"Like what? Any candidate that doesn't get Borked by the extreme left will get Borked by the extreme right."
So, getting Borked by extremely bad people for bogus reasons is the moral equivalent of getting Borked by good people for valid reasons?
The false moral equivalence, usually the exclusive tool of the left, is really getting a workout on this thread.
"So, getting Borked by extremely bad people for bogus reasons is the moral equivalent of getting Borked by good people for valid reasons?"
An absolutely jaw-dropping statement of self-congratulations.
"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.
She wasn't borked. The treatment both Bork and Thomas received at the hands of the Liberals was FAR, FAR worse.
The comparison of their ordeals to Miers is nothing more than hyperbole. People making such comparisons sound like EXAGGERATING LUNATICS. No wonder some talk-show hosts and pundits think they are smarter than we are.