Back in 1983, Biden Called “Packing the Court” a “Bonehead Idea…a Terrible, Terrible Mistake to Make”

FoxNews.com reports that

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris of California, have been mum on the question of court-packing should they win the November election, but in 1983 Biden was much more outspoken on the issue, calling it a “bonehead idea.”

Biden, then a U.S. Senator from Delaware, made the comments during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in July 1983 regarding nominations to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. At the time, Republican President Ronald Reagan had stoked controversy for attempting to replace three members of the commission.

Biden argued at the time that, although it was within the president’s right to do so, it risked damaging the credibility of the commission. He compared it to President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s unsuccessful attempts in 1937 to expand the Supreme Court by six justices – in other words, pack the court.

“President Roosevelt clearly had the right to send to the United States Senate and the United States Congress a proposal to pack the court. It was totally within his right to do that. He violated no law. He was legalistically, absolutely correct,” Biden, then 40, told the committee. “But it was a bonehead idea. It was a terrible, terrible mistake to make. And it put in question, if for an entire decade, the independence of the most-significant body … in this country, the Supreme Court of the United States of America.”

The question of court-packing has been evoked in recent weeks amid President Donald Trump’s nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. Democrats have argued that the next Supreme Court Justice ought to be decided by the winner of the November election and that Barrett’s confirmation to the court – so close to the election, no less – would unfairly cement a 6-3 conservative majority on the court.

With just three weeks to go until the election, Republicans have seized on the issue as a last-minute argument to voters that a Biden administration would upend norms and install liberals on an expanding Supreme Court.

Facing pressure to take a stance during a campaign swing through Phoenix on Thursday, Biden said the country would “know my position on court-packing when the election is over.”

Biden once again deflected on the court packing question on Saturday during in a campaign stop in Erie, Pennsylvania – telling reporters that should instead focus on Republican efforts to fill the empty seat on the Supreme Court before Election Day.

“Look, the only court packing that’s going on right now. It’s going on with the Republicans packing the court now,” Biden said, arguing that “it’s not constitutional what they’re doing.”

Both Biden and Harris have said the Senate should wait until after the election to fill the seat. Biden has pledged to select the first Black female justice if given a chance. But he and Harris are otherwise taking pains to avoid talking about their vision for the Supreme Court’s future.

There is a reason that Biden and Harris refuse to talk about packing the court:

That reason being, because they intend to do it if they get elected as President and President-in-Waiting.

Sunday’s “Democrat lie of the day” on the morning news shows was a false equating of Trump getting his nomination for the vacant Supreme Court Justice Seat, Amy Coney Barrett, seating before the Presidential Election to the practice of “packing the court”, which actually means adding more justices to the nine who already serve on the Highest Court in the Land.

The Democrats desperately want to pack the court so that, like all fascist governments before them, they can rule with impunity.

There is nothing illegal or immoral about President Trump wishing to get Judge Barrett seated on the Supreme Court before November’s Presidential Election.

It is one of the perks of winning the Presidency.

For the last four years, the Democrat Elite have behaved as if they were still in power in Washington, D.C. and as if their embracement of the failed political ideology of Marxism was shared by the majority of Americans.

They are wrong on both counts

Their behavior has not won the hearts and minds of average Americans living between the coasts…in fact, quite the opposite.

While push poll after push poll attempt to convince the gullible among us that Biden is way in the lead in the race for the Presidency, in reality, Sleep Joe has trouble getting more than 40 people to come to one of his campaign rallies.

Could it be the fact that Biden, after suffering two aneurysms and the possible onset on dementia, and those who have put him up to this, including Dr. Jill Biden and the Democrat Elite, has underestimating the intelligence of average Americans living between the coats, just as they did in the 2016 Presidential Election?

Hmmm…could be.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The War on Christianity: Democrats’ React to Trump’s Nominating Amy Coney Barrett, a Christian Conservative Wife and Mother, to Supreme Court

It was an honor to be at the @WhiteHouse when Pres.@realDonaldTrump announced his nominee for #SCOTUS—Amy Coney Barrett. From what I’ve read, she is more than qualified, has a brilliant legal mind, & will interpret the Constitution as it is written. – Franklin Graham, Twitter, 9/26/20

FoxNews.com reports that

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden on Saturday said the Senate should not act on Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court until after “the American people select their next president and the next Congress.”

“Supreme Court decisions affect our everyday lives, and the Constitution was designed to give voters a voice on who makes those decisions,” Biden tweeted Saturday, just after President Trump nominated Coney Barrett to fill the vacancy left by late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

“The Senate shouldn’t act until after the American people select their next president and the next Congress,” Biden continued. “Americans deserve to be heard.”

Biden, this week, called Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s efforts to push a nominee through the Senate before Election Day an “exercise in raw political power.”

Biden pointed to the controversy surrounding Obama’s appointment of Merrick Garland to fill the vacancy left by late Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016, and argued that “having made this their standard when it served their interest, they cannot, just four years later, change course when it doesn’t serve their ends.”

Senate Republicans refused to hold a hearing or a vote on Garland’s nomination, citing the imminent 2016 presidential election.

Biden has refused to release a list of potential Supreme Court picks should he be elected president, saying that he would make his nominations to the high court on a bipartisan basis.

“If I win, I will make my choice for the Supreme Court—not as part of a partisan election campaign—but as prior presidents did,” Biden said last week. “Only after consulting Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. Senate—and seeking their advice before I ask for their consent.”

He added: “As everyone knows, I have made it clear that my first choice for the Supreme Court will make history as the first African American woman justice.”

The Trump campaign has criticized Biden for failing to release a list of his own, suggesting he is “hiding” something.

“We know he’s a tool of the radical left, so the only answer must be that he doesn’t want Americans to see the radical leftists he would appoint, with judicial histories littered with extremist rulings on issues like abortion, religious freedom, immigration, Second Amendment rights and government regulation,” Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh told Fox News this week.

Meanwhile, Biden’s running mate Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., said that Trump’s choice to nominate Barrett would “harm millions of Americans.”

“Trump’s hand-picked successor to Justice Ginsburg’s seat makes it clear: they intend to destroy the Affordable Care Act & overturn Roe,” Harris tweeted, referring to the landmark Roe v. Wade decision.

“This selection would move the court further right for a generation & harm millions of Americans,” she said.

Also Saturday, Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez also weighed in, saying the president’s choice “confirms what we already knew.”

“Everything we care about is at stake in this election. Health care is on the ballot. Reproductive rights are on the ballot. LGBTQ rights, voting rights, and workers’ rights are on the ballot. The future of our planet is on the ballot,” he said in a statement. “Today’s announcement is an affront not simply to our values as a democracy, but to every organizer and activist who has fought, marched, and voted to make this country live up to its founding ideals.”

Perez added: “We must send a loud, clear, and unified message to Trump and every one of his Republican enablers at the ballot box in November by voting them out of office.”

The comments come after Trump formally nominated Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court from the White House Rose Garden Saturday. Coney Barrett accepted the nomination, pledging to “discharge the responsibilities of this job to the very best of my ability.”

“I love the United States and I love the United States Constitution,” she said Saturday. “I will do equal right to the poor and the rich and faithfully and impartially discharge my duties under the United States Constitution.”

Why are the Democrats so scared of a strong Christian Conservative American Woman with a loving husband and seven children, including two they adopted from Haiti and one who has special needs, who possesses an impeccable legal background which makes her more than qualified to serve on the Supreme Court?

Consider, if you will, a country in which its president is being fought against by municipal leaders of the other political party for trying to keep his promise to protect his country’s citizens for riots and killing sprees in their cities.

…a country where a black race car driver intentionally damages his sport by identifying a rope used for closing a garage door as a “noose” “awakening’ executives as NASCAR resulting in a ban on Confederate Flags at the races and a “solidarity march”, only to have the FBI find that the offending object was never a noose at all, just a way to close the garage door.

…a country in which a political party supports abortion up until birth and its Presidential Candidate calls a sitting President a “racist” without proof, while ignoring his own well-documented racism.

“You are traveling through a previously unknown country, a country whose population has politically been torn asunder, a country whose Democratic Leadership have forsworn its traditional faith and values to embrace those of its enemies. A country whose great promise is once again being realized, despite the best efforts of its enemies within. There’s a signpost up ahead. Next stop, the 2020 Presidential Election.”

This country has been pulling apart at the seams since the night of November 8, 2016, which Donald J. Trump was elected as our 45th President.

And the thing is, it is not his fault.

The direction which the Modern Democratic Party has taken to the Far Left of the Political Spectrum has put them at odds with the majority of Americans who still hold dear the Traditional Faith and Values System upon which our Sovereign Nation was founded.

In an article written for Decision Magazine dated February 12, 2012, America’s Pastor, Rev. Billy Graham, wrote on the subject of “Confusing Evil With Good”. Here are some excerpts…

Humanity has always been dexterous at confusing evil with good. That was Adam and Eve’s problem, and it is our problem today. If evil were not made to appear good, there would be no such thing as temptation. It is in their close similarity that the danger lies.

Modern social righteousness often differs from the righteousness of the Bible. Someone has said: “A wrong deed is right if the majority of people declare it not to be wrong.” By this principle we can see our standards shifting from year to year according to the popular vote! Divorce was once frowned upon by society, and laws against fornication and adultery were strictly enforced. But now divorce is accepted by society, and fornication is glorified in our literature and films.

The Bible says: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil.” God has not changed. His standards have not been lowered. God still calls immorality a sin, and the Bible says God is going to judge it.

Honesty was once the hallmark of character. But it has been set aside with an “It’s all right if you don’t get caught” philosophy. Only when we are in court are we required to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

…How do we get our values so mixed up? How do we fall into this trap of Satan? For one thing, we’re shortsighted. We look for shortcuts to happiness. Our lust for immediate pleasure prompts us to think of evil as good.

In one of novelist John Steinbeck’s books he has a character saying: “If it succeeds, they will be thought not crooked but clever.” In our desire to achieve success quickly, it is easy to get our values mixed up and call evil good and good evil.

Another way to call evil good is to say that morals are relative. Someone has said: “As the occasion, so the behavior.” We have changed our moral code to fit our behavior instead of changing our behavior to harmonize with our moral code. Nothing is firm today. We are not on solid ground. Young people are shifting from one side to the other. Morally, they are drifting aimlessly without compass or guide.

Still another way that evil is called good is for the conscience to be perverted, and certainly our consciences today are perverted. But right is right even if nobody is right, and wrong is wrong even if everybody is wrong. God does not change the moral law to suit our behavior.

…The modern conscience has been twisted and distorted so badly that it is difficult to tell what is genuine and what is false.

Self-centeredness is another reason we are so inclined to call evil good. When something brings profit or pleasure to us we are inclined to call evil good, even though we know it is dead wrong. “But it’s what I’ve always wanted,” or, “It’s good for me, although I know it’s wrong” are the alibis we have manufactured to justify evil and call it good.

It is very apparent that there is something that is literally tearing apart the fabric of our country.

The only conclusion that I, as a Christian American can reach, is the fact that our Sovereign Nation is in the midst of SPIRITUAL WARFARE for its very soul.

Make no mistake about it, boys and girls, EVIL EXISTS.

My friends, I believe that we are fighting a war against “princes and principalities”. Evil is still alive and well and flourishing in a world in which relative morality and situational ethics are increasingly being accepted as normal behavior.

We see it everyday around us.

It inundates the cable news channels, 24 hours a day. Heck, you can even see it on Facebook.

Since Cain slew Able with a rock, mankind, because we are all fallen creatures, has had to deal with the presence of evil in our lives.

From the legendary massacres, perpetrated by Vlad the Impaler, to the horrific scenes of Hitler’s Concentration Camps, to the killing fields of Pol Pot, to the massacre of innocent Middle Eastern Christians by Islamic State, to the murders by Chicago Street Gangs every night, the Forces of Evil continue to flourish across the globe.

Who we as a nation are struggling with are those forces who want to turn our country into not just an immoral society, but, an amoral one, whose concept of right and wrong is “Whatever Gets You Through the Night (It’s Alright. It’s Alright.)”, and whose ultimate authority is not the God of Abraham, but a Godless All-Powerful Central Government, whose credo is

From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. (Karl Marx)

Just as Marxism has failed wherever it has been tried before, if the Far Left Democrats have their way, so it would lead to America’s downfall.

The galling thing is the fact that, even though American Christians remain 75% of the population, we are propagandized and suppressed by the Liberals in both the Old and New Media, to make it seem as if WE are the Minority, when, in fact, WE are the overwhelming Majority.

It is this New Generation of Amoral Marxists, who have taken over the Democratic Party, who are in fact, just a tiny, albeit vocal, Minority of America’s population.

So, what can an average Christian American, like you and me, do about this “Tyranny of the Minority”?

Christians have to make a choice in these tough times whether to allow those who are attempting to “radically change” our Sovereign Nation, given to us by God into a Democratic Socialist Paradise or…

As the Apostle Paul tells us in Ephesians, we can STAND.

However, you cannot stand without “the full armor of God”. I have found, as have my family and friends, that the better that you are doing, in terms of your Christian Walk, the harder that you will be attacked.

10Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of His might. 11Put on the full armor of God, so that you will be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil. 12For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.…- Ephesians 6:10-12

Our Christianity as Americans does not and can not end at Noon on Sunday, as we shake the Preacher’s hand and walk out of the sanctuary (those of us who still get to go and are not “quarantined” at home).

“Onward, Christian Soldiers, marching as to war.”

Because believe me, Americans…we are in one.

With his nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to be the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, President Trump has fired a shot across the bow of those Americans who not only hate our country and our Traditional American Faith and Values, but who also look down at with disdain those of us who cherish them.

Isaiah 5:20 tells us

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! 

Stay tuned, gentle readers. they are about to one again reveal themselves for the entire world to see.

Pray for our President.

Pray for Amy Coney Barrett.

Pray for our country.

And, vote on November 3rd.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Trump to Pick Amy Coney Barrett, a Conservative Woman of Faith, as His Nominee for the Supreme Court…as Liberals Prepare to “Kavanaugh” Her

FoxNews.com reports that

Amy Coney Barrett, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals of the 7th Circuit, is reportedly one of the top contenders for President Trump’s nomination to the seat vacated by the death of late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Ginsburg was the face of the liberal bloc on the Supreme Court, meaning that an appointment by Trump and confirmation by the Republican-controlled Senate could potentially significantly shift the ideological balance of the court for years. Barrett’s record, including cases she’s ruled on during her time as an appeals judge and her scholarship as a law professor at Notre Dame, are set to be intensely scrutinized by the media and the Senate Judiciary Committee should Trump choose her.

Carrie Severino, the president of the conservative Judicial Crisis Network, said that Barrett and the other women on the Trump shortlist may disagree with Ginsburg on the issues, but have the intellectual firepower to fill in for the late legal luminary.

“These are really impressive women,” Severino said. “They’re worthy of following in her footsteps.”

Those on the left, however, have said they worry that Barrett would undo precedents like Roe v. Wade and impose her faith on others.

Here are a handful of the notable stances Barrett has taken that might indicate the effect she could have on the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence.

Gun rights

Perhaps the most high-profile opinion Barrett has written is a dissent in Kanter v. Barr, a case that upheld a Wisconsin law taking gun rights away from non-violent felons. The majority opinion was written by Judges Joel Flaum and Kenneth Ripple, who were appointed by President Ronald Reagan.

“History is consistent with common sense: it demonstrates that legislatures have the power to prohibit dangerous people from possessing guns,” Barrett wrote. “But that power extends only to people who are dangerous.”

She added: “[W]hile both Wisconsin and the United States have an unquestionably strong interest in protecting the public from gun violence, they have failed to show, by either logic or data … that disarming Kanter substantially advances that interest. On this record, holding that the ban is constitutional as applied to Kanter does not ‘put[] the government through its paces’ … but instead treats the Second Amendment as a ‘second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.'”

Due Process

Barrett wrote the majority opinion in the case Doe v. Purdue, a due process and Title IX challenge by a Purdue University student who had been accused of sexual assault, which led to the student losing his Navy ROTC scholarship.

The students in the case were identified as John Doe and Jane Doe to preserve their anonymity. Jane alleged that John had woken her up while they were sleeping together by groping her over her clothes and admitted to her that he had “digitally penetrated” her while she was asleep on a different occasion. John denied all the accusations to the school.

According to Barrett’s opinion, Purdue then allegedly wrote a report that “falsely claimed that [John] had confessed to Jane’s allegations;” refused to let John see evidence in the case; did not allow him to present witnesses; did not let him cross-examine Jane; and later “found him guilty by a preponderance of the evidence of sexual violence.”

The case was dismissed by a lower court, and Barrett was considering whether the claims on their face merited such a quick dismissal or whether the appeals court should order a closer look at the proceedings.

Criminal Law

In the case Rainsberger v. Benner, Barrett authored an opinion in which she denied qualified immunity — a protection for government officials from being sued for judgment calls they make on the job — for a police officer who was alleged to have submitted a document “riddled with lies and undercut by the omission of exculpatory evidence” that led to a man being put in jail for two months.

Qualified immunity has been a hot topic in recent months as police come under increasing scrutiny for alleged misdeeds on the job, whether that be police brutality or lying on documents as Benner was accused of. Sen. Mike Braun, R-Ind., briefly pushed a bill to scale back qualified immunity for police earlier this summer — an idea that was widely supported by Democrats.

Abortion

Barrett has been involved with a handful of cases that implicated abortion 7th Circuit. In one 2018 case she dissented from a denial of en banc rehearing — meaning she wanted the entire court to reexamine a decision by three judges — after the 7th Circuit ruled unconstitutional an Indiana law banning abortions for reasons relating to the sex, race or potential disability of the fetus. The law also banned fetuses from being disposed of as medical waste.

Barrett joined a dissent by Judge Frank Easterbrook that labeled the ban on abortions for sex, race and disability reasons “the eugenics statute” and argued the Supreme Court had never ruled on such a law so it should not be automatically considered illegitimate.

Immigration

Barrett has for the most part sided with the Trump administration on immigration cases. In Cook County v. Wolf, a case on the Trump administration’s controversial “public charge” rule allowed immigrants who were likely to use welfare to be barred from getting visas, Barrett said the rule was a “policy choice,” that should not be resolved in litigation.

In Yafai v. Pompeo, Barrett backed a State Department decision to deny a visa to the wife of an American citizen for allegedly trying to smuggle in children, despite the fact that the parents said their children had died in a drowning accident. The decision was reconsidered but the wife was still not given a visa.

Barrett said that the fact the denial was reconsidered, under the law and Supreme Court precedent, fulfilled the legal requirements the State Department had to meet. In a decision on whether or not the full court should rehear the case, she said that the State Department was given significant discretion and that the appeals court could not require more evidence than a simple citation of what law the decision was made under.

Death Penalty

Barrett spent a long time in academia, primarily as a professor at Notre Dame, which is her alma mater. She co-authored an article called “Catholic Judges in Capital Cases,” which examines the competing obligations of Catholics when asked to rule in a death penalty case. It suggested there might be some instances in which a Catholic judge should recuse himself or herself from such proceedings.

“Catholic judges must answer some complex moral and legal questions in deciding whether to sit in death penalty cases. Sometimes (as with direct appeals of death sentences) the right answers are not obvious. But in a system that effectively leaves the decision up to the judge, these are questions that responsible Catholics must consider seriously,” she wrote along with John H. Garvey, who is now the president of the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C.

“Judges cannot — nor should they try to — align our legal system with the Church’s moral teaching whenever the two diverge,” the article says. “They should, however, conform their own behavior to the Church’s standard. Perhaps their good example will have some effect.”

Ever since Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away, the Far Left Democratic Party has been protesting the fact that Trump gets to pick her successor and attempting to force him to wait until after the 2020 Presidential Election and the inauguration of the next President.

Of course, the Dems and the Never-Trumpers, all Nattering Nabobs of Negativity, knew whom the President was going to pick…and they had already made up their minds about her.

They knew that…shudder…President Trump was going to pick someone who was a Christian and who was unashamed of their faith.

And, of course, Trump did.

Christians still make up 75% of America’s population, so odds were that Trump’s nominee would believe in the Triune God.

And, that’s a good thing.

The legendary Judicial Giant who Trump’s first appointee, Neil Gorsuch, replaced, Antonin Scalia, was a Christian American.

Here is what he said about the role of Christianity in our government, which remains in sharp contrast to the Rewritten History and wish-casting of the “Democratic Socialists” whose heads are exploding even as we speak.

In his dissenting opinion in the 2005 case McCreary County v. ACLU, Justice Antonin Scalia explained:

Those who wrote the Constitution believed that morality was essential to the well-being of society and that encouragement of religion was the best way to foster morality. The fact that the Founding Fathers believed devotedly that there was a God and that the unalienable rights of man were rooted in Him is clearly evidenced in their writings, from the Mayflower Compact to the Constitution itself…

President Washington opened his Presidency with a prayer, and reminded his fellow citizens at the conclusion of it that “reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” President John Adams wrote to the Massachusetts Militia, “we have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion… Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

After going on to quote similar sentiments from Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, Scalia continued:

Nor have the views of our people on this matter significantly changed. Presidents continue to conclude the Presidential oath with the words “so help me God.” Our legislatures, state and national, continue to open their sessions with prayer led by official chaplains. The sessions of this Court continue to open with the prayer “God save the United States and this Honorable Court.” Invocation of the Almighty by our public figures, at all levels of government, remains commonplace. Our coinage bears the motto, “In God We Trust.” And our Pledge of Allegiance contains the acknowledgment that we are a Nation “under God.” As one of our Supreme Court opinions rightly observed, “We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.”

With all of this reality (and much more) staring it in the face, how can the Court possibly assert that “the First Amendment mandates governmental neutrality between… religion and nonreligion,” and that “[m]anifesting a purpose to favor… adherence to religion generally,” is unconstitutional? Who says so? Surely not the words of the Constitution. Surely not the history and traditions that reflect our society’s constant understanding of those words.

While the ever-increasing turn toward Marxism and the constant protesting and threatened violence by the New Bolsheviks of the Democratic Party, is very troubling, I find solace in the fact that they are still a minority in this country.

In my opinion, today, President Trump will pick ANOTHER winner.

Until He Comes,

KJ

What Do Attacks on Possible SCOTUS Pick Barrett and Sen. Majority Leader McConnell Have in Common?

scotus-pick-600a-li

“Judge Barrett is being attacked for Christianity. It’s open season on Christians in America. The attacks are…thinly disguised as concern about Roe v. Wade and access to contraception. In other words, the same old stuff the Democrats trot out against every Republican judicial nominee.” – Rush Limbaugh

The Christian Post reported this past week that

The speculation about who President Trump will pick for the Supreme Court seat vacated by Anthony Kennedy is heating up, as Democrats signal their particular distaste for Amy Coney Barrett, who is among the finalists.

Barrett, a federal appeals court judge on the seventh circuit who faced a contentious Senate confirmation hearing last year, is already drawing criticism amid the revelation that she is among four nominees on the president’s shortlist whom he has personally interviewed for the job. Barrett is also a graduate of and was a professor at Notre Dame Law School prior to being tapped for the federal appellate court judgeship.

During her Senate hearing last fall, Senator Diane Feinstein of California was criticized for what many considered bigotry for telling Barrett that the “dogma lives loudly” within her, when speaking of her faith. Other Democratic senators also made comments and raised questions about her faith many saw as inappropriate. Then, as now, some say the overt disdain toward her is in part because she is a devout Catholic.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer expressed this week several reasons why he considers Barrett unacceptable on the high court, as have left-wing and abortion rights activist groups, with much of his criticism focused on abortion rights.

Some of the concern brewing on the left is because many think Barrett, a Catholic mother of 7, will provide the fifth vote to dismantle Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark decision that legalized abortion nationwide, though some think such a conclusion is premature. 

I have written numerous times in the past eight years about the fact that strong Christian Americans are the mortal enemies of Modern American Liberals.

Judge Barrett is no exception.

The Far Left Democratic Party is afraid that if she is confirmed to the position of Supreme Court Justice, Barrett will allow her Christian Faith to influence her decisions.

Well, duuuuhhhh.

Speaking as a Christian American, our faith is not something that we turn off when we leave the confines of our homes or our churches.

We can no sooner divorce ourselves from our faith in the God of Abraham, the Triune God, than the Modern Democratic Party can divorce themselves from the radical teachings of Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky.

And that, gentle readers, is where their hatred and fear of the 75% of Americans who profess themselves to be Christians comes from.

Karl Marx said,

The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion.

And, that has become a mandate for the “New Bolsheviks” of the Far Left Democratic Party.

Traditional American Morals and Values, including our Christian Faith and Patriotism, are being challenged on a daily basis by these New Bolsheviks, to the extent to where they now are attempting to intimidate our government leaders when they are away from their jobs and spending time with their families.

According to Todd Starnes of Fox News,

A mob of far-left goons ambushed Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell Saturday as he was leaving a Louisville restaurant.

The Democratic Socialists of Louisville claimed responsibility for the verbal attack and posted video on its Twitter feed.

Powerful people like Mitch deserve no peace while they enable the imprisonment of babies in concentration camps.

“Where are the children? Where are the babies, Mitch,” the protesters shouted.

At one point an unidentified man threatened the senate majority leader.

“We know where you live, too Mitch. We know where you live. We know where you live Mitch,“ the man said menacingly.

The socialists appear to have followed the commands of Maxine Waters and Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin. Both anti-Trump women called on protesters to confront Trump supporters relentlessly.

What does the attack on Judge Barrett have to do with the attack on Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell?

What we are witnessing, gentle readers, is not just an escalating political civil war.

We are in the middle of a Spiritual and Cultural War for the very soul of our Sovereign Nation.

America was not founded to be another third-rate Marxist Nation doomed to follow the same path as every other nation which has surrendered their citizens’ individual freedom to the failed political theories of Karl Marx.

Our Founding Fathers believed otherwise…

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

While this ever-increasing turn toward Marxism and threatened violence by the New Bolsheviks of the Democratic Party, is very troubling, I find solace in the fact that they are still a minority in this country.

Regarding the possible nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, as far as being a Christian American Supreme Court Justice is concerned, she will be following in the footsteps of a giant who has left her (and us) with these words of advice…

“We are fools for Christ’s sake. We must pray for the courage to endure the scorn of the modern world. ” – Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia

Until He Comes,

KJ