Talarico recants past statements, says he was 'intentionally provocative' by calling God 'non-binary'

Michie · May 29, 2026

Democratic nominee for US Senate blasts Paxton as 'most corrupt politician in America'

Texas state Rep. James Talarico, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, sought Wednesday to defuse Republican attacks over his past comments on religion and gender while intensifying his assault on his opponent, Attorney General Ken Paxton, calling him “the most corrupt politician in America.”

In a wide-ranging interview with CBS News’ Ed O’Keefe — his first network television appearance since Paxton defeated incumbent Sen. John Cornyn in the GOP runoff — Talarico addressed resurfaced 2021 remarks that have become a central line of attack from Republicans.

Continued below.

Talarico recants past statements, says he was 'intentionally provocative' by calling God 'non-binary'

Texas state Rep James Talarico, the Democratic nominee for U S Senate, sought Wednesday to defuse Republican attacks over his past comments on religion and gender while intensifying his assault on

www.christianpost.com

Vambram · May 29, 2026

Frankly? I doubt his recantation is sincere.

Michie · May 29, 2026

Vambram said:
Frankly? I doubt his recantation is sincere.

It’s about getting elected.

Delvianna · May 29, 2026

"Talarico said he had been “intentionally provocative” but stood by the underlying idea."

uh..... you can't "recant" something you then say you agree with... What in the world?!

Vambram · May 29, 2026

Michie said:
It’s about getting elected.

I agree.

iluvatar5150 · May 30, 2026

Vambram said:
Frankly? I doubt his recantation is sincere.

I hope everybody takes note of this and instead votes for the guy who wasn't sincere about his oath sworn to the Texas bar, his oath of office, or his marriage vows.

Vambram · May 30, 2026

iluvatar5150 said:
I hope everybody takes note of this and instead votes for the guy who wasn't sincere about his oath sworn to the Texas bar, his oath of office, or his marriage vows.

The only part of that accusation is that is factual is the part about his marriage vows.

iluvatar5150 · May 30, 2026

Vambram said:
The only part of that accusation is that is factual is the part about his marriage vows.

lol, the 121 members of the Texas house who voted to impeach him for bribery, abuse of power, obstruction of justice, and making false statements would likely disagree.

Michie · May 30, 2026

Good lord people. Can people talk about the op which is Talarico instead of Trump as the constant go to?

iluvatar5150 · May 30, 2026

Michie said:
Good lord people. Can people talk about the op which is Talarico instead of Trump as the constant go to?

Nobody’s talking about Trump. We’re talking about Talarico’s opponent, Ken Paxton.

Granted, Paxton is also a Republican who’s been caught philandering and who’s faced legal troubles and impeachment for a variety of corruption scandals, so your confusion is understandable.

One notable difference is that, unlike the vote to impeach Trump, the vote to impeach Paxton was overwhelming and from his own party.

Michie · May 30, 2026

iluvatar5150 said:
Nobody’s talking about Trump. We’re talking about Talarico’s opponent, Ken Paxton.

Granted, Paxton is also a Republican who’s been caught philandering and who’s faced legal troubles and impeachment for a variety of corruption scandals, so your confusion is understandable.

One notable difference is that, unlike the vote to impeach Trump, the vote to impeach Paxton was overwhelming and from his own party.

Sure. Lol.

iluvatar5150 · May 31, 2026

Michie said:
Sure. Lol.

Do you doubt me? Trump was never a member of any bar association nor was he impeached by the Texas house, so neither post 6 or 8 would’ve made any sense if I were talking about him.

Tuur · May 31, 2026

Michie said:
Good lord people. Can people talk about the op which is Talarico instead of Trump as the constant go to?

No. This is CF. It's more about Trump than a MAGA rally.

Tuur · May 31, 2026

iluvatar5150 said:
Do you doubt me? Trump was never a member of any bar association nor was he impeached by the Texas house, so neither post 6 or 8 would’ve made any sense if I were talking about him.

Let's drop the other shoe: A quick check shows Paxton was acquitted on all charges. Like the judges charge traverse juries before deliberation, an indictment is not evidence of wrongdoing, only that there was sufficient evidence to hold a trial. Impeachments are the same.

Meanwhile, while waving articles of impeachment, naught is said about Talarico apparently being the best Texas Democrats can offer. Honestly, he reminds me of a US senator I once met who was wearing mismatched socks.

Postvieww · May 31, 2026

Michie said:
Democratic nominee for US Senate blasts Paxton as 'most corrupt politician in America'

Texas state Rep. James Talarico, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, sought Wednesday to defuse Republican attacks over his past comments on religion and gender while intensifying his assault on his opponent, Attorney General Ken Paxton, calling him “the most corrupt politician in America.”

In a wide-ranging interview with CBS News’ Ed O’Keefe — his first network television appearance since Paxton defeated incumbent Sen. John Cornyn in the GOP runoff — Talarico addressed resurfaced 2021 remarks that have become a central line of attack from Republicans.

Continued below.

Talarico recants past statements, says he was 'intentionally provocative' by calling God 'non-binary'

Texas state Rep James Talarico, the Democratic nominee for U S Senate, sought Wednesday to defuse Republican attacks over his past comments on religion and gender while intensifying his assault on

www.christianpost.com

So we have two imperfect men! Which one supports the constitution and country as founded. If I lived in Texas I could figure this out easily.

Vambram · May 31, 2026

iluvatar5150 said:
Nobody’s talking about Trump. We’re talking about Talarico’s opponent, Ken Paxton.

Granted, Paxton is also a Republican who’s been caught philandering and who’s faced legal troubles and impeachment for a variety of corruption scandals, so your confusion is understandable.

One notable difference is that, unlike the vote to impeach Trump, the vote to impeach Paxton was overwhelming and from his own party.

LoL, Paxton was acquitted in the Texas Senate. Then, the people of Texas overwhelmingly reelected him to be the State AG and now to be the GOP candidate for the US Senate in Texas. The majority of the people in Texas did not buy the garbage lies against Paxton.

iluvatar5150 · May 31, 2026

Tuur said:
Let's drop the other shoe: A quick check shows Paxton was acquitted on all charges.

lol wut? No he wasn’t.

He was acquitted on the impeachment, which is a political decision, not a criminal one. It doesn’t mean they found him innocent. It just means they found it not advantageous to remove him from office.

He cut a deal on the criminal charges and the bar complaints were dismissed because the court didn’t have jurisdiction due to separation of powers.

Like the judges charge traverse juries before deliberation, an indictment is not evidence of wrongdoing, only that there was sufficient evidence to hold a trial. Impeachments are the same.

No, they aren’t.

ViaCrucis · May 31, 2026

Postvieww said:
So we have two imperfect men! Which one supports the constitution and country as founded. If I lived in Texas I could figure this out easily.

Well that's easy. It's Talarico.

Paxton is a snake.

But then again, this is America. The place where sheep vote for wolves, and gazelles vote for leopards. So being a corrupt immoral snake is probably in Paxton's favor.

As far as the specific topic of the thread. I am not familiar with Talarico's specific remarks, but referring to God as "non-binary" is likely to serve two purposes: It is provocative, which Talarico seems to be admitting to here. But it's also normative, orthodox Christian doctrine that the Divine Essence is non-gendered. So while "non-binary" is a provocative statement, and would technically still be incorrect as non-binary applies only to a context of human gender; God is best described as non-gendered. This is a non-controversial and non-provocative statement, as it is entirely accurate. God is neither male nor female--He is God.

Tuur · May 31, 2026

iluvatar5150 said:
No, they aren’t.

Oh my word: This is Civics 101. Impeachment is a trial. On the Federal level, the House acts as the grand jury and returns articles of impeachment just as a grand jury returns an indictment. The trial is then held in the Senate, which is like a trial held by the traverse jury, except instead of 12 jurors you have 100.

A quick check shows that Texas follows the same model. The Texas House returns articles of impeachment and the trial for removal is held in the Texas Senate. There you have 31. Like it or not Paxton was acquitted on all impeachment charges.

Vambram · May 31, 2026

ViaCrucis said:
Well that's easy. It's Talarico.

Paxton is a snake.

But then again, this is America. The place where sheep vote for wolves, and gazelles vote for leopards. So being a corrupt immoral snake is probably in Paxton's favor.

As far as the specific topic of the thread. I am not familiar with Talarico's specific remarks, but referring to God as "non-binary" is likely to serve two purposes: It is provocative, which Talarico seems to be admitting to here. But it's also normative, orthodox Christian doctrine that the Divine Essence is non-gendered. So while "non-binary" is a provocative statement, and would technically still be incorrect as non-binary applies only to a context of human gender; God is best described as non-gendered. This is a non-controversial and non-provocative statement, as it is entirely accurate. God is neither male nor female--He is God.

God is the Heavenly Father. God is the Trinity Triune God. The Lord has never described Himself as the Heavenly mother.

Talarico recants past statements, says he was 'intentionally provocative' by calling God 'non-binary'

Well-Known Member

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Well-Known Member

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Believer

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Well-Known Member

Confessional Lutheran

Well-Known Member

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Similar threads