CartoonDems

 

USS Nimitz Deployment to Caribbean Comes as Cuba Tensions Surge

The U.S. aircraft carrier USS Nimitz and its strike group have arrived in the Caribbean this week as tensions with Cuba escalate and President Trump has raised the prospect of potential military action against the island, according to initial reporting by The Hill.

The Nimitz-class carrier is operating alongside its air wing — including F/A-18E Super Hornets, EA-18G Growlers and C-2A Greyhounds — as well as the USS Gridley, an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer,

 

 and the USNS Patuxent, a Henry J. Kaiser-class replenishment oiler,

 

 according to U.S. Southern Command, which oversees military operations in the region.

“USS Nimitz has proven its combat prowess across the globe, ensuring stability and defending democracy from the Taiwan Strait to the Arabian Gulf,” Southcom said on X.

The Nimitz, commissioned in 1975, 

 

had been conducting joint exercises with the Brazilian Navy off Rio de Janeiro last week, the U.S. Embassy in Brazil said.

Trump told reporters Wednesday that Cuba is “on our mind,” following a Justice Department indictment of former Cuban President Raúl Castro on murder-related charges tied to the 1996 shootdown of two civilian aircraft over international waters that killed four people.

“It’s very important,” Trump said. “It was a very big moment for people, not only Cuban Americans, but people who came from Cuba, that want to go back to Cuba, see their family in Cuba.”

The indictment was announced on Cuba’s Independence Day. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in a rare Spanish-language message to Cubans, marked the occasion by defending U.S. sanctions and blaming the island’s ongoing power outages on the communist government.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe also met with Cuban officials on the island last week, signaling that Washington’s timeline for talks would not remain open-ended, according to officials familiar with the meeting.

© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

 

Chris Murphy Spins a Fairy Tale About Thomas Massie’s Loss — Here’s a Reality Check

The defeat of Rep. Thomas Massie (KY-04) on Tuesday night by Trump-backed candidate Ed Gallrein in the GOP primary was welcome news for conservatives who had grown tired of Massie's attention-seeking antics and theatrics, and his frequent breaks with President Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans on America First policies.

Those antics, as we reported, continued right on into Primary Day, with Massie and his campaign texting an "endorsement" from Trump to voters in the 4th Congressional District, making it look like it happened this election cycle when it was actually from 2022.  

When a furious Trump called him out on it, Massie just doubled down and continued to make it look like it was a recent endorsement, most likely out of desperation from knowing he was about to lose.

---

READ MORE: Desperation? Thomas Massie Pulls a Last Minute Primary Stunt That Has Trump Fuming

---

In the aftermath, the hot takes were fast and flowing among the Usual Suspects who were speculating as to why Massie went down in defeat.

The consensus among Democrats and Marjorie Taylor Greene types on the right, of course, was that it was because of Massie's push for the release of the full Epstein files, and how the MAGA faithful in his district didn't appreciate it.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) was among the many who pushed this theory:

The problem with this hot take is that it ignores the timeline of Massie's sudden rush of concern about whether the full files would be released. It all started after the Trump administration made clear they hoped this would be Massie's last term in Congress:

In other words, it wasn't sincere, and everyone knew it.

Further, there was the incovenient-to-the-left's-narratives issue of how often Massie voted against his party (and Trump) in 2025 alone - including on issues like border security and tax cuts, as RedState previously reported:

Then there is Massie’s habit of casting crucial anti-Republican Party-line House votes. In that chamber, the GOP has a razor-thin margin, and an analysis of voting patterns in the 119th Congress by Fox News found Massie sided against his party "on 73 occasions, or 22.3 percent of the time." This includes votes against the One Big Beautiful Bill and for Democrat war resolutions against the Iran conflict. 

Let us also not forget what some have characterized as an antisemitic tone to some of Massie's Israel criticisms:

Massie has been doubling down on the antisemitic trope about Israel dragging Trump and America into conflicts and doing their dirty work. He deliberately mischaracterizes aid to Israel—almost all of which is spent in the United States, bolstering vital domestic arms manufacturers—as having no benefit to Americans. He ignores or lies about the fact that America derives enormous benefits from the alliance with the Jewish state in terms of intelligence and weapons development. And, like Carlson, he pretends Iran has not been at war with the United States since the Islamist regime seized power there in 1979. Just as bad, he’s been one of the prominent voices bolstering the smear that the crimes of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein were somehow linked to Israeli intelligence…He also seems to think there is something illegitimate about millions of Americans, both Jewish and non-Jewish, who understand that a close relationship with Israel is not only an expression of common democratic values.

As if to prove the point, here's the disgusting way Massie chose to begin his concession speech Tuesday night:

Gee, buddy, thanks for saying the quiet part out loud - and for proving the point in the process. 

It was time for Massie to go, not because of the Epstein files but because a majority of GOP voters who voted in the Tuesday primary wanted someone who actually was a conservative Republican instead of someone who cosplayed one only when it was convenient to his ambitions. This X user summed it up well:

Massie’s last-ditch effort of using a four year old Trump endorsement (deliberately blocking out the date by the way) perfectly summarizes just how vile and deceitful of a person he is.

It also demonstrates Trump’s continued dominance of the Republican Party.

Massie has been calling Trump a pedophile for over a year. Epstein Administration, Epstein Class, pedo protector, all of these slanderous titles he used to attack Trump. Regardless, when it came time to save his seat, he lies right to his voters’ faces and claims to be a loyal Trump supporter.

He did this every time he was in his district speaking to voters face to face. He put pictures of himself with Trump in campaign ads. Despite being an anti-Trump lunatic to his online, third world fanbase, he’s smart enough to know that actual voters, actual AMERICANS, love Trump.

Perhaps no one in history has been more deserving of a crushing, humiliating defeat than Thomas Massie. Good riddance to this piece of garbage.

If you come at the king, you best not miss.

He missed. Big time. 

Relatedly, Chris Murphy knows we'll take lectures from Democrats on the Epstein files on like the 4th of Never, right?

For heaven’s sake Bill Clinton spoke in prime time at the last Dem convention less than two years ago and he was far cozier with Epstein.

Stop pretending you care about this. Because you don’t. https://t.co/AhGiwev6GB

— Mark Hemingway (@Heminator) May 20, 2026

Yeah.

 

Nebraska Just Took a Sledgehammer to the ESG Machine Behind Corporate America

Two foreign-owned firms have been quietly running American boardrooms. Now a coalition of state attorneys general is moving to stop them. Nebraska Attorney General Michael Hilgers 

 

filed a lawsuit Tuesday against Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS), 

 

accusing the firm of pushing climate and DEI agendas on corporate America while telling its clients it was giving them straight, neutral advice. Attorneys general from at least 17 states are backing the effort. 

ISS and its competitor Glass Lewis are proxy advisory firms, businesses that tell large investors, pension funds, and mutual funds how to vote their shares in corporate elections. Think of them as the firms that quietly decide how Wall Street votes. 

 

If you have a 401(k), an IRA, or a pension, there's a good chance ISS has been voting your money. Most Americans have no idea. 

Together, the two firms control roughly 97 percent of that market. Both are foreign-owned. ISS is majority-owned by Deutsche Börse, a German company.

---

Read More: BlackRock, Vanguard Under Scrutiny Again - This Time Over America's Food Supply

Another Woke Industry Is Coming to a Screeching Halt in the Age of Trump

---

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, who announced a separate action this week, called them "unaccountable foreign-owned private corporations" manipulating shareholder votes "behind closed doors." 

According to the complaint, ISS told investors to vote against corporate board members at companies it believed weren't doing enough on emissions reductions or racial diversity, while never checking whether any of that was actually good for the people whose money was on the line. ISS also allegedly coordinated its recommendations behind the scenes with climate and DEI activist groups, including Climate Action 100+, Ceres, and The Children's Investment Fund. 

"ISS sold Nebraska investors on the promise of objective, independent research," Hilgers said in a statement to RedState. "What they were actually getting was advocacy — coordinated with ESG activist organizations, untested against any financial standard, and driven by an ideological agenda that ISS never disclosed. You cannot promise one thing and deliver another in Nebraska."

ISS's own employees apparently had doubts. Internal emails quoted in the complaint show staff questioning whether the firm's climate and diversity analysis was worth anything.

"I wish we had a better process (and one that didn't rely so heavily on the opinions of non-experts, frankly)," one employee wrote.

Another internal message stated bluntly:

"ISS ESG data probably isn't accurate."

One example highlighted in the lawsuit involved Warren Buffett.

In 2021, ISS told investors to think twice about reelecting Buffett to his own board, citing climate concerns, despite Berkshire Hathaway's stock rising more than 50 percent over the preceding five years. Nobody at ISS ran any analysis of what a Buffett-led buyout might do to the stock, the complaint alleges.

A senior ISS official acknowledged as much in an internal email:

We'll probably touch the stove for a moment with our cautionary FOR on Buffett, but it is in line with the other climate risk-driven recs that we've made this year.

Nebraska also alleges ISS was running a side business selling consulting services to the very companies it was supposed to be rating, without telling clients.

The complaint calls it "a health inspector selling cleaning services on the side." 

ISS did not respond to a request for comment.

Nebraska isn't acting alone. Iowa, Texas, and West Virginia filed their own suits the same day, according to an email to RedState. More than a dozen states have banded together under a Multistate Proxy Advisor Coalition. 

Uthmeier's Florida action seeks to fine ISS and Glass Lewis, bar them from continuing their practices, and require them to pay back affected investors.

They also have the White House behind them. President Trump signed an executive order in December 2025 directing federal regulators to go after the proxy advisory industry, calling out ISS and Glass Lewis for using their influence to "advance and prioritize radical politically-motivated agendas." 

West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey didn't mince words in a statement to RedState.

"ISS has, itself and through its proxies, exerted massive, secretive influence over major portions of our economy, leading to a restructuring of board rooms into political machines designed to destroy coal, gas and many of the values that West Virginians hold dear," McCuskey said. "That stops today."

 

Spencer Pratt and the Dem Destruction of Los Angeles

I hate to be the guy who throws on the spandex and a mask to play Captain Bringdown, but Spencer Pratt is not going to get elected mayor. That’s not dooming. That’s objectively assessing the situation. Spencer Pratt is a political superstar—there’s no doubt about that. He’s injected something that’s totally missing from the LA mayoral race, which is common sense. His innovative AI-aided ads and his ability to inflict something the Democrat overlords don’t ever get—public pushback—is highly entertaining. But Los Angeles is not coming out of its death spiral anytime soon. I wish it weren’t true. But it’s true.

And the spiral is spiraling. I just came back from my Houston house to spend some time here, and what struck me was the malaise. It’s dingy. It’s old. It’s dirty. This isn’t the California of my youth with swinging palm trees, sunshine, and endless opportunity. The sun still comes out, but there’s a vibe here I’ve never felt before in my 50+ years in Cali. It’s depressing. I grew up in a northern California San Francisco suburb (the same one and at the same time as Greg Gutfeld, though we didn’t know each other), and that had its unique problems, but it was a cool place to be. Then I went to college in San Diego in the 80s, and that was really cool. But after going off to the Army and the Gulf War, I knew I wanted to come back to Los Angeles because I knew Los Angeles was the place I could do whatever I wanted to do. And I did. I became a bunch of things: a senior Army officer, a partner in a law firm trying and winning multimillion-dollar cases, a best-selling author, a columnist, and even a stand-up comic. That was the California dream. If you wanted to do it and were willing to work for it, you could do it. This is where the great Andrew Breitbart chose to make his splash at the end of LA’s prime. Then, Los Angeles was a place of opportunity.

 

But that LA is gone, replaced by Palm Tree ‘n Fire Detroit. And it’s reasonable for you to ask why I’m not gone, at least not yet. Here’s what you need to know about California, and Los Angeles as well. It’s a feudal system. People asked me why I live here. I live here because it’s really good to live here, except for the taxes and the irritation I experience knowing they’ve managed to take the Golden State and turn it into the Gelded State. See, it’s semi-tolerable because I’m not a serf. I was a lawyer. I’m a nobleman. I don’t live in the City of Los Angeles. That’s not for people like me. The people like me—affluent professionals—live in the surrounding cities. I live in the Beach Cities south of LAX. It’s very nice here – good restaurants and very few bums. There are a few who wander in, but the cops are all over them. We don’t defund the police. We fund the police. All those ladies with the “Hate has no home here” signs? They see somebody who doesn’t fit in, and they’re on the phone to the local 5-0 before you can say “No Kings.” Oh, and when there are No Kings rallies, and there occasionally are, it looks like Sunny Acres has been issuing its residents day passes.

Of course, if you go five miles to the east across the 405, you get into where the poor people are. It’s Serfin’ USA. It’s a dystopian scene full of misery and decline. The high schools in my area send kids off to the Ivy Leagues and the UC system, provided they’re not white. The high schools in the hood might have five or 10 students who are grade-level proficient in reading and math. That’s not a percentage. That’s absolute numbers. But you know, their mom and dad voted for it or didn’t vote at all. Maybe the local Democrats just filled out their ballots for them—LA is as fully corrupt as Capone Era Chicago was. But it doesn’t matter. Not my problem.

Nope, Los Angeles is not my problem, and I’m not going to give it another moment of thought. If it wants to drown in a cesspool of hobo dung, it can dive in. Spencer Pratt is absolutely right about everything he says, from the fires to the junkies to the gross incompetence. Moreover, everybody knows it’s true. But nobody cares. You need to understand something. This isn’t about competence. When Karen Bass,

 

 a black communist mental defective, looks baffled at Spencer Pratt explaining how she’s helped run Los Angeles into the ground, that look of confusion is not because she’s stupid. She is, but it’s because he’s speaking a different language. She’s a literal communist. She’s gone to Cuba and taken notes. Her purpose isn’t to create prosperity and security for the people of Los Angeles. Her purpose, like that of all communists, is to secure power. The same is true of her bizarre, real competitor, some South Asian communist named Nithya Raman. As is endemic to the Third World, they fetishize power; these Marxists want control. That’s it. It’s not about filling in potholes. It’s not about safe streets. It’s not even about keeping half the city from going up in flames. It’s about control. There is no bottom to Los Angeles. It’s not going to get so bad that people are going to generate some sort of backlash, no matter how clever Spencer Pratt’s ads are, and they are clever. Those ads are only scoring with those of us on the outside. They give us false hope that something can be done. But nothing can be done. The decline is not the point. It’s literally irrelevant to them. Take Detroit, once also a rich and powerful city. Do you think that at some point, the leftists who control it looked at it and said, “Wow, we have become Detroit. Yikes! Should we try something else”? No. The dysfunction is the function; the squalor doesn’t matter to them. Not at all.

And it doesn’t matter to the vast majority of the inhabitants of LA. Almost all of those people who got burned out along the Pacific Coast Highway and in the Pacific Palisades are leftists who voted these people into office. And here’s the thing. They’re going to vote for them again. Raman ran an ad calling Spencer Pratt a “fascist.” It’s hysterically funny to the rest of us, equating the idea that safe streets and your house not burning down is pretty much the same thing as being Mussolini. But you know what? Those people whose houses burned down are going to listen to her, and they’re not going to vote for Spencer Pratt. They’re going to vote for her.

You can’t help somebody who won’t help himself. And let’s not fool ourselves into thinking we can.

What’s it going to take to fix Los Angeles, California, and the rest of the blue hellholes? Gosh, you don’t want to ask that. You’re not going to like the answer. They will never fix themselves. Never. All the normal people are gone. You’ve got a few rich leftists and a bunch of welfare cheats, and that’s it. It’s going to take something from the outside to fix them. It would have to be imposed upon them and not gently. It would take an American Franco, but then you would need to have an American Spanish Civil War to get there, and I’m not up for that—nor should you be. There are plenty of things I’m willing to fight and even die for, like my own personal freedom. After all, at my age, I’m too old to live on my knees, and I prefer to expire on a pile of expended brass. But I’m not willing to risk death to save people intent on destroying themselves.

Sorry to be depressing, but I’ve got to be honest. I’m not going to tell you the sun’s out like on an old-school California summer day. It isn’t. But that doesn’t mean Spencer Pratt isn’t performing an important service. The guy is a patriot. The guy isn’t giving up. He’s staying in the fight. And even if he doesn’t win this battle, and he’s not going to win this battle, he’s doing something for the rest of us. He’s shining the spotlight on the complete failure that the Democrat Party has embraced as it has invited the socialists and communists into the highest echelons of its ranks. Los Angeles won’t save itself, but the cautionary example that Los Angeles provides may help other places save themselves.

Thank you, Spencer, for sounding the alarm, and good luck to you even though you don’t have a chance in hell.

 

The Milwaukee Judge Who Wouldn't Protect a Domestic Abuse Victim Just Got an Insulting Promotion

Milwaukee County Judge Ana Berrios

 Last week, we learned that Milwaukee County Judge Ana Berrios, or Ana Berrios-Schroeder, refused to revoke the communication privileges of an inmate, Amier H. Jones, 

 who was abusing those privileges to harass and threaten a woman and children, who were victims of domestic abuse at the hands of Jones. Judge Berrios-Schroder refused to revoke Jones' communication privileges despite the fact that law enforcement reported his abuse and the District Attorney's office pushed for revocation and an increased bail. 

Jones is being held on multiple felony charges, including stalking, intimidation of a victim, possession of a firearm by a felon, fleeing and eluding, and recklessly endangering safety. Many of the charges carry habitual criminality enhancers. According to The Heartland Post, Jones stalked his victim for months, attacked her in her home, and pointed a gun at her.

It's another example of an activist judge putting the safety of the community and crime victims behind the supposed rights of criminals. Now, Judge Berrios-Schroeder has been named the head of the Milwaukee County Court's domestic abuse branch.

EXCLUSIVE: Last week, Milwaukee County Judge Ana Berrios-Schroeder refused to punish a domestic abuser who called his victim from jail more than 1,500 times. Today she was named the head of the Milwaukee County Court's domestic abuse branch. https://t.co/fXCu0PzGCL pic.twitter.com/TagLoikMQX

— Dan O'Donnell (@DanODonnellShow) May 20, 2026

Here's more:

Judge Ana Berrios-Schroeder was named Presiding Judge of the Domestic Violence Subdivision and the Misdemeanor Division by Milwaukee County Circuit Court Chief Judge Carl Ashley.

 The appointments take effect August 3.

Last week, Judge Berrios-Schroeder was widely criticized for her handling of the case against Amier H. Jones, Jr., who is in the Milwaukee County Jail on multiple charges, including felony stalking. While behind bars, he continued to contact his victim and made threats against her as well as a member of the Milwaukee County High Risk Domestic Violence Team who had been working on his case.

According to a motion filed by prosecutors, Jones sent a message to that member from a tablet approved by the jail that read, “If this is the detective from preliminary reading this & on the case, u already on my hit list.” Jail staff immediately moved Jones to a restricted housing unit and took away his access to phones and tablets and allowed him to contact only his attorney.

In a hearing May 7, though, Berrios-Schroeder reversed that move and reinstated Jones’ access to communication devices. The Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office had also requested that Jones’ bail be increased from $30,000 to $75,000 in light of the danger he posed to his victim and the officer he threatened, but Berrios-Schroeder denied this and kept bail at $30,000.

“I decided the onus is on him, that I would give him one opportunity,” Berrios-Schroeder said of her ruling.

This is eerily similar to the remarks made by Massachusetts Judge Janet Sanders, who knew that career criminal Tyler Brown was dangerous after he tried to murder two Boston police officers. Sanders instead 'took a risk' on Brown and sentenced Brown to just five years behind bars, and Brown recently went on a random shooting spree on a Cambridge roadway.

It's also not the first time a Milwaukee County judge has been lenient with domestic abusers. Former Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan was found guilty of obstruction in December after she helped an illegal alien evade ICE agents last April. That illegal alien, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, was in Dugan's courtroom on serious domestic abuse charges. Dugan faces up to five years in prison, and her sentencing is scheduled for June 3.

Domestic abuse survivors in Milwaukee County, as well as groups who advocate for them, should be made aware that the new head of the court's domestic abuse division is fine with inmates using their communication privileges to further abuse and terrorize their victims. 

Mace proposes amendment banning naturalized citizens from serving in Congress, Fed. Judiciary or holding Senate-confirmed positions

South Carolina GOP Representative Nancy Mace introduced a joint resolution on Wednesday proposing a constitutional amendment that would explicitly bar naturalized citizens from serving in Congress, the federal judiciary, or holding any Senate-confirmed positions.

The proposed legislation seeks to extend the “natural-born citizen” constraint — which currently applies only to the presidency and vice presidency under Article II of the U.S. Constitution — to all members of the House of Representatives, the Senate, federal judges at all levels, and prominent appointed officers such as Cabinet members and ambassadors.

If passed and ratified, the amendment would establish a strict dual-track citizenship restriction, requiring federal lawmakers and officials to have held U.S. citizenship from birth.

In a statement announcing the joint resolution, Mace described the legislative push as a necessary measure to guarantee unwavering loyalty among top federal decision-makers, arguing that those responsible for writing laws, confirming judges, and representing the nation on the global stage must have a single allegiance to the United States.

 

Mace argued that the amendment simply extends the rigorous constitutional standard already required of the president to other critical positions of national trust. She justified the urgency of the restriction by citing specific instances of conflicting loyalties among certain foreign-born officials, pointing directly to the public statements and actions of representatives like Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)

 

 as evidence of why systemic safeguards are needed.

Ilhan Omar. Shri Thanedar. Pramila Jayapal. All born in foreign countries, none were citizens by birth. All sitting in the United States Congress. All making clear every single day their loyalty is not to America.

 

We just introduced a long overdue joint resolution proposing a… pic.twitter.com/jTTKyr5Sgb

— Rep. Nancy Mace (@RepNancyMace) May 20, 2026

Mace argued further that the amendment is a long-overdue mechanism to close a security gap in the foundational text of the Constitution, emphasizing that anyone wielding federal authority should be a natural-born American.

 

The proposal, however, immediately drew criticism from naturalized lawmakers who viewed the amendment as a “betrayal of American values.” Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), who immigrated to the United States from India as an infant, released a statement denouncing the resolution, arguing that patriotism in America is measured by service and character rather than birthplace.

Meanwhile, the measure faces a high bar to clear before it can reshape the composition of the federal government. To successfully amend the U.S. Constitution, the joint resolution must first secure a two-thirds supermajority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, followed by ratification from three-fourths of all state legislatures.

If it accomplishes that threshold, the timeline outlined within the text specifies that the restrictions would apply to federal judges, ambassadors, and other Senate-confirmed officials exactly six months following final ratification, ending a centuries-old precedent that has allowed naturalized citizens to serve at nearly every tier of the federal framework.

 

Taxpayer Dollars Fund Inmates' Tech, But It Fuels a Disturbing Abuse

 

California taxpayers just learned their hard-earned dollars were funneled into a prison modernization scheme that reads more like a luxury tech rollout than sober corrections policy. The Newsom administration sanctioned a multiyear contract worth roughly $189 million to outfit tens of thousands of inmates with state-issued digital tablets — a program billed as “digital equity” but paid for by working families.

An explosive investigation found that many inside the system are using those taxpayer-funded devices in ways nobody promised to voters — watching pornography, exchanging sexual messages, and in some cases allegedly grooming victims on the outside. Dozens of current and former inmates interviewed for the report say restrictions are routinely circumvented, which should alarm every parent and neighbor who expects prisons to be places of punishment and accountability.

This is not just theory or rumor; federal prosecutors have tied specific criminal conduct to state-issued tablets. A federal indictment revealed that Nathaniel Ray Diaz, already jailed for lewd acts against a 12-year-old, allegedly used a CDCR-issued tablet and prison phone system to place thousands of calls and pressure the child into sending explicit images — behavior that continued despite a court-ordered no-contact restriction. Americans deserve to know their state isn’t enabling further victimization behind locked doors.

The state’s own purchasing roll shows the program was no small experiment: a new vendor won a multiyear, nearly $189 million deal to replace the prior system, a cost that critics rightly say should demand ironclad oversight and strict limits on access for violent and sexual predators. Officials defend the tablets as tools for education and reentry, yet taxpayers have a right to ask why dangerous offenders received the same privileges as nonviolent inmates and why safeguards failed.

Governor Newsom and his spokespeople have pushed back, deflecting responsibility to the corrections bureaucracy even as the scandal grows and parents reel from the details; that response is nowhere near good enough. If California wants to talk about rehabilitation, do it with accountability, not freebies that become instruments of abuse — and any official who greenlit this rollout must answer to the people who pay the bills.

 

Faith and Politics Collide: Why Christians Must Vote for the Future

 

Pastor Josh Howerton’s now-viral sermon — titled “How to Vote Like Jesus” — smashed through the usual chatter about religion and politics and dared to tell Christians what too many pastors have been unwilling to say: your faith demands civic engagement. The sermon and his subsequent conversation with Allie Beth Stuckey pushed back against the idea that Christians should retreat from the public square, arguing instead that Christian stewardship includes choosing leaders who reflect biblical truth.

Howerton was blunt: in a constitutional republic the voters sit at the top of the org chart, and God has placed believers where their choices matter for the common good. He tied centuries of biblical witness — from Moses to Esther — to the modern obligation to protect the institutions of family, church, and state, insisting that abdication is not neutrality but surrender.

Let’s be clear: silence from the pews is not humility; it is the vacuum into which godless agendas rush. Howerton warned that when Christians refuse to lead through voting, the only voices shaping law and culture are those hostile to Scripture, and that is a moral catastrophe for future generations.

 

Allie Beth Stuckey joined the conversation to demolish the progressive talking point that every act of faith-informed voting is “Christian nationalism,” showing how that charge is often used to shame believers into political cowardice. Both Stuckey and Howerton pointed to Romans 13 and the biblical recognition of government authority to argue that law and order are God-ordained tools to restrain evil, not pagan inventions to be feared by the faithful.

The left’s obsession with labeling any public expression of biblical convictions as sinister is a rhetorical trick, not theology. Stuckey rightly observed that conflating concern for national stability and border enforcement with theocracy is a bait-and-switch meant to silence parents, pastors, and patriots who refuse to let radical progressives rewrite moral categories.

Practical theology matters in a messy world: Howerton reminded listeners that a vote is a strategic decision, not a sacrament, and Christians must choose the best available path forward rather than hold out for impossible purity. That honesty about the imperfect nature of politics should free believers to act with both conviction and prudence, defending life, family, and liberty in every election.

Americans of faith cannot cede the future to activists who despise the moral order that birthed our freedoms; the cost of silence is ruin. If pastors and pews refuse to disciple civic life, then the nation will be governed by those who have no fear of God — and hardworking families will pay the price. Stand, vote, and lead like your children’s lives depend on it, because they do.

 

CartoonDems