"So, getting Borked by extremely bad people for bogus reasons is the moral equivalent of getting Borked by good people for valid reasons?"
Borking is attacking someone based on little to no facts and scewing those facts to attack that person.
Convincing people of the merits or failings of a nominee should be done using facts that are clearly presented and not by trying to paint someone to be a certain way by grabbing inferring things from details often taken out of context and that aren't consistent with other things known about the candidate.
If your justifying Borking based on "moral equivalency" you're a liberal, not a conservative.
"Borking is attacking someone based on little to no facts and scewing those facts to attack that person."
By your definition, then, Miers was not Borked. She was opposed on valid grounds.
"If your justifying Borking based on "moral equivalency"
No, I am saying that to equate what the scumbag left did to Bork with the moderate and valid criticism of Miers is to draw a false moral equivalence.