Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How was Robert Bork "Borked"?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:29 PM
Original message
How was Robert Bork "Borked"?
I was like 5 or 6 at the time, so I am unclear as to how Bork did not get through.

Were Dems in the majority in the senate at the timE? I mean, what's different about the Dems in the senate now? Did moderate republicans actually side with Dems?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
medeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. yep
it was a dem congress back then
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
2. The Ds had a majority and Spector sided with them.
There was no need for a filibuster, the Senate just voted him down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. A lot more Repubs were still concerned with real integrity...
Edited on Thu Jan-12-06 04:42 PM by JHB
...the kind Bork didn't show when he discontinued a criminal investigation at the command of one of the prime suspects in that investigation -- and after two (or more?) superiors had resigned rather than carry out that command. (See "Saturday Night Massacre" as it relates to Watergate.)

They figured that a man who couldn't didn't resign on principle in that situation didn't have the integrity needed for the SC. Naturally, the conservo-nuts thought the Senate should just rubber-stamp anyone a conservative president put forward, and so remembered Bork's defeat as a pernicious attack by "liberals".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nutmegger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. Yeah, I was a kid then too
So I had no idea what the hell was going on. Here is a link you may find helpful.

http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id320.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
4. Don't recall much other than he lost the vote by a wide margin...
...so some Repukes crossed over--Dems had the majority, though. The big issue was choice back then, as it should be now--don't know why Dems are so scared of being pro-choice these days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nutmegger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. It was 58-42
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thefloyd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
5. Senate was controlled by Democrats
and Republicans at the time were way more liberal....Goldwater type conservatives.
Really Bork never had a chance in my opinion....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chelsea0011 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
7. Senator Kennedy. Was the one then and is the one now.
He painted him as extreme beyond American values. And Kennedy didn't let up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RandomKoolzip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:33 PM
Response to Original message
8. Dems were a majority at the time, and the political climate was
Edited on Thu Jan-12-06 04:34 PM by RandomKoolzip
different. I was 12 at the time, but I remember a few things: Bork was considered an extremist not just by the Dems in the Senate, but my a majority of Americans. Today, he'd be considered center-right. (Jesus, that's fucking sad.)

Also, Bork got caught lying to the committe about his views on Stare Decisis. Before the committee, he claimed that Stare Decisis was important, then Ted Kennedy palyed a tape before the panel of Bork giving a speech in front of some college, saying the exact opposite. Of course, the republicans misinterpreted this as a "witch hunt," and were more preapred (with counter-attacks) when Clarence Thomas's name came up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. Remember the Clarence Thomas joke?
His first s/c decision was whether "harass" (say it out loud) was one word or two!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:33 PM
Response to Original message
9. He's an absolute crazy f**ker, wanting to waste the nation
the same way the criminals are doing, now.
He was't "Borked;" there were enough sane people in the senate, still, then, to say "NO."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justitia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
10. Even repubs changed their mind about him after his hearings.
It was quite something to watch. He shocked the moderate repubs (there used to be more of them) with his caustic comments and strident opinions.

His was probably the last "honest" set of confirmation hearings.

Bork "Borked" himself, with his own words.

These slippery mother f'ers would never get caught being so honest about their regressive positions today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:37 PM
Response to Original message
11. Bork was (is) an extremist and Democrats told the truth
about him, and I guess the GOP has been bitter about that for many years.

He was completely inappropriate and it's a very good thing that he wasn't confirmed. Right wingers have howled about how mean the Dems were to tell the truth about that ugly sucker ever since then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
long_green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
14. Teddy told the absolute truth
I don't recall his words exactly but what he said at the time of Bork's nomination has turned out to be prophecy.
It went along the lines of "Robert Bork's America is one where citizens will live in fear of their door being kicked in by police in warrantless invasions; one where women will be menaced by dangerous back-alley abortions; one where minority children will be shuttled into separate and unequal schools." Something like that. Preach, Teddy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nutmegger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. This is what he said
Edited on Thu Jan-12-06 04:46 PM by Nutmegger
"Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, children could not be taught about evolution." - Ted Kennedy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
long_green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. thank you
and it is prophecy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
15. Hard to recall for me but I do recall thinking he was sort of odd
He seemed out of date to me on things.We seemed to be going for more rights and he seemed to be for less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alfredo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-12-06 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
18. He borked himself. He came across as extreme, and one statement
stood out in a lot of people's mind as why he was unsuitable. When asked why he wanted to be on the court, he said for him it would be an "Intellectual feast." His reasoning centered around himself, not the nation. He came off self centered and elitist. He seemed not to understand that he was to be a public servant. He was to do a dead serious job, not engage in some type of mental masturbation.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 04:56 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC