New podcast: Who stands in the middle of American politics? Often, that's a religion question

There were two major stories in American life this week, when it seemed like the world turned in a matter of minutes.

The riot at the U.S. Capitol grew out of yet another legal Donald Trump rally, with its familiar mix of hero worship, populist rage and, yes, rhetoric and symbols used by conservative, often Pentecostal, Christians. Fired up by a truly radical message from the president, many (not all) of these protestors marched to Capitol and turned into an illegal mob, crashing through security fences and then through doors and windows. Yes, some of the Christian banners and signs went with them.

We will be learning more about the makeup of that mob as participants are identified, arrest and tried — perhaps under (irony alert) Trump’s June 26th executive order authorizing a “penalty of up to 10 years’ imprisonment for the willful injury of Federal property.”

There have been waves of statements by religious leaders condemning the violence, including many by evangelicals who (a) opposed Trump, (b) reluctantly voted for him or (c) enthusiastically backed him. I expect more coverage on all of that (I’m collecting material for an “On Religion” column). Readers can start with this piece from the left, care of HuffPost.com: “Trump’s Evangelical Allies Condemn Violence At The Capitol.” It focuses on evangelicals who are still finding it hard to attack Trump, while — almost hidden at the end — noting views from some of condemned both the violence and the president’s role in it.

Let me know, via comments or email, if you see more religion-driven riot coverage.

Meanwhile, this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here to tune that in) centered on a GetReligion post that was written about two hours before the riots began: “Life after Georgia — Questions about a pro-life Democrat in U.S. Senate and other issues ...”

The key is that victories by two Democrats (one a liberal Baptist pastor) put a very interesting conservative (and Catholic) senator at the middle of America’s increasingly divided and even bloody political map.

That man, Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, is a living symbol of what used to be a major force in American politics — the white Southern Democrat. Although he has been endorsed by Democrats For Life, his pragmatic political views on that topic will not be found in the Democratic or Republican platforms, but do resemble the views of millions of centrist Americans.

Many Democrats, in the past, have insisted that Manchin is not really a Democrat. Well, how many want to toss him out of the party right now (with that 50-50 Senate split)?

So if pro-life Democrats huddle with top DNC boss, will it anger all those young Nones?

Does everyone remember that special U.S. House of Representatives election down in suburban Atlanta, the one that Democrats and Republicans poured millions of dollars into as a kind of referendum on President Donald Trump?

The winner, a Catholic conservative named Karen Handel, defeated a young aggressively secular outsider named Jon Ossoff.

That was a pretty big news story, right? And speaking of rather important national news stories, does anyone remember the provocative statement that Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez made a few weeks before that, when he proclaimed:

"Every Democrat, like every American ... should support a woman's right to make her own choices about her body and her health. This is not negotiable and should not change city by city or state by state." In fact, he added, "every candidate who runs as a Democrat" should affirm abortion rights.

So this week's Crossroads podcast (click here to tune that in) started with those two stories and attempted to connect the dots, building off my recent post that ran with this headline: "Who is Karen Handel, winner of that big Georgia race? Surprise! Press ignored a key angle."

The basic question: Would Handel, in a House district that Trump barely won, have been able to win if Democrats had been willing to run a candidate who was an old-fashioned, pro-life, culturally conservative, "Blue Dog" Democrat?

Ah, but would such a candidate be acceptable to the current DNC leadership in the age of Sen. Bernie Sanders and millions and millions of edgy, young, idealistic Democrats -- many of whom, according to researchers, would surely fall under the "Nones" umbrella? You remember the "Nones," as in the rising tide of religiously unaffiliated Americans? That's a big story, too.

So we have a big story linked to another big story linked to yet another big story. So one would assume that a Washington, D.C. meeting between the leaders of the group Democrats for Life with the aforementioned Perez, primarily to discuss the party's willingness to run pro-life candidates in House districts in places like Georgia, would attract quite a bit of news attention.