nChrist
|
 |
« on: July 04, 2018, 04:43:23 PM » |
|
________________________________ The Patriot Post Digest 7-3-2018 From The Federalist Patriot Free Email Subscription _______________________________
The Patriot Post® · Mid-Day Digest
Jul. 3, 2018 · https://patriotpost.us/digests/56922-mid-day-digest
THE FOUNDATION
“The Declaration of Independence … [is the] declaratory charter of our rights, and the rights of man.” —Thomas Jefferson (1819)
IN TODAY’S EDITION
Are you proud to be an American? Not if you’re a Democrat. Judiciary in crisis — 17% of federal bench is vacant. The Supreme Court fallout for public unions after Janus. Remember: illegal aliens commit a lot of crimes beyond border infractions. Why do we celebrate the Fourth of July? Daily Features: Top Headlines, Memes, Cartoons, Columnists and Short Cuts.
IN BRIEF
Proud to Be an American?1 Nate Jackson
“I’m proud to be an American Where at least I know I’m free And I won’t forget the men who died Who gave that right to me And I’d gladly stand up next to you And defend her still today ‘Cause there ain’t no doubt I love this land God Bless the U.S.A.”
So goes the chorus of Lee Greenwood’s hit song, “God Bless the U.S.A.” It’s a particular favorite as our nation celebrates Independence Day.
And what of that independence from the tyranny of the British crown? In the Declaration of Independence2, Thomas Jefferson and the other Founders wrote, “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. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”
With those quotes laying the foundation, we turn to a new Gallup poll3 that holds disturbing results. For the first time in 18 years asking the question, a minority (47%) of Americans are “extremely proud” to be Americans. Gallup notes that’s “down from 51% in 2017 and well below the peak of 70% in 2003.”
The partisan breakdown is most telling. While the number of Republicans saying they’re “extremely proud” has ticked up a few points, Democrats’ sentiments have plummeted. In 2013, 56% of Democrats were “extremely proud”; now it’s just 32%. “Liberals” are even worse at a mere 23%. It’s interesting that the slide began during Barack Obama’s second term, only accelerating with Donald Trump’s election.
Two observations. First, the Obamas regularly disparaged our great nation. Everyone remembers Michelle’s infamous claim after Barack won the 2008 Democrat presidential nomination: “For the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country.” Clearly, she’d been bitterly disappointed until her country did something for her. Worse, as president, Barack Obama was constantly lecturing the country about something he didn’t like, saying, “That’s not who we are4.” That declaration of his deep disappointment in America was a recurring theme. Hillary Clinton continued it with her “basket of deplorables5” slur. Is it any wonder that message became embedded in the Democrat voter’s psyche?
Second, we return to the Declaration. Democrats fundamentally do not believe that unalienable Rights are endowed by our Creator. Instead, they believe government — their god — bestows rights on downtrodden identity groups. Witness their panic over Roe v. Wade as Trump considers a new Supreme Court justice. When your god is government and the “enemy” is in power, the feelings of panic, despair and anger are obviously more than many leftists can bear.
For those of us who love our country, as Mark Alexander wrote6 on this topic in 2013, “No matter what setbacks we face, Liberty is an eternal endowment. Never lose faith, fellow Patriots!”
https://patriotpost.us/articles/56914-proud-to-be-an-american
Judiciary in Crisis With 17% Vacancies7
A year and a half year into Donald Trump’s presidency, nearly one-sixth of federal court seats are still lacking judges — a total of 153 vacancies. Some of the positions have been vacant for so long that it has entered the category of “judicial emergencies,” meaning other judicial caseloads are so overloaded that those cases are no longer handled properly. The situation has become so bad that the only appropriate word to describe it is “crisis,” a term Senate Democrats used once upon a time when the number of vacancies reached just 68. And the situation will only become worse, as 32 more vacancies are set to occur soon, increasing the overall percentage of unoccupied benches to more than 20%.
So where does the fault lie for this judicial crisis? Don’t look at Trump, who has nominated 134 men and women to the bench over the last 18 months — more than any other recent president. Don’t blame Senate Republicans either, as Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has held 97 hearings thus far, which is far more than the average of 62 hearings for nominees of the previous six presidents at this point. In other words, Grassley’s pace is more than 50% higher than for former administrations.
The fault lies primarily with Senate Democrats and their commitment to slowing down the nomination process as much as possible. Even though the minority no longer can filibuster, Democrats have used other procedural games to stymie the process. As The Daily Signal reports8, “One tactic is to force the Senate to take multiple votes on each nomination. It takes the same number of votes to end debate as it does to confirm a nomination now, so the only reason for multiple votes is to drag out the process. Senate Democrats have forced the Senate to take these unnecessary votes to end debate on 40 of Trump’s judicial nominations. That compares to two votes, at this point, for the previous 12 new presidents combined.”
Clearly, Democrats are stalling as long as possible with the hope of retaking the Senate come November. Then they can really derail any attempt by Trump to seat solid constitutional conservative judges. By playing this political game, Democrats reveal that they have little concern for ensuring that the needs of the American people are met with timely access to good judges. Why play ball when they can #Resist?
https://patriotpost.us/articles/56900-judiciary-in-crisis-with-17-percent-vacancies
Top Headlines9
Trump interviews four Supreme Court candidates as decision nears (The Hill10) Meet the six stellar judges leading the pack on Trump’s Supreme Court short list (The Daily Signal11) Federal judge rules against indefinite detention of asylum-seekers (CNS News12) Quinnipiac: If Democrats retake the House this fall, they’ll have women to thank (Hot Air13) Rhode Island becomes first state to sue oil industry, seek damages for climate change (The Washington Times14) Trump administration to rescind Obama-era guidelines on race in college admissions (The Wall Street Journal15) DeVos agenda on higher education is a new front for Democrat resistance (NBC News16) Senators demand an explanation after the F-35 savings estimate is off by $600 million (Reason17) House Democrat server went “missing” soon after it became evidence in a cybersecurity probe18 (The Daily Caller19) Investigators broaden focus on Facebook’s role in sharing data with Cambridge Analytica (Chicago Tribune20) Policy: Trump’s chance to check the Court (Real Clear Policy21) Policy: To shrink budget “deficits,” shrink federal revenue collections (Real Clear Markets22) For more of today’s news, visit Patriot Headline Report23.
https://patriotpost.us/articles/56917-tuesday-top-headlines
BEST OF RIGHT OPINION 56910 56908 56905 56904 56911
For more of today’s columns, visit Right Opinion28.
FEATURED ANALYSIS The Supreme Fallout for Public Unions29
Lewis Morris
Last week’s Supreme Court ruling shooting down public-sector unions’ power to charge fees to nonmembers has Democrats and unions wondering what the future has in store for them.
For years, public-sector employees in several states were compelled to pay fees to unions even if they were not members. The unions claimed that these so-called nonmember “agency fees” were used for collective bargaining and administrative purposes that benefited all workers regardless of membership status. While true to a point, the reality was that public-sector unions were putting this money to work for their own political ends and forcing30 nonmembers to go along.
That came to an end in the 5-4 decision in Janus v. AFSCME31. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, stated, “This procedure violates the First Amendment and cannot continue. Neither an agency fee nor any other payment to the union may be deducted from a non-member’s wages, nor may any other attempt be made to collect such a payment, unless the employee affirmatively consents to pay.”
|