I’m almost certain Bork didn’t believe in the individual right to keep and bear arms. “Slouching Toward Gomorrah” and others were good books, but Bork was hardly a champion of freedom. He was an inside the beltway type, corrupted as they always are by prolonged exposure to academia, the legal world, and Washington, in all of which respectable opinion, or putatively respectable opinion, is monopolized by lefties. So we could pretend like he’s a hero of our side for positioning just barely to the right, though there’s an entire ocean of conservative and libertarian jurisprudence and legal theory that to him might as well mot exist.
He did our side a great disservice by emphasizing original intent instead of original meaning, by ignoring things like the 2nd and 9th amendments, and by abiding the idiotic Footenote Four stadard for unconstitutionality. We have been crippled, intellectually, by the presumption of constitutionality, by the pretended equavalence of conservative and liberal “judicial activism.
Bork was a somewhat diminished statistic, is all. States being able to ban condom sales, flag burning, or public obscenity was more important to him than almost any freedom I can think of. Too bad Dems went after him so hard andwith such thin arguments, for it gave us a false hero.
“He was an inside the beltway type, corrupted as they always are by prolonged exposure to academia, the legal world, and Washington, in all of which respectable opinion, or putatively respectable opinion, is monopolized by lefties. So we could pretend like he’s a hero of our side for positioning just barely to the right, though there’s an entire ocean of conservative and libertarian jurisprudence and legal theory that to him might as well mot exist.”
I liked what you said. I would have changed only one word lefties to insiders (fourth line). Once they become “insiders” they and their ideology are malleable to the benefit and the behest of the elite and not necessarily the USA.