Welcome to the weekend! Its been a while since your inboxes have been graced by an email from me on this topic, but that’s likely been because, well its election season, a new baby, lots of kids sports, and so on.
I actually have some interesting articles for you to check out – some are a few weeks old, aging well in my saved folder (Pocket App), and waiting for just the right moment for you to enjoy!
But of course the question many of you are going to ask is “isn’t he going to say anything about the Kavanaugh stuff???” Well what more is to be said? The outrage on the left from feminists is predictable, the bluster on the right from partisans is expected, but I suppose its the thoughtful people of both parties (and of no party) that I find all over the map on this thing.
I watched Ford’s testimony with sympathy, but credulity. Let me explain. Much of what she was saying didn’t line up with earlier statements, her body language was nervous to the point of odd, and it seemed that her was a lady not ready for the limelight. As sympathetic as she was, I didn’t find her believable – just at a gut level. I believe that something happened to her at some point (maybe multiple points), but it just didn’t sit right. Aside from my “gut” though, there are so many issues here – none of her friends or “witnesses” corroborate her testimony! Forget the committee not believing her – her own friends don’t believe her and in fact refute that this party even happened or that they were there at all. Also – she didn’t come out 12 years ago when Kavanaugh was set to become an important Judge on the D.C. Court of Appeals. She didn’t bring this up earlier in the #metoo movement – it wasn’t as though she was empowered by the movement and felt “moved” to come forward. What this means is that the optics are that she allowed herself to be used by Dems to bludgeon Kavanaugh as a last ditch effort to forestall his installation.
His testimony was very passionate – he was very emotional and worked up. He should have been more calm – which he admits in an Op-Ed for the Wall Street Journal. I saw several liberals in the news media say that this was the straw that broke the camel’s back. He didn’t have judicial temperament. He was too partisan. He was too political. On and on. I don’t deny that he should have been more reserved and sympathetic. But I think what we saw was honest, and human – from both of them (I hope) – and that’s not a bad thing. This idea that judges are to be a-political and have no opinions about the partisan wrangling that has resulted in their getting publicly skewered (in this case), is nonsense, both historically and logically. He would be a dolt with no mind at all if he grew up in D.C. and had no inkling of the machinations involved in this process. Further, his courage in calling it out was refreshingly honest – something we want in judges.
My conclusions are that if we (the Senate, that is) didn’t confirm this guy, it would make a mockery of our Republic, and the process for legislative advise and consent. We have too much popularity-driven politics right now, and we don’t need more of it in the judiciary. Electing judges (which is the case in many states) is a terrible idea for just that reason. We must not allow our desire for political transparency to result in popular anarchy. We must be careful and wise and thoughtful in our evaluation of these matters – but ultimately its not for us to decide – we hired people to do it! And that’s a good thing, because its something the majority of Americans simply can’t do (because of the lack of time and full information), or refuse to do (because of the media-fed partisanship they’re engulfed in). That’s why we elect people to sit on a committee and sort through all of this for us – it doesn’t mean our voices can’t be heard, but it does mean that civility must reign if we’re not to become 18th century France. We must give people the benefit of the doubt – including the ESSENTIAL principle of innocence until proven guilty. In the same way we gave Ford the presumption of veracity, we must give Kavanaugh the presumption of innocence. Her case was laid out but found seriously wanting. The nation’s leaders should make decisions based on the facts as they know them, otherwise the result is going to be complete and total anarchy – which is not a place we want to be…
Now…for some links…
This was really neat: Ronald Reagan’s letter to his dying father-in-law, annotated
Really interesting perspective: What Is the Greatest of All Protestant “Heresies”?
I know most people on the right will simply dismiss this out of hand as “a liberal media drive by” but there are too many facts here to just ignore. It doesn’t mean much politically, but it does bear a part of how we evaluate our leaders. It’s a very long article, so you might want to have the Pocket App read it to you (as I did)! Trump Engaged in Suspect Tax Schemes as He Reaped Riches From His Father
Good historical perspective: A history of Healthcare…and why Christians have done it different
That’s all I got! Enjoy the weekend!