Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
Sebby,
I draw a distinction.
In 1986 Bork, while conversative, was one of the most qualified jurists of his generation and a judge who by any objective standard should have been approved by near unanimity. The Demos dumbed the process down beyond belief (FWIW, at that time, I stated, that if a demo nominated Tribe then, unfortunately, the Senate should approve, because by any objective standard he is qualified.)
Today, based on his current writings (i.e. over the last decade or so), I agree, he's appalling. But that still doesn't change the fact that he was emminently qualified and should have been approved, but for a smear campaign, by the likes of degenerates such as Byrd, Kennedy and Biden.
|
You just made my argument for me. Whether Bork was barely palatable in 1986, it was clear his leanings indicated a man who would devolve into a something too idealistic, shrill and unstable for such a position. Bork is certainly principled, pathologically so; about that there is unanimous agreement. His rigid ideology and warped principles did not suddenly emerge post 1986. Clearly, there was something about the man in 1986 that made him so repugnant, and easily defeated despite his wealth of technical legal ability. I'd say Byrd, Kennedy and Biden did an incredible job of predicting the future ramblings of a dangerous ideologue and keeping him off the bench. That they acted partly out of political motives doesn't invalidate the excellent result. We've had a nice stasis on the Court for a long time. Bork was a fucking lunatic who would have upset the apple cart.
