Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


SWMissourian last won the day on January 5

SWMissourian had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

34 Excellent

About SWMissourian

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. SWMissourian


    We had a tremendous time at our rally in Iowa! We talked about our rights and some environmental policy! I highly recommend you check out the transcript located on my Press Office's page if you weren't able to attend! Next stop in #CoMO where I will discuss more on gun rights and the Second Amendment! See you there! #Constitution #2A
  2. SWMissourian

    Johnathon Grant (R-MO) Press Office

    Office of Representative Johnathon Grant Authorized for Immediate Release Johnathon Grant Holds Rally in Cedar Rapids, IA; Speaks on Various Issues CEDAR RAPIDS, IA - Representative Johnathon Grant (R-MO) hosted a Grant For Senate rally in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, today to rally support for his Senate bid. Mr. Grant talked about a few topics, including energy/environmental policy, economic policy, and Governor Erick Travere. Full transcript below: “Hello, Iowa! Oh, it is great to be back in this great state. Great to be here in Cedar Rapids, too! I got some family in Iowa City who moved up here in 2005, so I’ve grown familiar with the area. Nice to be here, and nice to see so many people here today. It is important that we engage with our government and the political system around it. I don’t have any one dedicated topic this time. I just want to address some general issues and topics. We aren’t that far from the big day, and there are a still subjects I need to speak on, right? So, first, I want to talk about where I stand on energy and environmental policy. I know many on the Left would have you believe that I am a climate change denier. Well, I am not. I do believe that climate change exists, and yes, I do believe that humans are indeed contributing to it to some degree. I don’t think that conflicts with conservative philosophy, and I don’t have any problem looking at the data our great scientists at NASA and elsewhere are gathering that shows these things. The problems I have with the Left and it’s radical environmentalism is well...it is too radical. Climate change is an issue, and there is responsible policy to be had in regards to it, but handicapping global and American economic growth, imposing burdensome regulations, and throwing people into unemployment and panic over it isn’t the right direction. I want to spur economic growth and innovation in key fields to help the whole issue. America, through free market forces, was easily the largest carbon emissions reducer in 2018, for instance, even without the Paris Climate Accord hanging over our heads. Innovation brings more efficient technologies, which cost less money and energy. I want to create and protect economic conditions conducive to that. They are helpful to the American worker and our environment. I specifically support energy investment in the nuclear field, because nuclear energy has so much potential and is really quite cleaner than other forms of renewable energy. I do support innovation in renewable fields too, don’t get me wrong, but I think our government would be much more justified in helping innovation in the nuclear sector. As Senator, I will work to create great economic conditions for innovation in the economy that will lead to a cleaner and better society for everyone without imposing government control over more aspects of people’s lives. So, Governor Travere endorsed Mr. Daniels for Senate, which I find quite telling. Governor Travere has done some alright things, right? [insert some alright things] But, he has also done some pretty severely tyrannical things, which reveals much about his character and leadership. Travere tried to suspend the First Amendment with an executive order, for instance. It was so bad even the ACLU sued him for it, and the ACLU typically leans left! He has shown his blatant disregard for and ignorance of the Second Amendment by pandering to the gun control lobbyists. He has proven either that he doesn’t understand the Constitution or that he doesn’t care for it. People all across the political spectrum should thus disregard his endorsement. We all love and enjoy our rights, and someone endorsed by a man who shows blatant disregard or even animus towards those rights is not the guardian you want for those rights. If we want the Second Amendment and the First Amendment protected strongly and clearly, Daniels is not your man. A tyrant’s endorsement in a democratic republic like ours shouldn’t be looked at fondly. As Senator from the Midwest, I promise to protect our Constitution. I will defend your right to protect yourself and your family. I will do my best to guard against infringement on freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Freedom is what matters most in America. Freedom is what matters most to me and every American. We want to be free. We want to be left alone to live our lives how we want. We don’t want big government bullying us around. We don’t want statists dictating how we spend our money, live our lives, and worship our faiths. I will defend your gun rights and your free speech rights. I will encourage better economic conditions that will spur innovation for a cleaner, better society. I know what Iowa, what the Midwest, wants. I want what you want. We want liberty. That’s what I will stand for as Senator from the Midwest, and that’s why a Constitutionally ignorant man like Governor Travere would never endorse me. God bless you, Iowa! I’d be happy to meet with some of you out back. Thank you for coming out and have a fantastic day!” Representative Grant proceeded to meet with people for the next 20 minutes before departing for Missouri, where he will hold his next rally in Columbia. Authorized by Grant for US Senate
  3. SWMissourian


  4. SWMissourian


    I wish I could say I was surprised at @YourRepCraig being endorsed by a governor with blatant disregard for the Second and First Amendments, but I can’t honestly say so. #VoteGOP #ConstitutionalRights
  5. SWMissourian

    Johnathon Grant (R-MO) Press Office

    OFFICE OF REPRESENTATIVE JOHNATHON GRANT Authorized for Immediate Release DETROIT, MICHIGAN - Representative Johnathon Grant (R-MO) travelled to Detroit today for a Midwest senate campaign rally in which he talked about multiple topics, including limited government, budget restraint, the judiciary, and religious freedom. “Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen! It’s nice to be out here today. This is my kind of weather: not too cold, not too hot, and plenty of clouds in the sky. Great day. It is great to see so many people, of all ages backgrounds out here today. I think we all know why we are all here. We are here to celebrate and participate in the great American experiment. We are here to exercise and protect our most sacred freedoms. That’s what I want to talk about today: what our great movement is all about. Obviously, our first and foremost concern is limited government. The Founding Fathers experienced firsthand the tyranny of monarchy and big government. They sought to build a government that was limited in scope by its own institutions. It really was an genius and quite novel idea, and our status today as the world’s greatest nation is a testament to that. We haven’t always lived up to the American ideal of limited government and equality under the law, but we have perfected the experiment and system in many ways. But we have also lost our way in many other areas. Regulation of the economy, for example. Yes, some regulation is justified and necessary, but it has gotten excessive. It gets too difficult and costly to operate a business, losing Americans money that can be used to invest, innovate, and expand. These regulations are used to club ordinary Americans over the head in the name of some grand cause. We have given the unelected bureaucracy too much power. As Senator, I will work to wrest power from the bureaucrats and hold them accountable. Government accountability goes hand-in-hand with limited government. I will fight for transparency and accountability. And of course, along with our belief in limited government, we believe in budgetary restraint. Look at our deficit! 21 trillion dollars and climbing! That is higher than our GDP! Politicians on both sides have been unwilling to fix and address the issue, even little by little. As Senator, I will work to reduce the deficit by fighting for reduced spending and against government waste. Government agencies need to be audited and they must be looked at critically. Does this program deserve to exist? Is this a worthy allocation of American tax dollars? Can we end this program soon? What cuts can be made? Has this program’s mission been accomplished? Why or why not? That is what I stand for, and I think we can all get behind reducing the deficit until we can get to shrinking our debt instead of growing it. That isn’t just a conservative or even libertarian issue. That’s something we can all agree on. That is what I will stand for in the Senate.” In contrast to Mr. Grant’s position, the Democrats want to explode the deficit and debt with expensive “feel-good” programs that look good on a campaign sticker but aren’t practical in the real world. Mr. Grant continued: “Of course, if you want a functioning republic, you need a responsible judiciary. For too long, judicial activists have been put on the Supreme Court to read the Constitution as they see fit and shove words and meaning into it where there are none. The Supreme Court has made some of the worst decisions in history and has sheltered and enabled bad government policy and institutions like Jim Crow before. Irresponsible judicial activists insert meaning into the Constitution because they aren’t actually interesting in following the Constitution. They are interested in re-writing it according to their own personal political agenda. That is wrong and antithetical to every idea America stands for. The Constitution says and means what its authors understood it to say and mean, and we must not allow activist elite to change our most important governing document under our noses. The good people of the Midwest don’t want unelected bureaucrats and judges making decisions about the nature of the law of the land for them. As Senator, I will only vote for judges that will uphold originalist and responsible jurisprudence. I will work with Paul Vang to assure that those justices will be nominated and confirmed to the Supreme Court, safeguarding our republic from judicial overreach. Finally, I want to talk about a freedom that has been under attack lately: the freedom to exercise your religion and believe as you see fit. This is an essential part of our country. Indeed, the US was founded by men and women looking for religious tolerance. While they didn’t always live up to the tenets of religious tolerance, they set the foundation for what we have today. But that is all under attack. Suddenly, those who seek to faithfully and sincerely practice their religion in peace are branded with a slew of -phobic’s and -ist’s. They are investigated and prosecuted by government agencies. Senators question a nominee for government’s qualification for a role based on their religious beliefs. This is wrong. I believe, as I think we all do, that every religion has a right to peacefully believe and worship as they want. Muslims, Buddhists, Christians, and Jews alike, they all have the right to believe as they want. As Senator, I will work to defend religious liberty from attacks on all fronts because I want a religiously tolerant America for us all. Ladies and Gentlemen, that’s all I have time for tonight! Thanks so much for coming out! It was wonderful coming here and seeing everyone! God bless you, God bless the Midwest, and God bless America!” Authorized by Grant for US Senate
  6. SWMissourian


    Small, accountable government is essential to our American republic, and the people of the Midwest know this!
  7. SWMissourian

    Johnathon Grant (R-MO) Press Office

    Office of Representative Johnathon Grant For Immediate Release Johnathon Grant Holds Free Speech Rally in Minneapolis, MN MINNEAPOLIS, MN - Johnathon Grant held a Grant for US Senate rally in Minneapolis yesterday. In his speech, he talked about limited government and how he would champion that principle as Senator from the Midwest. He mostly talked a lot about government waste. After his speech, he held a meet and greet for 45 minutes before departing. "Hail, Minnesota! Ah, it's great to be out here today. Bit cloudy, but I don't mind clouds. It is awesome to see so many people out here today ready to take part in the political process, which is so important to our great republic. I want to talk to you great people today about a topic that is central to the American experiment: limited government. Limited government is one of the founding tenets of our great nation. This is the idea that government is a threat to liberty, and to protect our liberty our government must be limited. To do this, the Founders established checks and balances and wrote the limitations of our government into the Constitution. Government exists to protect the natural rights of the people: the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The government only exists to protect and ensure your rights, not to run your life or livelihood. Despite these institutional checks on government power, the government has still grown massively. This is at least partially understandable. After all, we are a nation of over 325 million people now. However, there are many parts of the government that are bloated and need to be reigned in. For instance, the budget. Every American knows what a disaster the federal government's budget is. We are over 20 trillion dollars in debt, but the government keeps on spending, spending, spending. The Democrats solution? Spend more, tax more! They act like letting Americans keep more of their hard-earned money is the end of the world, when really it is a spending problem Washington has, not a revenue problem. But the Democrats keep peddling these expensive, massive expansions of government. They know we can't pay for them. But these programs sound nice, and sometimes their repercussions wouldn't be felt for many years after they have left office. The government is bloated and full of waste, but statists on both sides want to make it bigger. Need a case in point about the massive waste and malfeasance in the federal government? I've got some right here. I must extend a big thank you to our Senator from here, Rand Paul, for helping dig this stuff up, and to many news publications like Reader's Digest and many others for publishing this waste as well. Such a great job he has done. Let's look at these: 1) the federal government spent over $500,000 to study the sexual habits of Japanese quail high on cocaine. You can't make this stuff up. Just like many of y'all did, I laughed when I first read that, but then I realized that they just spent half a million dollars on it. 2) $30,000 on a production of Hamlet but with dogs. Yup. 3) 1.04 billion dollars to expand San Diego's trolley by slightly less than eleven miles. That is 100 million dollars per mile! Even worse, that could be used to build 250 million miles of four-lane highways, which would be used more often! That's an insane amount of money to just spend away! 4) The Department of Defense lost over 1 billion dollars of equipment. That includes Humvees, mortars, rifles, and the DoD just lost it. I love our military, I really do. As Senator, I will support them. Part of that is holding them accountable for the costly mistakes they make that cost taxpayers tons of money. I want every government agency held accountable. 5) The Government Accountability Office concluded that of all the cars the federal government purchases, there is no way of knowing whether or not they are being used or sitting in a parking lot. Just these five things are bad enough, but it gets worse all the time. Government isn't held accountable enough, and when government is expanded drastically, like the Democrats want to do, it gets harder to hold it accountable. Sure, these things don't in themselves add up to a lot compared to what the federal government spends in total, but they do still matter. Especially with that 20 trillion dollar debt hanging over us. As Senator, I will support limited government and government accountability programs. I will fight for a fair and balanced budget for the American people as well. The American people deserve and want a government that is accountable and unobtrusive. That is what I will fight for as Senator from the Midwest. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen! Have a great day!" If you would like to learn more about government waste, we recommend the following links: https://www.circa.com/story/2017/11/27/politics/james-lankford-finds-100-examples-of-wasteful-spending https://www.businessinsider.com/james-lankford-federal-fumbles-report-of-government-waste-2017-11#washington-dcs-streetcar-6 https://www.rd.com/culture/wasteful-government-spending-examples/
  8. SWMissourian

    Midwest Senator Campaigning

    Johnathon Grant 1. Rally in Illinois targeting Conservatives (1 hour) 2. Rally in Illinois targeting Moderates (1 hour) 3. Rally in Indiana targeting Moderates (1 hour) 4. Rally in Iowa targeting Moderates (1 hour) 5. Rally in Michigan targeting Conservatives (1 hour) 6. Rally in Michigan targeting Moderates (1 hour) 7. Rally in Minnesota targeting Moderates (1 hour) 8. Rally in Missouri targeting Moderates (1 hour) 9. Rally in Ohio targeting Conservatives (1 hour) 10. Rally in Ohio targeting Moderates (1 hour) 11. Rally in Wisconsin targeting Conservatives (1 hour) 12. Rally in Wisconsin targeting Moderates (1 hour)
  9. Mr. Speaker, I second the motion for UC. I yield.
  10. SWMissourian

    Electricity Reliability and Forest Protection Act

    Mr. Speaker, I second the motion. I yield
  11. SWMissourian


    Glad that @JAllen's bill to protect American military paychecks during a shutdown will be voted on, and hopefully passed on the House Floor!
  12. SWMissourian

    Johnathon Grant (R-MO) Press Office

    Office of Representative Johnathon Grant Official Press Release Craig Daniels is a Fake Pro-Lifer Craig Daniels recently released a Press Release talking about so-called "Real Pro-Life" measures. Of course, you know that once he starts off with the "real" pro-life rhetoric, it means he isn't actually pro-life but doesn't want to alienate the many voters here in our great region who are, or who just don't want to fund murder themselves. This is an interesting political tactic, but I know the Midwestern voters will see right through it. First, I want to start with Craig Daniel's lie: abortion only counts for 3 percent of Planned Parenthood's budget. Now, I'm not even sure where he gets this statistic from, because the source he linked in his press release relates to services, not budget. It does say 3 percent by "Abortion" so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he misspoke. This claim, that only 3 percent of Planned Parenthood's services are abortions, has been debunked repeatedly, even by left-leaning news outlets like the Washington Post. Planned Parenthood deflates their abortion percentage while inflating others by counting every interaction a woman gets while going to Planned Parenthood for an abortion a "service". As Alexandra DeSanctis put it in January 2018,"Take an example. A woman walks into a Planned Parenthood clinic. She takes a pregnancy test, meets with a counselor, and chooses to have an abortion procedure. While she’s there, she also receives an STI test and a breast exam and is handed birth control on her way out the door. Planned Parenthood would count each of these “discrete interactions” — six in total — as a service, so abortion would be only 16 percent of that woman’s visit." This is hardly a reliable statistic, and yet Daniels still relies on it for the crux of his argument against defunding Planned Parenthood, even as he touts himself as a "real" pro-lifer. Want some real perspective on Planned Parenthood's services? Once more, according to Alexandra DeSanctis,"Take an example. A woman walks into a Planned Parenthood clinic. She takes a pregnancy test, meets with a counselor, and chooses to have an abortion procedure. While she’s there, she also receives an STI test and a breast exam and is handed birth control on her way out the door. Planned Parenthood would count each of these “discrete interactions” — six in total — as a service, so abortion would be only 16 percent of that woman’s visit...As the most expensive procedure provided, abortion underwrites a huge portion of the group’s bottom line. Surely this is why the national organization routinely imposes abortion quotas on its regional affiliates and rewards clinics that exceed their abortion targets." If you really want to see the importance of abortion to Planned Parenthood, ask none other than Cecile Richards, their President. She said that the choice to have an abortion was Planned Parenthood's central mission. That is what Craig Daniels is really supporting. He only postures as pro-life, but he doesn't actually want pro-life policy, because then Planned Parenthood wouldn't donate millions of government dollars to his party anymore. Daniels also seemed to imply that I support making women suffer/die because they made a mistake. This isn't true. 1) I support saving the life of the mother. 2) I support funding pregnancy crisis clinics and adoption centers to help with the mothers who got unexpectedly pregnant and can't afford a child. I do not support ripping apart an unborn baby, causing great suffering to that innocent child. The child did nothing to deserve that or bring that on themselves. Daniels also says that Roe v. Wade established autonomy over one's own body. If it did, then it obviously didn't do it correctly. If the Court did affirm bodily autonomy, then (a) why do Democrats insist on involving public funds in abortion and other bodily medical products, which necessarily reduces bodily autonomy, and (b) why do unborn children not have a right to their own body? They do. They have a right to life just as the rest of us do. That is a right the US is founded on, but the founding ideals of the US, such as limited government and the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as well as freedom of speech, seem to have been lost on our Democratic friends in Congress over the years. Now, Daniels does get a couple things right, to his credit. He doesn't advocate for abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or the mother's life. I completely agree. Let's actually make that happen. He also wants to expand and simplify adoption services. I completely agree. Let's reroute the 500 million dollars Planned Parenthood gets a year to better adoption services. Mr. Daniels is trying to have it both ways: pro-life and pro-choice. I recognize that he is trying to appeal to moderates. But he is wrong in his justification and approach. Even moderates can support defunding Planned Parenthood. After all, they make a healthy profit already, and they have high and increasing overall revenues. More importantly, the moderates recognize that when the government takes a good, hard-working evangelical's money and sends it to Planned Parenthood, they are involving that person in something they are completely against, against their will and with no accountability. There could be a case made for emergency abortions, like ones in which the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother, but we need to set up a separate system for that, not one that just hands over half a billion dollars to Planned Parenthood a year. Forcing hard-working Christians, Muslims, Jews, or someone just against the procedure, like Daniels himself professes to be, to fund it with their money is wrong, and I know the people of the Midwest recognize that. As Senator from the Midwest, I will fight to expand and improve adoption services. I will fight to allow the good people of the Midwest to stop funding abortion against their own will. That is my promise to you.
  13. SWMissourian

    John Grant For Senate | Senate Campaign Townhall

    Good question, Ms. Lane. First off, I want to say that I do not agree with white nationalists or supremacists of any kind. America is a nation of ideas, and these ideas transcend race. It’s one of the best parts about America. I grew up in an area with significant Hispanic, Asian, and black minorities, and they were no less American than I am. So, these White Crusaders are planning to rally in Skokie? I have to admit I’m not all that familiar with the White Crusaders off the top of my head, but I of course have heard of them and some of their ideas. Anyway, this is obviously a free speech issue here, and free speech requires a lot of respect from the government, otherwise we don’t have free speech. I think that these white nationalists/supremacists should be allowed to have their rally so long as it remains peaceful, of course. Yes, I completely disagree with them on race, but though I think what they’re saying is disgusting, if we don’t all have free speech, none of us do. There is no legal way to define hate speech without introducing a slippery slope that gives government too much power over speech in general. As for the unconfirmed reports, obviously those should be investigated, and if the White Crusaders are responsible, they should be prosecuted. So as far as if the Midwest legislature should be taking more actions against this group and other similar groups, there are perhaps a few things, like perhaps making sure no government contractors conduct business with these groups. Much of these policies need to be looked on a case-by-case basis and be tailored to respect the freedom of speech. If you wish, you can ask specifically about some policies that the government could implement and I’d be more than happy to answer. As for the regional government in general, they can make sure our police forces are well-trained and effective in keeping these rallies peaceful and within reasonable restriction. We can do that through perhaps training grants or programs for local precincts as well as for state law enforcement. I’m fine with the federal government providing help to local law enforcement agencies as well when it comes to training and funding. Law and order in a community is essential, of course. Overall, yes the group should be permitted to rally in Skokie, no matter how despicable they are. Their views still fall under free speech. However, law enforcement should be on the scene to make sure the rally stays lawful and peaceful, and those unconfirmed reports should definitely be investigated. This is an issue that requires nuance and care, because the freedom of speech is essential to our republican form of government, so we need to be careful when it comes to policy like that. Good question, and feel free to ask a follow-up, Ms. Lane!
  14. SWMissourian

    John Allen for US Senate Town Hall | Medford, Oregon

    Congressman, How do you plan to help the economy?
  15. SWMissourian

    Johnathon Grant (R-MO) Press Office

    Office of Johnathon Grant For Immediate Release Johnathon Grant Holds Rally in Grand Rapids, MI GRAND RAPIDS, MI - Johnathon Grant held a rally in Grand Rapids, Michigan, yesterday to discuss judicial activism and originalism and their significance in a functioning republic. "Hello, great people of Grand Rapids! It is so great to be here and to see so many fantastic people here! This is the first time I've ever been to Grand Rapids, and I gotta say, y'all have such an interesting and wonderful city. Every time I go to a city like this, I am awestruck, as a boy who grew up in rural Southwest Missouri. It's great to be out here today and see so many supporters of limited government and natural rights. This country is such a wonderful experiment in democratic republicanism, but there are many threats to this experiment. One of the foremost is judicial legislating and activism, and that is what I want to talk about tonight. So, what is judicial activism? I'm sure most of us have heard the term thrown around by both sides. I learned it in my civics class in high school, but I know many aren't familiar with it. Well, judicial activism is when a judge or justice makes a decision in a case that is irrespective of precedent or the Constitution. It mostly ties in with a judicial concept known as broad constructionism, meaning the Constitution says what I want it to say when I want it to say it. These judges decide policy and precedent not based on the Constitution or case law, but on their own biased whims. This is dangerous to a democracy, and for obvious reasons. When unelected men and women get to decide policy based on their personal preferences from the bench, there is no representation of the people, no sense to a republican government, and no accountability from the government. I'll give you an example. Stick with me. I know this example is controversial, but even if you disagree with me on the core issue, hear me out. The year is 1973, and Roe v. Wade is decided by the Supreme Court. Now, whether or not you are pro-life is irrelevant in this case. The Court clearly made up a new Constitutional right out of thin air in order to further their own political agenda. There is no clause in the Constitution guaranteeing a right to abortion, and by no means can any clause in the Constitution reasonably be read to include that right. If you approached the writers of every seemingly relevant amendment or clause to our great governing document, they would be appalled and disgusted by what the Court said their clauses were defending. This is the "the Constitution is a living document so it says whatever I think it says" interpretation of the Constitution. What is the problem with this interpretation? Well, it is fairly simple. It goes against every single ideal of limited government and republican democracy our nation was founded on. Policy is decided and written by lawmakers on Capitol Hill, and overseen and enforced by the Executive Branch. This interpretation de facto turns the Court into a political machine of dangerous authoritarian power. These judges are unelected and can't be held accountable; they serve for life. They have been allowed to ignore the Constitution and write in ghost clauses against the true process of amending the Constitution, one that is republican in nature and not run by unelected power-hungry justices sitting on a bench. Unfortunately, the statists and radical leftists in government want this. It is their best way to force their agenda on the American people, even once they're rejected and voted out of office. The justices stay. They don't want a Constitution that means anything, because after all, it means nothing if it means whatever five Supreme Court justices want it to say.They want a Judicial Branch that will invalidate and obstruct the agenda of small government and economic liberation. They want a lifetime of "progressive" policy being churned out in what is unfortunately the least accountable and potentially the most powerful branch of government. It was never intended to be this way. The Founding Fathers intended for the judicial branch to be the least powerful branch of government and the most independent, so that its interpretation of the Constitution would be based on the Constitution and its history only, not the personal policy preferences of at least five justices. But that is how it turned out. When the Court did its job, which it often neglected, it was threatened. I know many people love FDR, but he was unfortunately fairly authoritarian; he tried to pack the Court when it didn't agree with him. Luckily, Congress had the good sense at the time to say no. But judicial activism continued. We saw this in Roe v. Wade. Where an issue, abortion, used to be left up to the states, to the people, it was decided by unelected men in black that you should accept it. The Democrats then made you pay for it. Luckily, the Court has seen a resurgence of originalism: the idea that the Constitution should be read and interpreted as it was meant to be by its authors. You would think this would be obvious. After all, we otherwise wouldn't want to pass amendments for fear their words would be turned against us. Why even have a Constitution if its meaning is not clear, consistent, and set in stone? When the meaning of the Constitution is allowed to float freely undefined, there is no point in having a Constitution. That's what this idea recognizes. Justice Thomas subscribes to this idea, Justice Alito does, Justice Roberts sometimes does. Justice Gorsuch does. Now, thanks to President Trump, Justice Kavanaugh does. These great people represent the type of justice we need, we deserve. They will limit the government and allow the people freedom, not because they want to, but because they have to. Because the Constitution mandates they do. They will not follow their personal policy preferences. They will perform the job of justice as it is meant to be performed in a republic: with respect only to the Constitution of the United States of America! This is something we should all want. Democrats, Republicans, moderates, Independents, libertarians, centrists, everyone who loves our great democratic republic, and everyone who loves their freedoms. When a panel of unelected judges decides that the law means what they want it to mean, and not what it was written to mean, we have no democracy. This judicial rewriting of the Constitution is bad, no matter the results. If we are to remain free, we must stop this threat before it grows too large, and the next thing we know, the most powerful position in the nation will be the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America, the President will his figurehead. What can we do, though? We can elect responsible politicians (a very rare breed, but they are out there) to appoint confirm these justices. Paul Vang is your man for President. He will nominate these justices, ones that will heed only the Constitution when it comes to a decision they make on the bench. As your Senator, I will vote to confirm these great men and women to the Supreme Court, the ones that will keep America great, that will keep America the beautiful country we know it as today (and hopefully, will help make it better by only deferring to the Constitution in judicial opinions). A vote for Macmillan is a vote for those judicial activists, he practically admitted it himself. Pro-life justices be damned, to him. It isn't a matter of whether or not a justice is pro-life, but whether or not they will actually read and follow the Constitution. A vote for Craig Daniels is an affirmation and enabling of that crooked and corrupt ideology, an ideology itself bent against the people. That's why I recommend a vote for me and Paul Vang come November. The Legislative and Executive hold an obligation to check the power of the Judicial Branch, and we together will do that. God bless you, ladies and gentlemen! I will be happy to meet a few of you backstage before I leave!" Representative Grant proceeded to meet with several people backstage for a further half hour before departing the venue. Representative Grant wishes to make clear that he is adding this promise to his Contract with the Midwest on his campaign site.