The Smears Begin
The left's smears against Judge Amy Coney Barrett are beginning. Here's the "scandalous" headline on page two of Monday's Washington Post: "Barrett Spoke At Law Program Touting 'Christian Worldview.'"
The left’s smears against Judge Amy Coney Barrett are beginning. Here’s the “scandalous” headline on page two of Monday’s Washington Post: “Barrett Spoke At Law Program Touting ‘Christian Worldview.’”
The “sinister” group referenced by the Post is the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which was founded by Dr. James Dobson, D. James Kennedy, Bill Bright, Larry Burkett, and others. It was created to push back against the radical agenda of the ACLU and to defend religious liberty and traditional values in the courts.
ADF is an outstanding group, and we are proud to be on the same team with them!
I also know of another major meeting where Christian views were touted and Barrett actually has embraced this other group too. They were much more selective — only 41 people attended the meeting, which took place in Philadelphia. It was called the Constitutional Convention.
I guarantee you that the delegates assembled at Independence Hall also believed in a Christian worldview. While they were familiar with Greek and Roman political philosophy from which they found support for the separation of powers, the most profound ideas that influenced their thinking were found in the Torah and the New Testament.
Their brilliance and dedication to those values made America possible. But there will be no future for America if this Washington Post headline becomes the prevailing worldview, one where Christians have no place in public life or public office.
Targeting Her Children Too
It’s bad enough that the left is targeting Judge Barrett’s faith. The Constitution actually forbids a “religious test” for public office. But now some leftists are going after her children too!
Yesterday, we told you that Boston University Professor Ibram Kendi compared Barrett to “white colonizers” for having adopted two black children from Haiti. It’s now being reported that the director of Tom Steyer’s superPAC, NextGen America, is attacking the legitimacy of the adoptions.
John Lee Brougher tweeted:
As an adoptee, I need to know more about the circumstances of how Amy Coney Barrett came to adopt her children, and the treatment of them since. Transracial adoption is fraught with trauma and potential for harm, and everything I see here is deeply concerning.
Brougher has no right to demand anything from Judge Barrett. And the accusation that her children are being abused in some way, suffering trauma and harm, is beyond disgusting.
This is a new low for the left. About the only thing the Democrats didn’t do was accuse Judge Kavanaugh of abusing his children. But that’s where the left is starting with Judge Barrett.
Pelosi’s Post-Election Plot
Speaker Nancy Pelosi sent a letter to her caucus over the weekend. She warned of the possibility that the results of the presidential election could be seriously contested and that the Electoral College may not be able to determine a winner.
If that happens, and it last happened in 1876, the election would be decided by the House of Representatives. Under this unusual scenario, each state gets one vote, which is determined by a majority vote of the state’s House delegation.
For example, Florida has 27 seats in the House of Representatives. Its delegation is currently split 13 Democrats to 14 Republicans. If all members vote based on their party affiliation, then the state of Florida would cast one vote for Donald Trump.
Here’s the kicker: Even though Democrats currently control the majority in the House, they DO NOT control a majority of state delegations. Republicans currently control 26 state delegations, while Democrats control 22. (Two states are tied, and tied delegations are not counted.)
But it is not THIS House majority that would vote. It is the next House majority — the one determined by the November elections and seated in January — that would decide a contested presidential election.
Suddenly, this year’s political calculus is far more complicated.
In other words, it doesn’t do Democrats any good to win more House seats in California or New York, where they already dominate those state delegations. It doesn’t do Republicans any good to win more House seats in Texas, although both parties certainly want to win wherever they can.
But any House race that could potentially flip a state delegation’s majority is much, much more important given that the result could determine the next president of the United States.
Two races getting the most attention in this scenario are the at-large House seats in Alaska and Montana, currently held by Republicans.
If Republicans can retake seats lost in 2018 in Michigan and Pennsylvania, they could flip those state delegations. Likewise, Democrats are hoping to defeat a vulnerable Florida Republican.
If Republicans can capture contested seats in Maine and New Hampshire, they could deadlock those state delegations and take their votes out of the Democrat column.
Rest assured, my friends, we have been looking at this possible scenario for some time too, and CWF is strategically investing your resources in the most critical House races!
Trump’s Third Nomination
No, this isn’t about the Supreme Court.
As you know, President Trump was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to negotiate the Abraham Accords between Israel and the United Arab Emirates. But you may not know that the president received a second Nobel Peace Prize nomination for his efforts to normalize relations between Kosovo and Serbia.
Well, the accolades just keep coming. President Trump has now received his third Nobel Peace Prize nomination for his efforts to get America out of “endless wars.”
To be fair, Joe Biden also received a Nobel Peace Prize nomination, and it’s a lot like Barack Obama’s. He got it just for talking and for his “calming influence.” And I suspect his chances of winning are pretty good.
Of course, he hasn’t actually done anything, like make peace between multiple nations. But Obama proved that real results weren’t necessary to win.