RINO vs Conservative---Is Rep. Justin Amash’s challenger doomed?

LOTFI: Is Rep. Justin Amash’s challenger doomed? | Ben Swann Truth In Media:

In a recent interview with the Weekly Standard, Brian Ellis, who is GOP Rep. Justin Amash’s primary challenger, provided a statement that should put the final nail in the coffin of his own campaign.

Ellis told the Weekly Standard that Amash should stop voting against bills because he thinks they violate the Constitution. “If something is unconstitutional, we have a court system that looks at that,” Ellis said.

Ellis’ statement needs to be dissected in order to understand the strain of big-government neoconservativism he personifies.

First, it should be noted that the oath of office demands that federal representatives are obedient to the Constitution itself, and not to the Court.

By Ellis’ logic, African-Americans are property and not humans. Why? The Supreme Court said so in Dred Scott v. Sandford.

By Ellis’ logic, the federal government can force you into the insurance market. What will happen if you refuse to comply? You will be forced to pay a “fine.” Why? The Supreme Court said so in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius.

By Ellis’ logic, a farmer can’t grow wheat for himself to feed his family and his animals during times of economic hardship. Why? The Supreme Court said so in Wickard v. Filburn.

By Ellis’ logic, the federal government can take all police powers away from the states. Why? The Supreme Court said so in Champion v. Ames.

By Ellis’ logic, the federal government can control essentially every ditch of rainwater, machine and employee, regardless of lines of commerce. Why? The Supreme Court said so in United States v. Darby.