Depending on what media outlets you follow, the the Senate filibuster will fall meaning the DimocRats’ federal For The People voter fraud act will “pass” (you no longer need to vote; the Dims will do that for you); or the filibuster is safe, and states will still set their own election rules as directed by the Constitution.
If there are any remaining Constitutionalist Senators (not mine, who got elected through the very unlawful process that the Dims want to enshrine nationally), I suggest some FTP amendments should it look at if it’s going to a vote.
If: No voter ID
Then: No gun buyer ID
If: Mail-in voting
Then: Mail order guns (again; we used to do that)
If: Secret ballots
Then: Secret purchases; no more 4473s
If: No proof of residency or citizenship
Then: Ditto for firearm purchases
If: Felons vote
Then: Felons buy guns (they do anyway, and places like Chiraq and NYC don’t even prosecute anymore)
Sure, I’m dreaming; and you can probably come up with plenty of other if/thens. But I’d like to see 1) if tehre’s anyone left in the Senate with a semblance of integrity and consistency, and 2) if there’s anyone on the Dim side who might go, “Whoa. Wait.”
Doubtful, on either point.
Conversely, If the Second Amendment’s “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” means that the 2A is a collective right of state militias, instead of the SCOTUS-approved individual rights meaning, then Article 1, Section 2 (The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States…) just as much makes voting “collective.” “People,” not individuals; “States,” not individual voters.
Let states collectively elect Representatives as opposed to the current, improperly individualistic direct elections. Why not? Section 4 says that states can run the elections anyway they want: The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof;. A leftwing collectivist approach to electing Represenntatives would be consistent with the original Constitutional provision that legislatures — not direct vote by the state’s populace — choose Senators.
A confuused lefty might look at this…
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.
…and get the idea that voting should be by individuals because they talking about the numbers of individuals in each state. Not so; that merely determines how many Representatives the legislatures choose.
Some will probably claim that the 19th amendment clearly indicates individual vote, but I argue that means they vote for their state legislators who then elect Representatives and Senators for their constituents just as they pass laws and confirm appointees on behalf of those same constituents.
But I suppose a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds whoe expect words mean what they say, laws to mean what they say, and fricking DimocRats to mean whatb they say.
Emerson was full of shit. Pythagora may have been misunderstood, because the concepts he was explaining were new and difficult. Dim redefinitions cause misunderstanding because they are lying to obfuscate well-understood things that had been understood for centuries.
