Bush Is An Honorable Man

[TheGeneral]

Friends, pro-lifers, judiciary committeemen: Lend me your ears! I come to praise John Roberts, not to bury him. The evil that men do lives after them. The good is oft interred with their bones. Say it ain't so for Judge Roberts! The noble Bush hath told you that Roberts is pro-life. If so, NARAL would consider it a grievous fault.

Link to full article:
http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=396

[Joe_Liberty]

I agree with Stephen G. Peroutka that Roberts was an awful choice and will make an awful judge. However, I disagree with him when he writes that Edith Jones would make a great nominee because it is plain in the Bible that God has ordained that the order of the headship of man must be maintained in each governing institution set up by God. (http://www.visionforumministries.org/sections/hotcon/ht/ballotbox/2004-07-08_einwechter.asp)

I agree with the Conservative Caucus and others that a Christian man, like Judge Roy Moore (http://www.conservativeusa.org/roymoorepetition.htm), who does not repudiate the Bible, would be the best choice and the kind of person a President Peroutka should appoint.

[TimV]

That's actually not always true. It's certainly the way things were intended, but there are exceptions to the rule. I think you'll find the case law in Numbers Chapter 30.

[Joe_Liberty]

"Every time the Scripture speaks to the subject of the necessary qualifications for those who will bear rule in the civil sphere, it always speaks in terms of men and never in terms of women."

[TimV]

As I said, that is optimum, but life isn't always optimum, so exceptions are allowed, as in the Chapter I gave. Ruth would have like the men to have been more manly, but they weren't, and she was appointed by God as a judge. So there is president.

[Joe_Liberty]

"It would be unwise to cancel out the explicit biblical teaching on the headship of man, the clear statements of the law, the picture of the virtuous woman, and the lament over women ruling on the basis of what took place in Israel in one of the most confused periods in Israel’s history."

Do you really think that President Bush ought to appoint a woman like Edith Jones to replace O'Connor? Do you believe there are no many men left? What about Roy Moore? Would you rather see Jones appointed than Moore?

[TimV]

"It would be unwise to cancel out the explicit biblical teaching on the headship of man, the clear statements of the law, the picture of the virtuous woman, and the lament over women ruling on the basis of what took place in Israel in one of the most confused periods in Israel’s history."

Do you really think that President Bush ought to appoint a woman like Edith Jones to replace O'Connor? Do you believe there are no many men left? What about Roy Moore? Would you rather see Jones appointed than Moore?

Who are you quoting in the first sentence?

I don't know anything about Edith Jones. I do believe that "first the seed, then the ear, then the full corn shall appear". You can't have it all right now, and there is a process one needs to go through to get what you want. Roy Moore doesn't have the chance of a one legged man in a butt kicking contest to get appointed, so why do you even bring it up? A woman and/or a minority may very well be the wise choice. (not that Bush is capable of making a wise choice).

You speak of Israel being confused at the time, but even they didn't attack Iraq (Babylon) then ;)

[exmarine]

"It would be unwise to cancel out the explicit biblical teaching on the headship of man, the clear statements of the law, the picture of the virtuous woman, and the lament over women ruling on the basis of what took place in Israel in one of the most confused periods in Israel’s history."

Do you really think that President Bush ought to appoint a woman like Edith Jones to replace O'Connor? Do you believe there are no many men left? What about Roy Moore? Would you rather see Jones appointed than Moore?

I believe Bush's record and manner prove that he has graduated with honors from the School of Political Correctness. I feel nauseated just thinking about it.

Did you hear his dripping patronizing speech for Bill Clinton at the opening of the Clinton Library earlier this year? If one didn't know Clinton before the Bush speech, one would think that he is a veritable saint and revered leader after the speech. I was actually yelling at the TV that day. haha. When I thought of all the children who were led astray by Clinton's "oral sex is not sex" example and his literal and figurative soiling of the Oval Office, I blew my stack at the TV.

[LAmama]

The noble Bush hath told you that Roberts is pro-life. If so, NARAL would consider it a grievous fault.

Link to full article:
http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=396

My main concern with the Roberts nomination was the utter lack of noise, opposition or kicking up of dust from the left. It just never came. And I couldn't help but wonder about the few on the left who may have voted in opposition to Roberts if their votes weren't simply for effect.