garden shed,

Where a mother laid her baby in a cardboard box to be his bed:

María was that mother mild; Heh-sus did she name the little child.

In a palace in the royal city, great king Donald thundered from his lair;

Sent his troops to seek out and eject those persons for whom he did not care:

Not for him the poor and lowly, only those who called his mission holy.

Thirteen men in balaclavas surged around the garden shed,

Took the crying mother and the baby, tased the father while he pled:

Woman and babe sleep on Fort Bliss floor, man to prison in El Salvador.

Now in Donald’s royal city everything is pure and strong,

And his followers are not confronted by suggestions that they might be wrong:

Let the foreigners all perish as we celebrate with those we cherish.

“Treat the foreigner who lives among you as you treat your native-born.”

“Love the Lord with all your being; love your neighbor as your own.”

“Lord, when did we not serve thee?” “When you did not serve the least of these.”

The Smithsonian Museums and a Necessary Debate about Our National Sins: We Need to Face our Painful Past

An important debate is swirling around our country. It was triggered by President Trump, but the controversy goes back thousands of years. It is a debate about human nature and ethics, about good and evil, and about what we should do if, whether individually or collectively, we have committed evil.

People and cultures influenced by the three great monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) ground their moral code in the nature of God. According to these faiths, humans are special beings created in God’s image, able to choose between good and evil. Most adherents of other religions, as well as agnostics and atheists, also have a sense of right and wrong. Traditionally, committing an evil act was called a sin, but that word is not so common today. It is not just a change of words, but also how we view ourselves and our actions. Back in 1973, a psychiatrist, Karl Menninger wrote a book called Whatever Became of Sin?, in which he argued that our modern world was shifting away from the concept of sin. It was being replaced with terms like illness, dysfunction, or mental disorder. He suggested that this shift would result in a gradual reduction in accountability for our actions. Behaviors previously considered as sinful would now be excused as normal consequences of our biochemistry (nature) or our environment (nurture).

This lack of accountability now permeates our society. We either blame others for our errors, or we reclassify past sins as now morally neutral or necessary. This is a re-writing of history and is taking place today right before our eyes. An important example of this took place last Tuesday. President Trump ordered his lawyers to conduct a review of the Smithsonian museums because their description of the history of the United States was too negative, and they focused too much on “how bad Slavery was”. He continued, “The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was, and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been — Nothing about Success, nothing about Brightness, nothing about the Future,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

This is Trump’s rewriting of his own description of the Smithsonian portrayal of U.S. history. Trump had previously praised the Smithsonian museums, including the National Museum of African American History and Culture, which he toured during his first term as president. “I’m deeply proud that we now have a museum that honors the millions of African American men and women who built our national heritage, especially when it comes to faith, culture and the unbreakable American spirit,” Trump said during remarks at the museum in February 2017. Later that month, Trump said the museum “tells of the great struggle for freedom and equality that prevailed against the sins of slavery and the injustice of discrimination.”

Why did Trump make this complete about face? Here are some possible reasons:

Trump wants to distract the U.S. people from paying too much attention to the Epstein files.
Trump wants to deflect criticism of his failed diplomacy attempts to bring peace to Ukraine. Putin has yet to make any concessions (such as a temporary ceasefire) and the Russian leader is slow-walking bilateral or trilateral peace talks. Is Putin playing him again?
Trump wants to draw attention away from the rate of inflation that is starting to rise due to his tariffs.

Whatever his motivations, Trump is not alone in minimizing national sins and exaggerating national virtues. Rulers from long ago (Egyptian Pharaohs and Roman Emperors) and in more recent times (Hitler, Putin) have appealed to a cheap “patriotism” in attempts to justify their evil actions. The British claimed their imperial expansion was “beneficial” for their colonies. George Washington and other Revolutionaries saw through the hypocrisy of these claims. Prior to the U.S. war with Mexico (1846-1848), Illinois congressman Abraham Lincoln brought legislation before the House of Representatives which denounced President Polk for taking our country into an immoral, imperialistic war against our neighbor to the south. Evidence demonstrated Lincoln was right, but the citizens of his district did not re-elect him to his House seat.

Jesus warned about rulers who cover up their evil deeds and falsely claim they are seeking the well-being of their subjects. “The kings of this world lord it over their subjects; yet want the people to address them as ‘Doers of Good’ (=Benefactors). But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves.” (Luke 22:25-26)

It is not just rulers who deny their own evil deeds. It is quite common for most of us to ignore or minimize our sins, whether they be personal or national. Almost two thousand years ago, the Apostle John wrote, “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.” John continues with the remedy, “But if we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (I John 1:9-10) Justice requires that we seek reconciliation with those we have damaged and that we pay compensation that is appropriate.

Some of us are sensitive to “individualistic” sins, like drunkenness or sexual infidelity, but are not nearly as attuned to social or national sins. Nevertheless, religious Scriptures deal with both individual and national sin. For example, the prophet Amos denounced the national/social atrocities of Israel’s neighbors. The Syrians, the Phoenicians, the Ammonites, the Moabites, and others were guilty of slavery, expansionist warfare, and the oppression of foreigners. The just God would bring judgment upon those who committed such evil acts. You can almost hear the Jews cheering as Amos railed against his nation’s neighbors and enemies and announced their impending judgment. But being God’s “chosen people” did NOT mean that Israel was guiltless. If anything, it means the Jewish people are probably more accountable for their actions because they have received more of God’s revelation. Therefore, Amos turns his attention to Israel and Judah. (Amos 2:4-16) He denounces their idolatry, their oppression of women via prostitution, their corruption, and their cruel mistreatment of the poor. Yes, social sin is real, and can be just as bad as individual evil… or worse. Yes, slavery in our country was truly atrocious and evil. If many of the slaveowners were “Christians”, their faith did not sanctify their actions. It merely added “hypocrisy” to their list of sins. The supposed “exceptionalism” of the United States does not justify nor sanctify our national sins.

Of course, I was not alive during the time of U.S. slavery. It ended nine decades before I was born. Nevertheless, some of my ancestors were slaveowners. Some of the inheritance I received (property, money, education) was due to the sinful exploitation of slaves. What should I do to make restitution? I’m just beginning to take some small steps.

Just as it is impossible to overemphasize the horrors of the Holocaust, I believe it also impossible to give too much importance to the horrific sins committed in our national slavery. Slaves were beaten and killed. Families were separated. In most cases, slaves were not allowed to learn how to read or write, nor to get married, nor to own property, nor to vote. The Christian faith they heard was heavy on “Slaves, obey your masters” and weak on “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free”.

The presidential order quoted at the beginning of this post criticized the Smithsonian for showing “how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been”. This is the epitome of hypocrisy. I, and many of my fellow citizens, celebrate the resilience of those who endured slavery, and we are deeply impressed by the great accomplishments of Black Americans in all fields of endeavor. Two examples are the Tuskegee Airmen and Jackie Robinson of baseball fame. Nevertheless, Trump has previously ordered the removal of these two outstanding examples from governmental agencies because they are “bad” expressions of DEI. Mr. Trump, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t criticize the Smithsonian for omitting great black achievements and also order the removal of these examples from government agencies. Your blatant hypocrisy is damaging the moral education of our nation’s children.

Esteemed readers, do we know who we are and where we are going? An article in the Smithsonian Magazine tells us part of the purpose of its National Museum of African American History and Culture. “It was to help a nation understand itself — an impossible task without the full recognition of the horrors of slavery.” Some truths are quite painful, but they are necessary for our own self-understanding. If we learn from these painful truths, instead of trying to bury them, we are on the path of growing up.

Grading Trump on His Performance in the Summit: Using His Own Criteria, He did not Pass the Test

I give President Trump credit for organizing and attending the summit with “president” Putin. But giving Trump a grade on his performance at the summit, Trump failed the test.

Here are the criteria that Trump himself provided for evaluating the summit.

When the Putin-Trump meeting was first announced, it was hailed as a major breakthrough. Nevertheless, in the days leading up to their talk, the White House lowered expectations. A three-hour meeting in Alaska would not immediately end the war in Ukraine, but it would be considered a “success”, if Trump could arrange a “second meeting” in which he would moderate and Putin and Zelensky would settle their differences. No such “second meeting” has been announced nor appears on the horizon, but Zelensky is scheduled to come to the White House on Monday. Hope springs eternal?
This week Trump did affirm to Bret Baier of Fox News that, at the very least, a successful summit would result in a ceasefire. No ceasefire has been announced…yet.
Trump said there would be a joint press conference in which he and Putin would field questions from the international press. The press gathering lasted only 12 minutes, no questions were allowed, and the session was abruptly ended. Putin then turned the tables on Trump by giving him an invitation to meet the next time in Moscow.
Although Trump said they had a very productive meeting, no specifics were provided. Later, he conceded, “we haven’t gotten there”.
Even Trump’s supporters were disappointed in his performance. Fox News Senior White House Correspondent Jacqui Heinrich offered a brutal, eye-witness assessment of the awkward and confusing joint press conference fiasco. “We were told we would have an opportunity to put questions to both leaders after a joint press conference in the event the meeting went well enough that they could set the stage for a second meeting, And President Trump said if that didn’t happen, he was likely to call off the joint presser and just address the media solo and send people home. Neither of those things happened. And what was really stunning to me as someone who has been in a lot of these press conferences was a few things that were very unusual,” she said. “You had Putin come out and address the press first. We are on U.S. soil here. And that left the media scrambling to get their headsets in. Usually, it is the leader of the country — the host country of a summit that speaks first and addresses. Putin started off in Russian. And we all had to get our heads set on and listen to him rattle off the diatribe about the history of the U.S. and Russia. The way that it felt in the room was not good,” she reported. “It did not seem like things went well, and it seemed like Putin came in and steamrolled, got right into what he wanted to say. And got his photo next to the president and then left. Of course, that is only the piece of the picture that we have right now, and certainly President Trump, who is the host and who is, the president, would not want to, I think, enable something that would make him look weak.” Contrast her analysis with Trump’s grading himself as a perfect 10.
Putin did not make any concessions. Is he still “playing” Trump, by pretending to be open to peace negotiations, but not willing to follow through? James Stavridis, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, called Putin’s handling of our president a “rope a dope” experience.

Although Trump did not pass this mid-term exam, he has not totally failed the course. If he studies harder and works on his negotiating skills (such as using economic pressure to force Putin to make concessions), he can still get a passing grade. In fact, if he brokers a deal between Putin and Zelensky that Ukraine finds acceptable, I might even consider supporting his desire of winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

Trump will Meet with Putin: Strong Prayer for a Weak President

Donald Trump is scheduled to have a summit meeting tomorrow with Russian “president” Vladimir Putin to discuss ways to end the war in Ukraine. Although I applaud Trump for meeting with the Russian leader, I do not hold out much hope for this summit. Ending a needless war that has killed thousands of people (both soldiers and innocent civilians) is a noble, valiant goal. But to be totally truthful, Trump is in a weak position before a formidable foe. Trump himself has lowered the expectations for their meeting. He now calls it a “listening” event which might lead to a second more important meeting. In spite of being the president of the most powerful country in the world, and in spite of all his bravado and bullying, Trump is quite weak. Here’s the evidence:

Trump’s irrational praise of Putin – over the last decade, Trump has praised authoritarian rulers all over the world, both present and past (China’s Xi, Hitler, etc.) Trump has been quite lavish in his admiration for Putin. In his book “Time to Get Tough,” Trump wrote, “Putin has big plans for Russia. He wants to edge out its neighbors so that Russia can dominate oil supplies to all of Europe. Putin has also announced his grand vision: the creation of a ‘Eurasian Union’ made up of former Soviet nations that can dominate the region. I respect Putin.” Yet in his more thoughtful moments, Trump has recognized that Putin has “played” him.
Trump’s weakness with the Truth – I do not intend any cheap criticism of the president, but he has had a troubled relationship with the truth. Just two weeks ago, he didn’t like the job report of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Instead of admitting responsibility for his failed economic policies, Trump fired the BLS director. He claimed he won the 2024 election in a landslide. In fact, he received less than 50% of the vote. These are just two examples of how the president invents a false reality instead of dealing with the real world. I believe, as Jesus said, “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free”. If Jesus was right, then Trump’s preference for untruths means he is neither very free nor powerful.
Trump’s exaggerated estimation of his own abilities – The president campaigned on ending the war in Ukraine on “Day 1” of his presidency. That did not happen. He also claimed he would bring inflation down below zero percent. He was wrong. The July inflation report that was issued this past Tuesday shows the annual core inflation rate moved up to 3.1%. Realism and maturity demand that we all have a sober estimate of our own abilities. Trump is weaker than he thinks.
Trump’s approval rate is underwater. Most major polls place his approval ratings between 37% and 44% with his disapproval ratings much higher. He is down even on his stronger issues, like immigration and the economy. His weakest areas refer to his handling of the Epstein files, his policies regarding tariffs, and the “Big, Beautiful Bill” tax legislation.
Trump’s concessions to Putin do not bode well for the summit. Trump has already conceded everything but the kitchen sink which greatly harms Ukraine. Most democracies in the world consider Putin to be the guilty invader of its neighbor Ukraine. Putin is a pariah and is prohibited from even visiting their countries. Nevertheless, Trump is elevating Putin on the international stage, by granting him a summit on U.S. soil. They will be talking about Ukraine’s future, yet Ukraine’s president Zelensky was not even invited to participate. Trump has announced a “swapping” of territory (readers beware: Ukraine would give up land to Russia, not vice-versa). Ukraine would not be able to join NATO…and on and on and on. Later, if Zelensky does not accept these concessions, he is the “problem”, not Putin.

Given these varied weaknesses, many Americans believe it would take a miracle for the summit to be successful. True peacemaking needs divine intervention and this includes “strong” prayer. The emphasis is on the word “strong”, not the questionable religiosity of the phrase “God bless America” that many politicians use to close their political speeches. No, strong prayer does not ask God to bless our fallen plans and actions. Strong prayer can happen because the All-Powerful, All-Wise God invites fallen people to humble themselves and become active participants in making human history through their prayers and their actions. The Apostle Paul encouraged fellow believers to pray for all persons, especially for kings and those in authority so that people could live in peace. (I Timothy 2:1-3).

There is a certain amount of mystery regarding prayer. Does it depend on God? Yes, of course it does. Does it depend on those who pray? Yes, to some extent. Does it depend on those who are prayed for? Yes. Somehow their human wills need to become aligned with God’s will being done on earth as it is done in heaven. Humility is essential. People need to humble themselves in a variety of ways.

People who don’t agree with Trump need to humble themselves and to pray for a leader they perceive as wrong.
People who do agree with Trump also need to humble themselves and to pray that their president repent of his arrogance and especially his political sins that harm the world.
Trump needs to humble himself and to ask God to show him ways to become a better peacemaker and wisdom and courage to promote a just peace.
Putin needs to humble himself and to repent of his invasion of Ukraine and the thousands of human deaths he has caused.

Readers:

If you consider yourself a person of faith, pray and live out your faith with love, justice and grace.
If you do not see yourself as a person of faith, may you live your life according to your highest ideals.
If any of the information I mentioned is inaccurate, let me know.

Gerrymandering and the Mess in Texas: Are there any Adults in the Room?

The attempt to change the boundaries of the federal congressional districts in Texas has set off a political firestorm across the nation. At the beginning of each decade, after the national census results are tabulated, a process of redistricting frequently takes place. Given that there is migration within the country, usually from states in the north and northeast to states in the south and southwest, it is common for northern states to lose a congressional district or two, and the receiving states to increase the number of their districts. The goal of redistricting is to maintain a similar number of people in each district (to the best mathematical degree that is possible). This is based on the facts of the census and there is not much controversy at this stage.

Within each state, the boundaries of the congressional districts are also re-drawn in order to guarantee that each district has an equal number of people. This is where gerrymandering enters the picture. In U.S. politics, gerrymandering is “the practice of drawing the boundaries of electoral districts in a way that gives one political party an advantage over its rivals (political or partisan gerrymandering) or that dilutes the voting power of members of racial or ethnic minority groups (racial gerrymandering).” Let’s look at a typical purple state with one million voters in which there is an equal number of Republicans and Democrats (500,000 voters each party). Let’s assume the state has ten congressional districts. “Fair” districts would have roughly 50,000 voters from each party, therefore making each district competitive. Acknowledging that rural voters tend to favor Republicans and urban voters prefer Democrats, one would expect each party to win five districts, or at most six. What might happen if typical gerrymandering occurs? Let’s suppose the boundaries are drawn in such a way that in eight districts, party A has a 60,000-40,000 edge over party B, but in the two remaining districts, party B has a 90,000-10,000 edge. Although in the state, each party receives 500,000 total votes, party A wins 8 districts and party B just 2 districts. Throughout our history, both major parties have taken advantage of this “gerrymandering unfairness”. Democrats have practiced gerrymandering…so have Republicans. Therefore, some states now have laws that require the boundaries to be drawn by non-partisan organizations or approved by the state’s Supreme Court. Even so, there exist questions about fairness. If a political party wins 60% of the vote in a state, should they get 60% of the congressional seats? Or through gerrymandering, should they get 90% of the seats? Today I hear more politicians arguing for partisan gain instead of the common good. Where are the ethical adults in the room?

Here Texas enters the fray. In the midterm elections, the party that does not control the White House generally makes a strong comeback and picks up dozens of seats in the House of Representatives. This spells disaster for Trump whose approval rate is under 40% in most polls and who has an extremely slim majority in both the House and in the Senate. Trump has urged the Texas state legislature to gerrymander their districts in order to give Republicans a pick-up of five congressional seats. There is not even an attempt to hide their partisan goals. The fact that this is 2025 (and not at the beginning of a decade) shows they have no regard for the facts of the 2020 census. This move violates the historical norms of our political redistricting. Democrats in Texas have physically left their state to deny Republicans a quorum. Republicans have countered with legal actions, including calling in the FBI (although no federal laws have been broken). Nationally (and naturally), Democrats have threatened to fight “fire with fire” in blue states (like California and New York) where they can re-shape districts and turn them from Republican to Democrat control. This same tit for tat action is threatened in red states. We might easily descend into political chaos.

Where are the adults in the room who will address this issue with reason and a sense of fairness. When will “the common good” be considered? Will the adults in the room stand up and rise to the occasion?

“Figures Never Lie, But Liars Do Figure” – Who is Telling The Truth? Trump Or The Bureau Of Labor Statistics?

On Friday, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) released their job report for the month of July. Employers added a total of only 73,000 jobs in July, about 50,000 fewer than was expected. It was a significant sign that the economy was slowing down. What was even more troubling was that the report revised downward by 258,000 the number of jobs created in May and June. Combined, this three-month period represents the slowest economic growth since 2009, except for the recession in 2020, during the height of the COVID pandemic. The unemployment rate inched upward from 4.1% to 4.2%. President Trump did not like the report. It indicated that his economic policies, especially tariffs, were not working very well. So, he immediately fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Commissioner Erika McEntarfer, accusing her of “rigging” the numbers to tarnish his administration. Of course, any president, including Trump, has the right to raise questions about data reports from the BLS or from any similar agency. But if you question the figures, you need to provide evidence…if you want to be believed. This drama is taking place in plain view before the public in the United States. The American people will be functioning as the “jury” to decide whether Trump or the Bureau of Labor Statistics is more credible.

The Reputation of the BLS and McEntarfer

Over many decades, the BLS has had a reputation for being the “gold standard” of information collection agencies. Its employees take their job seriously. They make economic data public, but they do not make policy recommendations to the President or to Congress. Ms. McEntarfer, a labor economist who has worked in the federal government for more than two decades, was confirmed as BLS Commissioner by the Senate in early 2024 in a bipartisan 86-8 vote. Both Vice President J.D. Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio (Republicans), who were Senators at the time voted to confirm her nomination.

The Economic Impact of the Tariffs

The “Liberation Day” tariffs announced by Trump on April 2, 2025, have had a significant impact on the U.S. economy. In the first weeks following Liberation Day, the economy continued strong, as consumers who were able to do so, made big purchases (cars, appliances, etc.) before the added tariffs went into effect. Then the negative consequences began to happen. Trump had promised 90 international trade deals in 90 days, but only a few deals have even been sketched out. Due to the uncertainty created by these “on again-off again” trade negotiations, CEOs were unwilling to expand their productions. In addition, given that these tariffs are essentially taxes that will add to the sticker price of their products, these CEOs had to cautiously predict what would happen to their sales. (Don’t just take my word for this problem. Here are some sad facts from Ford. The automotive giant posted its first quarterly loss in two years after seeing $800 million in tariff costs and predicted that the tariffs would cost the company about $2 billion in annual earnings. In May Ford raised prices on three of its models produced in Mexico due to the impact of the tariffs.)

The Role of Revisions

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has twin concerns: speed and accuracy. For the goal of usefulness, the report must be released as soon as possible after the preceding month’s economic activity has occurred. By necessity, this report is preliminary. As new data is incorporated over the next several weeks, the report is revised. Revisions to preceding job reports are routinely issued when a new one comes out. Trump claims that the revisions announced on Friday show tampering, but such allegations need to be proven with credible evidence. Trump has yet to provide such evidence. As the saying go, “It’s time to put up or shut up.”

The Opinion of an Expert Appointed by Trump

Bill Beach was Erika McEntarfer’s predecessor as Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. He was nominated to head up the BLS by Trump himself in 2017! Yesterday, Beach denounced the firing. Beach affirmed that Trump did not understand the data collection process and the reporting standards at the bureau, especially the compilation of statistics on critical economic factors including inflation and employment. He sharply took issue with Trump’s accusation of McEntarfer’s tampering with the statistics, There’s no way for that to happen,” Beach told CNN’s Kasie Hunt on yesterday’s “State of the Union” program. “The commissioner doesn’t do anything to collect the numbers. The commissioner doesn’t see the numbers until the Wednesday before they’re published. By the time the commissioner sees the numbers, they’re all prepared.”

Chris Christie’s Evaluation of Trump’s Firing of McEntarfer

Former New Jersey Governor Christ Christie has frequently defended President Trump from criticisms by his adversaries, but not on this issue. The veteran Republican politician described the firing as “classic Trump”. On yesterday’s “This Week” television program, Christie told host George Stephanopoulos. “When Trump gets news he doesn’t like, he needs someone to blame because he won’t take the responsibility himself, and this is the action of a petulant child. Like, ‘You give me bad news, I fire the messenger.'”

The Verdict

In this public “hearing”, you, my readers, are the members of the jury. Who is telling the truth, Trump or the Bureau of Labor Statistics? Please render your verdict.

Trump and Democrats Drop To All Time Lows in Approval Ratings: What Should They Do?

According to the Gallop poll released last week, President Trump hit an all-time low in approval ratings. Only 37% of Americans approve of Trump’s performance in his second term. Even on his best issues (immigration, tariffs, national debt) his poll numbers are negative. As a political party, the Democrats find themselves in a similar situation. A Wall Street Journal poll shows that 63% of the American public view the Democrat party unfavorably (the Republicans polled slightly better). I don’t believe Trump and party leaders are suffering low ratings due to their moral righteousness or great policies. No, they are due to their ethical and political failures. Everyone needs a deep dose of repentance, a significant change in attitude and actions. I respectfully suggest the following areas that merit attention.

President Trump

Stop your lying – You have a troubled history with the truth. You dilute and distort it with multiple falsehoods. Some of your lies might play well with your base, but they are not true. For example, let’s look at your comments on tariffs. Tariffs are essentially taxes. You have frequently claimed that billions of dollars will flow into our country as foreign countries pay the cost of the tariffs/taxes. That is a lie. Foreign countries do not pay the tariffs that the U.S. government charges on imported goods. Foreign companies do not pay the tariffs. U.S. companies (think Walmart) pay the money. This is an additional cost added to the product. Walmart might absorb some of this cost, but to maintain their profits they need to pass on the major part of these costs to the consumer. (Even my beloved Hershey‘s Chocolate has recently announced a double digit increase in their prices.) Let me summarize. Mr. Trump, neither foreign countries nor foreign companies pay for your tariffs/taxes. American companies and we, the consumers, pay these taxes. Stop lying about your tariffs.

Some of your lies are just plain weird. Two weeks ago, you told a story about your uncle, John Trump. He was a beloved professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). That part is true, but then you fabricated a tall tale that linked your uncle with the late terrorist Theodore “Ted” Kaczynski, better known as the Unabomber. You claimed that your uncle taught Kaczynski at MIT and that he told you Kaczynski was a good, although arrogant student. The truth is that your uncle died in 1985 and Kaczynski was not publicly revealed as the Unabomber until 1996. In addition, there is no record of Kaczynski ever studying at MIT. Your fluid movement from reality into delusion seems to be a psychological/mental liability rather than an asset. I suggest you get help to stop these delusions.

Admit your mistakes – We all make mistakes because “to err is human”. Many people have difficulty in accepting responsibility for their actions, but you seem to have a lot of trouble in acknowledging your mistakes. Given the power of the presidency, your mistakes are amplified and can cause great harm to millions of people. For example, you promised to cut waste and fraud from the federal government, but Elon Musk/DOGE used a chainsaw instead of the necessary scalpel. The gutting of USAID, with the resulting stoppage of medicine shipments and the rotting of food at ports around the world, has caused the premature deaths of tens of thousands of women and children. Hundreds of essential federal workers (ex. meteorologists) have been fired which increased the loss of life in the recent floods in Texas. Mr. President, be mature enough to take ownership of your decisions and these tragic results.

Mr. Trump, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t take credit for the positive aspects of the economy and, at the same time, blame Biden or Powell for the negative results. Six months into your presidency, you “own” this economy. If inflation continues to rise, you are responsible.

Your initial evaluation of people (both friends and foes) has been quite flawed. That is why you fired a record number of cabinet members during your first term in office. Your current cabinet has people who are woefully unqualified (like Hegseth and Gabbard). You praised the Russian “president” Putin for being an honorable, strong leader. What a naïve, horrible opinion! You should have listened to Marco Rubio who denounced Putin as a tyrannical authoritarian with the blood of thousands of Ukrainians on his hands. Mr. President, acknowledge your naïve mistake, and use economic sanctions to bring about a just, lasting peace in Ukraine.

Democrats

Learn from your mistakes – It was not so much that Trump won the 2024 presidential election (with under 50% of the vote), but that the Democrats lost it. By and large, Democrats went too far in emphasizing gender issues at the expense of bread-and-butter economic topics. Take for example, the issue of trans women competing in girls/women sports. Many Democrats felt they had to defend the trans women even though they knew they had an unfair advantage in body size, strength and speed over “biological women”. Many voters were persuaded more by “what is fair” than by “what is politically correct”. Democrats need to relearn the wisdom of the old advice, “it’s the economy, stupid”. For the 2026 mid-term elections there are many economic issues that are of vital importance to voters due to the one Big Beautiful Bill: 10 million Americans will lose their health insurance, hundreds of rural medical clinics and hospitals will close, and food will be taken away from mothers and children. This will done in order to transfer funds from the poor and middle classes to the wealthy. Democrats, raise your voice for those who have no voice!
Make unlikely alliances to defend freedom and democracy – As the old adage affirms, politics makes “strange bedfellows”. Marjorie Taylor Greene is not my favorite kind of politician. She is an inconsistent, extremist firebrand who says weird stuff that I do not share. Nevertheless, she does have guts. Recently, she had the courage to denounce Israel’s actions in Gaza for what they truly are: genocide. She uncovered Netanyahu for who he really is: a politician with blood on his hands who has used war to in a failed attempt to bolster his sagging poll numbers among voters in Israel. Democrats, work with MTG to stop starvation in Gaza. Work across the aisle to apply economic sanctions on the murderous Putin. Work with Republican MAGA representatives in order to bring transparency to the Epstein case and to bring justice to those young women who were victimized in his sex trafficking atrocities (and by his friends, regardless of how important they might be).

We the People

We need to promote the truth, whatever the cost – more than pledging “loyalty” to a political party, or even to a president, we need to be people of the truth who seek the common good. May we rise to the challenge of this high civic calling.

In Honor of Samuel Escobar

I am happy to share this invitation to honor the legacy of Samuel Escobar.

Friday, October 10, 2025 | 3:00 pm – 5:00 pm

Billy Graham Hall, Wilson Suite, Room 432

You are warmly invited to a special afternoon event to celebrate the life, ministry, and enduring legacy of J. Samuel Escobar (1934–2025) — Peruvian theologian, pastor, and leading voice in Latin American evangelicalism. For more than five decades, Dr. Escobar shaped missiological understanding and evangelism trends through his work with the Fraternidad Teológica Latinoamericana, the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students, InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, and other global evangelical networks and seminaries.

The program will feature tributes from family members, colleagues, and ministry partners, a presentation of a special double issue of the Journal of Latin American Theology: Christian Reflections from the Latino South, dedicated to Dr. Escobar, and a curated exhibit showcasing highlights from the newly acquired J. Samuel Escobar Papers. A generous gift from the Escobar family, the Escobar Papers include personal correspondence, photographs, and original manuscripts from the 1950s onward. The collection is now housed in the Wheaton Archives & Special Collections and is open for research.

A reception with light refreshments will follow the program.

This event is free and open to the public. For more information, please contact the Wheaton Archives & Special Collections at 630.752.5910 or archives@wheaton.edu.

I Applaud President Trump for (Finally) Waking Up and Seeing the Evil of Putin

During his first term, Donald Trump and Russian “President” Vladimir Putin had a relationship of mutual praise. Trump admired Putin for being a “strong leader”. Trump justified Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, by asserting that Biden’s weakness had, in effect, “invited” Putin to invade. Trump lamented the loss of life in the war in Ukraine and campaigned that he would end the war on “Day One” by bringing Putin to negotiations. Regarding Putin, Trump affirmed five months ago, “I believe he wants peace, I mean, I know him very well. Yeah, I think he wants peace.… I trust him on this subject.”

Even though Trump’s envoys favored Russia in the preliminary peace talks and Trump humiliated Ukraine’s President Zelensky in their White House meeting, Putin didn’t cooperate in good faith. Although Putin said he wanted peace, what he really wanted was to take over control of all of Ukraine. In an unguarded moment, Trump admitted he was getting “played” by Putin. Something significantly changed a few weeks ago. Trump started to wake up. He began to see Putin for who he really was: a murdering tyrant and an aggressor. In a press conference, Trump was asked a question by a female reporter. Noting her accent, he asked her where she was from. She replied, “Ukraine”. She added that her husband was still in their home country. Remarkably, Trump seemed to show sincere empathy for her situation. He began to perceive the tragic reality about Putin that many saw a decade ago. Did Marco Rubio whisper the truth into his ear? Maybe.

After days of expressing anger with his latest phone call with Putin, Trump erupted at a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday. He said, “We get a lot of bullsh*t thrown at us by Putin, if you want to know the truth. He’s very nice all of the time, but it turns out to be meaningless.” There’s a bill going through the Senate that would apply economic sanctions on Russia that has the overwhelming support of Republicans and Democrats. The president seems to like the bill as long as it doesn’t tie his hands.

Where should we put the emphasis? That Trump woke up to the truth regarding the evil of Putin OR that it took him so long to wake up? I am just glad that he seems to be awake now. Perhaps we are a bit closer to peace in Ukraine. PS. On Monday, Trump will give a major address on Russia.