Burned by Billionaires: Applauding Chuck Collins

Chuck Collins is not a household name, and I had not heard of him until recently.*¹ But his new (2025) book, Burned by Billionaires (BbB) is an excellent work that is especially pertinent now, as for the first time a billionaire occupies the White House and has surrounded himself with fellow billionaires and “centi-millionaires” (people whose net worth is over $100 million).

Collins was “born on third base,” as he says in an earlier book.*² He is the great‑grandson of Oscar F. Mayer, the meat‑packing magnate. In 1985 (when he was 26), Chuck inherited roughly $500,000 from his family’s Oscar Mayer fortune. That same year, he donated the entire amount to foundations and community organizations. He later left to live in a commune.

When his father, a libertarian conservative, learned of what Chuck had done, he said he was afraid his son had become a Marxist. Chuck responded by saying that he would rather be called a “Gandhian or Christian.”*³ He explained that he didn’t want to spend his life “managing inherited wealth” and that giving it away freed him to pursue community organizing and economic‑justice work.

Collins is now widely known for his work exposing how wealth is accumulated, hidden, and protected in the U.S. He says in the Introduction of BbB “The drive by billionaires to amass ever greater wealth is warping the nonprofit sector, dictating what’s on your dinner plate, and shaping the news you consume.”

How Concentrated Wealth and Power are Ruining Our Lives and Planet is the subtitle of BbB. Collins writes, “With their inordinate wealth and power, billionaires are hijacking our political system with their campaign contributions, paid lobbyists, communication firms, and dark money contributions."

I cannot even introduce here the important chapters in this book, but I strongly recommend reading it. It is a bit pricey to buy, but many public libraries likely have it. (There are several copies in the various Kansas City metro libraries.)

“An Agenda to Reduce Billionaire Power and Improve Our Lives” is the title of the final chapter before the Conclusion, and it includes four major topics with about two dozen subtopics. They are all good suggestions, but they are not very helpful regarding what we ordinary “peons” can do—other than vote for legislators who do have power to follow those suggestions.

At the end of the Conclusion, Collins offers this advice: “Get your information from sources that are not owned and controlled by billionaires.” That is one small thing I did before reading Collins’ book: I quit subscribing to and reading The Washington Post. In doing that, I was following the actions of Jen Rubin, who was the leading opinion article writer of the Post.

In protest to a Jeff Bezos directive in 2025, Rubin left her prominent position and became co-founder of an online publication called “The Contrarian,” which I now read daily. That Substack blog, which started with the tagline “Not owned by anybody,” now has nearly 500,000 subscribers. She allows “tightwads” like me read it for free, and here is a link if you would like to try it out: The Contrarian | Substack.

Ever since the One Big Beautiful (=Ugly) Bill was signed into law on July 4, 2025, I have been concerned about the growing control of billionaires and the extremely wealthy over American life—and incensed that financial resources continue to flow upward to those who need them least, while the poor suffer even more.

That bill delivered $1 trillion in tax cuts to the top 1% of taxpayers, while cutting roughly $1 trillion from Medicaid and SNAP—programs used by the poorest Americans. Nearly half of those tax cuts went to the top 0.1% of earners.

And consider who the POTUS took with him to China last week: 17 CEOs, several of whom were billionaires. Why were they in his entourage? Mainly because of the donations they had made to Trump. Several of them had previously donated $1 million or more to his inaugural fund. So, the president took them along so they could negotiate with China on behalf of their own business interests. The appearance of a quid pro quo is hard to miss.

It is also hard to miss the judgmental words of the prophet Amos, pronouncing woe on the wealthy who “trample on the needy and destroy the poor of the land” (8:4, CEB)—and it is easy to see that Chuck Collins is a present-day Amos.

_____

*1 The cover of the December issue of Sojourners magazine was emblazoned with the words “The Big Steal,” and the cover story was on “The Wealth Extractors: Billionaires are upending our lives and our economy.” It featured an interview of Collins by Julie Polter, the editor of Sojourners.

*2 Collins previously authored a book titled Born on Third Base: A One Percenter Makes the Case for Tackling Inequality, Bringing Wealth Home, and Committing to the Common Good (2016). The main title is said to be the words of Barry Switzer, the famous football coach, but they were not original with him.

*3 Collins has been a lifelong member of the Unitarian Universalist Church.

Note: Research and wording assistance was provided by Claude (Anthropic A.I.).

Why I Am a Progressive Christian

As I wrote in response to Thinking Friend Vern Barnet’s excellent comments regarding my April 30 blog post, I grew up in a rather fundamentalist/traditionalist Protestant church and denomination. My theological understanding changed through the years, though, with the help of a good professor at William Jewell College (David O. Moore) and good profs/scholars at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (Eric Rust, Dale Moody, and Glenn Hinson). 

Advocating a Radiant Center. My theological position changed progressively, and now I am pleased to identify myself as a progressive Christian. As one who has long advocated a “radiant center,” I intentionally sought to avoid the extremes of fundamentalism on the right and liberalism on the left. That intention is seen in the two books I have written on the subject.*¹

In those two books, I had in mind a continuum with five positions: fundamentalism on the far right and liberalism on the far left. Then, I titled the tenth chapter of the second book “Between Liberalism and Fundamentalism,” and I concluded with a subsection called “Advocating the Radiant Center” (pp. 329-330)

Perhaps it is now time to propose only three positions: liberalism, the radiant center, and fundamentalism, with the center constituting half of the spectrum and the extremes only one-fourth each. On such a scale, I now place myself on the left side of the broad middle, rejecting the extremes of liberalism but being as far as possible from the extremes of fundamentalism.  

Introducing ProgressiveChristianity.org. Mark Sandlin is a Presbyterian pastor of a small church in North Carolina, but a prominent shaper of progressive Christianity. He is the president and co-executive director of ProgressiveChristianity.org. On that website, Sandlin articulates “The Core Values of Progressive Christianity.”*²

First, though, please bear in mind that a key difference between progressive Christianity and evangelical Christianity is that the former emphasizes the importance of this world where is the latter tends to be “otherworldly,” emphasizing the importance of “saving souls” for everlasting life in Heaven. Progressive Christianity, however, primarily stresses the importance of life on earth now, helping people to flourish (with the “abundant life” Jesus promised) in this present world.*³

Here are some of the values Sandlin postulates:

* We [progressive Christians] believe God is Love, not a distant evaluator.

* Jesus shows us what Love looks like in human form.

* The Bible is a living conversation and we’re invited into it.

* Salvation is about becoming whole, not escaping earth.

* Other religions hold wisdom too and that doesn’t threaten our faith.

Introducing Doubter’s Parish. Martin Thielen is a former Southern Baptist who became the pastor of a large Methodist church. He graduated from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in 1982 (20 years after I did) and later received a D.Min. degree from Midwestern Baptist Seminary in Kansas City.

Since his retirement from the 8,000 member megachurch, he created a website called Doubter’s Parish. He posts only one article a month, but I have found them to be well worth reading. Here are some of what he said about progressive Christianity in his April 7 post titled “A Life-Giving Alternative to Religious-Right Religion” (see here; the image above is at the top of that website, but is location of that church sign is undesignated).

Thielen writes, “Thankfully, we don’t have to choose between religious-right religion and no religion at all. There is an alternative. It’s called progressive Christianity. And we need it now more than ever.” Here are a few of the fourteen benefits he says that kind of faith embraces:

* Progressive Christianity emphasizes grace over judgment.

* Progressive Christianity is committed to social justice.

* Progressive Christianity prioritizes Christian living over doctrinal conformity.

* Progressive Christianity practices inclusion rather than exclusion.

* Progressive Christianity seeks to follow the example and teachings of Jesus.

* Progressive Christianity majors on living a life of love.

Since my faith now resonates significantly with the values and characteristics given by Sandlin and Thielen, I am pleased to say that I am (or seek to be) a progressive Christian.

_____

*¹ Fed Up with Fundamentalism: A Historical, Theological, and Personal Appraisal of Christian Fundamentalism (2007; 2^nd ed., 2020), and The Limits of Liberalism: A Historical, Theological, and Personal Appraisal of Christian Liberalism (2010; 2^nd ed., 2020).
*² I encourage you to click on the following link to that website and see how progressive Christianity is portrayed there: https://progressivechristianity.org/.
*³ That difference is explained in a 2023 post by Presbyterian pastor Bo McGuffee. That post, which I read for the first time while working on this article, can be found at https://evolvingchristianfaith.net/2023/01/evangelical-progressive-christianity/

 

What a Phenomenon! In Memory of Teilhard de Chardin

In 1962, I purchased and carefully read The Phenomenon of Man, the magnum opus of French paleontologist and Jesuit theologian Teilhard de Chardin, who was born 145 years ago on May 1.* Teilhard died on Easter Sunday in April 1955, the month before I graduated from high school. It was not until ’62, though, that I heard of, and was challenged by, him for the first time. 

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was his full legal name when he was born in 1881. “Teilhard” was the core family surname and “de Chardin” was the inherited second surname from his mother’s noble line. The double surname originated in 1841, when Pierre‑Cirice Teilhard (his grandfather) married Victoire Barron de Chardin.

Although ordained as a Jesuit priest, Teilhard became a paleontologist (a scientist who studies past life as known from fossil remains). His research, coupled with his belief in the Creator God, led him to an evolutionary worldview that culminates at the “Omega Point,” the grand fulfillment of creation.

Here is an introduction to three contemporary scholars who were significantly influenced by Teilhard.

Brian Swimme (b. 1950) is an American mathematical and evolutionary cosmologist who teaches at the California Institute of Integral Studies in San Francisco. He grew up in a Catholic tradition, which clearly impressed him, and as one reviewer says, there a strong "incense scent of religiosity" to his work. But he does not publicly claim to be a Christian now.

Interestingly, though, Swimme has adopted Teilhard’s thinking that everything in existence has both a physical and a spiritual dimension, and he believes the universe is evolving with a telos (goal or purpose) of beauty. Richard Rohr’s Center for Action and Contemplation has promoted his ideas, along with other Teilhard scholars who are clearly Christians.

Journey of the Universe (2011) was co-written by Swimme, and he is the personable narrator of that beautifully done film, which clearly show his affinity with Teilhard. It portrays well the sense of evolution as a sacred, universe‑wide process moving toward greater complexity and consciousness (which is what Swimme terms beauty).

Watching Swimme’s movie filled me with a sense of the Creator's awesomeness and the universe's splendor. I highly recommend the film, which is currently available on various streaming platforms.

Simon Conway Morris (b. 1951), a groundbreaking paleontologist at the University of Cambridge, was awarded the 2026 Templeton Prize last week (on April 21). It is valued at over $1.4 million and one of the world’s largest individual awards.**

According to Religion News Service, when he was about seven, Simon’s mother “gave him an album of stamps depicting various pre-historic animals and dinosaurs. This prompted him to go fossil-hunting and inspired a lifelong fascination with the evolution of life.”

Morris has spoken publicly about coming to Christian faith and rejecting materialism. He candidly states that he is “convinced of the truth of the Gospels.” Looking at how the universe has evolved, Taylor says he believes “God is the agent of creation” and is “happy to be known as a Christian.”

Ilia Delio is a Franciscan Sister and American theologian specializing in the intersection of science and religion. She has been associated with Rohr’s Center since 2013, and he explicitly identifies her as an expert on Teilhard. She is said to have “a widely appreciated gift for making Teilhard’s brilliant but dense writings accessible.”

Delio’s Christ in Evolution (2008) is the book most scholars point to as her most sustained and direct engagement with Teilhard. In it, she works through his positing of Christ as the future fullness of the whole evolutionary process, the Omega Point, where the individual and collective adventure of humanity finds its fulfillment.

That book established Delio’s reputation as Teilhard’s premier contemporary interpreter and led to her being called “the most prolific Teilhard interpreter in the English-speaking world today.”

I close with words widely attributed to Teilhard: “Above all, trust in the slow work of God. We are quite naturally impatient to reach the end,” but “it might take a very long time.”

Note: I am grateful to my friend Claude (Anthropic’s AI) for research and writing assistance in the preparation of this article.]

_____

  * Teilhard’s book was first published under the title Le Phénomene Humain in 1955, and the first English translation was issued in 1959. The title of a new translation, published in 1999, is The Human Phenomenon (the title that the first English translation should have had).

** The award was established in 1972 by John Templeton (1912~2008), a Presbyterian Christian from Tennessee who became a global investor and philanthropist.

Happy 75th Birthday, Ken Sehested!

Through the years, I have posted articles regarding many individuals, but very few about personal friends / acquaintances. This post is about a man I first met 39 years ago and whom I am glad to call a friend. I trust you will enjoy learning more about him and his meritorious activities over the past decades. 

Kenneth L. Sehested was born on April 29, 1951. After receiving degrees from New York University in 1973 and Union Theological Seminary in 1978, Ken began his career with Seeds magazine in the latter year. That publication, which I remember well, focused on food security and world hunger concerns. That is probably when I saw Ken’s name for the first time.

In 1984, Ken became the founding director of the Baptist Peace Fellowship of North America (BPFNA), and as one who had become a pacifist while still a teenager, I became even more impressed with Ken and his work. I don’t remember how soon it was that I became a supporter of BPFNA, but I attended their summer gathering in Mars Hill, N.C., in July 1987.**

Perhaps it was later that year that Ken published “Trust and Obey,” which was identified as Peacemakers International Spiritual Pamphlet #10. I noted in my January 1988 diary/journal that I had read it. In that small publication, he quoted Clarence Jordan (1912~69), whom many of us greatly admired back then and still hold in great esteem.

Jordan said, “Faith is not belief in spite of the evidence; that’s not faith, but foolishness. Faith is life lived in scorn of the consequences.” Then Ken asserted that trust and obedience most go together: “To obey is the evidence that we live in trust.” Then he states,

Trusting and obeying creates no interest off which we may live. If unemployed, we fail to exercise our faith, we are reduced to spiritual poverty.

Edwin Dahlberg (1893~1986) was an American Baptist pastor and a passionate peacemaker. In 1960, the Gandhi Peace Award was established, and two peacemakers were selected to receive the awards that inaugural year: Dahlberg and Eleanor Roosevelt.

Four years later, the American Baptist Churches established the Dahlberg Peace Award, and the first recipient was Martin Luther King, Jr.  In 1979, Jimmy Carter received that Award, and Ken Sehested was the recipient in 1995. I was overjoyed when I heard that my friend Ken had been given such a prestigious award.

Ken and Nancy Hastings married in 1973, and they both attended Union Theological Seminary, graduating in the same class of 1978. After years of service in various ministry activities as members of Oakhurst Baptist Church in Decatur, a suburban city on the east side of Atlanta, in 2001, Ken & Nancy (and others) established the Circle of Mercy (CoM) church in Asheville, N.C.

Ken relinquished his pastoral duties at CoM in 2015, but Nancy continued her ministry there until 2021. They are still a part of that unique church fellowship. In 2014, Ken created an online blog, prayerandpolitiks.org. Its motto is “at the intersection of spiritual formation and prophetic action.”  (Here is a link to “Contagious Resurrection,” his recent post: Recent – Prayer & Politiks.)

When I asked for some of his quotes that I might share here, he wrote, “Probably the bedrock statement of my theological orientation has long been this: God is more taken with the agony of the earth than the ecstasy of heaven.” Also, “There’s no getting right with God. There’s only getting soaked. (A protest against transactional notions of faith.)”

Ken also shared this core belief/emphasis: “Faith entails both the disarming of the heart and the disarming of the nations. (One of the believing community’s worst failures is not understanding the interconnection of those two realities.)”

It has been my privilege to share these reflections about my friend Ken Sehested. Perhaps those of you who do know him and have read some of his publications learned something new from this post. I am especially happy that those of you who haven’t heard about him have learned some important things about him now, just a few days before his 75^th birthday.

I now close this post with what Ken calls his “favorite homegrown benediction.” 

_____

** In August 2018, I wrote an article titled "Passionately Pursuing Peace.” It was published that month in Word&Way, the historic Baptist paper of Missouri. The piece narrates some of the history of Baptist peace publications before the BPFNA was founded. (That article can be found on my supplementary blogsite, see here).

What is Truth?

A week ago today, most Christians around the world observed what is widely called Good Friday. It was on that day that Pilate said to Jesus, probably scoffingly, “What is truth?” (John 18:38).  He may not have meant the question seriously; yet that remains an inquiry of profound importance that deserves deep reflection.

Philosophers have discussed the meaning of truth for millennia. In the Western world, that question dates back at least to the sixth century BCE, and even further back in the Eastern world of India and China. In the philosophical formulation of responses to the question, the following are the most common.

** Correspondence theory — truth is what matches reality. For example, “it is raining” is true if, in fact, one can clearly see or feel raindrops falling.

** Coherence theory — truth is what fits consistently within a web of established beliefs, like interlocking puzzle pieces with no gaps.

**Pragmatist theory — truth is what works in practice, proving useful and yielding real-world results.

These three theories are all correct and useful in answering the question regarding what truth is on the second of the three levels of reality about which I wrote in my February 28 blog post (see here). But they are not sufficient for comprehending “ultimate truth,” which is what I called the third/top level of reality in that article.

Ultimate Truth must be known by personal encounter rather than by abstract thought. Emil Brunner (1889~1966) wrote Truth as Encounter, and that is a primary emphasis of some of the philosophers I have studied most. Brunner rejected classical mysticism, but I am using that term here to refer to personal contact with God rather than intellectual reasoning about God.

Here, briefly, are three philosophers/theologians who emphasize mysticism the way I am defining it:

** Blaise Pascal (1623~62). On November 23, 1654, that highly acclaimed French mathematician and physicist wrote about his unexpected, life-changing experience: “FIRE. GOD of Abraham, GOD of Isaac, GOD of Jacob not of the philosophers and of the learned. Certitude. Certitude. Feeling. Joy. Peace.” That was surely a “mystical” encounter of the highest level.

** Søren Kierkegaard (1813~55). That famous Danish philosopher, widely regarded as the father of existentialism, deepened Pascal’s vision by insisting that God’s existence cannot be proved by reason but rather must be personally encountered as the living God in whom one is brought to faith, repentance, and worship. His emphasis on the “leap of faith” is easily linked to “mysticism.”

** Richard Rohr (b. 1943). This noted Franciscan friar and Roman Catholic priest authored The Universal Christ (2019), one of the most valuable books I have read in the last ten years. He embraces the mystical label himself, and his emphasis on contemplative, non-dualistic knowing fits comfortably within the broader mystical tradition.

** Michael Polanyi (1891~1976). This scientist turned philosopher is not a religious thinker as the previous three are, but he can be thought of as an epistemological ally rather than a fellow mystic. He demolishes the pretension that objective, impersonal, propositional knowing is the only legitimate form of knowledge, so he is a philosophical apologist for knowing truth by encounter.

Knowing Ultimate Truth is far more complex than understanding truth on lower levels. In everyday life, “truth” can be considered whatever works pragmatically (as in the third theory listed above). In that sense, truth can be “relative.” What works for me may not be the same as what works for you—and that is all right.

In considering both what is real and what is truth, though, we must seek both in the higher/universal realm. And we need to remember Jesus saying that “you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:32).

In John’s Gospel, Jesus does not present truth as a set of detached propositions but as a relationship that unfolds in ongoing encounter. Those who “abide” in his word “know the truth,” not in the sense of embracing correct ideas, but by entering into living fellowship with the One who declared, “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6a).  

The freedom Jesus promises is the freedom that comes when Ultimate Reality—whom Christians confess as God—is no longer an object of discussion but a personal Presence who addresses us, claims us, and sets us free.

With relation to the contemporary world, on every level, people of this country and around the world need to be freed from the lies of the current POTUS, who, for more than a decade now, has been misleading the public with lies and deceptive statements daily.

What Happened to the Population Bomb?

Only you older readers have clear memories of 1968, but I remember it well. That was nearly 60 years ago, and it was a pivotal year in my career. I also remember it because of a book that was published that year, a work that had widespread societal as well as personal impact. 

Paul Ehrlich was the author of The Population Bomb (1968), the book just mentioned. He was born in Philadelphia in 1932, and after graduating from Pennsylvania University in 1953, he received the Ph.D. degree in Entomology (the scientific study of insects) in 1957 from the University of Kansas. From 1959 to 1968, he was a professor at Stanford University.

When Ehrlich’s soon-to-be bombshell book was first released in May 1968, it was initially ignored—no major newspaper reviewed it for four months. Its rise to prominence came through a different route entirely. In February 1970, Johnny Carson invited Ehrlich onto the Tonight Show, and the book soon became a bestseller.

The book received the Bestsellers Paperback of the Year Award in 1970, selling over two million copies. It raised general awareness of population and environmental issues as well as influencing public policy in the 1960s and 1970s.

It should be noted that Paul, with the assistance of his wife Anne, wrote the first draft in about three weeks, based on his lecture notes. The publisher, though, insisted on listing only Paul's name—a decision Ehrlich later called a mistake he was “stupid enough to go along with.” Anne was genuinely the co-author from the beginning.

Paul died on March 13 at the age of 93, and Anne, his wife for 71 years, is still living and now 92 years old.

Why would a biology professor be qualified to write a book about human overpopulation? The answer is found in his emphasis on “coevolution,” about which he wrote a landmark paper in 1964. That work, co-written with botanist Peter Raven, was titled “Butterflies and Plants: A Study in Coevolution and published in the journal Evolution.

Ehrlich’s entomology background trained him to think in terms of populations, limits, adaptation, and ecological relationships rather than just individual organisms. That perspective made it easier for him to frame human population growth as part of a larger biological system with finite resources.

In his ecological studies, Ehrlich repeatedly saw that when a population (of any species) undergoes exponential growth, it then experiences a subsequent crash as it has grown beyond what its environment can support. Since his research led him to believe that to be true, then humanity, he thought, was due to experience a cataclysmic downsizing of the population.

As it turned out, Ehrlich's dire prophecy proved self-defeating. The alarm he sounded was taken seriously enough to trigger responses that averted the catastrophe he foresaw for the 1970s.

Ehrlich himself was a keynote speaker at the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970, helping to shape the day's sense of urgency. In addition, the Green Revolution, international family planning initiatives, and agricultural investment in vulnerable regions also contributed substantially to staving off the outcome he feared.*

Although there were an impressive 8-9 million people at the No Kings protests on March 28, that is far less than half the number estimated to have participated in the first Earth Day activities. However, the latter covered a very broad range of activities while the No Kings figure refers to concentrated, single-day marches and rallies, which makes comparison tricky.

What was averted in the 1970s has been coming true in the 2020s. Since what he predicted in 1968 didn’t come true in the 1970s, Ehrlich changed his position during that decade and later. In the present decade, however, what is happening in the Global South resonates powerfully with his original warning.

The population explosion Ehrlich feared in 1968 largely did not materialize in the wealthy nations he was most focused on, but population growth now is concentrated in the poorest and most climate-vulnerable regions, primarily in Sub-Saharan Africa and other vulnerable regions of the Global South.**

The main issue now is climate-related disasters displacing millions—what many now call “climate refugees.” Drought, desertification, erratic rainfall, and crop failures is displacing large numbers of people primarily in the Sahel region (Mali, Niger, Chad, Burkina Faso) and the Horn of Africa (Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea).

Next month, Earth Day will be termed Earth Week, with major activities beginning on April 18 and continuing through April 25. Those activities will likely be much smaller but potentially more important than the No Kings activities on March 28. What will you do for humanity and for Mother Earth that week?

_____

 * The Green Revolution refers to a series of agricultural research and development initiatives, spanning roughly the 1940s through the 1970s, that dramatically increased food production in developing countries, particularly in Asia and Latin America. It was led principally by American agronomist Norman Borlaug, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970.

** The Progress Network posted “The Underpopulation Bomb” in their March 26 newsletter. It is largely critical of Ehrlich’s “prophecy of catastrophe” in The Population Bomb and, contrastingly, writes of the current concern with underpopulation and pronatalism. That article, and the Progress Network itself, is overly focused on the wealthy West and negligent of the population and ecological issues of the Global south.

Note: Research assistance provided by Claude (Anthropic).

 

Three “Lunatics” Supporting the Lunatic-in-Chief

“Is Trump a Lunatic?” is the title of my previous blog post. Bruce Maples, founder of the “Forward Kentucky” website, recently referred to Trump as “the Lunatic-in-Chief.”* This post highlights the “lunacy” (used in the metaphorical sense) of three men closely associated with the POTUS. 

(Pete Hegseth as depicted by Rachel Bitecofer)

Trump delivered an “address to the nation” on December 17. That same day, Maples portrayed the speech as an unhinged, lie-filled, 20‑minute tirade marked by bragging, blame‑shifting toward Biden and the Democrats, and disjointed nonsense.

Andy Curtis is an applied linguist and former president of the TESOL International Association. Back in 2018, he labeled Trump the ‘Lunatic‑in‑Chief.’ Maples cast the December 17 address as yet another performance that fully merited that description. In a 2019 post, Curtis also called Trump the “most famous liar in the world today.”

There are, not surprisingly, many loyalists who support Trump’s prevarication, misleading statements, and gaslighting. This post is a brief look at three “lunatics” who are his main supporters.

Steve Bannon (his given name is Stephen, but he is called Steve in the media and public life), has been closely associated with Trump since 2016.

Bannon (b. 1953) was a close ally of Andrew Breitbart, founder of Breitbart News. After Breitbart’s death in 2012, Bannon became its executive chairman and shaped in into a nationalist, pro‑Trump website. Consequently, Breitbart News came to be known as “the platform for the alt‑right” and was widely seen as “Trump Central” during the 2016 campaign.

After breaking with Trump in early 2018, Bannon started his “War Room” podcasts early in 2019, releasing new episodes five or six times a week. His podcast on March 19, 2026, was labeled as #5227. Bannon’s War Room is often depicted as “ultra-conservative” or “hyper-partisan right,” and it is widely seen as “a hub for extreme MAGA rhetoric.”

Currently, Bannon is clearly one of the “lunatics” actively supporting the Lunatic-in-Chief.

Stephen Miller (although he has the same given name as Bannon, he goes by the full name, never by Steve) has also long been a Trump supporter. Miller (b. 1985) is said to have felt an intense personal connection upon Trump’s June 2015 candidacy announcement, viewing ‘it as aligning perfectly with his longstanding anti-immigration views. At Bannon’s and Jared Kushner’s urging, in 2016 Miller joined Trump’s campaign full-time as a senior policy advisor, writing Trump’s early speeches and embedding nationalist rhetoric like “radical Islam.” His loyalty proved unwavering through Trump’s first term and his 2024 campaign.

Since January 2025, Miller has served as the White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy in President Trump’s administration. That position gives him broad oversight of immigration enforcement, homeland security, and domestic policy execution, including mass deportations and executive orders.

Without question, Miller is one of the three main “lunatics” currently supporting the President.

Pete Hegseth (although his given name is Peter, he universally goes by Pete) assumed his first paid federal government role in Trump’s second term, when he nominated Hegseth for secretary of defense in November 2024. The Senate confirmed him after a tie-breaking vote by VP Vance, and he was sworn in on January 25, 2025.

Hegseth (b. 1980) is clearly one of the most important and most dangerous men in the U.S. today. As the Secretary of Defense/War, he is the official most responsible for launching/conducting the current “war” against Iran. As the oft-quoted anonymous saying puts it, “The most dangerous people are those who commit violence believing they are doing God’s will."

As is widely known, Hegseth is a conservative evangelical Christian who embraces a literal interpretation of what the Book of Revelation says about Armageddon and the Rapture. His current involvement in the war on Iran seems clearly to be based on his fundamentalistic Christian beliefs.**

Hegseth has said he will practice “no quarter” in Iran, which means he will refuse to spare enemy lives or take prisoners but will execute all who surrender or are captured. Supposedly, that is legitimate since, in his eyes, all Muslims are going to “fry when they die” (my words, not his) anyway.

Robert Reich’s March 16 Substack post was titled Trump’s Stupidest Cabinet Member, and he said Hegseth, this third of Trump’s “lunatic” enablers, is “a clear winner.”

With the rampant presence and power of these three “lunatics,” I repeat what I said at the end of my previous post: Heaven help us!

_____

  * Following his unsuccessful run for Louisville Metro Council in 2014 as a Democrat and frustrated by weak progressive voices in those elections, Maples founded Forward Kentucky in 2015.

** For those not familiar with the common conservative evangelical view of the end times, see the following articles: “Evangelicalism’s Twin Engines of Destruction: The Theological Innovation Sanctifying Trump’s War in Iran,” “Armageddon is not a strategy for peace in Iran,” and “The Pentagon’s Armageddon Problem,” Rachel Bitecofer’s March 12^th Substack post. (The image at the top of this post was taken from the latter.)