Monday, August 31, 2026

Lex Anteinternet: On starting a 37th Year I will not finish.

Lex Anteinternet: On starting a 37th Year I will not finish.: I was admitted to practice 36 years ago today. Back when the Rocky Mountain News was still a thing, they used to run columns by Charley Ree...

On starting a 37th Year I will not finish.

I was admitted to practice 36 years ago today.

Back when the Rocky Mountain News was still a thing, they used to run columns by Charley Reese.  I didn't always agree with them by any means, Reese was a dyed in wool Confederate Gray Southerner, but they were often quite interesting.  I can recall his final column when he noted he was going to retire.  On the timing he said something like "when you know, you know".

I'm at that point.

My wife, however, definitely isn't at that point for me, an ongoing source of conflict.

In Wyoming, and maybe in most places, lawyers are admitted to the bar in August for the most part. A second, smaller crops, is admitted in March or so.  I was admitted in August, 36 years ago.

Back in September 2025 I started a thread about having passed the 35 year mark but never published it.  I was angry about something at the time, pretty clearly, and it was a very bitter posts.  I thought better of it and didn't post it, but I didn't wipe it out until recently.  I reread it and then did so, even though much of what I wrote in it is still true.

All careers are individual, of course which is what makes career advice so dangerous.  I've known people, for instance, who served in the military and absolutely hated it.  The entire film M*A*S*H and the television series is, in no small part, based on a hatred of military service, although the book's author, a conservative, ironically did not hate his. The same is true, for what it's worth, of Catch 22.  Heller actually admired the military he lampooned.  Both books were hugely successful, however, as they not only tapped into the oddities of military life, but also into a hatred of it in some quarters.

In contrast, I've known people who loved it, and I myself liked it.

I note that as I suppose that the law is the same way, maybe all careers are.

That aside, the law is unique and is well known for being so.

The law has an alcoholism and alcohol abuse rate that's far higher than other professions.  That isn't the only abusive trait in it, however.  It's estimated that something like 60% of lawyers have had in the office sexual infidelities and while I haven't tried to add up percentages, and that percentage seems high, there are indeed a lot of them.  The law also has some really screwball personalities in it, although I'm at the point where I now wonder if those personalities became that way due to the law, or entered the law because of it.  In my current Gen. Jones stage of life, I'm amazed by the number of burnt out husks of people who won't retire from the law as that's all they have.

I'm not the only one who's noticed that, and a recent conversation is part of what brought me back to this thread.  In speaking to an opposing lawyer I've known a long time by phone, on a holiday, he brought up the very things I've noted, this included.  Indeed, he noted that for a lot of people, they'd become lawyers, that's what they now were as part of their personality. That's all that's left.

That should never happen, but the law is an all consuming job.

He was actually a bit angry about it.  I'm not angry, but I don't want to become one of those people.  My friend noted that what he "is", is a hunter and mountain climber.  What he "does" is be a lawyer.  That's pretty much true for me as well, although I'd substitute outdoorsmen for climber.

He also had the observation that after working years at the law, late nights, early days, weekends, that he and his wife did things together rarely.  The pressure of work brought that about.  That's pretty much the same story in my own life.  Another lawyer I know just had his wife of about 30 years just up and leave him, leaving him wondering why.  It seems a "therapist" suggested that, and frankly I have a dim view of most therapist or counsellors, but what I suspect is that the same thing was at work.  That fellow had told me not all that long, before the disaster came, that he was never going to retire, because he enjoyed the fellowship of the lawyers.

Well, nothing that we do at work is something "enjoyed" by our spouses, except for perhaps the money.  If the lawyer is really one of those ones who enjoys the courtroom combat, or the intellectual challenge, the spouses don't participate in that at all.

Money can matter, however.  Yet another lawyer I know, about my same age, is trying to retire but is upset as his wife just can't grasp that the funding burn rate has to stop.  I think a lot of lawyers who keep on keeping on face that with a family member or perhaps themselves. From the outside, you know they'd be fine.  But to them, or a loved one, the fear of no further income will just drive them into the grave, working.  Fears of that type, and not my own, have kept me working for the past four years.

The law is not only an all consuming occupation, it's one that's soul destroying.  Many "plaintiffs' lawyers" have really lost their humanity.  Not all by any means, but quite a few. They really don't care about the people they represent in many instances.  It's one of the thing that makes practicing law so dispiriting and damaging to your own soul.  Most of the propaganda that lawyers and law firms of a certain type being there to help people is pure crap.  They don't mean it, and everyone inside the law knows that.  Simply practicing law, at some point, or perhaps more accurately being in litigation, is participating on a fraud on the public.

I'm told I'm really good at the law.  If that's true it's proof you can be good at something that you really don't love.  I'm beyond the point of not loving it anymore.

I entered the profession for the same reasons a lot of people do.  My earlier career had not worked out and I didn't seem to have any other place to go.  I had started off obtaining a very difficult science degree only to graduate into an economy where I was unemployable.  This is, I'd note, more common than a person might suppose.  There was no family business to step into.  What I really wanted to do, and still do, wasn't open to me.  Even at that, I hesitated and I chose not to enter the law school class I was admitted into.  I waited a year hoping to find work, and didn't.  Soldiering was the work that year.  I guess I could have chosen to make that a career, and in some ways I"m surprised I didn't.

The last year of my undergraduate degree I tried switch to a different field:

The road not taken.

Sigh. . . 

I'd be offered a summer position with them, but not until years later, at which point I was already practicing law and engaged.  I've posted on that before.

If 'd had my druthers, which hardly anyone does, I would have have been a rancher.  I have been around agriculture which is to say that I would have ranched full time.  I came close it without really realizing it after law school right as my father was looking at retiring.  We came close to the two of us starting a place, and then he died.  I abandoned that particular effort in order to help my mother, who had no such interest.  Laster I found she was baffled why I hadn't let her know.

My wife and I have always had cattle, but it's never been a full time thing.  Sometimes it's promised to almost be that, but it never has.  Now I'm 63 and time has moved on.  It's something I'll never recover from.  It was one of the goals that kept me at my desk job, and now the goal can't be met.  

Time and effort wasted.

There are some things that are quite scary about time moving on, I'll note.  Fear of death is not one of them.  I constantly hear that people are supposed to be afraid of death, but I've lived pretty close to death my entire life and I'm not.  If death arrives before my plans play out, well, so be it.  Nobody knows the day nor the hour.  Momento mori.

But what has moved on is the opportunity to complete a bunch of things I used to do and be engaged in before I started practicing law.  That must show something about my own character, as other lawyers take long vacations and the like, but I don't really seem capable of devoting time to vocations and avocations.  I'll leave it to the reader to decide which is which.  The interest in those pursuits remains, however.

Gone is interest in the law itself.  I'm not interested nor fascinated in it.  I never loved it in the first place, but I have had over the years a reputation as being a legal scholar.  I still get calls from various lawyers about legal situations which are rare or difficult. The difference is that I no longer find them interesting at all.

At one time, seeing as I was a lawyer, I really wanted to be a judge, which is a position for legal scholars, and I've applied within our system a bunch of times, and been encouraged to do so by judges.  Now I'm too old, as mandatory retirement is at age 70 and the committee isn't going to appoint somebody at age 63 for a single term.  Or I suppose not. To my surprise, they recently almost in fact did that in a district in which very few people were applying for the position. The past two Governors and the Judicial Nominating Committee have pretty much wrecked the process for successful lawyers, so applications are way down.

Indeed, one of my frustrations with the practice of law has been watching the decline of the judicial nominating system, which has grown much more political over the last few decades. When I started out you could really see why various judges got appointed to their positions.  When Matt Mead became Governor, however, he had an agenda of appointing women and that's what he was going to do.  That was a politically motivated bias and it meant if there was a man up for the same position, he wasn't getting it.

Governor Gordon has had a very strong bias towards prosecutors, although there are some exceptions. 

The oncoming Governor, Barlow, will be interesting to watch in this regard.  He's a professional himself (veterinarian) and perhaps he'll take a more informed and balanced view.

Anyhow, after 36 years of this, it's time to move on, so I'm moving on.  I'll complete this year, but I'm not starting another one.

Indeed, on the topic, I'm capable of reading the signs.  The American dream is that you live to age 100 and die in your sleep.  You probably aren't going to.  

Over the last couple of years I've watched some of the lawyers who are older than me decline pretty seriously in some ways.  And I'm declining too.  I had colon surgery out of the blue, something that probably could have been averted if I'd had regular colon checkups like you are supposed to.  Going through that process I ended up having an odd thing on my thyroid discovered.  Half my thyroid ended up coming out, although I probably could have avoided that if I was willing to risk it being nothing, which didn't seem to be a solid risk at the time.  Now I have to take pills every day for the first time in my life.

A year ago the eye doctor noted something peculiar in my eye.  Last week, on my follow up exam, it was clear it was a tiny cataract  It's not a problem yet, but it probably will be in "ten years".  I'm young for a cataract, but it's due to an injury.  

I've endured a lot of injuries over the years.

I'm considerably more tired than I used to be, and my physical stamina, still pretty good, has declined.  I could probably address this as people ought to at my age by exercise, but my schedule is incredibly burdened.  

I don't handle stress anywhere near as good as I used to, however, and stress is a killer.

So, in four months, I'm done.

The big challenge now is letting everyone know, and getting my wife to accept it.  That part isn't going to be easy at all.  

It's not going to be easy as at least my long suffering spouse doesn't want to believe I'm at this point.  I've been mentioning it, but when retirement comes up, it's always "you can't".  Retirement is, she suggests, a year further in the future than I imagine it.

A year isn't much, but it's a year.  I hear all the time that somebody retired and then died, as if retirement killed them.  Really, they just hang on too long.

And again, that hanging on is a funny thing.  I've watched one lawyer who has no family (divorced) and who has no faith keep on going to work.  I guess it's his identify . I mentioned retiring to him once and he scoffed, saying "good luck".  Of course, I don't have to pay alimony and I don't take expensive trips.

I've also watched a couple of very ill lawyers hang on after their illness set in. It provided a distraction I guess.  Indeed, on the very odd occasion I mention this to anyone people always suggest a law job I could take in retirement, which isn't what I have in mind at all.

In contrast, one lawyer who experienced a health care scare recently, one year younger than me told me that next year was definitely the date.  When I expressed doubt, the reply was "watch me".

What you are supposed to say, like Edith Piaf, is that you have no regrets about your career as a lawyer.

I can't say that.

I probably should feel that way.  Just yesterday, once again, thinking over the past 36 years I came to the conclusion that with the box I was in, I did the only thing I could do.  True or not, and it's probably true, hindsight being 20/20, I'd have avoided the law like the plague if I'd known what it was like.  As noted above, I'm sure there are people who look back and say they loved every second of it.

I'm not one of them.

To compound  things, I've been in litigation the entire time.  That was a mistake, as I'm not well suited for it internally.  I'm an introvert and I don't like being in extroverted situations.  I just couldn't find a way out of it.

Well, anyhow, page one of the concluding chapter.

So now, I have to start informing people.  This isn't going to be fun at all, but knowing myself, if I don't, it won't become real.

I've never liked doing trials.  Some lawyers claim to love them, and I suppose they do. There's something in their personalities, a defect really, which requires them to test their wits against other people.  Most lawyers don't like doing them, and most of the lawyers who say they do, are lying.

Like baseball players before a game, most lawyers have some sort of ritual before they try a case.  At one time, as late as the early 90s, that ritual for quite a few involved heavy drinking.  I don't think that's the case so much anymore.  Frankly, while conservatives are all worked up about it in some quarters, I think that's one of the things that the massive introduction of women into the law changed, and for the better.

When I get close to trials, I usually rewatch The Wild Bunch.  I know that's odd, but I love that movie and I find it very engaging.  Part of the reason that I watch it in this context is that the protagonists in the move are basically all mercenaries of a sort.  Yes, I know that they're criminals, but still.  And there's not one redeeming person in their whole contest.

Everyone who likes movies is familiar with the famous concluding gunbattle of the movie.  But that's not the last scene.  Former gang member turned bounty hunter Deke Thornton is waiting outside the town gate as evening arrives, having sent the dead bodies of the gang back with the other bounty hunters.  Elderly gang member Skyes rides up with Mexican Indians and  the following exchange occurs.

Sykes: I didn't expect to find you here.

Deke Thornton: Why not? I sent them back. That's all I said I'd do.

Sykes: They didn't get very far.

Deke Thornton: I figured.

Sykes: What are your plans, now?

Deke Thornton: Drift around down here. Try to stay out of jail.

Sykes: Well, me and the boys got some work to do. You want to come with us? It ain't like it used to be, but it'll do.

That's how I feel about things.  I intend to hunt, fish, work cattle, write and put in a garden.

But even if I only do a faction of that stuff, it'll be okay.

It ain't like it used to be, but it'll do.

Tuesday, August 25, 2026

Lex Anteinternet: Ecclesia militans. On the use of the word "Christian".

Lex Anteinternet: Ecclesia militans. On the use of the word "Christ...: Ἰησοῦς εἰς τὰ μέρη Καισαρείας τῆς Φιλίππου ἠρώτα τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ λέγων· Τίνα λέγουσιν οἱ ἄνθρωποι εἶναι τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου;  οἱ δὲ εἶπ...

Ecclesia militans. On the use of the word "Christian".


Ἰησοῦς εἰς τὰ μέρη Καισαρείας τῆς Φιλίππου ἠρώτα τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ λέγων· Τίνα λέγουσιν οἱ ἄνθρωποι εἶναι τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου; 
οἱ δὲ εἶπαν· Οἱ μὲν Ἰωάννην τὸν βαπτιστήν, ἄλλοι δὲ Ἠλίαν, ἕτεροι δὲ Ἱερεμίαν ἢ ἕνα τῶν προφητῶν. 
λέγει αὐτοῖς· Ὑμεῖς δὲ τίνα με λέγετε εἶναι; 
ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ Σίμων Πέτρος εἶπεν· Σὺ εἶ ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ζῶντος. 
ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ· Μακάριος εἶ, Σίμων Βαριωνᾶ, ὅτι σὰρξ καὶ αἷμα οὐκ ἀπεκάλυψεν σοὶ ἀλλ' ὁ πατήρ μου ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. 
κἀγὼ δὲ σοὶ λέγω ὅτι σὺ εἶ Πέτρος, καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς. 
δώσω σοι τὰς κλεῖδας τῆς βασιλείας τῶν οὐρανῶν, καὶ ὃ ἐὰν δήσῃς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσται δεδεμένον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, καὶ ὃ ἐὰν λύσῃς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσται λελυμένον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. 
τότε διεστείλατο τοῖς μαθηταῖς ἵνα μηδενὶ εἴπωσιν ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ Χριστός.

_____________________________________________ 

Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi and

he asked his disciples,

"Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" 

They replied, "Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah,

still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." 

He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" 

Simon Peter said in reply,

"You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 

Jesus said to him in reply,

"Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. 

For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. 

And so I say to you, you are Peter,

and upon this rock I will build my church,

and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. 

I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 

Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven;

and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." 

Then he strictly ordered his disciples

to tell no one that he was the Christ.

Matthew 16:13-20

The other day I saw an item on Blue Sky posted by Atticus Finch of Georgia which linked in an article on "post truth Christianity".  It brought into focus something that's really been increasingly bothering me in recent years. . .well more specifically the Trump era.

Then, as an example of synchronicity, I was speaking with a close relative of mine who absolutely exploded on the same topic.  I didn't bring it up.  That person did.

Then, this past Sunday, Matthew 16:13-20 was the Gospel reading.

Yesterday there was a post on Twitter in which an Orthodox Christian reacted the same way I am here.

So here's what that topic is.

When the term "Christian" is used recently, it tends to refer to "Christian" support of Donald Trump.  And, hence the error.

While you can find individuals of any stripe of Christianity and religion supporting Trump, in reality, the Christians that support Trump are, for the most part, and most significantly, Evangelical Christians.  Yes, you can find a Catholic or Orthodox cleric here and there that does.1 And, in fairness, you can find Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Atheists, and any number of other sets of beliefs with individuals who support Trump.2  But the real core of the "Christian" support of Trump comes from a slice of the Evangelical world, and just a slice at that.

The "post truth" comment is what really got my attention.  

American Catholics generally try to make nice with other Christian denominations, although less so in the post 1960 world than we used to, but lots of Protestants don't try to make nice with us.  So we have tended, post 1960, to keep some of our weltanschauung to ourselves.3 So much so, in fact, that we've allowed the Protestantization of lots of Catholics, who now think like Protestants.  While there are exceptions, when you find a real pro Trump Catholic, they probably have a Protestant world outlook and don't realize it.

So, to post truth.

Protestants have been "post truth" for about five hundred years.  Protestants outside the mainline Protestant churches are very post truth.

We've known that all along.

Starting with science, Catholics are in favor of science, not against it.  The entire Big Bang Theory is our deal.  We're not opposed to the theory of evolution.  People evolved from earlier primates.  The world is not 5,000 years old.  It's billions of years old.

We know that. We not only accept that (most of us) but we rejoice in it.  We don't feel that God has to fit within our limited human imagination.

Our basic view is that God gave us the intellect to explore his creation.  So far, we haven't found one darned thing that causes us to question our faith.  Moreover, if you belong to a religion that requires you do deny science, something about it is deeply wrong, even false.

So, yeah, there's a lot of "post truth" Christians out there, and they're coming from the Evangelical end of the pool.  If you find a Catholic holding those views, they've likely dipped their toes in it.  Some are swimming really deep in it.

And here's another thing, which my relative was exploding on.

Catholics have taken a beating for decades simply for being Catholic.  It's okay, Christ told us that we would.  In the US we get, from Evangelicals, the question of "are you Christian?", with the reply from them often being that if we're Catholic, we're not Christian.

Well, I guess when people had access only to their friends and neighbors and a pastor who had been miseducated on these topics, that was not only to be expected but semi tolerable, but it isn't any more.

We are the original Christians.

Πάντες τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ἀκολουθεῖτε, ὡς Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς τῷ πατρί, καὶ τῷ πρεσβυτερίῳ ὡς τοῖς ἀποστόλοις. τοὺς δὲ διακόνους ἐντρέπεσθε ὡς θεοῦ ἐντολήν. μηδεὶς χωρὶς τοῦ ἐπισκόπου τι πρασσέτω τῶν ἀνηκόντων εἰς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν. ἐκείνη βεβαία εὐχαριστία ἡγείσθω, ἡ ὑπὸ ἐπίσκοπον οὖσα ἢ ᾧ ἄν αὐτὸς ἐπιτρέψῃ.

ὅπου ἄν φανῇ ὁ ἐπίσκοπος, ἐκεῖ τὸ πλῆθος ἤτω, ὥσπερ ὅπου ἄν ᾖ Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, ἐκεῖ ἡ καθολικὴ ἐκκλησία. οὐκ ἐξόν ἐστιν χωρὶς τοῦ ἐπισκόπου οὔτε βαπτίζειν οὔτε ἀγάπην ποιεῖν· ἀλλ' ὃ ἄν ἐκεῖνος δοκιμάσῃ, τοῦτο καὶ τῷ θεῷ εὐάρεστον, ἵνα ἀσφαλὲς ᾖ καὶ βέβαιον πᾶν ὃ πράσσετε.

See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.

 The Epistle of Ignatius, 33 to 108, to the Smyrnaeans, written in 107.

Nobody with any religious education of a serious nature denies this whatsoever.  John Calvin and Martin Luther didn't deny that.  The only religion that can raise a hand on it are the Orthodox Churches, and they don't deny that we're first, they just take they position that they are also first, and that actually makes some sense.  There's a schism between the Orthodox and the Catholic Church, but we all go back to day one.  That's not to make light of the schism, but it's significant in that we all know that our churches go directly back to the moment Christ founded the church.

No Protestant Church can claim that and maintain the claim, although some try to.  Those that do have to acknowledge that the Catholic Church is first, and try to argue that they're related closely enough to it in order to make the same claim.  That is the claim of the Methodist and Anglican Churches, for example.

All of which brings up the next point.  Any Protestant Church that claims to be authentically Christian that doesn't have a good explanation for this is in real trouble.  Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.  You can't be a Protestant Christian and just claim you are like the original Christian communities.  Take a look at what St. Ignatius of Antioch wrote in 107.  St. John the Apostle had only been dead for about seven years when he wrote that.  You aren't like the original Christians if you don't look like the Catholic Church, with Bishops, priests, and deacons.  You can't claim there was a great falling away, a Great Apostasy, early on.  There wasn't. We have all the books and we know that there wasn't.  Ignorance, on this topic, is your only defense (and now that you've read that, you don't have that).

Indeed, if you aren't Catholic, you need to have a really good explanation for it, and there really isn't one.

So, here's the thing, now that Trump is in office and flaming out we're hearing from the same group of people who said that we're not Christians that we need to throw in with them and support Trump.

We do not.

Trump is not a religious man himself, and there's very little evidence that he has any deeply held religious beliefs, if any religious believes at all.  Personally, he's a study on certain of the Seven Deadly Sins.  He's a warning on the love of money.  He's a serial polygamist.  He's a liar.

He's an evil man.

Throwing in with evil is never justified save for the principle of Double Effect.  I.e., my tipping the pizza delivery guy may have just funded the purchase of illegal drugs, but that was not the intended effect.  My working for the post office may mean that I'm delivering pornography (well, I guess that probably doesn't happen anymore in the age of the Internet, but you get the point), but that is incidental to the occupation, not its purpose.

But this obviously crosses over a line, somewhere.  If, for example, I were a German and this was 1940, a hatred of Bolshevism would not justify joining the SS.

And that's sort of where we are at now, in a way.

Some thinking Catholics supported Trump either openly or quietly with their vote, earlier, as they were opposed to abortion and the weirdness of social trends in sex and gender in general.  Well, the Supreme Court has reversed Roe v. Wade and the transgenderism thing is jumping the shark, if it hasn't already jumped it.  Indeed, in Europe, where it first appeared, it's in major retreat.  Obergefell hasn't been reversed, but there's been no case that presented an opportunity for htat to occur, probably because conservatives fear to advance one.

Irish born immigrant  Patrick J. Sullivan.  He became wealthy raising sheep in Carbon County and relocated to Casper in 1892, when he went into other enterprises.  He was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives from 1894 to 1896 and from 1898 to 1900, Mayor of Casper from 1897 until 1899, Senator from Wyoming from 1929 to 1930, appointed to fill the seat left by the death of Francis E. Warren.  While he was a practicing Catholic, he tended to deemphasize it at the time as it was damaging to his public standing, something that was the case up until Kennedy ran for President.

Now, mind you, I'm not telling you who to vote for, what I'm suggesting is whom you do not support, or to put it another way, what you should not get wrapped up in.

The MAGA movement isn't justifiable from a Christian perspective at this point, if it ever was.  It's weirdly nationalistic and in many instances engaged in idol worship in the form of fanatic adoration of Donald Trump, even somewhat crediting him with supernatural powers in "always being right".   The administration has committed the military to actions which are outright murderous in the Caribbean and South American Pacific.  It's waging an unjust and illegal war.  It creeps right up on being racist and some of its members hold beliefs that are deeply antithetical to Apostolic Christianity.  Some of the people in it are deeply evil, and all of them are deeply compromised.

Vote for those who you will, and in keeping with your conscience.  But some things to remember.  

Trump is not any kind of real Christian.  Attaching Christianity to this administration is going to have a massive negative impact as it falls.  It is in fact already doing so.  There are people in the secular world who truly believe that its the "Christians" who are supporting Trump, and that people like Mike Johnson and Mike Lee are posters for Christians. They are not.4  The fact that they're being made posters for Christianity means that they, and Trump, are driving thinking people away from the Church.  When Trump falls, he's going to take a lot of Evangelical Christianity down with him, just as the fall of the Confederacy during the Civil War heavily damaged the Episcopal Church in the South.

Catholics, we don't want to be part of that, and there's no reason that we should be.

Ecclesia militans.5

Footnotes

1.  A prominent example of that is Bishop Barron.  Bishop Barron shows up on occasion at Trump related religious gatherings and he servers on President Trump’s Presidential Religious Liberty Commission.

I'm not here to criticize a Bishop and I don't really understand what the Bishop is doing, or what the Commission does.  Nor have I followed it.  I'm just noting this.  Cardinal Timothy Dolan, who is well liked, also serves on it.  Archbishop Elpidophoros of America and Bishop Salvatore Cordileone are advisory members.

2.  Stephen Miller, who just the other day accused the Protestant seminary student who is competing for a Senate seat from Texas of not being Christian, is Jewish.

3.  We can trace this to the 1960 election of John F. Kennedy, as we have before, who basically promised to only be Catholic on Sundays.

Kennedy was a horrible example of a Catholic to start with.  But his election was such a thrill to American Catholics that a large number of them followed him into the same easy belief, which has been a disaster for a generation of American Catholics that we're only now just really beginning to recover from.

4.  Johnson is a Southern Baptist, which is presently the largest Protestant denomination in the US, having about 12.3M members.  In contrast the number of Catholics in the US is around 70M.  A person needs to keep in mind that not all Catholics are observant, but then neither are all Baptists.  Anyhow, Johnson also seems to adhere to the New Apostolic Reformation and sincerely believe that he's been licensed to lie in order to bring about a Protestant state.  Lee is a Mormon and therefore not a Christian at all.

5.  This huge icon is a Russian Orthodox icon.

Monday, August 24, 2026

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 21st Edition. The Contest in the General Election.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 21st Edition. The Contest in th...:   And so we're off and running for the General Election, which in Wyoming's case means the election is pretty much over for the stat...

The 2026 Election, 21st Edition. The Contest in the General Election.

 

And so we're off and running for the General Election, which in Wyoming's case means the election is pretty much over for the statewide races.  Sure, the contest officially carries on, but chances are that the Republican nominees will take everything.

Still, this year, there's a chance, here and there. . . 

So, our early predictions.*

Governor:

Republican.  Eric Barlow

Barlow is a rancher, veterinarian, and long time legislature.  

He's won this race and the General Election in this case is a mere formality.

Democrat.  Kenneth Casner

75 year old making his third pointless bid for the Governor's office. He won't win, everyone knows he won't win, and he shouldn't be running.

Casner's appearance says something, however, about the state of the Democratic Party in Wyoming, and it's the opposite of what's happening in much of the rest of the country.  In much of the country Democratic voters are rising up and tossing out geezer candidates, but in Wyoming the Democratic ranks are so depleted the Democrats are falling back on them, which is not a good sign.

Casner would have done his party a favor if he hadn't run.

Constitution Party:  Rebecca Bextel.

The Constitution Party is a gadfly far right political party which was once the home of people who now populate the Wyoming Freedom Caucus.  Indeed, it's their proper home, which shows in the one candidate of theirs which we know to exist, Rebecca Bextel.

The central figure in CheckGate, Bextel is flat out delusional and is running as she feared that Brent Bien would lose and there would not be any candidates running for the true interpretation of the Double Secret Constitution known only to the Wyoming Freedom Caucus.  Bextel appears to seriously believe that Barlow could only win if vast hoards of Democrats, which don't exist in Wyoming crossed over to vote for Barlow and that in the general election the great mass of MAGA/WFC true believers will carry the day.

With the WFC having received a titanic dope slap in the primary, a rational person in her position would drop out. But then, running as a Constitution Party candidate shows demonstrated irrationality.

Endorsement:  Barlow by far.

Secretary of State

Republican:  Robert Short.

Short is an excellent choice and will take the office.

Democrat:  Bryan McCarthy.

McCarty actually has an impressive business background and has worked as an auditor.  He should be given credit for running, although he probably should have run for State Auditor.

He's going to lose and it's not even going to be close.

Endorsement:  Robert Short.

State Auditor

Republican Kristi Racines won an uncontested Republican primary race and no Democrats ran.

State Treasurer

Curt Meier won his bid to run again in the primary for the Republicans and no Democrats ran.

Senator

Republican:  Harriet Hageman.

63 (soon to be 64) year old incumbent Congressman with a terrible record on public lands who came up due to the "hate Cheney" wave two years ago.  If she wins, she'll be 70 at the end of her first term.

Democrat:  James  Byrd.

72 year old former legislator, geophysicist, and businessman.  Really impressive overall, but he is in his 70s.

This race features two candidates who are pushing what we regard age limits.   Hageman is a nightmare of a candidate however.

Byrd actually stands a chance in this race, but it's a real uphill battle.

Endorsement:  We won't vote for Hageman, which leaves Byrd the only realistic choice, and by and large he's a good one, but we aren't doing an endorsement yet.

House of Representatives

Republican:  Chuck Gray

Gray is a carpetbagger about whom Wyomingites know utterly nothing, other than he's an adoring sycophant of Donald Trump, he sent Wyoming's voter rolls to the Federal Government illegally, he has a nasty public personality, and he's a Californian who went to Wharton.   About him personally, we know  utterly nothing.

Having received only 25% of the primary vote, his election to the House can't be assured.

Democrat:  Lisa Kinney

About the worst candidate the Democrats could have chosen for this position, 75 year old Kinney can't win the office and is a remnant of an earlier era in more ways than one.  Her being the nominee is a sign of the absolutely pathetic state of the Wyoming Democratic Party.

Libertarian:  Shaun Johnson

Like the Constitution Party, the Libertarian Party has become so obscure their state's organization doesn't even list their candidates. This is the only one we know to exist.

Johnson is a lawyer presently in Thermopolis.  I don't think he stands a chance, but I'll note that former Wyoming legislator Tim Stubson, who once ran for Congress, has endorsed him, which shows the depth to which a lot of Republicans despise Chuck Gray.

Write In:  Kevin Christensen?

A building movement to mount a write in campaign for Christensen, who ran in the GOP primary, exists.  He came up late in the primary election and got 21,632 to Chuck's 31,222.  While that's about 9,000 more votes, both Balow and Gilat, both seen as early possibilities for defeating Chuck, received over 10,000 votes.  Even gadfly Reid Rasner received a little over 10,000 votes.

If we had Alaska's system, Christensen, along with Friess and Balow, would be on the election in the Fall.  If we had the system in which the top two vote getters were on the ballot, Gray and Friess would be.  Given all of this, there's a really strong indicator that many of those who voted for a candidate other than Gray would vote for Christensen.

Overall, therefore, this race remains in a state of flux while its seen if enough momentum can build up to create a write in campaign for Christensen against a well funded Chuck.  

Endorsement:  Kevin Christensen.  I'm early in doing this, and I note that some disaffected Republicans are saying they'll vote for Kinney. But Kinney is at best a lesser of two evils.

Superintendent of Public Instruction

Republican:  Steve Harshman

Harsham is a long time Wyoming educator from Natrona County who was in the legislature for many years.  He's an excellent choice for this office.and he will win it.

Democrat:  Ana Cordova.

Cordova won the contested Democratic primary.  She's a Wyoming native and extremely well educated.  She only returned to the state recently, however, and really has no chance in this race.

Endorsement:  Harshman.

Other races:

We'll no doubt comment on some as time goes by, but will hold off for the most part right now.

Some early comments:

A tour of the 48 key House races

In the Northeast, Midwest and West, it’s almost all upside for Democrats. But redistricting will hand Republicans some seats in the South.


Some voters on the Wind River Reservation say transportation to the polls is an issue

Footnotes

*We steadfastly refuse to adopt the moronic "red=Republican" standard used only in the U.S. Red=Political Left, Blue=Political Right.

That's the way it is everywhere.

Prior edition:

The 2026 Election, 20th Edition. The 2026 Wyoming Primary Results.

Sunday, August 23, 2026

The Agrarian's Lament: The GOP's useful idiots in agriculture.

The Agrarian's Lament: The GOP's useful idiots in agriculture.: An old friend of mine who is a rancher has been somewhat active in this year's election cycle.  He is, of course, a far right Republican...

The GOP's useful idiots in agriculture.

An old friend of mine who is a rancher has been somewhat active in this year's election cycle.  He is, of course, a far right Republican.

I say of course as just about every rancher and farmer in Wyoming over the age of 40, and quite a few over the age of 35, are diehard right wing full blown MAGA Republicans.  Below the age of 40 things start to change a lot.  Most are Republicans, but a lot aren't diehard.  They're Republicans the same way everyone in Wyoming is a Republican, pretty much.  Generally conservative.

But above 40, they're in lockstep with Donald Trump.

My friend, this cycle, had a big Chuck Gray up near the DOT fence.  This wasn't too surprising as his grandson works for Gray.* **

Well, now, all of a sudden the noted friend is posting on the disaster of letting foreign beef into the country.  So are a bunch of other ranchers I know.

The Republican Party has been pretty much screwing ranchers and farmers since 1929.  It was the Democrats who save farmers and ranchers during the Great Depression.  Most small and mid sized ranches would have been utterly destroyed but for the Taylor Grazing Act.  

The Trump Administration, for its part, looks at farmers and ranchers the way the Democrats once looked at African Americans, people who could reliably be counted on to vote for the party no matter what.  In recent election cycles African Americans proved they were no longer reliable.  So far, people in Agriculture aren't showing any thought at all.

Indeed, they're showing cognitive disconnected.

This morning I've seen all sorts of complaints from ranchers about how they're getting killed in this economy, as noted.

And now Trump's bringing in below market cost foreign beef.

No shit.  YOU VOTED FOR IT.

Inflation, particularly of fuel, caused by Donald Trump's pet illegal war. The same with fertilizer costs.

WAKE THE CRAP UP.

The GOP is not coming to save you.  It's coming to screw you.

Indeed, trade talks just broke off with Canada.

Double digit inflation, caused by a massive rise in energy costs, is about to occur.

Footnotes:

Gray has more affection for Trump than Natalie Harp and Melanija Knavs combined.

The grandson is an interesting case in and of himself.  He's undoubtedly the first member of his extended family to go to university.  He's in law school right now.  He's also a diehard MAGA, and indeed, maybe even beyond that.  Now the question of how that happens is another matter.

The common myth, and it is a myth, about young people in conservative homes is that they go to college, where they lose all of their values, and their faith, emerging hardcore screaming liberals if not Bolsheviks.  This is, it is believed, because they're indoctrinated in college by leftist professors.

It's largely bull and in the scientific disciplines definitely bull.  Majors in geology, for example, aren't going to have time for liberal indoctrination.

For that matter, majors in English probably don't either.

So what's going on here.

Well, a person from a really conservative Protestant background may in fact find a lot of what they learn in college shocking.  The Earth isn't 5,000 years old.  Evolution isn't a fib.  Conquering the West wasn't bringing enlightenment to an oppressed people and, in fact, some of those being conquered where already Christian.  The US isn't bestowed by God with a new Israelite like mission, and for that matter, the modern state of Israel does some outright horrible things.

Faced with that onslaught, young people are in fact faced with the choice of accepting that Pastor Jim back at his own do it yourself Evangelical Church is flat out wrong on a lot of stuff, and Mom and Dad are ignorant, or concluding that everything they're being taught is a fib.

Most will conclude, to some degree, that Pastor Jim is wrong on a lot, and that Mom and Dad are ignorant on a lot of stuff.

Now, I'll note, this shouldn't impact member of the Apostolic faiths at all, but in the US some Apostolic Christians are heavily Protestantized and have bought in, through ignorance, to a lot of what the Evangelical far right believes.

Anyhow, a lot of this is about to collapse on an enormous scale, as we'll soon see.

**There was a good Republican candidate running against Gray, Christensen.  He had worked for the BLM.

Well, we're getting instead a Californian who worked for his daddy's radio station.

Thursday, August 20, 2026

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 20th Edition. The 2026 Wyoming Primary Results.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2026 Election, 20th Edition. The 2026 Wyoming ...:   August 18, 2026 Today is primary election day. Quite a few of us have already voted of course, myself in cluded. Early voting in Wyoming’s...

The 2026 Election, 20th Edition. The 2026 Wyoming Primary Results.

 


August 18, 2026

Today is primary election day.

Quite a few of us have already voted of course, myself in cluded.

Early voting in Wyoming’s primary election trails historic 2022 contest, clerks say



Wyoming’s primary election live: The consequences of today’s election

This will bed a consequential day.  After the polls close, most of the races in Wyoming will have been determined.

The polls, for that matter, just opened.

August 19, 2026

Results are in.

Like most elections, it's a mixed bag. Some good results, and in this instance, some really awful ones.

Governor:

Erick Barlow trounced his opposition including Trump endorsed Megen Degenfelder.  A win for Wyoming and a loss for Trump and a major loss for the Wyoming Freedom Caucus.  The GOP/WFC endorsed Bien came in a career ending third.

A very good result.  Barlow was the only good candidate, and stands to be a better Governor than Governor Gordon.

Senate:

Harriet Hageman, in spite of holding views on public lands and being fairly nasty publicly, handily beat out her competition.  She'll face Democrat James Byrd whom is likely to lose, but who would win this contest in any normal situation.

A very bad result.

Wyoming will regret this choice, and almost immediately, if it sticks and Byrd doesn't win, which he's not likely to in spite of being the clearly better candidate.

House:

Chuck Gray took a minority of overall votes but more than anyone else to squeak by with 25.4% of the vote./  Friess came in second with 20% and Christensen just behind him.

How anyone could vote for Gray is a complete mystery.  75% of Wyoming Republican voters didn't.

He'll face Lisa Kinney who will lose.  Gray will be our horrific complete Trump sycophantic Congressman.  He'll be the worst Congressman in the state's history.

A very bad result.  My guess is that he might be a one term Congressman, bucking the normal Wyoming trend. 

Secretary of State

Robert Short won beating out WFC Rachel Williams.  Wiliams was the titular head of the WFC, and her career is now over.

He'll face Bryan McCarthy, who will lose.

A very good result.

Superintendent of Public Instruction

Harsham easily beat his opponents and will win in the fall.

He'll face Ana Cordova, which is surprising.  She's likely a good candidate, but will lose.

Local races.

Really interesting results locally. The night was a disaster for the well funded Freedom Caucus.

Freedom Caucus candidates in Natrona County were trounced.  Bob Ide was sent packing, which was a great result.  Tony Locke was booted.  Jayme Lien was booted.  Jeanette Ward lost big to Elissa Campbell in her bid to recapture her seat.  Allemand retained his seat by only eight votes, which is pathetic and surprising.

Major Freedom Caucuser John Bear is out, a huge defeat for the WFC.

Elsewhere, Ogden Driscoll kicked out Freedom Caucus member Neiman

Melissa Butcher kicked out WFC member Ken Pendergraft.

Eve Brennan booted Daniel Singh, a WFC member.

Conservative Republican Albert Sommers is back in the House.

All in all the Wyoming Freedom Caucus lost at least fourteen seats in the legislature with two of its main figures, Ide and Bear, going down in defeat.  Reps. Steve Johnson, Tony Locke, Ocean Andrew, Ken Pendergraft, Marlene Brady, Jayme Lien, Nina Webber, Mark Jennings, Gary Brown, Daniel Singh, Ann Lucas, Robert Wharff and Darin McCann, Chip Neimann and Sen. Bob Ide, all lost.

A very good result.

In the Natrona County Commissioner GOP race, where six candidates advance, ancient Dallas Laird took the highest number of votes, which is franky bizarre.  The other candidates advancing aren't too surprising.

An interesting night, and a bit difficult to explain.  At the statewide level, the voters made a hard correction towards the center, where as for Congress, they sent two people who don't represent Wyoming's views, and one who is a pathetic sycophantic liar.

Of course, the general is yet to come, but it's very difficult to imagine Lisa Kinney, who is ancient, beating screaming whiner Chuck Gray, even though 75% of Wyomigites voted against Gray.  It's not impossible to imagine Byrd defeating Hageman, but it'll be hard.

August 20, 2026

The impact of Tuesday's primary in Wyoming is still being widely discussed.  The rejection of the WFC was on the historic level.

They are not all taking it well.

As earlier noted, they're back out of control of the House having suffered an election massacre and have reduced influence in the Senate.  Their members are pouting and declaring that they'll come back, which they will not, and that they have had a positive impact on Wyoming, which they haven't.

Some news articles:


Nine of 10 Republican candidates tied to ‘Checkgate’ lost in Wyoming’s primary


In stunning upset, Wyoming Freedom Caucus loses most of its House seats, backslides in Senate


It's dead.

Freedom Caucus Champion John Bear Upended By Political Newcomer In Campbell County


UW Professor Cameron Wright Defeats Incumbent Ocean Andrew in Laramie's HD 46


On the Freedom Caucus, right now it's defeated members seem to largely be a state of shock, but as noted, there's some angry defiance there.  The WFC posted this:


The broadside is more than a little ironic.  The WRC liked to defend its extremism by claiming that the voters had elected them and it was the will of the people.  Now, the will of the people has shown them the door, and they're saying they're not leaving.

As a movement, they will be.

And much of what they did in the legislature, which was darned little, will pass like a fart in a windstorm.

It's a shame, frankly, that most of the carpetbaggers who represented the face of the movement won't be packing up and moving back to where they acquired their extremism.  This election should have informed them that the Wyoming they live in isn't the imaginary one that they thought they did.  The far right tends to be delusional, but a defeat of this magnitude is such that a delusion will be hard to maintain.

Still, one of the first Freedom Caucusers in the legislature, who lost her position two years ago and lost again this week, Jeanette Ward, commented that it was "curious" that she lost as it didn't reflect her canvassing results which shows that people who answer doors are a lot more politie to visiting politicians than I am.

On the Freedom Caucus/MAGA hard right, it turns out that fifty Republican Sheridan County voters tried to change how votes were counted by getting the county to conceded that its electronic voting was out of date and revert to the really out of date hand counting, giving the county less than a week to accede to their demands.  Almost all of the signatories to the letter signed it on August 9 and were members of Cowboy Church of the Big Horns, which was founded by Mark Jennings, who was running for House District 30.

I have another thread I'm working on regarding the association of the Evangelical hard right with the conspiratorial thinking of MAGA/hard right/WFC, but this provides an example.  The church proclaims itself to be "Nondenominational Bible-based Worship" which means it is denominational and a member of a minoritarian view of Christianity that's common in the US.

The incoming legislature will return to sanity.  Before we get there, however, we have the outgoing legislature holding hearings on proposed legislation now, and will all the way until the new legislature convenes.  The Freedom Caucus influence in those has been felt, but by the same token its been muted as they never controlled the Senate.  This probably kills off Freedom Caucus bills for the 2027 legislature, although it may also mean that they'll work to stall any bills contrary to their desires as well.

The next session is a budget session.

Tempering the general rejoicing over the death of the Freedom Caucus has been the bad news on the primary victories of Gray and Hageman.

On the costs of that:

Primary Election Winners: Curt Meier Got The Best Deal Per Vote, Chuck Gray The Worst

Distress over Gray's victory is widespread.  He only took 25% of the vote and a lot of Wyomingites are not happy about his winning the primary. There's already serious discussion of a write in campaign for Kevin Christensen.

Some disaffected Republicans are indicating that they'll vote for Democratic nominee Lisa Kinney.  I'm sure some will, but Kinney is a weak candidate and stands very little chance of beating Gray.  Christensen would stand a real chance.  It'll be interesting to see how this develops.  Suffice it to say a large number of Republicans are unhappy with Gray's candidacy and its pretty clear but for the vote splitting he would have gone down with the rest of the Freedom Caucus.

Hageman would not have.

Hageman took 65% of the GOP votes in the primary, which is not only stunning, it's mysterious.  Sam Mead seemed to be a good candidate, but he took 28%, well below expectation.

Hageman took 70% of the vote in the general election for House two years ago, riding on a Trump endorsement and the sudden outbreak of far right hatred of Liz Cheney.  A disadvantage that Cheney had which is often missed is not only that she stood up for what was right, but she had been a plurality candidate in her first run for the House, like Gray, and she was a carpetbagger, like Gray.  Indeed, I was very much opposed to her early on and only came to respect her as she grew into her office in her last two terms.  Be that as it may, she was an import branded by the GOP as a Wyomingite and only got in as the vote was split between two other good candidates originally.

Again, note the similarities to Gray there.

Anyhow, Hageman has been a horrible Congressman, supporting anti public lands positions in the GOP while being anti science.  That she did so well is really hard to explain.

She's facing James Byrd in the general.election.

Byrd is a Democrat from a Democratic family, but his platform reads like that of a Republican.  In his campaign website he states:

James Byrd is a native son of Wyoming, a man who has spent his life working on the front lines of our state. With a distinguished career spanning business leadership and public service, James brings a deep understanding of the challenges facing our families. His platform is built on the core values of transparency, economic resilience, and the unwavering protection of Wyoming’s unique heritage.

James has proven his ability to deliver results under pressure. He is running for the United States Senate to act as a fierce advocate for our energy independence, rural education, and veteran support services. His vision for the future is as bold as the Wyoming landscape itself, focused on creating a legacy of prosperity for generations to come. Join James in fighting for the heart and soul of Wyoming.

Any Republican could have stated the same thing on his website.

Not only that, but Byrd has strong Wyoming credentials.  Hageman is a fourth generation Wyomingite, but Byrd is a fifth generation son of the state, which is phenomenal.  He was a geophysicist who worked for the Compagnie Générale de Géophysique and British Petroleum Amoco before going into high tech in the 1980s.  He served in the legislature up until 2018.

Operating against him is that he's a Democrat. That shouldn't matter, but in Wyoming it will. . . or perhaps we might say might.  Hageman can't take him on, really, on anything else in regard to his declared positions which means that Hageman will resort to ignoring him at first, and then accuse him of being from the far left, which he isn't.  As a last ditch fall back she'll claim that electing Byrd will help flip the Senate to the Democrats which would be betraying the Dear Leader.

Hageman is going to have to handle her disdain for public lands and science.  Byrd will have to handle the Democrats general positions on social issues.  He'd be well advised to surprise Hageman by saying he's opposed to abortion (I don't know that he is) and to transgenderism (and I don't know his position on that).  That might upset some true hardcore Democrats but it would leave Hageman floundering on inflation, disdain of public lands, an illegal war in the Middle East and that she's genuinely not likeable.

That should give Republicans a reason to cross over and vote for him frankly. And some will.  Hageman, as noted, drew 70% of the vote in the last election, when pro Trumpism and anti Cheneyism were at peak levels.  Now that Wyomingites have returned to conventional conservatism Hageman will not do as well.  But overcoming her simply being a Republican will be hard to do.

In other races, former Democratic U.S. Representative Mary Peltola  of Alaska will advance to the general election for U.S. Senate in Alaska in that state's unique election system.  She'll facie incumbent Republican U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan and two other candidates, one of whom might be another Dan Sullivan.

Alaska's system is unique in that it uses ranked choices.  So, you can vote for your favorite and second favorite.  If no candidate receives a majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and voters that ranked that candidate first have their vote counted for their next choice.  Peltola has a really good chance of winning.

Her campaign is using the catchphrase The fight for "Fish, Family, Freedom" which is a really good one.  I wish some Wyoming candidate stood for that.  Chuck Gray's, as far as we can tell, is "drill baby drill but oppose any industry which it seems that Wyomingites might be against while kissing Donald Trump's ass."  Hageman's comes across as "Shut up, I"m smarter than you and a Republican".

Peltola booted back an effort by Kamala Harris to supporter her, which was wise, but also shows her political savvy.

In Florida DSA member Angie Nixon, who had just joined the DSA recently and then didn't campaign on its issues, defeated the much better-funded former national security official Alexander Vindman, for the Democratic Senatorial ticket reflecting a turn to the left in Florida, the state that Trump claims to be his home state.  She'll face Republican Senator Ashley Moody in November in a special election for the final two years of former Senator Marco Rubio’s term.  Trump backed African American Republican Byron Donalds won the GOP nomination to succeed term-limited Governor Ron DeSantis.  He'll face former Republican turned Democrat David Jolly.  Other Florida races are difficult to gauge as the legislature redrew Florida's election map in an effort to wipe out their Democrats in the House of Representatives.  Suffice it to say, if the Democrats are in control in 2028, preventing this short of gerrymandering will be a priority for them.

On a really minor note, Stephanie Kessler, long associated with conservation efforts in the state and Fremont County, was elected to the Fremont County Commission.

And with this, which was focused on this week's' primaries, we'll end this edition and go on to a new one.

Last edition:

The 2026 Election, 20th Edition. Primary Voting Commences Edition. Vote like your future and that of your state depends on it, because it does, part four.

Lex Anteinternet: On starting a 37th Year I will not finish.

Lex Anteinternet: On starting a 37th Year I will not finish. : I was admitted to practice 36 years ago today. Back when the Rocky Mountain N...