Monthly Archives: June 2023

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Demos are among numerous left-wing voter advocacy groups partnering in the Biden administrations bid to interfere in U.S. elections, according to a new report.

On Wednesday, The Daily Signals Fred Lucas reported that the Indian Health Service (IHS) which assists American Indians as part of the Department of Health and Human Services confirmed the ACLU, Demos, the National Congress of American Indians, and the Native American Rights Fund are among the groups helping it to register and turn out voters under Executive Order 14019.

Signed by Biden in March 2021, the order instructs hundreds of federal agencies tointerferein the electoral process by using taxpayer money to boost voter registration and get-out-the-vote activities. This includes soliciting and facilitating approved, nonpartisan third-party organizations and State officials to provide voter registration services on agency premises. As The Federalist has previouslyreported, voter registration efforts are almost always a partisan venture and often involve left-wing groups that abuse their nonprofit status to target likely-Democrat voters.

Under Executive Order 14019, the heads of each agency werealso requiredto draft a strategic plan explaining how his or her department intends to fulfill Bidens directive. Despite attempts by good government groups to acquire these plans, the Biden administration has routinelystonewalledsuch efforts by slow-walking its response to federal court orders andheavily redactingany related documents it has released.

According to Lucas, The Daily Signal filed an open records request with IHS last year over the agencys strategic plan and any information regarding its criteria for selecting nonprofit organizations to work with it to achieve the goals of the order. In its response to the outlet last week, IHS claimed After a thorough search of our electronic data files, we did not locate records responsive to your request.

Its worth mentioning that IHS was one of the agencies flagged in a progress report released by more than 50 left-wing organizations (including the ACLU and Demos) that evaluated how well certain departments were complying with Bidens order. According to the evaluation, IHS is classified as one of three agencies that are falling behind in their efforts to register and turn out voters.

Unfortunately, there is no evidence to date that IHS has done any work to follow through on this commitment, which would be transformative for increasing voter access in Indigenous communities, the report reads.

Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

Excerpt from:

Biden Is Working With Left-Wing Groups To Interfere In Elections - The Federalist

Special Counsel Jack Smith officially indicted former President Donald Trump on Thursday for his retention of presidential documents following his departure from the White House.

The Attorney General Merrick Garland appointee was hard-pressed to cook up charges but somehow still confirmed Americans widely held suspicions that this is just a continuation of the deep states ploy to get Trump, which started with the Russia collusion hoax in 2016.

Todays act of open legal warfare by the highly politicized and partisan Department of Injustice, has taken things to a new level, and set a dangerous precedent, the Trump campaign said in a statement on Thursday night. By politically weaponizing the DOJ, the Biden administration and their henchmen in the Swamp are now conducting an all-out prosecution of the leader of the current administrations political opposition. This is un-American and wrong.

As Federalist Senior Legal Correspondent Margot Cleveland repeatedly noted prior to the charges, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) appeared to share no legitimateconcernsabout the documents Trump kept in his Mar-a-Lago home. If they did, NARA failed to afford Trump the same help it gave the Obama administration in securing documents that needed to be preserved.

Yet, the Department of Justice still used the EspionageAct, which does not explicitly prohibit the retention of classified documents, to sic the FBI on Trumps home in a dramatic raid last August.

President Joe Bidens DOJ says this is about preserving the rule of law. Yet, if Democrats truly valued the rule of law, illegal border crossers, Russia hoaxers, Jeffrey Epsteins clients, pro-abortion vandals, rioters, and the people who run corrupt government agencies like the Department of Justice, the FBI, the NSA, and the Manhattan DAs office would be the ones standing in court, not Trump.

If muddled questions of personal or campaign payments were truly criminal matters, campaign finance offenders like failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and former President Barack Obama would have faced some punishment. Instead, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, encouraged by corporate media and Democrats who fear a second Trump term, revived a case that several DOJ officials previously declined to pursue.

If rallying rioters on Twitter was really an indictable offense, Vice President Kamala Harris should have faced punishment for raising bail money for vandals and rioters during the 2020 summer of rage. Instead, Smith is expected to come up with a crime to punish Trump for his constitutionally protected speech on January 6, 2021.

If taking documents home from the White House is a crime, then the DOJ would have launched a criminal probe into Biden and his classified documents the moment they were discovered. Instead, the DOJ concocted a reason to launch an unprecedented raid on Trumps Mar-a-Lago home, followed by an unprecedented legal case.

To put it simply, the cases against Trump are rigged to look successful for the left. In reality, they are actually quite weak. But that doesnt mean they wont bite. Thats because the real reason for the indictment frenzy isnt about holding politicians accountable. Its not even just about Trump. Its about his voters and what they believe.

Under the auspices of taking out their number one enemy, the deep state has set its sights on dissenters like you and its not backing down.

Every time Democrats and their cronies hand down an impeachment or indictment of Trump, they are really indicting you. It sounds provocative, but its true.

Preventing Trump from taking the White House was always the lefts top priority. As evidenced by the Democrats prosecutions over the last year, this goal has not changed. Unfortunately, the lefts persecution wont stop with Trump.

How do we know? Because Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who just announced his Republican presidential campaign last month, faces coordinated smears from corporate media, attacks from the White House podium, and potentially even criminal charges from partisan officials.

DeSantis presidential run may have only been possible because of the populist brand Trump harnessed in 2016 but hes made it clear that hes not Trump. So why would get Trump Democrats and their allies in the corporate media complex feel so threatened by him that they have already begun to act?

Even if Democrats successfully oust Trump from the 2024 election, they know his platform will live on through MAGA Republican voters, many of whom will likely pivot to DeSantis. The left will, of course, find this unacceptable because they hate not just Trump and DeSantis, but everything they and their voters stand for.

The lefts short-term goal may be hampering the rights chances in the next presidential election but the long-term goal was always to outlaw the ideological platform that made this new GOP competitive in the first place.

The Biden administrations recent weaponization of the bureaucracy against conservative Christians is simply evidence of that.

Over just the last couple of years, the Biden administration launched attacks on concerned parents, raided a pastors home, refused to protect Republican-nominated Supreme Court justices from coordinated influence campaigns designed to undermine the Dobbs v. Jackson ruling, and attempted to punish Republican states for protecting children including the unborn.

The DOJ and the FBI are, in all senses of the word, a threat to the republic. Even before the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago a majority of Americans knew the U.S. has atwo-tiered system of justice. Now, after a year of more smears and one felony indictment, more than half of the nation says they want the lefts enforcement arm to face punishment for weaponizing its power against the American people to achieve political goals.

Under this regime, youre not allowed to believe babies in the womb deserve a chance at life. Youre not allowed to believe that the rainbow is about Gods promise, marriage is between a man and a woman, and June is reserved for the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Youre not allowed to believe that parents get the final say in what their child hears, sees, reads, and studies. Youre not allowed to believe that there are only two sexes and they arent interchangeable.

As of now, Trump is at the helm of the movement that rejects the lefts institutional takeover at its very core. Hes made a fine obstacle for the left for the last seven years, but its important to recognize that hes only an obstacle.

When Trump descended on a golden escalator in June 2015, Democrats and the corporate media werent interested in exploring why so many people liked and supported him. The contempt they felt for half of the nation after Trumps 2016 victory lives on today. Only this time, they will do everything it takes to hamper conservative voters effectiveness.

Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire, Fox News, and RealClearPolitics. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordanboydtx.

Continue reading here:

The Indictment Isn't Just About Trump, It's About Wrongthink - The Federalist

Nowadays, labor-law cases are a rare sight at the Supreme Court. The Court usually takes them only when they intersect with other fields, such as arbitration or the First Amendment. And at first glance, the Courts latest effort seemed a bit of a dud. In Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the Court applied well-worn doctrine to find that federal law does not preempt certain state-law tort claims. That was the right result and, in truth, not all that interesting. More interesting, however, was the principal concurrence. Written by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch, the concurrence suggested that labor-preemption doctrine cedes too much authority to administrative agencies. And if that view catches on, the Court could soon find itself wading back into the labor-law fieldthis time, in a more consequential case.

To understand the debate, we need some background. The main federal labor statute, the National Labor Relations Act, says nothing about preemption. Yet courts have given the Act broad preemptive effect anyway. Theyve reasoned that when Congress passed the Act, it was trying to nationalize labor policy. It wanted one set of rules to govern all labor disputes. So it created a single administrative body, the National Labor Relations Board, to make those rules up. And to make sure the Boards rules were followed, it implicitly preempted most state law in the labor field.

Or at least, thats what courts have inferred from the statute. And theyve carried that inference quite far. In the leading case, San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon, the Supreme Court held that the Act blocks state courts from regulating any conduct arguably protected by federal labor law. And generally, whether something is arguably protected is a decision for the Board. State courts cant make that decision for themselves; they have to wait for the Board to weigh in.

In Glacier, the question was how far that principle goes. The case involved a company that produced ready-made concrete. The company delivered the concrete in specialized trucks; after the concrete was mixed, the trucks spun it in drums to keep it wet until it could be poured. The truck drivers were members of a local chapter of the Teamsters. The unions collective-bargaining agreement had expired, and the parties had failed to negotiate a new one. So the union called a strike. But more than simply strike, the union timed its action to inflict maximum damage. It waited until the concrete had been prepared, loaded into the trucks, and dispatched. Then, while the trucks were en route, it told the drivers to walk off the job. The drivers then returned their trucks with full loads. Worse, some of them failed to tell the company their trucks were still full. So the company had to scramble to prevent the concrete from hardening in the truck bins. Using on-hand supervisors, it emptied the bins and saved the trucks. The concrete, however, was ruined.

The company sued the union for intentional property destruction in state court. But a trial court dismissed the complaint. The court held that because the alleged destruction happened during an arguably protected strike, the companys claim was preempted. The Washington Supreme Court agreed. The U.S. Supreme Court then took the case to decide whether intentional property destruction was arguably protected.

The Court had no trouble answering that question in the negative. Eight Justices agreed that federal labor law does not protect intentional property destruction. Lower courts, the Board, and even the Supreme Court itself had always treated intentional destruction as unprotectedeven when it happens during an otherwise protected strike. The state courts were therefore wrong to find the claims preempted and wrong to dismiss the case.

That result was unsurprising and (mostly) uncontroversial. More surprising, and potentially more consequential, was a concurrence by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch. The two Justices agreed with the result. But they wrote separately to question the Courts approach to labor-law preemption in general. Garmon, they wrote, is an outlier of preemption jurisprudence. It does not merely resolve conflicts between state and federal law. It affirmatively casts a shadow, or penumbra, over arguably protected conduct. This penumbra deprives states of jurisdiction even when their laws are logically consistent with federal law. Worse, states cant decide for themselves whether conduct falls into the penumbra. They instead have to wait for the Board to decidea decision the Board might never make. And until the Board acts, the injured party is stuck a legal no mans land: she has no state claim, no federal remedy, and no realistic prospect of getting either.

Thomas and Gorsuch didnt just hint that they think this approach is wrong; they openly urged the Court to reconsider Garmon. And when the Court does that, they said, it should replace Garmons test with one that asks whether state and federal law are in logical contradiction. That is, federal law should preempt state law only when its logically impossible to comply with both. Otherwise, state courts should be free to step in.

If the Court took that approach, the jurisdictional balance would tilt. States would have much more leeway to regulate labor relations. For example, they could require employers to let union organizers onto their property. Or they could forbid union organizers from soliciting employees at home. And they could enforce those rules in court. Courts could play a much more direct role in interpreting, developing, and applying labor law. Passive deference could give way to active engagement.

That result would track the Courts recent ideological trend. The Court has expressed increasing skepticism about deferring to agencies. Look no further than its recent decision to accept cert in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, where it will reconsider Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. National Resources Defense Council. Chevron is a well-known monument to the administrative state. It requires courts to defer to certain reasonable agency interpretations. It has shifted much lawmaking authority to agencies. As a result, it is commonly held up as a major source of administrative mission creep.

But as Thomas and Gorsuch point out, Garmon has the same effect. Like Chevron, Garmon requires judges to defer to the legal judgments of agency officials. The main difference is that Garmon is less well known. It applies to a narrower band of cases, so it has drawn less attention from the bar and the academy. Yet at least one body seems to be paying attentionthe Court. So if Chevron goes down, Garmon may follow in short order.

To be sure, Glacier established no new doctrine. If the main opinion is discussed in future cases at all, it will likely be at the end of a long string cite. But the concurrence might still stand for something bigger. There is a rising tide of skepticism toward the administrative state. And if the concurrence suggests anything, its that the tide could carry labor law along with it.

Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public policy matters. Any expressions of opinion are those of the author. To join the debate, please email us atinfo@fedsoc.org.

More here:

Is Glacier Northwest the Tip of the Iceberg? - The Federalist Society

I knew media bias runs rampant across our nation, but it runs equally as biased in my home state of South Dakota. South Dakota Searchlight published a recent hit piece by business reporter Makenzie Huber titled, Physicians feel trapped by SDs abortion trigger law. Theyre hoping to change it.

As you can imagine, she pushed the lefts abortion narrative, taking cheap shots at pro-life policies and being dishonest about key facts. I wrote a rebuttal to her skewed piece expecting this small-town paper, a publication that prides itself on accuracy and fairness, to run it, but it refused and so did two other South Dakota publications.

This reporter started out her story (published above the fold) with a South Dakota family physician, Dr. Laura Hoefert, as her marionette, recounting Hoefert feeling trapped by South Dakotas abortion trigger law. Hoefert wasnt sure if her third miscarriage was an ectopic pregnancy (when a fertilized egg grows outside the uterus, usually in the fallopian tube). That ended up not being the case, but with South Dakotas trigger law in full effect after the reversal of Roe v. Wade, reporter Huber asks her readers the question, Who would help her?

As a former abortionist and having over 30 years of experience delivering babies, I can tell you Huber got this piece all wrong. It is more opinion than reporting. Publications like The New York Times, Washington Post, and Harvard Gazette tout the myth that mothers are no longer protected in a post-Roe world and that states trigger laws will not allow doctors to help women with ectopic pregnancies and other life-threatening conditions. This is a blatant lie.

Treating ectopic pregnancies is not the same thing as getting an abortion; even Planned Parenthood admitted as much on its website. Ectopic pregnancies threaten the life of a mother, and its extremely rare that babies survive these pregnancies.

Huber reached out to me while writing her article and asked me about ectopic pregnancies, among many other medical questions relating to the protection of the mother. I clearly explained that abortion in South Dakota law refers to the elective termination of an unborn human life, for no other reason than the mothers choice. This does not refer to the premature separation of the preborn life due to any life-threatening medical condition of the mother. But of course, she disregarded these facts and published her slanted piece anyway.

Another falsehood pushed by the media is that pregnant women who have cancer, epilepsy, kidney disease, or another chronic illness (which Huber covered as well) cannot be helped. Not all chronic illnesses are life-threatening, but when they are, doctors like me treat each unique scenario first and foremost to protect the mother. As medical professionals, we dont take life-altering decisions lightly. In South Dakota, our trigger law is clear: Doctors must use their best judgment in deciding what is the best medical route for safeguarding the life of the mother. This is not a disputable point.

I sent Huber two articles from the American Association of Pro-life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, listing many of these life-threatening medical conditions that would necessitate an early baby delivery. It is misleading and an outright lie to confuse these two very different situations. No doctor in South Dakota or any pro-life state needs to fear a felony when it comes to saving the life of the mother. But again, reporters choose to turn a blind eye.

Having worked at Planned Parenthood, I know this game and Ive seen time and again how the abortion lobby plays into it. In addition, theyve been disparaging our South Dakota pregnancy resource centers. In fact, more than 80 pregnancy centers across the nation have been vandalized, with a number of those firebombed. Dont believe the media lies and accusations of pregnancy center workers coercing and manipulating women, when in fact, its pure projection.

Corporate media are not our friends. They rarely portray the truth and are hardly interested in publishing the other side of the story. Dont believe their lies about mothers not being protected the life of the mother will always be a doctors first priority.

Dr. Patti Giebink is a former abortion doctor, MD, Author of "Unexpected Choice," an abortion doctors journey to pro-life, and a South Dakota native.

Excerpt from:

Yes, Abortion Laws Protect The Life Of The Mother - The Federalist

What do you buy for the man who has everything else (aka almost every dad ever)? Great question. And since Fathers Day is right around the corner, its time to start asking it.

Even if your dad has a lifetimes worth of junk cluttering his garage and rightly says he doesnt need anything, here are a few ideas for every budget to show you care without adding to the existing piles.

Spotify Playlist

What father doesnt like music? Almost every time my dad and I are together, at least one of us is showing the other a new song weve discovered. Why not compile all those hits into a For Dad playlist? Add your fathers favorites, songs he introduced you to, bands youve seen in concert together, or your own recommendations you know hell love. Its a thoughtful gift that wont break the bank. Bonus: Make it a collaborative playlist so he can add his own songs, and you can both enjoy it!

If your dad still needs a push into the 21st century, maybe start by gifting him a Spotify subscription.

Hobby Supplies

When your pop has a free afternoon, where can you find him? The golf course? A tree stand? The lake?

No matter his hobby of choice, he can no doubt use some new gear or supplies: new guitar picks (or this cool pick punch so he can make his own), a thermos, Scent Killer hunting wipes or soap, a waterproof dry bag, ammo or reloading supplies, golf or tennis balls, a fresh water bottle for his bicycle, fishing lures, boat erasers, a backpack cooler, reflective gear for evening walks, a headlamp, grill tools or dry rubs, and so much more.

Meat and Cheese

Maybe this is my Wisconsin talking, but the best gifts are the cheesy ones literally. Pair some cheeses with gamey jerky for a tasty I love you. This Crave Brothers cheese sampler comes with their delicious farmers rope string cheese. You cant go wrong with anything from Star Dairy in Weyauwega, Wisconsin. If youre looking for something a little more unique or to spend a bit more check out what Madison-based Fromagination has to offer.

DVD or Blu-Ray Box Set of His Favorite Show

On-demand streaming is great until the woke scoldsstart nuking your dads favorite episodesover some leftist -ism or -phobia. The complete series of The King of Queens and Gilligans Island have provided hours of entertainment over the years after my brother and I bought them for Fathers Days past. Whatever your dads favorite show is, hell be happy for the hard copy when the digital version gets yanked from Netflix.

A Subscription to The Federalist

Obviously.

Bible

Maybe your dad could use a new Bible this Fathers Day. Whether his is falling apart or hes new to Scripture reading, theres a perfect copy for him. Check out this imitation leather brown study Bible or this journaling study Bible with space right in the margins for taking notes. Heres a nifty large-print sportsmans Bible with a camouflage cover. If youre looking to spend more, this sleek, U.S.-tanned and hand-bound leather Bible is assembled in Texas, comes in regular or large print, and can be personalized.

Vinyl

If your dad has a record player or collection, hed love a new or old vinyl. Pick out a sleeve showcasing his favorite frontman, or find out what vinyl hes missing from his stash and see if you can dig one up.

Portable Mosquito Repeller

One of my dads favorite gadgets is a portable mosquito repeller, like this one from Thermacell, which provides all the benefits of Off! without the stinky, sticky Deet cloud. Its great for countless outdoor activities: working on the car, fishing, camping, dominating at cornhole you name it.

Brewery or Distillery Tour

The only thing more fun than kicking around a brewery (Is my Wisconsin showing again?) is doing so with your dad. Schedule a tour at his favorite brewery or distillery, or find out which one hes been meaning to check out and go explore it together. Give yourself enough time to grab a drink or two. Cheers!

If your father would prefer to tinker with suds at home and you have wiggle room in the budget, consider getting him started with some home brew equipment.

Air Tag or Tile Tracker

Is there any dad out there who actually knows where his wallet or keys are? Didnt think so. After this Fathers Day, however, your dad will never have to rummage through the pockets of yesterdays jeans again, all thanks to the Bluetooth technology of Apple AirTags or Tile trackers. The Tiles handy designs come ready to slide on a key ring or into a wallet. If you opt for an AirTag, dont forget a corresponding keychain.

A Bottle of His Favorite Spirit

Your dad might not be able to justify springing for that bottle of Blantons Single Barrel or (*insert the name of his favorite liquor here*), but maybe this Fathers Day, you can. You dont have to get too fancy. Just his go-to spirit will do, or perhaps a reserve version of what he usually buys.

Smart Meat Thermometer

For the grillmaster dad, smart meat thermometers are prime. This wireless KitchenAid option has a magnetic dock for charging and connects to an app on his phone or tablet. Check out this similar option from Meater, which as of this writing is on sale on Amazon.

Tickets

The most memorable gifts are the ones that translate to experiences, so why not opt for tickets to an event or show your dad would enjoy? Is his favorite band or comedian coming to town this year? Does he get a thrill from roller coasters? How about a football game? Whatever your dads thing is, consider giving the gift of experiencing it together.

Dinner Together at a Steakhouse

The corresponding Fathers Day card writes itself: Dads like you are rare. (Youre welcome.) You really cant go wrong with a night out at a good steakhouse unless your Dad is vegan (God forbid). In that case, a meal for two at his favorite restaurant will do. Once again, shared experiences are always a hit.

Flight Voucher

Does your father live far away? This year, give him the gift of togetherness with an airline gift card or flight voucher. Hell be on cloud nine.

See original here:

15 Father's Day Gifts That Won't Just Clutter The Garage - The Federalist

As I write, our childrens schoolroom is festooned with rainbows. Christina Rossettis poem is on one shelf, Frederic Edwin Churchs painting on another. Hand-painted rainbows colored with enthusiasm if not with Churchs skill by our 5- and 3-year-olds hang on the walls.

Are we taking a cue from the president, professional sports, and all the nations most powerful corporations and doing our part to celebrate pride in our little homeschooling way? No. Our lessons follow the seasons, and because it is spring, we have a week or so of rainbow-themed learning. The kids love it, and rookie homeschoolers though we are we are having a blast too.

Should we toss out the lot poems, paintings, coloring pages, songs and live in a colorless world because a bunch of twisted adults use this month to mock God? Of course not.

There is much to agree with in Elise Temmes recent guide on How To Parent During Pride Month. I heartily concur with her five practical suggestions, and you can bet we read a lot of Genesis in our house teaching our brood about the true, covenantal meaning of the rainbow. Nonetheless, I feel compelled to warn parents away from adopting the approach, as detailed in Temmes introduction, of telling young children not to take joy in the rainbow flags they are likely to encounter this month. Our goal is to reclaim the rainbow, fully and heartily not relinquish its meaning to the secular hordes. I dont care if the Dodgers host Dylan Mulvaney in a nuns habit with a rainbow wimple no human has the power to make ugly what God has made good. That goes for all the colors of the Earth and sky.

C.S. Lewis was inspired to write his classic defense of objective value, The Abolition of Man, after encountering an elementary textbooks cynical claim that all value judgments are subjective. The textbook authors argued that because one person might call a waterfall sublime, and another might say its only pretty, there is no right answer its merely a matter of subjective feelings.

Lewis saw the danger of this philosophy, which rejects thousands of years of universal human wisdom, from St. Augustine to Aristotle to Genesis itself. Lewis summarizes the traditional doctrine of objective value as the belief that certain attitudes are really true, and others really false, to the kind of thing the universe is and the kind of things we are. He says that because our approvals and disapprovals are thus recognitions of objective value or responses to an objective order, therefore emotional states can be in harmony with reason or out of harmony with reason

What goes for waterfalls goes for rainbows. The correct, objective response to a rainbow the emotional state in harmony with reason is perfectly captured by that 4-year-olds joy: Look, Mommy! A rainbow flag! Dont train that truth out of her. We cannot divide our childrens world into the right kind of rainbow and the wrong kind of rainbow. We cannot let our subjective feelings take charge of when awe is due based on the perceived intent of the rainbow-bearer. You should never think twice about loving a rainbow.

Once you insert that subjective filter into your young childs brain even if you insert it with the best of intentions the crazed, grooming activists will have won. Our goal is not to raise inhuman conservative machines instead of inhuman leftist machines, but that is what will happen if we start raining on childhoods colorful imaginative parade.

The best defense is a strong offense. Or, as Lewis writes elsewhere in The Abolition of Man, The task of the modern educator is not to cut down jungles but to irrigate deserts. The right defence against false sentiments is to inculcate just sentiments.

Do all you can to cultivate your childrens moral imagination while theyre still young (here is a great place to start). Keep them as far away as you can from the corrosive enemies of childhood wonder: the modern school and the modern screen. Support activists such as Matt Walsh and Chris Rufo, and do all you can to ban the impossible and harmful ideology of transgenderism. But do not weigh down your childs capacity for wonder with worldly cares of adult perversion. Otherwise, this wonder may never grow at all.

I understand why parents are worried about rainbows this month. We all know the double game the activists are playing taking great offense at being called groomers while simultaneously targeting their celebrations at the most child-friendly aesthetic imaginable (I see my young patients wear rainbows and princess dresses year-round; I dont know if Ive ever once run into a grown-up casually wearing a similar outfit at the office water cooler).

Like a stranger tossing candy from his windowless van, this months pride celebrations are colorfulbut dangerous. Use this opportunity, however, to teach your children to beware of strangers with candy not to question the joys of candy itself.

Parents might also be loath to indulge their childs natural, rightly ordered delight in rainbows by shelling out big bucks to companies that actively corrupt such innocent wonder. Thankfully, good alternatives are available. Influencers like Allie Beth Stuckey show us you dont have to support the creeps at Targetto get a rainbow shirt. Sola Gratia is another theologically faithful source ofrainbow merch. You can boycott sinister groomers without boycotting the beautiful sign of Gods covenant.

Lewis, its fair to say, would not have been a pride month enthusiast. In his apologetic work Mere Christianity, he calls pride the essential vice, theutmost evil. Yet in that same chapter, Lewis also teaches us one crucial way to protect against this anti-God state of mind humbling ourselves through contemplation of Gods creation. After all, A proud man is always looking down on things and people: and, of course, as long as you are looking down, you cannot see something that is above you.

So take a lesson from Lewis this month, and look up. Look up in wonder at Gods creation. And yes, that most certainly includes the rainbow.

See more here:

How To Protect Your Children's Innocent Awe Of The Rainbow - The Federalist

On Friday, inspirational and controversial film Flamin Hot debuts worldwide on Hulu and Disney Plus, purportedly telling how Flamin Hot Cheetos came to be as it recounts the rise of Hispanic family man Richard Montaez from janitor to marketing executive at Frito-Lay.

The fast-paced and charming story, from a script by longtime screenwriter Lewis Colick (October Sky) and Linda Yvette Chvez (Gentefied), comes via faith-film producer DeVon Franklin (The Star) and Latina first-time director Eva Longoria.

The movies biggest issue is that similar to past feel-good family flicks such as Cool Runnings and The Greatest Showman key aspects of Flamin Hot conflict with the factual record. Thats according to a lengthy Los Angeles Times investigative expos published in 2021.

In other ways, Flamin Hot reflects realities of faith often absent from major studio biopics. According to a recent Pew Research study, 64 percent of Latinos nationwide report affiliation with Christianity. The film creators close ties to the Latino community, including input from real-life Richard and Judy Montaez, resulted in the familys Christian beliefs showing up on-screen.

Faith being a throughline was very important to us, Franklin told me in an interview. From Richard to Judy to Eva and so many others, the people behind this wanted to portray the Latino community and Latino families with the dimension that you rarely see in film.

The faith focus is particularly notable in a film released by Searchlight Pictures, a unit of Disney. In recent years, the entertainment giant has faced financial challenges as many faith-driven families have felt betrayed by the companys descent into activism on social issues.

Franklin has spent years challenging Hollywoods trend of bypassing the faithful.

Hollywood needs to know there are millions of families out there that want content that can uplift and inspire them, and respects their beliefs, he said.

Filmed in New Mexico, this inspirational dramedy has a larger scope than a typical direct-to-streaming feature with 44 principal cast members, 875 extras in several scenes, and a narrative depicted over several decades.

Viewers are introduced to Richard as a boy in the 1960s, one of 10 siblings who grew up in a migrant labor camp in the small town of Guasti, near Ontario, California.

During his teen years, in an economically distressed community, Richard got involved in a street gang that sold drugs. Later, following his marriage to girlfriend Judy, the birth of their first child is depicted as a turning point, giving Montaez new drive to make a better life for his family.

Hiring managers are skeptical of the former gang member, until a Frito-Lay plant in Rancho Cucamonga gives him a chance as a janitor. The snack wars of the 1970s and 80s are in full swing during this era, with many of his coworkers affected by rounds of layoffs. Montaez puts in long hours and also seeks to enhance his skills.

A mentor played by Dennis Haysbert (24) trains the janitor to operate the plants high-tech manufacturing machines; the Times investigative report notes Montaez was promoted to machinist in 1977.

The L.A. Times report confirms that Montaez developed some snack foods during his tenure at Frito-Lay and introduced strategies to reach Hispanic consumers. But it debunks that Montaez formulated the Flamin Hot blend of spices or ever presented it to PepsiCo Chief Executive Officer Roger Enrico, events depicted in the movie.

It even quotes a Frito-Lay statement calling Montaezs version of events an urban legend. (After pushback on the Times report, Frito-Lays parent company PepsiCo walked back that phrase in a follow-up statement but did not fact-check any details in the investigative story.)

Franklin concedes the film goes beyond Montaezs account. He likes to have fun with how he tells the story, Franklin said of the films subject. At times, he gets carried away. The producer visited Frito-Lay headquarters in Plano, Texas, and met with key staff to get the full story. Revisions to the script integrated multiple points of view in key moments.

Richard had this idea of helping save the factory by marketing this spicy product to his community, said Franklin.He started as a janitor and ended his career 40 years later as one of the most celebrated executives within the company. That is historic and its also indisputable.

Amid these events, the faith journey of Montaez is portrayed as complex and dynamic. His father has a harsh view of God that initially pushes the boy away.

At the beginning of the film, Richard doesnt see the value in prayer or belief in God, said Franklin. Ultimately, when he finally surrenders to God and he prays for the first time, things start to happen.

The producer is no stranger to thoughtful faith movies. At Sony, he developed hit films Heaven is for Real and Miracles from Heaven. More recently, Franklin produced Breakthrough, about a boys inexplicable recovery from drowning. And he played the role of a skeptical reporter in this springs Jesus Revolution, which earned over $52 million at the box office.

Franklin acknowledges that many faith films are not at the quality that they should be, but points to productions of Kingdom Story Company and Franklin Entertainment as helping turn the tide.

For him, Flamin Hot serves as an analogy to that struggle. We hear Richard tell Frito-Lay execs, Listen, if you bring my people in, I guarantee you its going to work. Its similar to how I meet with studio heads and preach the gospel of this underserved faith audience.

This lighthearted drama brings to the screen an authentic portrayal of a Latino family that nonetheless plays it loose with the origin of Flamin Hot Cheetos (and Montaezs role). Most viewers will take away themes about vision, love for others, and a persevering work ethic.

We would not know the Flamin Hot brand today if it was not for Richard Montaez, said Franklin. His vision was to save the jobs of his co-workers at that factory motivated by a heart of service to be his brothers keeper.

Rated PG-13 for some strong language and brief drug references, Flamin Hot is streaming worldwide on Hulu and Disney Plus on Friday.

This article has been updated since publication.

Josh Shepherd covers culture, faith, and public policy for several media outlets including The Stream. His articles have appeared in Christianity Today, Religion & Politics, Faithfully Magazine, Religion News Service, and Providence Magazine. A graduate of the University of Colorado, he previously worked on staff at The Heritage Foundation and Focus on the Family. Josh and his wife live in the Washington, D.C. area with their two children.

Read the original post:

Feel-Good Flick 'Flamin' Hot' Elevates Family And Faith - The Federalist

Republicans on the House Oversight and Administration Committees held a joint hearing on Wednesday highlighting foreign interference in Washington, D.C.s elections.

Our nations capital should be a beacon of democracy and a national model for excellence in election administration. This isnt about who wins or loses elections, but rather ensuring voters have confidence in our elections, said House Admin Chair and Rep. Bryan Steil, R-Wis.

In his opening remarks, Steil emphasized numerous problems threatening the integrity of D.C. elections, including the districts allowance of voters to cast a ballot without an ID and ballot harvesting. Among the most notable issues raised, however, is the citys recent decision permitting non-citizens to vote in local elections.

Passed by the D.C. Council late last year, D.C. Bill 24.300 expands the definition of qualified elector for municipal elections to include otherwise eligible non-citizen residents. This means that non-citizens residing in the nations capital for 30 days, including foreign diplomats from countries such as China and Russia, could vote in mayoral, city council, and other local elections. According to The Washington Post, there are an estimated 50,000 non-citizens residing in D.C.

In February, House Republicans utilized their constitutional authority to pass a measure blocking the laws implementation. Despite 42 House Democrats joining their Republican colleagues in supporting the bills passage (260-173), Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer refused to bring it to the Senate floor for a vote.

While Democrats would like to believe otherwise, D.C. has experienced a myriad of election-based administrative failures in recent years. An audit of the citys 2020 election found that 11 percent of all ballots mailed to voters ahead of the November contest were returned as undeliverable (48,018 out of 421,791), a rate more than eight times higher than the national average, according to NPR. This came over a year after the D.C. elections board opted to mail a ballot to every single voter on the citys voter rolls.

Similar numbers were also reported following the federal districts 2022 primaries and general elections. According to the D.C. elections board, 65,398 of the 402,323 ballots mailed to voters ahead of the June primary and nearly 90,000 of the 508,543 ballots mailed ahead of the general election were returned as undeliverable.

In an effort to rectify such issues and bring integrity to D.C. elections, Steil and House Republicans are proposing the American Confidence in Elections (ACE) Act. Introduced last year, the measure, according to a bill summary, prohibit[s] non-citizen voting, allows states to use REAL ID as proof of citizenship, and directs [the] bipartisan [Election Assistance Commission] standards board to establish a federal forum that will help states develop best [election] practices.

The legislation also includes specific provisions regarding D.C. elections, such as voter ID requirements for in-person and absentee voting, an expansion of poll observer access, and requirements for annual voter roll maintenance. Prohibitions on non-citizen voting, ballot harvesting, and mailing ballots except upon a voters request would also be enacted under the law.

If Democrats want to work together to encourage more people to vote, they can start by supporting the ACE Act to strengthen voter confidence right here in our nations capital, Steil said.

Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

The rest is here:

House Republicans Highlight Foreign Interference In DC Elections - The Federalist

President Joe Bidens declining mental acuity has become a national security issue and has seemingly emboldened Red Chinas willingness to engage in increasingly aggressive behavior.

On Saturday, a U.S. destroyer was abruptly cut off by a Chinese naval vessel during a transit through the Taiwan Strait. According to Fox News, the USS Chung-Hoon which was conducting a freedom of navigation exercise with the Royal Canadian Navy was forced to slow down to 10 knots to avoid a collision with the Chinese vessel. U.S. Indo-Pacific Command said in a statement that the Chinese ship came within 150 yards of the U.S. destroyer and that Chinas actions violated the maritime Rules of the Road of safe passage in international waters.

The U.S. military flies, sails, and operates safely and responsibly anywhere international law allows, U.S. military officials said. Paul Mountford, the commander of the Canadian frigate, claimed the Chinese vessels maneuver was announced over the radio before it was attempted, clearly indicat[ing] this was intentional. Predictably, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) defended the aggressive move by calling it lawful, safe and professional.

This weekends incident marks the latest in a growing list of Chinese maneuvers that appear designed to interfere with U.S. military operations. Two weeks ago, a Chinese fighter jet came within 400 feet of a U.S. reconnaissance aircraft while the latter was conducting a patrol of the South China Sea. The unexpected fly-by signifies an alarming increase in the number of risky aerial intercepts and confrontations at sea by [Peoples Liberation Army] aircraft and vessels, according to the Pentagon.

The list of aggressive actions taken by the CCP in recent months isnt the only one thats getting longer. Within the past few days, Biden has advertised several moments of ailing mental and physical health.

On Thursday, the president tripped over a sandbag while handing out diplomas at the Air Force Academys 2023 graduation ceremony. When exiting Marine One later that same day, Biden hit his head on the helicopters door frame, later telling reporters he got sandbagged, in reference to his graduation fall.

In addition to falling numerous times, Biden has failed to recall basic facts while speaking at public events. For example, when asked by a child during a White House event in late April about the last country he visited, Biden completely blanked on the question until another kid had to remind him it was Ireland where he had been only two weeks prior. Bidens also had moments where hes gotten lost on stage, forgotten the name of his defense secretary, confused President Donald Trump with President George W. Bush, and forgot what office he was running for, just to name a few.

While legacy media have worked overtime to run interference for Biden by accusing Republicans of seizing on these moments to question his fitness to serve, the presidents penchant for exhibiting physical and cognitive weakness poses a major problem. Every public display of Bidens fragility is another indication to Xi Jinping and the CCP that America lacks the effective leadership necessary to confront Chinas growing ambitions.

And why wouldnt it? Bidens domestic policies have crippled Americas national security and economic stability, while opening the door for antagonistic powers such as China and Russia to move towards a multipolar world order devoid of U.S. hegemony. Moreover, the CCP already tested Bidens resolve when it sent a spy balloon into U.S. airspace earlier this year. Instead of shooting it down immediately, Biden waited for it to drift across the entire continental United States after it had gathered intelligence from several sensitive American military sites before taking action.

Absent a strong American leader to challenge the CCP, its not out of the question to think China will take advantage of the Biden presidency as an opportunity to take additional aggressive actions throughout the Indo-Pacific in order to further its regional (and ultimately global) objectives.

Shawn Fleetwood is a staff writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He previously served as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

Read more:

Biden's Declining Mental Acuity Invites Red China's Aggression - The Federalist

If it wasnt already clear, the anti-Trump rights resistance to economic and cultural populism embraced by the MAGA movement is predicated almost entirely upon an aesthetic revulsion toward a people whom they consider inferior and inconvenient.

A few days ago, a short video of a pair of late-middle-aged white Americans dancing alongside a cardboard cutout of Donald Trump with moonshine went viral on Twitter after being shared by an account named Republicans against Trump.

Live shot from Magadonia, the caption reads.

In a large, unkempt outdoor space, trucks, American flags, and piles of yard waste are in clear sight. The couple bobs and jives to a recording of I Am a Man of Constant Sorrow from the Coen Brothers O Brother, Where Art Thou? What looks to be a medical mobility device appears partially on screen as the woman in her daytime pajamas works her way across the videos threshold, and the pairs dog is preoccupied with something it seems to have found on the ground.

The couple is energetic; theyre undeniably excited. We dont know why, but theyre clearly having a good time. The generally clean cutout of Donald Trump stands in stark contrast to the couples rugged appearance and the thick puddles of mud on the ground.

Its apparent that Republicans against Trump which call themselves pro-democracy conservative[] Republicans fighting Trump & Trumpism and use their platform to repeat the same braindead, reheated talking points about democracy and decency in an attempt to restore Bush-era establishment norms shared this video solely for the sake of belittling their countrymen for enthusiastically supporting the 45th president.

But why? Under Donald Trump, Americans were happier, richer, and safer abroad. Under Trump, the U.S. attained full employment, conservative judges flooded the judicial branch, and the country attained energy independence. These are just a few of the Trump administrations successes; no conservative, let alone any Republican, can deny them in good faith.

So why do the ostensible establishment Republicans appear to genuinely despise those who continue to celebrate Trump?

In a 2010 essay for The American Spectator titled The Ruling Class, the late Angelo Codevilla argued that entrenched political interests are so insulated and detached from the rest of the country, the people they purport to serve, that they develop a sense of holier-than-thou resentment.

Republican and Democratic office holders and their retinues show a similar presumption to dominate and fewer differences in tastes, habits, opinions, and sources of income among one another than between both and the rest of the country, Codevilla said. They think, look, and act as a class. This paradigm obviously extends beyond the political and applies to business, finance, and culture as well.

And this is where Trump thrives because, beyond the policy, he is a cultural figure who, despite being part of Americas elite circles, sided with the people and agreed with them that they were being screwed by tyrants in benefactors clothing.

Sure, they hate Trump, but they really hate you. They hate you so much theyll ridicule the clothes on your back, the teeth in your mouth, and the way you pronounce your words; but dont you dare disrespect the Democrats or disregard the norms that led us to a state of cultural freefall and decay.

Campaigning on a message of hope and change in the wake of the Great Recession and the Iraq War, among other things, Barack Obama was able to turn an extraordinarily pessimistic cultural and political environment into one of hopeful optimism. He failed to capitalize upon this and subsequently became an incredibly divisive and toxic individual who turned Americans against one another for his own political gain while the nation continued to circle the drain. But he was initially able to amass immense loyalty because he inspired hope.

Trump entered the political arena with nothing to gain and everything to lose and was verifiably able to change the country for the better. In doing so, in temporarily reversing the decay, he gave millions of Americans hope. He still does.

The Republican and Democrat parties, Big Business, entertainment conglomerates, et al. convinced the American people the countrys best days were behind them. Trump convinced them to step into the arena and keep fighting.

But when cynical elitists see common people expressing a love of country grounded in something other than a love of the Dow Jones Industrial Average, they recoil in disgust because they know their grip on power is not absolute.

Samuel Mangold-Lenett is a staff editor at The Federalist. His writing has been featured in the Daily Wire, Townhall, The American Spectator, and other outlets. He is a 2022 Claremont Institute Publius Fellow. Follow him on Twitter @smlenett.

Read the rest here:

Elitists Hate Trump Because He Gives The Wrong People Hope - The Federalist