(Two of) The Big Three Do Not Disappoint

Ben noted one of the comments from the Big Three below, but two out of three of them gave us good soundbites that point to the fact that Judge Alito is extremely well-qualified (including this: “Alito was unanimously[!] confirmed by the U.S. Senate[!] to serve as U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey.”). (Plus, good ones from Kate Michelman and Ralph Neas.)

Rather than selecting a nominee for the good of the nation and the court, President Bush has picked a nominee whom he hopes will stop the massive hemorrhaging of support on his right wing. This is a nomination based on weakness, not strength. � Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass.

It is sad that the president felt he had to pick a nominee likely to divide America instead of choosing a nominee in the mold of Sandra Day O’Connor, who would unify us. This controversial nominee, who would make the court less diverse and far more conservative, will get very careful scrutiny from the Senate and from the American people. � Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.

President Bush put the demands of his far-right political base above Americans’ constitutional rights and legal protections by nominating federal appeals court Judge Samuel Alito to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. � Ralph Neas, president of the liberal People For the American Way.

Now the gauntlet has been, I think, thrown down. It was humiliating, it was degrading and it’s a profound and distributing view of Judge Alito that he would uphold spousal notification as he did in the Pennsylvania case, and it raises concerns about his views of women. � Kate Michelman, former president of NARAL-Pro Choice America.

[Presumably that was “disturbing” and not “distributing”; but, who knows? Anything’s possible from NARAL.]
Wow, Kate takes things personally! It was “humiliating” and “degrading” for Pres. Bush to pick Alito. She acts as if Alito raped her and then wouldn’t give her an abortion! Get over yourself.

And then there’s Sen. Leahy:

This is a needlessly provocative nomination. Instead of uniting the country through his choice, the president has chosen to reward one faction of his party at the risk of dividing the country.

All I can say is that if these people are upset, there is much to be happy about with this nomination. It is to be hoped that Alito makes Schumer et al. look as ridiculous as Roberts made them look. One question: why in the world did the President not nominate this man in the first place?

Timotheos

“Thy Strong Word Bespeaks Us Righteous” (Or: The Festival of the Reformation)

O Lord God, heavenly Father, pour out, we beseech Thee, Thy Holy Spirit upon Thy faithful people, keep them steadfast in Thy grace and truth, protect and comfort them in all temptations, defend them against all enemies of Thy Word, and bestow upon Christ’s Church Militant Thy saving grace; through the same Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with Thee and the Holy Ghost, one God, now and forever. Amen.

“I will also speak of your testimonies before kings and shall not be put to shame.” (Psalm 119:46).

Othniel has some words for false reformers here.
WYDDQ has some strong words for those who are worried about being “Reformation bastards,” and calls for a happy Reformation Day.

[Timotheos]

All Say “Alito”

President Bush has nominated Judge Samuel Alito to fill the remaining vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel: Thesis XXV

“In the twenty-first place, the Word of God is not rightly divided when the person teaching it does not allow the Gospel to have a general predominance in his teaching” (C.F.W. Walther, The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel reproduced from the German edition of 1897 by W.H.T. Dau (St. Louis: Concordia, 1986), 4).

Reluctant? CNN Knows

This from my CNN breaking news e-mail: “President Bush ‘reluctantly’ accepts Supreme Court nominee Harriet
Miers’s request to withdraw her nomination.”

What’s with the quotation marks? Now the media is into divining the President’s feelings? He may really be reluctant, but did he say so? Seriously…

On the other hand, as has been suggested here and other places, perhaps this nominee was only a ploy. What if this was a way to gauge the opposition? Nice one, Mr. President.

Timotheos

Make Them Pay

Now that Harriet Miers has withdrawn her nomination, it is time for the President to nominate someone who cannot be criticized the way Miers was. Someone who has a solid record, someone with a mind like John Roberts, and the wit to defend him/herself. Frankly, I will know the next nominee is good if the Big Three (Schumer, Biden, and Kennedy) get angry. They believe that they represent the mainstream of American thought on this issue, and it will simply be a beautiful thing to see them self-destruct against a competent nominee. This is not only about who actually takes a seat on the bench. This is also about making the Left wing say what they actually think. They came close against Roberts, but just imagine if the nominee were African American or Hispanic. I guarantee that the rhetoric would edge dangerously close to racism.

I think the President is on the edge of great success. Iraq has a constitution; the terrorists in that country are blowing themselves up; gas prices are going down; the economy is getting better. Now, a hardcore conservative will only solidify his reputation. Mr. President, make the Democratic senators take a stand–and, having taken that stand, fall.

Timotheos

Another Look

“Any consideration of the significance of a resurrected Jesus requires a long look at why a world would find him distasteful” (David Dark, The Gospel According to America: A Meditation on a God-blessed, Christ-haunted Idea (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005), 147).

What are the reasons? Why does one have a less than favorable impression of Jesus Christ?

The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel: Thesis XXIV

“In the twentieth place, the Word of God is not rightly divided when the unforgiven sin against the Holy Ghost is described in a manner as if it could not be forgiven because of its magnitude” (C.F.W. Walther, The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel reproduced from the German edition of 1897 by W.H.T. Dau (St. Louis: Concordia, 1986), 4).

Chew on This One For A Minute

What is at stake here?

Timotheos

Hey, Honesty’s Something

[via Bunnie Diehl] You know, there’s only so much you can say to a person who is foaming at the mouth to say something that doesn’t make any sense.

You could argue, but, clearly, that would not do any good. You could engage in a pissing contest over whose religion has killed more people in the history of the world: mine (Christianity) or his (militant atheism–Communism, anyone?). Not worth it. You could refute the more ridiculous assertions, such as believing in Christ in order to gain power(!), but apparently the trump card is the President. On the other hand, we could just wait for the ADL and multiple Islamic organizations to sue him. (I mean, how many people can call future Muslims “blithering idiots” and get away with it?) Someone must read his column; he has 362 comments. Think it’s not mainstream? Live in the U.K.

But everyone needs a little light-hearted entertainment once in a while. My favorite part is the whole “I hate the people who think they have the truth; let me tell you the truth” part. Irony must have gotten lost somewhere on the evolutionary trail.

Reminds me of one of the best-named cds in the last year: “No, sir, Nihilism is not practical.”

Timotheos