Bork v. Bork (Full of Sound and Fury, Signifying Nothing)

hughhewitt.com ^ | October 19, 2005 | Hugh Hewett

[quidnunc]

Ten days ago I wrote about the Miers nomination in light of Judge Bork's introduction to a new book of essays on SCOTUS.

In this morning's Wall Street Journal, Judge Bork weighs in with a denunciation of the Miers nomination, which includes the fairly astonishing sentence:

The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq aside, George W. Bush has not governed as a conservative (amnesty for illegal immigrants, reckless spending that will ultimately undo his tax cuts, signing a campaign finance bill even while maintaining its unconstitutionality).

This is the same as arguing that "Except for opposing Hitler and later warning of the descent of the Iron Curtain, Churchill did not govern as a conservative."

It is also striking that Judge Bork includes an assertion about a Bush policy — "amnesty for illegal immigrants" which is simply not true, as well as an exaggeration about spending that confuses Bush's deficits with those of the President that nominated the judge. Which didn't undo that president's tax cuts either.

I prefer the anti-Olympian Judge Bork, the one who would not be dismissive of careers as distinguished though non-judicial as Harriet Miers' or as contemptuous of her faith as the Wall Street Journal essay clearly is. I am also surprised to see Professor Gralia, Professor Sowell, Dean Starr and others lumped in among the "[s]ome moderate (i.e., lukewarm) conservatives [who] admonish the rest of us to hold our fire until Ms. Miers's performance at her hearing tells us more about her outlook on law… ."

In short, this morning's is an intemperate essay, quite extraordinary and unpersuasive. But like most of the arrows being fired at Miers now, it was not intended to persuade anyone at all but rather to inflame the anti-Miers crowd into a great frenzy of head-nodding murmuring. It may do that, although today's issuance of Diane Fienstein's ominous warning about Miers may have a far greater effect on the BWAE than Judge Bork's thunder. Look who's nodding and murmuring right along with you, friends.

-snip-

I really don't know what to make of the anti-Miers collective, except that they are anti-Miers, and have a list of a few people they'd have preferred to see nominated.

Judge Bork and the anti-Miers crowd are increasingly defined by their Potter Stewart-like standard for SCOTUS nominees: They'll know a good one when they see it.

-snip-

[syriacus]

[Williams]

You are correct. Although my point is as well. Bork's book changed it to Slouching Toward Gommorrah, and his article's headline then switched Gommorrah to "Miers" Plainly placing her in the spot of a very undesirable situation. It is a great poem as well. Dark as all Hell.

[George W. Bush]

...his article's headline then switched Gommorrah to "Miers" Plainly placing her in the spot of a very undesirable situation.

Admittedly, the destination of Gomorrah isn't exactly a compliment in most circles.  ; )

But it is quite interesting to see how many Yeats fans have turned up. (Not me, I'm no poetry lover.) FR can really surprise you on this stuff. I recall once how surprised I was to find out how many right-wing classical pianists hung out here. Well, that was long ago. Not sure if any are still here. But the cultivated tastes of FR can even surprise FReepers. Even more so when you find those poetry lovers and pianists are often rabid gunowners. It's, well, an interesting contrast. How disappointing it must be to the DUmmies when we fail to fulfill their sterotypes in such unpredicable ways.

I should ask some of our DU spies if they've ever seen a Yeats quote or that much interest in any major poet over at the DUmmies. I never have but don't have much patience in reading their monotonous drivel and flat-earth debating style.

You know, Rush is right. The libs never had such fallout and vigorous debate over anything during the Xlinton era, resembling mostly a helpless and stale Stalinist cadre. Even when Xlinton was butchering their most sacred cows (welfare, etc.). The present Miers debate, even when fierce, does underline our basic strength. Just as Limbaugh pointed out in his WSJ op-ed which almost drove the libs insane a few days back.