3 Thanksgiving leftover sandwich recipes that even non-cooks — like me — can try



As this story's headline indicates, I'm not much of a cook.

I can do meatloaf in a pinch and can manage some roasted veggies — and I've even been known to create some of the best baked spicy chicken wings this side of ... well, this side of my street. Maybe.

'Let's get to cookin'!'

That said, this Thanksgiving Day, do you have plans for all those leftovers that have predictably piled up after dinner is done? All of that turkey, stuffing, and, of course, cranberry sauce?

Sure, there are plenty of exotic recipes for leftovers out there that require a bit of effort — as well as ingredients that may not be so easy to procure if you don't already have them on hand (especially amid crowded Black Friday shopping conditions). And who wants to exert even more effort after hours and hours of prep time and cooking time on this holiday?

Certainly not me — and I'm not even the one doing the Thanksgiving cooking. Ease and speed and comfort are the kings in this kitchen.

In an effort to help y'all think ahead, how about a trio of post-holiday sandwich ideas that can win the day and pare down the piles of food left in your fridge?

Thanksgiving leftover sliders

This entertaining fellow — his YouTube handle is @morehowtobbqright — presents on video what appears to be an easy recipe for sliders that even I'd be game to try. (He also calls them "samiches," so you know they're gonna be good.)

Our chef tells us, "Let's get to cookin'!" and then shows us how.

Looks like you need a pack of King's Hawaiian Savory Butter Rolls — but hey, maybe you can repurpose leftover dinner rolls from your T-Day feast too. He says you then place all the bottom roll halves on foil, pile up a bunch of American cheese slices, followed by leftover turkey pieces, then your leftover stuffing, then your leftover cranberry sauce — followed by, you guessed it, more of those American cheese slices — and then you pop the top halves of the rolls on top to crown your creation.

Our chef also instructs us to melt some butter and brush it on the top of the "samiches," after which you wrap 'em all in foil and then bake them on a tray for 30 minutes at 350 degrees. Then you uncover the sliders and bake them for 15 more minutes to brown the tops.

Thanksgiving leftover quesadillas

Believe it or not, even easier than the sliders.

Our chef — her YouTube handle is @MealsWithMaria — shows us in a less-than-30-second video how simple these quesadillas are to create.

Just warm some butter in a skillet over medium heat and add a tortilla. Then add leftover mashed potatoes, leftover sweet potatoes, shredded Monterey Jack cheese, and chunks of leftover turkey. Then you fry it all up until the cheese is melted and the tortilla is crispy.

Finally, for the last minute of heat, you add some leftover cranberry sauce on top and fold over the tortilla. She suggests slicing it in half and, if you want, dipping it in leftover gravy.

Thanksgiving leftover deluxe grilled cheese sandwiches

OK, now for the "deluxe" portion of our program.

Our YouTube guide — his handle is @Chef_Tyler — presents a snazzy grilled cheese sandwich recipe in his brief video. First, he suggests toasting your leftover bread in an oiled pan before assembling the stuff in the middle. (It also looks like he's slicing part of a leftover hard-crusted loaf. This is already a mighty big cut above the grilled cheese I typically make.)

He then tells us to mix our leftover cranberries with mayo — to prevent things from getting soggy — and then spread the mixture on the toasted bread. (Oh, got any herbs on hand? They're good for that cranberry-mayo spread too.)

Then you put your cheese on top of the spread — he recommends slices of aged cheddar or gouda, but anything will do. Then the leftover turkey chunks. The drier the better, believe it or not. (And don't forget to heat the turkey in the pan before putting it on top of the cheese, as Chef Tyler says that will help the cheese melt faster.)

It appears you cook the sandwich on both sides until the crust is golden brown — natch — and then dip it in leftover gravy if you want.

Happy Thanksgiving — and the days after — one and all!

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Turkey-hater's delight: 6 historic Thanksgiving substitutes



This Thanksgiving, consider the poor turkey. Is there any animal we consume with less gusto?

It has become something of annual tradition to denigrate the day's traditional fare. Nearly 35% of Americans claim turkey is their least favorite part of the feast, according to one recent survey.

This vintage Better Homes and Gardens recipe is a bit of a cheat, as it does use turkey — although not in any form you're likely to recognize

The internet just stokes the hatred. Every year the same tiresome "contrarian" opinions: "Stop pretending you like turkey. It's no good on Thanksgiving, or any other day."

Even celebrity chefs can't resist punching down. "Turkey is wildly overrated," says restaurateur David Chang.

"The only reason to cook the turkey is to get the gravy, and then you can just give the turkey away."

We must admit that turkey-haters have a point. Yes, turkey meat can be dry and flavorless (although brining is a dependable way to avoid that). And yes, the tradition of eating turkey — and most Thanksgiving foods — was essentially created by advertising in the early 20th century. (College freshman home for fall break voice: "It's all a scam by Big Cranberry!")

While we're content to stick with the standard flightless fowl, there were plenty of other contenders in the great battle for the Thanksgiving table. As a service, we provide the following recipes for anyone wanting to change it up.

1. Roast eel (1621)

Among the meats served at the first Thanksgiving in Plymouth would surely have been this vital freshwater food source. The 1622 promotional pamphlet for the Plymouth colony "Mourt's Relation" describes how the Wampanoag native Tisquantum (better known as Squanto) taught the Pilgrims to catch the slippery, succulent treats.

Tisquantum went at noon to fish for Eels, at night he came home with as many as he could well lift in one hand, which our people were glad of, they were fat & sweet, he trod them out with his feet, and so caught them with his hands, without any other Instrument.

Here's how they might have prepared it:

Ingredients

  • 2 lbs cleaned freshwater eel
  • Salt, splash of vinegar
  • Sage or bay, butter

Instructions

  1. Soak eel 30 minutes in salt water and vinegar.
  2. Dry; rub with salt and herbs.
  3. Split a roasting stick down the middle, coil eel around stick.
  4. Roast over open fire 20-25 min.
  5. Baste with butter.

2. Roast swan (17th-18th centuries)

Long a favorite of European royals (peasants were forbidden to hunt them), swan was plentiful in the New World and was most likely one of the waterfowl consumed at the first Thanksgiving.

Here's a recipe from Hannah Woolley’s "The Queen-like Closet," (1670) a cookbook that later colonists would have had in their kitchens:

To bake a Swan.
Scald it and take out the bones, and parboil it, then season it very well with Pepper, Salt and Ginger, then lard it, and put it in a deep Coffin of Rye Paste with store of Butter, close it and bake it very well, and when it is baked, fill up the Vent-hole with melted Butter, and so keep it; serve it in as you do the Beef-Pie.

For something more elaborate, here's a preparation from the late 14th century cookbook “Le Menagier de Paris”:

Pluck like a chicken or goose, scald, or boil; spit, skewer in four places, and roast with all its feet and beak, and leave the head unplucked; and eat with yellow pepper.

Item, if you wish, it may be gilded.

Item, when you kill it, you should split its head down to the shoulders.

Item, sometimes they are skinned and reclothed.

RECLOTHED SWAN in its skin with all the feathers. Take it and split it between the shoulders, and cut it along the stomach: then take off the skin from the neck cut at the shoulders, holding the body by the feet; then put it on the spit, and skewer it and gild it. And when it is cooked, it must be reclothed in its skin, and let the neck be nice and straight or flat; and let it be eaten with yellow pepper.

3. Passenger pigeon pie (1700s)

Though extinct for more than a century, passenger pigeons were once as abundant as the kind you see fouling statues in urban parks. While we wouldn't recommend eating those birds, Cornish game hen or squab make a decent substitute.

Mock-passenger pigeon pie:

Ingredients

  • 2 Cornish game hens (substitute for extinct passenger pigeons)
  • 1 onion, quartered
  • 2 tbsp butter
  • 2 tbsp flour
  • 1-1½ cups chicken or turkey stock
  • Salt and pepper, to taste
  • 1 tsp dried thyme
  • Double pie crust (bottom + top crust)

Instructions

1. Prepare the meat

  1. Simmer game hens with the onion until fully cooked and tender.
  2. Remove hens; pick the meat from the bones.
  3. Place shredded meat in a bowl.

2. Make the gravy

  1. Melt butter in a pan.
  2. Add flour and cook until lightly browned.
  3. Stir in stock to form a smooth gravy.
  4. Season with salt, pepper, and thyme.
  5. Simmer until slightly thickened.

3. Assemble the pie

  1. Line a pie dish with bottom crust.
  2. Add shredded meat.
  3. Pour warm gravy over the meat.
  4. Cover with top crust and seal edges.
  5. Cut a small vent in the center.

4. Bake

Outdoor Dutch oven method (historical):

  • Preheat Dutch oven with coals above and below.
  • Elevate pie pan inside the Dutch oven on metal hooks or a trivet.
  • Bake ~10-20 minutes, checking frequently to avoid burning.

Modern oven method:

  • Bake at 375°F for 35-45 minutes, until crust is golden.

5. Serve. Let cool slightly before slicing.

4. Sautéed calf's brains with mushrooms, sour cream, and dill

In 1904, railroad heir George Vanderbilt and his wife, Edith, hosted a lavish Thanksgiving at their Asheville estate, Biltmore. Turkey was on the menu — but so were calf's brains. Here's one preparation that guarantees a delicate, custardy mouthfeel:

Ingredients

  • 1 lb brains (veal, pork, or lamb)
  • Water for soaking
  • Salt (for poaching water)
  • 2 tbsp butter
  • 1 cup sliced white mushrooms
  • 2-3 tbsp sour cream
  • 1-2 tbsp fresh dill, minced
  • Toasted bread, for serving

Instructions

1. Prep the brains

  1. Soak brains overnight in cold water to remove blood pockets.
  2. Drain.
  3. Poach gently in salted water (bare simmer) for 10-15 minutes until firm.
  4. Cool slightly, then peel off the thin outer membrane.
  5. Cut brains into bite-size pieces.

2. Cook the mushrooms

  1. In a skillet, melt butter over medium heat.
  2. Add mushrooms and sauté until they release their juices and the butter turns lightly browned and nutty.

3. Add the brains

  1. Add chopped brains to the skillet.
  2. Toss gently with the mushrooms and browned butter for 1-2 minutes.

4. Finish the sauce

  1. Remove skillet from heat.
  2. Stir in sour cream to form a loose sauce.
  3. Add minced dill.
  4. Adjust salt if needed.

5. Serve. Spoon the mixture over warm toast. Serve immediately.

5. Celery au naturel (late 1800s-early 1900s)

Now the most unwanted vegetable on the crudite platter, this Bloody Mary garnish was a highly coveted status symbol of the Gilded Age (it was hard to grow). Everyone will want the recipe.

Ingredients

  • 1 bunch crisp celery
  • Cold water
  • Ice cubes (optional)
  • Salt (for serving, optional)

Instructions

1. Trim the celery

  1. Cut off the root end.
  2. Remove tough outer stalks if desired.
  3. Trim leafy tops to a neat fan.

2. Refresh the stalks

  1. Place celery in a bowl of cold water (add ice for extra crispness).
  2. Chill 15-30 minutes.

3. Present with appropriate ceremony

  1. Stand stalks upright in a tall glass, vase, or celery jar.
  2. Arrange so the tops flare elegantly.

4. Serve. Place the celery in the center of the table. Offer a pinch dish of salt on the side.

Note: In the late 19th century, this was considered a showpiece delicacy. Your guests are encouraged to admire its beauty before eating it exactly as it is.

6. Turkey lime molded salad (1969)

This vintage Better Homes and Gardens recipe is a bit of a cheat, as it does use turkey — although not in any form you're likely to recognize.

Ingredients

  • 2 packages (3 oz each) lime-flavored gelatin
  • ¼ tsp salt
  • 2 cups boiling water
  • ½ cup cold water
  • 1 (7 oz) bottle ginger ale
  • 2 cups diced cooked turkey
  • 1 cup sour cream
  • ¼ tsp ground ginger
  • 1 (16 oz) can pears, drained and diced
  • 6½-cup gelatin mold

Instructions

1. Make the gelatin base

  • Dissolve lime gelatin and salt in 2 cups boiling water.
  • Add ginger ale and ½ cup cold water.
  • Chill until partially set.

2. Prepare the turkey layer

  • Fold diced turkey into the partially set gelatin.
  • Pour into a 6½-cup mold.
  • Chill until almost firm.

3. Prepare the sour cream-pear layer

  • Beat sour cream, ground ginger, and ½–1 cup of the remaining unset gelatin until smooth.
  • Chill until partially set.
  • Fold in diced pears.

4. Add second layer

  • Spoon the pear-sour cream mixture over the firm turkey layer.
  • Chill until completely set.

5. Unmold and serve

  • Dip mold briefly in warm water.
  • Invert onto a serving platter.
  • Lift mold carefully to reveal two layers.

Why leftists hate Thanksgiving — and can't stop ruining it



Is there any hope for this perpetually outraged leftist?

I’d like to think so. After all, I’ve written about opening your home to others — even perhaps strangers — on Thanksgiving. But Robert Jensen is a hard case.

Redistribute land and wealth? No wonder his fellow leftists would rather gorge on stuffing.

That’s because Jensen, who writes at AlterNet — the spiritual home of the fevered far left — wouldn’t be much fun at your Thanksgiving table. That's because he says we need to "replace the feasting with fasting and create a National Day of Atonement to acknowledge the genocide of indigenous people that is central to the creation of the United States.”

Holiday haters

Jensen is one of those Thanksgiving haters. He's been writing about this for years, popping up in November with dark sentiments about the "evils" of Thanksgiving.

But his irritation has grown exponentially in recent years, apparently because he hasn’t been able to convince his fellow leftists to give up their turkey and pumpkin pie. They're just not feeling his "fast and atone" vibe. And who could blame them?

Some of them, in fact, have the unmitigated audacity to suggest that coming together on Thanksgiving can celebrate love and connection with family and friends.

But Jensen, who is more left than your garden-variety progressive, is just not having it.

"The moral response — that is, the response that would be consistent with the moral values around justice and equality that most of us claim to hold — would be a truth-and-reconciliation process that would not only correct the historical record but also redistribute land and wealth," he wrote last year.

Redistribute land and wealth? No wonder his fellow leftists would rather gorge on stuffing. As much as they love to dream about wealth redistribution, they're never referring to their own wealth, of course, and leftist struggle-sessions don't really lend themselves to a festive atmosphere.

Last year, he wrote about how he teetered between these two (delightful!) choices:

We can go to the Thanksgiving gatherings put on by friends and family, determined to raise these issues and willing to take the risk of alienating those who want to enjoy the day without politics. Or we can refuse to go to such a gathering and make it known why we're not attending, which means taking the risk of alienating those who want to enjoy the day without politics. ... We must refuse to be polite when politeness means capitulation to lies.

Are you feeling sorry for Jensen's family yet?

Imagine, if you will, slurping down your mashed potatoes and cranberry sauce to this rant: “In the white-supremacist and patriarchal society in which we live, operating within the parameters set by a greed-based capitalist system. ... What political activity can we engage in to keep alive this kind of critique until a time when social conditions might make a truly progressive politics possible?”

Much to his family’s relief, Jensen ultimately chose to sit home by himself and contemplate additional dark thoughts involving "genocidal Europeans."

But he’s mad that his people dare to define the holiday as an opportunity to rest, enjoy loved ones, and eat a delicious meal.

"We don't define holidays individually — the idea of a holiday is rooted in its collective, shared meaning," he wrote. "When the dominant culture defines a holiday in a certain fashion, one can't pretend to redefine it in private."

(I can think of a few things rooted in a collective, shared meaning that the left has redefined in private — and then tried to shove down our throats. But I digress.)

RELATED: This Truthsgiving, I'm thankful for European settlement

Bettmann/Contributor/Getty Images

Jensen reports that he also has the option of participating in a public event that resists Thanksgiving. However, on that topic, last year he confessed, “I'm not aware of (an anti-Thanksgiving event) happening in my community, and because of commitments to other political projects, I didn't feel I could organize an effective event in time for this Thanksgiving Day.”

He’s been whining about this since at least 2017, so I’m not sure how he ran out of time to “organize an effective event.” Oh, that’s right: “Commitments to other political projects.”

Do these people ever unclench and be human, or is it always “political projects” time?

What Jensen's missing

We all know that the Native peoples in America were not treated wonderfully as American history unfolded. But things weren’t all sunshine and rainbows before European arrivals, either. Tribes regularly warred against and slaughtered each other, taking and retaking territory and resources.

What Thanksgiving commemorates, however, is really something remarkable.

Consider this sequence of events:

  • In a village of the Wampanoag tribe, a young boy named Squanto grew up, was kidnapped by a European sea captain who sold him into slavery in Spain, and was eventually released due to some kindly monks. He made his way to England and onto a boat sailing back to the New World, where he found his village had been wiped out by some sort of disease.
  • Shortly thereafter, the pilgrims — who’d been aiming for Manhattan island — were blown off course and ended up landing basically at that same abandoned village, finding land already cleared, food stores, and fresh water sources.
  • A few months after their arrival, Squanto returned. He had learned English, so he was able to communicate with the Pilgrims, and he had been introduced to Christianity, so he understood them. He set out to help, teaching them to plant crops and helping them negotiate agreements with Chief Massasoit.
  • Even with all the help, about half of the original Pilgrims died due to the harsh conditions. Leader William Bradford recognized Squanto, his skills, and his welcome were all a gift from God without which none of the Pilgrims might have survived.
  • The Wampanoag also benefited from their relationship with the Pilgrims, which held off attacks by the Narragansett and others.

The inclination to celebrate that first fall harvest sprung from profound gratitude for the food, Squanto, and for God guiding them to the one point on the continent where they would encounter an English-speaking Native and build a peaceful and productive relationship.

Ninety Indians joined the 53 remaining Pilgrims for the three-day event, which included feasting and shooting games. And it is that history that informed President Lincoln’s decision, many years later, to institute the holiday of Thanksgiving. It honors the pivotal role of the first Pilgrims, the lifesaving role of the Wampanoag, and the societal benefit of a day devoted to gratitude.

So, Robert Jensen, I sincerely hope you might consider that if white Europeans and brown Natives could feast together, you might be able to sit with your family and enjoy some turkey and pie too.

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

When America feared God: The bold Thanksgiving prayer they don't teach any more



Thanksgiving is an annual reminder of our nation’s Christian roots and our godly heritage. Although Virginia proclaims that the first Thanksgiving was in Jamestown in 1619 — not in Plymouth in 1621 — the Plymouth one became the prototype of our annual celebrations.

George Washington was the first president under the Constitution to declare a national day of thanksgiving, and President Lincoln was the first to declare Thanksgiving an annual holiday.

'It is the indispensable Duty of all Men to adore the superintending Providence of Almighty God; to acknowledge with Gratitude their Obligation to him for Benefits received, and to implore such further Blessings as they stand in Need of ...'

However, Samuel Adams, with the help of two other continental congressmen, was the first to declare a National Day of Thanksgiving for America as an independent nation.

The time was the fall of 1777. Overall, it seemed that things were not going well for the United States. Americans lost the Battle of Brandywine on September 11, which Dr. Peter Lillback notes was our "first 9/11."

George Washington saw that the Brandywine defeat meant the impending fall of Philadelphia, our nation’s capital at the time, into the hands of the British.

So Congress had to flee westward, first to Lancaster and then to York, Pennsylvania. Washington and his troops had to flee westward also. They ended up in a place called Valley Forge. The worst was yet to come with the brutal winter there.

Meanwhile, on October 7, 1777, there was a victory at Saratoga, New York. Samuel Adams of Boston, a key leader in American independence, saw that we as a nation could rejoice in this act of divine Providence. So — with the help of fellow Continental Congressmen Rev. John Witherspoon of New Jersey and Richard Henry Lee of Virginia — Samuel Adams wrote our country’s first thanksgiving declaration as an independent nation.

This is what they wrote in that First National Thanksgiving Proclamation, November 1, 1777: "It is the indispensable Duty of all Men to adore the superintending Providence of Almighty God; to acknowledge with Gratitude their Obligation to him for Benefits received, and to implore such further Blessings as they stand in Need of.”

As humans, as Christians, we should be grateful. They continue, “And it having pleased him in his abundant Mercy, not only to continue to us the innumerable Bounties of his common Providence; but also to smile upon us in the Prosecution of a just and necessary War, for the Defense and Establishment of our unalienable Rights and Liberties; particularly in that he hath been pleased, in so great a Measure, to prosper the Means used for the Support of our Troops, and to crown our Arms with most signal success.”

I think it’s fair to say that Adams, Witherspoon, and Lee were looking for the good news (the Saratoga victory) in a sea of bad news (American setbacks, the latest of which was the defeat at Brandywine).

They continue: “It is therefore recommended to the legislative or executive Powers of these UNITED STATES to set apart THURSDAY, the eighteenth Day of December next, for SOLEMN THANKSGIVING and PRAISE.”

And what were the Americans to do during that day of Thanksgiving and praise? To confess “their manifold sins … that it may please GOD through the Merits of JESUS CHRIST, mercifully to forgive and blot them out of Remembrance; That it may please him graciously to afford his Blessing on the Governments of these States respectively, and prosper the public Council of the whole.”

RELATED: That we may all unite in rendering unto our Creator our sincere and humble thanks

Interim Archives/Getty Images

If someone prayed like this in Congress today, people might try to drive him out of town on a rail — like the leftist members of Congress who blew a gasket when California minister Jack Hibbs prayed in the name of Jesus in Congress in early 2024.

Writing on behalf of Congress, Adams, Witherspoon, and Lee continue: “To inspire our Commanders, both by Land and Sea, and all under them, with that Wisdom and Fortitude which may render them fit Instruments, under the Providence of Almighty GOD, to secure for these United States, the greatest of all human Blessings, INDEPENDENCE and PEACE.”

They also prayed for God “to prosper the Trade and Manufactures of the People,” as well as the farmers, for success of the crops. They also asked for God’s help in the schools, which they note are “so necessary for cultivating the Principles of true Liberty, Virtue and Piety, under his nurturing Hand; and to prosper the Means of Religion, for the promotion and enlargement of that Kingdom, which consisteth ‘in Righteousness, Peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost.’”

This prayer proclamation is no namby-pamby type of prayer such as we might hear from Congress these days. These are bold proclamations of faith, showing the pro-Christian side of the founding fathers that we rarely hear about these days.

This article is adapted from an essay originally published at Jerry Newcombe's website.

JD Vance to Canada: Stop blaming Trump for your decline



Vice President JD Vance did something remarkable last week: He described Canada more honestly than most of its own political leaders.

In a short series of posts on X, Vance captured the two anxieties that now define Canadian life — mass immigration and a refusal to take responsibility for national decline.

The deeper problem is leadership that seems consistently more focused on the fortunes of global capital than the welfare of Canadians.

“While I'm sure the causes are complicated,” he wrote, “no nation has leaned more into ‘diversity is our strength, we don't need a melting pot we have a salad bowl’ immigration insanity than Canada. It has the highest foreign-born share of the population in the entire G7 and its living standards have stagnated.”

Vance continued, “And with all due respect to my Canadian friends, whose politics focus obsessively on the United States: your stagnating living standards have nothing to do with Donald Trump or whatever bogeyman the CBC tells you to blame. The fault lies with your leadership, elected by you.”

Truth hurts

Those comments struck a nerve because they describe a reality that Canadians live with every day. Immigration levels have soared to historic highs. Canada’s population is closing in on 40 million, with roughly 23% foreign-born in the 2021 census — and likely much higher today, given the recent revelation that 42% of babies born in 2025 will have foreign-born mothers. For years, political and media elites insisted that this was a sign of national strength. Ordinary people can now see the strain everywhere: stagnant wages, collapsing services, unaffordable housing, and infrastructure buckling under the load.

Vance’s second point was equally accurate. Canadian politicians — especially Liberal ones — have long relied on Trump as a universal scapegoat. No matter the problem, the reflexive response has been to point south and blame “American extremism” for Canada’s failures. It was a convenient distraction from the consequences of their own policies.

Man with no plan

Prime Minister Mark Carney was a master of this blame-shifting. Before entering politics, he spent years burnishing his reputation as a global technocrat. Yet when he ran for prime minister, he adopted an almost paranoid tone toward the United States, claiming in one speech: “President Trump is trying to break us so that America can own us. … We need a plan to deal with this new reality.” His “plan,” as it turned out, was simply to win power — and once in office, Carney abandoned the rhetoric even as he continued neglecting basic economic and security interests.

Nowhere has that neglect been clearer than in defense procurement. Ottawa is reportedly considering scrapping the F-35 fighter jet program in favor of Sweden’s Gripen — an aircraft incompatible with the F-35s flown by every branch of the U.S. military and central to NORAD’s interoperability. As U.S. Ambassador Pete Hoekstra has warned repeatedly, such a move would be sheer folly, undermining both North American defense and Canada’s most vital alliance.

The deeper problem is leadership that seems consistently more focused on the fortunes of global capital than the welfare of Canadians. Brookfield Asset Management — the firm Carney chaired before deciding to seek the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada and replacing Justin Trudeau as prime minister — recently surfaced in headlines for its involvement in an $80 billion agreement with the Trump administration to produce nuclear reactors. That deal may be good business, but it has only reinforced public suspicion that Carney’s loyalties were formed long before he stepped into elected office.

RELATED: Is this the end of Canada?

Dave Chan/Getty Images

Soft authoritarianism

Meanwhile, Canada’s once-vaunted bureaucracy is looking increasingly ideological, unaccountable, and hostile to the people it purports to serve. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s ongoing occupation of a family farm — and its insistence on slaughtering hundreds of healthy ostriches despite nearly a year without symptoms of avian flu — has alarmed Canadians across the political spectrum. It is the kind of aggressive, unrestrained government action that would have been unthinkable a generation ago.

All of this is unfolding as the Liberal government pursues sweeping censorship and surveillance legislation, from online speech controls to broad new powers for federal regulators. The United Kingdom has already slid into a soft authoritarianism that polices “offensive” speech through arrests and intimidation. Canada appears determined to follow the same path.

This is what Vance was speaking to: a country drifting into economic stagnation, cultural fragmentation, bureaucratic overreach, and political corruption. A country that no longer seems capable of telling itself the truth about what is happening. A country that responds to national crises not with reform, but with scapegoats — whether Donald Trump, American conservatives, or anyone who challenges the official narrative.

Canada is not yet lost. But it is undeniably breaking, and the political class shows little interest in repairing it.

As Vance noted, the ultimate responsibility lies with Canadians themselves. They elected the leadership that brought the country to this point. Whether Canada recovers will depend on whether they are willing to demand something better.

'Slam Frank': The Anne Frank musical with something to offend everyone



Ten years ago, I sat in the dark at the Public Theater in downtown New York City, surrounded by a murmuring crowd, waiting for the curtain to rise on a brand-new play called "Hamilton."

At that point in time, Lin-Manuel Miranda’s hip-hop musical had yet to become the behemoth it is now. Quite the opposite — there were no cast albums or Disney+ recordings, and aside from a few regional workshops years earlier and its word-of-mouth reputation as the “next big thing,” no one in the audience had any idea what we were in for.

A pansexual Latina Anne Frank with an Afro-Caribbean tiger mom and a chronically 'neurospicy' closet case for a dad? Now you've gone too far.

Expanding the form

The next few hours were filled with a strange, albeit thoroughly impressive, showing of lyrical prowess. Miranda had somehow managed to turn historian Ron Chernow's 818-page Alexander Hamilton biography into a crowd-pleasing, pop-culture-infused depiction of the earliest days of a fledgling America.

More provocative was Miranda's deliberate choice to cast primarily black and Latino actors to portray the founding fathers. While a few nitpickers balked at the spectacle of "people of color" portraying slave owners, most marveled at the audacious ingenuity of it: What could be more revolutionary than retelling the American story so that it reflects all Americans?

The crowd left the theater excited. There was no doubt that we had witnessed something groundbreaking. If Aaron Burr could be black and Alexander Hamilton Puerto Rican, what else was possible?

Decolonizing 'Diary'

Eight years later, lyricist and composer Andrew Fox stumbled upon an answer. It came to him in the form of a (since-deleted) 2022 Twitter thread hotly debating a never-before-asked question: Did Anne Frank ever acknowledge her white privilege?

As is often the case, the online arguing devolved into acrimonious ad hominem and fruitless whataboutism. Fox realized that mere words would never get to heart of the matter. As with "Hamilton," it would take the power of musical theater to win hearts and minds. And he would do Miranda's non-white casting one better — reimagining Anne Frank herself as a person of color.

And so Fox and librettist Joel Sinensky set out to transform the "Diary of Anne Frank" into "Slam Frank," an intersectional, multiethnic, gender-queer, decolonized, anti-capitalist, hyper-empowering Afro-Latin hip-hop musical.

Originally slated for three weeks at small off-Broadway venue the Asylum, "Slam Frank" has become a massive hit for the theater, which recently extended its run through the end of December.

Piercings and Patagonias

Want diversity? Look no farther than the viewers showing up in droves. At any given performance, you can find a septum piercing, a Patagonia vest, and a pair of bifocals all in the same row.

Yes, even liberals enjoy "Slam Frank," despite the outrage it has provoked in some of their compatriots. “This whole project is head-spinningly grotesque and offensive,” went one post to the r/JewsOfConscience sub-Reddit. “Bringing up the holocaust and not mentioning the current genocide in Gaza just gives me the ick,” lamented another.

The irony of takes like these is thick, since one can imagine these same critics of "Slam Frank" being perfectly open to the idea of race- and gender-swapping other historical characters. But a pansexual Latina Anne Frank with an Afro-Caribbean tiger mom and a chronically "neurospicy" closet case for a dad? Now you've gone too far.

RELATED: 'Anne Frank' kindergarten is being renamed for the sake of diversity: 'We wanted a name without a political background'

TIM SLOAN/AFP via Getty Images

A real production

The show's earliest marketing attracted attention with a simpler question: “Is 'Slam Frank' a real musical?”

The answer is a decisive "yes." "Slam Frank" is not a social media gimmick or an expertly crafted exercise in long-form rage- bait. Again: It is a full-length show, with a cast, that is being performed on regularly scheduled dates at the Asylum NYC.

I know because I've seen it. "Slam Frank" is not just a real production, but an entertaining one. It is smartly written, balancing humor with sincerity, featuring songs composed and performed with impressive musicianship. Think Trey Parker and Matt Stone’s "The Book of Mormon" or the award-winning puppet extravaganza "Avenue Q" — but with a final gesture of leftist piety that pushes the logic of your average keffiyeh-clad student protester at Columbia to uncomfortable extremes.

The shocking finale is played so straight that plenty will miss the satire, and even those in on the joke may notice how easily it could be mistaken for peak-wokeness agitprop. If there is a clear "message" here, the show's creators aren't about to clarify it. "Slam Frank" is happy to offend each viewer in whatever way he, she, or they wish to be offended. How's that for inclusive?

Trump personally requested the revival of an iconic movie franchise — and now it's happening



Just days after it was reported that President Donald Trump was pushing for the revival of classic 1980s and 1990s movies, Paramount is now making the president's dream a reality.

Trump ally Larry Ellison's control over Paramount — and its giant film library that includes "Titanic" and "Saving Private Ryan" — is the key connection.

'Cancel culture stopped them dead in their tracks.'

According to Semafor, Trump has been pushing to bring back what were described as the "raucous comedies" and action movies of decades past, and has shown passion for titles like Jean-Claude Van Damme's generational martial arts movie, 1988's "Bloodsport."

That isn't the first title to be resuscitated by Paramount, however. Rather, the president has reportedly personally asked Paramount to revive the buddy cop film "Rush Hour," from director Brett Ratner, starring comedian Chris Tucker and action star Jackie Chan.

As of Tuesday, it seems Paramount is ready to get the ball rolling on "Rush Hour 4" nearly two decades since the last release.

RELEASE: The new ‘Karate Kid’ just kicked grievance culture in the teeth

Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan. Photo by Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

The studio is now in the works to distribute the sequel, according to Variety, which also reported that Trump requested the franchise's return. Paramount will release the movie theatrically but will not be marketing or financing it, while Warner Bros.' New Line Cinema will get a percentage of box office revenue; they backed the original production and sequels.

Variety also reported that director Ratner and the "Rush Hour" producers shopped the new film around to different studios, but cancel culture stopped them dead in their tracks, with other Hollywood execs not wanting to be attached to Ratner's name.

Ratner, who recently directed a documentary on Melania Trump, hasn't done a feature film since 2014's "Hercules" starring Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson.

Ratner was accused of a whole slew of sex crimes in October 2017 as part of the Me Too movement that saw at least six women launch accusations at him.

This resulted in Warner Bros. severing ties with the "X-Men: The Last Stand" director.

RELATED: Fugees felon gets 14 years for illegal Obama donations

Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker. Photo by Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

The three "Rush Hour" films, released in 1998, 2001, and 2007, vaulted both Chan and Tucker from their specific genres into the mainstream and grossed over $500 million against a combined budget of around $263 million. Internationally, the films grossed almost another $400 million.

Throughout the 1990s, Tucker had been a successful stand-up comedian and starred in movies like "Friday" and "The Fifth Element" before landing the iconic role.

Chan had already starred in dozens of action films, but his popularity was on the rise in the United States in 1990s, with "Supercop" and "Rumble in the Bronx" gaining cult status, before "Rush Hour" took him to new heights.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

My mother was evil; here's how I help others face their own abusive childhoods



Almost every coaching client I serve says something like this:

“What am I supposed to think about my mother? I don’t want to think of her as a bad person, but would a good person treat her children the way our mother treated me and my brothers and sisters?”

These good shards of her personality could never coalesce into a normal-range person. But I have an idea of who that woman could have been.

Who are these clients, and what am I doing with them that we’d be talking about this?

If I were a licensed mental health “professional,” you’d call what I do counseling. Since I’m not a licensed professional, I call it personal coaching and consulting. As a man who was raised by a mother deranged with borderline and narcissistic personality disorders and who became a self-destructive alcoholic for much of his life, I offer peer support and advice from someone who lived it.

Accepting reality

Let’s return to the question we opened with. No, a good person would not abuse her children the way the parents of my clients treated them. That’s the answer that many people don’t want to hear. But accepting the ugly reality of an abusive parent is a minimum requirement for getting past the psychological damage this inflicts on children who later become damaged adults.

For many people who grew up this way, accepting reality is necessary but not sufficient. They don’t know what to do with the memories of the good times, the apparent kindnesses they remember from otherwise frightening parents. I’m going to come back to this below with some stories about how I’ve turned this over in my mind as I’ve tried to grapple with who my abusive mother really was.

How did the parents of my clients treat them? Many of my clients had parents who threatened or attempted suicide in order to extract care and pity from their children. Some of my clients were nearly killed by their fathers. (Yes, I mean that the fathers consciously, knowingly tried to kill them; strangulation is the usual method.) Some were pimped out as prostitutes by their mothers.

Not everyone had such a florid experience, but nearly everyone I serve was raised by a parent who could not be trusted. My clients were abused as children. Actually abused, not “TikTok” abused. They don’t ruminate on how being denied an ice cream cone at age 8 ruined their lives. Instead they’re people who suffered under cold, capricious, and sometimes sadistic parents. And decades later, these adults who never did anything to deserve what they got still feel it is their fault their mother didn’t love them.

A moral problem

As I’ve written about before, we are living in an age characterized by what are known as Cluster B personality disorders. These are better thought of as character disorders, in the vein of psychologist George K. Simon. He’s one of the few practicing and writing psychologists who recognize that people who are intensely narcissistic, exploitative, manipulative, dishonest, and cruel are not suffering from a medical problem. They are suffering from a moral and spiritual problem. A personality disorder is not an organic brain problem. It is not a “disability.” It is not diabetes. It is the state of having an immoral and warped personal character.

My goal with clients is to give them a kind of conversation that will allow them to see, and to accept, the reality of their parents’ derangement. If you grew up in a normal, loving family, you may have a hard time accepting that I’m telling you the truth about what kinds of people these parents were to their kids. There is a taboo against acknowledging that some mothers (it’s not symmetrical; people have no problem believing this of fathers) do not love their children and try to annihilate them.

To hell with the taboo. Reality doesn’t conform to what we prefer to feel.

RELATED: We need to start trusting our primal survival instincts again

Stefano Bianchetti/Getty Images

Emotional balance sheet

Grown children from abusive homes usually don’t know, or can’t accept, that their parents were bad people. Many of my clients hesitate to use the word “abuse,” even a moment after a client tells me a story about how her mother hit on her teenaged boyfriend and then slapped the daughter, accusing her of being a slut. Genuinely abused children spend decades denying the truth and working overtime to rehabilitate the image of a grossly destructive father or mother. It is only when alcoholism, depression, or a string of failed relationships drive them to despair that they’re ready to take steps toward telling the truth.

When a person crosses the threshold and accepts that her mother or father was not a good person, did not “do their best,” and did not really love their children, she’s made enormous progress. This is the first and most important goal in recovering equanimity. But it’s not enough for many of us. What are we to do with the good memories? How are we to see our mother when we remember the times she imparted skills and wisdom to us? How do those affect the emotional balance sheet’s bottom line?

I’m going to concede something but with an important proviso: Yes, it’s generally true that no person is all good or all bad. But here’s the proviso: The kind of parents we’re talking about are not “a normal mix of good and bad.” We’re talking about parents who are, to a close approximation, 95% “bad” and only 5% “good.”

The arithmetic on that is straightforward. Five percent achievement will not get you a passing grade on a test, and it does not give these adults a passing moral grade for parenthood.

Glimpses of good

Still what about the good times? I’ve thought about this for years. I’ve talked about it with my (non-woke, conservative, old-school) therapist for years, and it’s been on my mind lately.

Back in the late '80s, my mother and I were watching TV, and something came up about women’s place in society, how to have a career and a family at the same time. We’ve all heard these topics discussed for decades; it was one of those times when something “truthful-ish” leaked out in my mother’s conversation.

My mother was a deranged woman with borderline and narcissistic personality disorders. She was abusive and horrible. I use the past tense even though she’s still alive because I permanently removed her from my life 10 years ago.

But there were times when a real person glimmered through. Sometimes you could see and hear the intelligent, insightful woman she could have been if her good qualities hadn’t been subsumed by her moral and psychiatric derangement.

The mother she wanted to be

This conversation in the '80s was one of those times. I remember it so well because it’s one of my memory’s best examples of the woman I hoped she truly was — the woman who could have been the good mother that deep down I think she wanted to be but could not.

We were listening to the TV discussion. I don’t remember the specifics, just that it was filled with the usual pat feminist answers that contradicted each other and demanded a world of circumstances for women that was never realistic. Having cake and eating it too, that sort of thing.

My mother reflected on all that, and she had this to say:

“It’s impossible for you to understand how strong the biological drive to have children is for women. We like to pretend it isn’t real and say it’s not real, but it is. A woman can feel the pull, and it’s overwhelming. I wanted to be a mother and have children since I was a little girl. It’s all I wanted to be.”

Living with the contradiction

This was true but only sometimes. My mother had borderline personality disorder, and such people have extreme and often opposing desires that conflict with each other. Their problem is that they don’t know how to integrate these conflicts, or how to live with the conflict and ambiguity. So instead of acknowledging the conflict, they pretend it’s not there. The next day, for example, my mother could rail at the top of her lungs about how women were enslaved, how they had a right to be “more than just mothers.”

A contradiction, yes, but an understandable one. My mother would have been better off if she’d found some way to live with the conflicts that most women feel, especially in a society that treats the status of women and mothers in such a, well, borderline way. My mother may have been crazy globally, but she was not “crazy” to react badly to these contradictory messages.

She also said this:

“Young women are making a mistake waiting so long to have children. You just don’t have the energy at 30 or 35 that you have when you’re 20. It’s not the same. Women were built to have children, and we were built to have them as young women. Today’s mothers are going to have problems they’re not counting on because they waited so long.”

She was right. Even my mother, a florid Cluster B personality case, could see the truth in traditional wisdom. Even she, a screeching feminist liberal, could admit that men and women were built differently and that women had biological drives to bear children.

Unanswered questions

My mother and I had many conversations like that over the years. Long talks where honesty crept in, even if it was gone the next day. I remember them so well because they showed the woman she could have been, they showed the best of her intellect and perception.

I miss them. I do know, of course, that there wasn’t a stable version of my mother just waiting to blossom. These good shards of her personality could never coalesce into a normal-range person. But I have an idea of who that woman could have been.

So it goes with many of my clients. A son remembers his intensely selfish and punitive father who sometimes imparted helpful wisdom. A daughter remembers a mother who once took real joy watching her daughter graduate from college, even though the week before, mom overdosed on pills in a sick bid for attention.

Who are these people? We may never know. This is not how I want to end this essay. I don’t like unanswered questions and puzzles that can’t be solved. Nevertheless here they are.

'Landman': Is Taylor Sheridan's gritty oil drama the last honest show about America?



The days of "The Wire," "The Sopranos," "Boardwalk Empire," "Breaking Bad," and "Better Call Saul" are gone. And they're never coming back.

Instead of quality TV, we get a stream of shallow muck that insults our intelligence and wastes our time. Seth Rogen peddling the same stale stoner humor for the thousandth time. Pedro Pascal starring in a dystopian video-game adaptation so obsessed with gay "representation" that it might as well list Grindr as a co-producer.

Sheridan shows a country held together by early mornings, long shifts, and people who take pride in work most citizens rarely notice.

Then, just as you’re about to suffocate in the hothouse atmosphere of algorithm-driven fake-prestige TV, one show comes stomping in with a pair of steel-toed boots and kicks the door off its hinges. Fresh air floods the place — enough that something real might actually grow again. That show is "Landman."

Drill, baby, drill

Forget "shame"; it's time to drill, baby, drill. Taylor Sheridan's hit is back for season 2, with the TV auteur once again proving that he is one of the few people in Hollywood who actually understands the America he is depicting. Many viewers know him from "Yellowstone," the rare modern hit that refused to treat ranchers the way Hollywood treats anyone who still works with their hands. Where executive elites see deplorables, he sees Americans with stories worth telling.

Sheridan brings that same respect to "Landman." He writes ordinary Americans with dignity rather than derision. He shows them as they are: hardworking, flawed, loyal, funny, and strong enough to carry a story on their backs. "Landman" is no cheap cousin of "Yellowstone." It stands tall: lean, mean, focused, and built with the same skill that made Sheridan’s early work impossible to ignore.

The show moves effortlessly between blue-collar reality and white-collar brutality, revealing the canyon between those who pull the oil from the ground and those who profit from it. There’s a real honesty to that contrast. Sheridan knows this world, and it shows. You feel it in every shot of the Permian Basin. You hear it in the blunt, believable way his characters speak.

Billy Bob at his best

And then there’s Billy Bob Thornton. One of America’s finest actors, doing his best work since he stole "Fargo" as a soft-spoken psychopath who could change the temperature of a room with a single line. As Tommy Norris, a ruthless oilman, he brings back that same menace, just a little more restrained. He’s the perfect Sheridan creation: bruised, stubborn, quick to size people up, and capable of cruelty when pushed.

Season 1 worked best when it put Norris at the center and let everything else orbit around him. The very first scene of the very first episode sets the tone. Norris, blindfolded in a room with a cartel heavy, cracks a dry line about how they both traffic in addictive products. His just happens to make more money. It’s a joke with teeth. Sheridan doesn’t shy away from the darker corners of the oil world, the places where danger, deceit, and obscene wealth share the same bed.

Norris once ran his own outfit. Now he’s a fixer for M-Tex Oil, answering to Monty Miller, a billionaire played by Jon Hamm of "Mad Men" fame. Hamm leans into one of the last great “man’s man” roles on TV. He moves through marble corridors and executive suites with the relaxed confidence of a man who has never had to fight for a parking space or a paycheck.

Norris gets the other Texas. The asylum-adjacent McMansion he shares with co-workers. The long, unforgiving drives that eat up whole days. And the late-night waffle joints where truckers, rig hands, and the down-and-outs swallow bad coffee and brood over worse decisions.

Recognizably real

Sheridan shows a country held together by early mornings, long shifts, and people who take pride in work most citizens rarely notice. He zooms in on communities where faith still shapes daily life, where people curse when they have to, where men bow their heads before a meal and chew tobacco like there’s no tomorrow.

For conservatives, and especially for Christians who are tired of being reduced to stereotypes, "Landman" feels recognizably real. Season 1 had its flaws, including a few moments that leaned too hard into climate panic, but it never lost sight of what matters: good storytelling built on real characters and real consequences.

RELATED: 'Yellowstone' actor Forrie J. Smith on why America needs to rediscover its cowboy culture

Blaze Media

Men at work

And yes, the progressive pearl-clutchers will claim "Landman" has a “woman problem,” the same complaint they threw at "Yellowstone." They insist that Sheridan sidelines women or turns them into cardboard cutouts.

The truth is far less dramatic. Both ranching and the oil fields are worlds dominated by men, and Sheridan writes them as they actually are, not as activists wish them to be. That’s not misogyny, but an accurate reflection of the reality millions of Americans live every day. Sure, some female characters could use more lines, but that hardly damages the show. It simply acknowledges that in these worlds, the danger, the decisions, and the dirty work fall mostly on men.

"Landman" also has something most modern shows forget: a genuine sense of place. Not the packaged Americana you see on postcards, but the West Texas that actually exists, where the heat melts your mind and vacation time is something you hear about, not something you get.

Season 2 promises to go deeper — underground for the oil and under the skin of the people who pull it out. More tension between the barons and the boys in the mud. More of Thornton’s world-weary wit. And more of what Sheridan does better than anyone around: crafting TV that wouldn’t look out of place beside the giants of the late 1990s and early 2000s.

If "Yellowstone" was Sheridan’s hymn to the American ranch, "Landman" is his sermon on the American worker. In an age of narrative nothingness, something on TV finally feels worth watching.

Jehovah's Witnesses: Worshipping with the most hated denomination



After attending a somewhat run-of-the-mill novus ordo Mass with only a few redeeming qualities, my husband and I decided to visit another church in Nevada that is possibly one of the most hated and misunderstood Christian denominations — even with the Latter-day Saints and Seventh-day Adventists.

It was both his and my first time attending a Jehovah’s Witness church.

'I personally don’t want to go to heaven, but want to remain on Earth when we’re resurrected. I want to live among the animals and trees and plants and not rule over others.'

We walked 40-some minutes to the Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses and were greeted warmly, even though we were two minutes late and the congregation had already begun singing the first hymn. The setting might have been bland, but I felt I had achieved a bucket-list goal.

For years I’d tried to visit a Kingdom Hall. The Jehovah's Witnesses were one of the last churches to reopen nationwide after COVID, offering online meetings for nearly two and a half years, until summer of 2022. Even after that, many remained closed for another year, and a large portion still host hybrid Zoom/in-person gatherings for the immune-compromised.

Kingdom Hall

To many, the inside of the meeting hall would appear no different from a conservative Protestant church. Most women wore skirts or business suits; the men were in full suits. The carpet was gray, the walls plain, decorated with a few pictures of flowers. There were no windows.

Rows of theater chairs faced a pulpit. Though the Jehovah's Witnesses do not have ordained ministers, any baptized man may teach from Scripture. On the day we visited, a guest speaker from Idaho — tailored suit, bright red tie — delivered a sermon much like any Protestant pastor’s, citing extensive Bible verses to support his points. There was no American flag, unsurprising given JW pacifism. Jehovah's Witnesses do not vote, and while they don’t forbid self-defense, they register as conscientious objectors during drafts. They believe that those who live by the sword will die by the sword (Matthew 26:52).

RELATED: Church-hopping: Confessions of an itinerant worshipper

Keturah Hickman

The sermon

The message, titled “Is There in Fact a True Religion from God’s Standpoint?” began with statistics: 85% of the world identifies as religious, 31% Christian, across 45,000 denominations — with a new one forming every 2.2 days. “But how does Jehovah want to be worshipped?” he asked.

He read from Mark 7:6-7 and James 1:26, then cited Solomon: True religion is to fear God and keep His commandments (Ecclesiastes 12:13). More verses followed — Isaiah 48:17-18, Micah 6:8, Matthew 7:16 — arguing that true belief and conduct must fit like a well-tailored suit, not mismatched pieces.

He condemned most Christian denominations for justifying slavery so that men might Christianize pagan souls for the kingdom of God. He pointed out that the Jehovah’s Witnesses never supported such horrid beliefs. (He failed to mention that slavery was already abolished by the time they came along.) He warned against fatalism, ancestor worship, and faith in human institutions. “If a religion permits or promotes practices the Bible condemns, it is not true,” he said, citing Colossians 3:10, John 8:32, James 3:17-18, and others.

“Truth is found in the word of God,” he concluded. “When we love the word, we are peaceable.”

The sermon ended with the JW hymn “My Father, My God and Friend (Hebrews 6:10)."

All along the Watchtower

After the hymn, an elder read from "The Watchtower," the denomination’s monthly study magazine. Before the group was called Jehovah’s Witnesses, it was the Watch Tower Society, founded by Charles Taze Russell in 1881.

The article that day was “Jehovah Heals the Brokenhearted” (Psalm 147:3). The elder read each paragraph aloud, then passed the microphone for congregants — men and women, in person or on Zoom — to share reflections.

Here are some highlights.

  • Satan wants us to wallow in our feelings. Jehovah wants us to defy Satan and serve Him. When we do that, He sees us and is moved to help us.
  • Jehovah doesn’t keep track of our sins, but only of the good we do.
  • Jehovah does not put a time limit on our prayers as if it were a therapy session. We can pray to Him for as long as we like, and He’ll keep listening.
  • The Son’s sacrifice forgives our past sins so we can move ahead into the future.
  • We can comfort each other by being gentle and genuine.
  • We are not to blame for how others hurt us.

It was repetitive but sincere — an hour-long group meditation on comfort and resilience.

The service ended with another hymn. There was no tithe, and communion is held only once a year for those who believe they are among the 144,000 destined for heaven.

The congregants

Afterward, several congregants welcomed us. One woman, Linda, about 70, explained that she had converted from Protestantism before marrying.

“There aren’t many differences between us and other churches,” she said, “except that we don’t teach what other places teach.”

“Such as?”

“We teach that Jehovah is Almighty God and that Jesus is His son and our Messiah. And we don’t believe in hellfire,” she said. “You can’t really find that idea in the Bible.”

I asked her if that meant that she believes everyone goes to heaven or if they just die.

She said, “The Bible says 144,000 go to heaven to be kings and priests to be the government of the kingdom of heaven that will come to Earth. I personally don’t want to go to heaven, but want to remain on Earth when we’re resurrected. I want to live among the animals and trees and plants and not rule over others.”

Linda gave me a small Bible — I gladly accepted it because it was lightweight and would fit perfectly into my backpack, and until now I had only been able to carry a New Testament. She explained to me that the Jehovah's Witnesses didn’t approve of many of Scofield’s notes in the KJV and that their version had more accurate cross-references. I love having various versions of the Bible to read through, so there was no complaint from me!

She invited us to join her husband and friends at a cafe for a late lunch. And so we went with about 20 other congregants. I sat by a woman just a little older than I. Ozzy had been raised in the Jehovah's Witnesses and had spent much of her youth as a traveling nanny. She told me that nearly six years ago she had married a Grace Baptist Church man and had a daughter with him. They eventually divorced. “I’m just grateful my daughter is learning about God in both homes she’s raised in," she said.

Although Ozzy did not speak ill of her ex-husband, it was clear that she thought her expression of faith was more valid than his. So I asked her what was different between the two theologies, in her opinion.

“That’s a good question," Ozzy said. "Not much."

Then she added:

Except how we define the Trinity — you know, you can’t find that word in the Bible. I’ve searched every translation of the Bible, so I know. We both believe in the concept, though JW is more literal and bases their definition on how the Bible describes it. We believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are three separate entities united by a common will. Grace Bible Church is more Catholic when they talk about the Trinity.

After a day with them, I found them sincere and Bible-focused, hardly cult-like. They loved God, quoted Scripture freely, and treated us with warmth — even when I somewhat aggressively asked about one of their more infamous beliefs.

“I have heard that your church does not allow people to get blood transfusions and that this has caused many people to die.”

"Yes, we believe blood is sacred and not to be spilled in war nor ingested for any reason," Linda responded. "But blood can be divided into four components, and it is okay to receive any of those minor fractions.

"Most people don’t even need blood transfusions as much as they used to," she added, noting that "scientists have discovered that there are healthier ways to fill a low blood count with supplements and iron.”

Are the Witnesses a cult?

I’m not sure what makes a group a cult any more. Some say it’s when people follow a man rather than the Bible — but the Jehovah's Witnesses have no central figure. They encourage personal Bible study.

Interestingly, 65% of members are converts — adults who join by conviction, not birth. While many leave, those who stay do so deliberately. Angry ex-members exist in every religion, and that alone doesn’t define a cult.

Much of JW doctrine is nothing your average Protestant would quarrel with: anti-abortion but pro-birth-control, personal responsibility for family size, and no institutional oversight (beyond guidance from JW Broadcasting in New York). There’s also no enforcement mechanism for rules on blood transfusions or holidays.

There are 8.6 million Jehovah’s Witnesses worldwide, compared to 15.7 million Jews, 17 million Mormons, and 22 million Seventh-day Adventists. Many Protestants single out the denomination's rejection of transfusions, but the Jehovah's Witnesses are neither faith healers nor anti-medicine. They are pacifists but politically moderate and scientifically literate.

Charles Taze Russell

Jehovah's Witnesses founder Charles Taze Russell was raised Presbyterian. At age 13 he left his church to embark upon a kind of quest for the truth, for a time backsliding into unbelief.

Known for writing Bible verse on fences as a way to evangelize, he founded a group called the Bible Student Movement in 1879. Much like Mormons, the Two by Twos, and the Jim Roberts Group, his group grew by sending out pairs of men to preach the word of God directly from the Bible.

Despite Russell's zeal, his life was riddled with scandal. He divorced his wife after she demanded a larger editorial influence on "The Watch Tower." He sued for libel often, occasionally winning — one time the jury mockingly ruled in his favor but gave him only one dollar, and so he filed an appeal and received $15,000.

After wrongly predicting the end of the world numerous times, Russell died in 1931. The group split apart. Approximately a quarter of the members remained faithful to Russell’s successors and began calling themselves Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Their use of the name “Jehovah” also irritates critics, though it appears in the King James Bible (Exodus 6:3; Psalm 83:18; Isaiah 12:2; 26:4).

Their rejection of the Nicene Trinity remains the sharpest point of division — a doctrine codified by the Catholic Church and later adopted by nearly all of Protestantism. It’s an irony of history: Protestants who define themselves against Rome still use Rome’s creed as the boundary of belief. Disagreement with that doctrine, however, does not make a faith a cult.

The trend to schism

One striking point from the sermon stayed with me: Every 2.2 days a new denomination is created.

Until the 16th century, Christianity had only a handful of branches. Now there are 45,000. The JW speaker said it is because everyone seeks truth; I think it’s because we’ve forgotten love.

As Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 13: “If I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing.”

What merit is truth without love? God does not honor self-righteous division. This, perhaps, was Martin Luther’s and Henry VIII’s greatest sin — their pride tore Christ’s body into pieces.

Protestants readily maintain friendly regard for Judaism, which does not accept Christ’s divinity, while showing far less tolerance for groups such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, or Adventists — who profess Jesus as Lord and Redeemer.

For this reason, I urge believers: Visit all churches. Seek unity where possible. Not to follow fads, but to love the whole body of Christ — even the Jehovah’s Witnesses.