RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/06/why-does-conservative-supreme-court-love-obamacare-matthew-vadum/

Conservatives across America have to be asking themselves why they put so much time, money, and energy into electing Republicans when the supposedly conservative Supreme Court justices who follow side with the Left in important cases.

The latest jurisprudential atrocity is the high court’s dreadful but not altogether unexpected betrayal of the U.S. Constitution in California v. Texas, a challenge to the Obamacare redistribution statute lodged by Texas and 17 other states that had been backed by the former Trump administration.

“It’s never been a proper role for the federal government to regulate health care and health insurance,” Robert Henneke of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, who represented two individual plaintiffs, said after winning at the trial court level. “It is a proper role for the states.”

There are 6 conservative justices and 3 liberal justices on the Supreme Court, or so the conventional wisdom goes.

Yet instead of dealing with the legal controversy head on, a majority of the court chickened out, failing for a third time to mete out a richly deserved death blow to the flagrantly unconstitutional, un-American monstrosity that is the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). By a vote of 7–2 on June 17, the Supreme Court cavalierly brushed aside questionsof the law’s constitutional validity by finding that those challenging it lacked the required legal standing to do so.

Of the three Trump appointees, two –Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett— voted to protect the ACA. Even the most brilliant member of the court, conservative stalwart Justice Clarence Thomas, bought into this cowardly nonsense, siding with the majority on standing.

This ruling should disabuse Americans once and for all of the claim, repeated ad nauseam by the Left, that the Supreme Court,which momentarily is dominated by Republican appointees, is somehow “conservative” or “right-wing.”

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/06/of_founders_slavery_and_freedom.html

More people around the world are—at least nominally—free than at any other time in history. Free from monarchs, dictators, communism, fascism. Free from serfdom, servitude, slavery, deprivation and extreme oppression. This has ironically led many to take their freedom for granted. Especially in the West. Perhaps the longer you have had something the less you cherish it. Because never before in human history have so many people willingly ceded control of their minds, souls and bodies to others. Examples of this are legion, perhaps none more illustrative and chilling than the reaction to government mandates and restrictions put in place during the coronavirus plandemic pandemic.

Healthy people must stay in their homes for two weeks a year or more? No problem. We have to cover our breathing apparatus with masks, indoors or out? Check. My job is “nonessential?” Yes, sir. I can’t go see my dying grandmother? Okay. Daughter can’t get married if she wants all her friends and family to attend and share her joy? Whatever you say. “Experts” say I must inject an unvetted foreign substance into my body if I wish to attend college or keep my job? Thank you, sir, I’ll have another! We must keep at least six feet apart from all other homo sapiens and eat our Thanksgiving dinner outside? Big Brother knows best!

Whether submitting to hoaxes, obeying frauds or allowing “educators,” “journalists,” Big Tech tyrants, corporate charlatans and unelected bureaucrats to tell us what to do, how to speak, how to think, and what is right, far too many of us have effectively knelt before the emperor. But the emperor has no clothes. It is time for us to acknowledge this fact.

(A brief aside: Those who would enslave us spent four years telling us that President Trump was an emperor, a tyrant. They opposed everything he did or said simply because he did or said it. Turns out, most of what he said was correct. And he was one man fighting, for us, against the vast systemic bigotry of The Left. He was, in fact, the anti-emperor, the embodiment of a true anti-fascist.)

Too many of us have put up with exorbitant taxes, punitive regulations, mindless mandates, and policies that make us less happy, less free and at greater risk of being physically harmed or killed. Enforced mask mandates for us but not for those burning down our cities. Protect our borders? No way. Defund the police? You bet.

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/06/23/the-republic-is-preserved-but-the-democrats-will-try-insurrection-again/

Republicans have saved this country’s two-party political system. At least for now. The power-hungry Democrats won’t give up easily, though. They’ll redouble their efforts to set themselves up as an unchallengeable political force that rules rather than governs.

With Sen. Mitch McConnell and the rest of the Republicans in the 50-50 Senate voting against moving forward with the “For the People Act of 2021,” the Democrats’ plan to put elections under federal rather than state and local authority was shelved Tuesday. It was the proper ending for legislation that should have never been written.

Of course, the Democrat-media cabal swears that the defeat is a disaster for the country, the bitter end of democracy. They’ve screeched until breathless that without the bill, the U.S. would be a swamp of “voter suppression.”

The Democrats know full-well that none of that is true – and are also entirely aware that the For the People Act was a naked power grab by the party that continues not to drift but steer hard to the left, a fact they’ve tried to cover up with their theatrics. The legislation, which got through the Democratic House in March by 10 votes, was a brazen effort to install permanent Democratic control of the federal government. It’s insurrection by ballot.

Beneath its feel-good title, the For the People Act is a dark ruse that creates favorable conditions for voter fraud. Its provisions include: 

Mandates to allow automatic registration and same-day voting after registration.
Limits states’ ability to work with each other to determine which voters are registered in multiple states simultaneously. 
Prohibits election observers from cooperating with election officials to file formal challenges to suspicious voter registrations.
Criminalizes protected political speech by making it an offense to “discourage” someone from voting.
Bars states from making their own vote-by-mail laws.
Allows “citizens who lack any appropriate photo ID to gain access to the polls with sworn affidavits to their identity.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-manchins-voting-compromise-11624401491?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

Senate Democrats tried and failed Tuesday to move their version of H.R.1, the bill to impose a federal election code on all 50 states. That 800-page travesty was doomed once West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin came out against it. But now Democrats are rallying around Plan B, which is based on a three-page memo circulated by Mr. Manchin’s office.

It’s a curious document. The preamble insists that any voting bill “must be the result of both Democrats and Republicans coming together.” But then it suggests an H.R.1 “compromise” that is no bipartisan kumbaya. As Republican leader Mitch McConnell said last week in ruling out Mr. Manchin’s wish list, it still involves “an assault on the fundamental idea that states, not the federal government, should decide how to run their own elections.”

To start, Mr. Manchin’s memo suggests mandating “at least 15 consecutive days of early voting.” Yet one prominent Democratic opponent of H.R.1., New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner, has objected that his state’s constitution dates to 1783, and it “requires that a voter must be present” on Election Day unless “absent from the town or city, or physically disabled.” Yet New Hampshire, he added, has had “the third highest voter turnout in the country for each of the last four presidential elections.”

The Manchin memo proposes that Congress “ban partisan gerrymandering and use computer models.” It’s not clear precisely what Mr. Manchin has in mind, but skeptics will rightly see this as a plan to turn an overtly political process into a covertly political one that would be controlled by unaccountable technocrats.