Their Will Be Done [Robert Bork on O'Connor's replacement, constitutional law, and moral chaos]

American Outlook Today ^ | July 5, 2005 | Robert H. Bork

[AntiGuv]

You are badly misreading Bork's positions. It is the lib-Dems both on the Court and off it, who promote group rights over individual rights, in the racial, sexual, political areas.

You are badly misreading my statement. I just said that Bork is as wrong on his end as the liberals are on theirs. Telling me how wrong the liberals are on their end obviously does not then refute my statement. They are both authoritarian, but with a capital A. They merely quibble over what ends their authoritarian ends should reach.

[AntiGuv]

Their authoritarian means..

[ClaireSolt]

It looks to me as if the left has been making a battle of Republican nominees for 20 years, but the Republicans have not retaliated when it was their turn. I still love seeing Clarence Thomas accusing the senate judiciary committee of a "high class lynching" and have wished that others would find a way to stand up to mistreatment instead of just silently enduring it as John Ashcroft did.

That creepy Ralph Neas in back on TV. YUK!

[yarddog]

What do you mean? I heard yesterday that Orin Hatch recommended Ginsburg

I recall seeing Bork interviewed about Ginsberg and he said he thought she would make a wonderful SP justice or words to that effect. I nearly gagged when I heard him say it.

[1Old Pro]

I recall seeing Bork interviewed about Ginsberg and he said he thought she would make a wonderful SP justice or words to that effect. I nearly gagged when I heard him say it.

I guess Ginsburg pulled the ultimate deception. Her "rulings" were "moderate" and when appointed she unleased her radical liberal views on America.

[TeleStraightShooter]

lol

[Gritty]

The stakes here aren't just "high". They are astronomical.

If the GOP fails on this crucial test, they will prove they no longer deserve to govern, and won't, for long.

[hosepipe]

[ The stakes here aren't just "high". They are astronomical. If the GOP fails on this crucial test, they will prove they no longer deserve to govern, and won't, for long. ]

Clue.. the republicans are not governing NOW, the democrats are.. If they were, the democrats would guard their words.. They don't.. Its the republicans that guard THEIR words.. for fear of not appearing bi-partisan..

Which is an invention of democrats who are NEVER bi-partisan unless they would lose anyway.. The demos rule the roost.. Republicans = chickens, Democrats = roosters.. and the metaphor don't stop there either.. Bush is a lesbian chicken not a fighting cock.. I wanna see a cock fight.. not a bunch of lesbian chickens clucking in a bass octave.. trying to appear like a COCK.. but laying socialist eggs..

[Iris7]

You fail to distinguish between right and wrong. Refusal to distinguish between right and wrong is called licentiousness. Licentiousness is the fundamental Left characteristic, sometimes called nihilism or moral relativism.

Perhaps you can relate to the Red Queen, whom I paraphrase, "The words 'Right and Wrong' mean what I say they mean, nothing more, and nothing less."

You are a Leftist, lad.

[Sam Cree]

Although Mr. Bork makes some good points, I disagree with him on a fairly fundamental level.

The court, and the country, IMO, are not becoming more "liberationist," but more controlling. In other words, if sodomy is to be allowed, it is not because it is a natural right, with which we are endowed by our Creator, but because our government, in its munifiscence, has decreed that it be so.

What I am trying to say is that our moral chaos is a specific result of the ever increasing responsibility for our lives taken by the state and the thus inevitible ever decreasing responsibility for our lives taken by ourselves. It's what must happen in a socialist top down country. Or fascist country, for that matter, if that's where we are headed.

[little jeremiah]

Moral Absolutes/Homosexual Agenda Ping.

Bork is a genius. I love that man. It is disgusting, crying shame and tragedy he wasn't made a justice. I hope to God that Bush - and every single Republic [and any Democrats who aren't moral anarchist traitors] involved with the process - reads this article and takes it to heart.

Says it all.

Freepmail me if you want on/off this pinglist.

[Gritty]

Clue.. the republicans are not governing NOW, the democrats are.. If they were, the democrats would guard their words..

*sigh*

I fear you have nailed it. It just goes to show you what having the MSM in your pocket, unlimited chutzpah, no soul, no conscience and an aggressive game plan can do for you - even if you continuously lose elections!

[little jeremiah]

So he's not perfect. A big not perfect. But he's right about everything else I've ever read.

[little jeremiah]

What? He supported her???

Gack.

[AntiGuv]

I am a libertarian; I haven't made any misrepresentations in that regard. Moreover, I regard freedom as an absolute end unto itself. Better to die free than to live a slave.

[Nice50BMG]

it is hard to imagine what people would need to keep in the garage to serve that purpose.

At long last... justification for my own private Manhattan Project.

Uh oh... I think I hear G-men rummaging through the Garage

[Iris7]

Generally Libertarianism is outgrown. Not always, of course.

[CatQuilt]

I think yarddog is confused (sorry yarddog!). She was a member of the ACLU. He wouldn't have said that...

[little jeremiah]

After posting my comment, I figured before I got all bent out of shape, I just check the facts. Who knows, he might have made a polite general comment.

Her view and his are diametrically opposite on almost everything.

[yarddog]

I think yarddog is confused (sorry yarddog!). She was a member of the ACLU. He wouldn't have said that...

Well I am easily confused but this was not one of those times. He did mention that his judicial philosophy was different from hers, but that is like saying, "I don't agree with those who want to destroy America but I support them".