Is that all it takes to win over the religious right? What a bunch of abject frauds.
After Trump's acidic performance last Tuesday during his Charlottesville presser, a hailstorm of criticism rained down on Trump, his two economic councils were disbanded.
However, only one person resigned from Trump's faith council, and for the rest of the members, we heard muted silence and the chirping of crickets.
Falwell had the audacity to actually tweet this:
He words were so insulting that some Liberty University graduates are sending back their diplomas in protest of Falwell's zombie-like support.
An estimate of 50 grads are sending them back so far and Ms. Hamann, who graduated from Liberty in 2006 said, “It felt like a shocking yet appropriate response to shocking and inappropriate comments.”
During Sunday's ABC This Week, sub-host Martha Raddatz asked Falwell about the exodus from his college.
Raddatz, "An NPR report this morning says that a growing number of Liberty University graduates are preparing to return their diplomas in protest of your continuing support for President Trump. Chris Gaumer, a 2006 graduate, and former student government association president told NPR that it was a simple decision. In defending the president's comments, Jerry Falwell Junior is making himself, and it seems to me, the university he represents, complicit."
Falwell Jr.'s response was sophomoric as it was ludicrous.
He said, "He completely misunderstands my support. My support for the president is his bold and truthful willingness to call terrorist groups by their names, and that's something we haven't seen in presidents in recent years."
The entire Republican clown car of presidential candidates in 2016 all attacked President Obama for refusing to say "radical Islam," so why was Trump different?
And by the way, what a chicken sh*t litmus test to give a candidate anyway.
When Raddatz called him and Trump out for refusing to call the neo-Nazi who drove his car into counter-protesting, killing Heather Heyer and injuring nineteen people "domestic terrorist," Falwell hemmed and hawed with nonsense.
Falwell, "Yes. He's doing exactly the opposite of what I was criticizing Obama and Clinton for not doing, he's calling them by their name. He's calling the Nazis and white supremacists evil.
Raddatz, "He's not calling it domestic terrorism. The president said Tuesday, you could call it terrorism, you can call it murder, you can call it whatever you want. Why hasn't he called the attack in Charlottesville domestic terrorism?"
Falwell then turned the rest of the interview into a "Who's On First" parody skit.
All these Evangelical leaders who still supported Trump after he admitted to sexually assaulting women all the time because he was a celebrity, want America to believe they truly care about their faith and the country, but they are only interested being fanboys and cheerleaders to the Oval Office.
Jennifer Rubin wrote this in today's Post: Jerry Falwell Jr. and other religious backers of Trump embarrass themselves
Lack of principle, however, has been par for the course for the vast number of politically active Christian conservatives who endorsed and defended Trump, rationalized every outlandish, hateful statement (on Mexicans, POWs, a federal judge, “Access Hollywood,” etc.) and gave a pass to a thrice-married, dishonest narcissist who displays no religious sensibilities or ethical principles. They have continued to vouch for him, acting as a political shield, not as a spiritual force. They are mute when Trump measures success purely in monetary terms (just billionaires and generals in his Cabinet, thank you) and omits any mention of Jews from an International Holocaust Remembrance Day statement. They rejoice when he enacts a religiously bigoted travel ban and wants to throw honorably serving transgender people out of the military.
The decision to pursue access and power, to act as political advocates for Trump rather than as spiritual leaders, has stripped the religious right of any claim to the moral high ground. Instead of amplifying the worst traits in our political debate — rapid partisanship, angry populism, tribalism and blind xenophobia — they might consider challenging, not defending, the purveyor in chief of racial animosity and xenophobia.
I'd say she nailed it.