Let's not get Borked!

[hilbert]

If Romney is elected, we’re gonna have Bork on the Supreme Court, as soon as there’s a vacancy.

Romney and Bork, a Dangerous Team: People For the American Way Campaign Exposes Romney

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

Bork thinks the 14th Amendment is 'un-Constitutional.'

The campaign highlights Romney’s choice of Robert Bork to lead his constitutional and judicial advisory team. By allying with Bork, a jurist so extreme he was rejected by a bipartisan majority of the U.S. Senate 25 years ago, Romney has sent a clear signal that he means to drag America’s courts even farther to the right, endangering many of the civil rights, liberties and economic protections won by the American people over the past five decades.

At age 85 it’s unlikely Bork would realize an appointment to the High Court, but in some sort of advisory capacity to Romney he could steer radical rightwing jurists to the Federal courts jeopardizing the civil liberties of every American.

 

[Oddball]

If Romney is elected, we’re gonna have Bork on the Supreme Court, as soon as there’s a vacancy.

Romney and Bork, a Dangerous Team: People For the American Way Campaign Exposes Romney

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

Make mine.....

Just let the liberoidals show their true colors and try to smear a black woman.

 

[Liability]

If Romney is elected, we’re gonna have Bork on the Supreme Court, as soon as there’s a vacancy.

Romney and Bork, a Dangerous Team: People For the American Way Campaign Exposes Romney

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

Make mine.....

Just let the liberoidals show their true colors and try to smear a black woman.

Oddball:

You ARE the man.

You EARNED the right to keep the brain.

Janice and the Bork!

Holy cow. It's almost enough to make me think we could save this Republic yet.

I rep thee!

 

[Listening]

If Romney is elected, we’re gonna have Bork on the Supreme Court, as soon as there’s a vacancy.

Romney and Bork, a Dangerous Team: People For the American Way Campaign Exposes Romney

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

Just to be clear on what getting "Borked" means.....

to attack (a candidate or public figure) systematically, especially in the media.

So, in effect, you are borking Romney.

Not that I am surprised...you have appeared to be something of an ignorant twit.

BTW: the smear was about a bunch of extrapolations. They really could not get him on his record. Joe Biden was in on the smear and in the middle of it he was exposed for plagurism.

Get it right, asshole.

 

[Listening]

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

Bork thinks the 14th Amendment is 'un-Constitutional.'

Citation please.

 

[Listening]

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

Bork thinks the 14th Amendment is 'un-Constitutional.'

The campaign highlights Romney’s choice of Robert Bork to lead his constitutional and judicial advisory team. By allying with Bork, a jurist so extreme he was rejected by a bipartisan majority of the U.S. Senate 25 years ago, Romney has sent a clear signal that he means to drag America’s courts even farther to the right, endangering many of the civil rights, liberties and economic protections won by the American people over the past five decades.

At age 85 it’s unlikely Bork would realize an appointment to the High Court, but in some sort of advisory capacity to Romney he could steer radical rightwing jurists to the Federal courts jeopardizing the civil liberties of every American.

Bipartisan my ass.

It's times like this that I am so glad TED is DEAD.

 

[Political Junky]

Yep, Romney will use Bork to advise him on Supreme Court appointments. He thinks an employer can ask an employee to be sterilized, among other things.

 

[Lakhota]

If Romney is elected, we’re gonna have Bork on the Supreme Court, as soon as there’s a vacancy.

Romney and Bork, a Dangerous Team: People For the American Way Campaign Exposes Romney

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

Scary thought. The current 5 wingnuts are scary enough.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yep, Romney will use Bork to advise him on Supreme Court appointments. He thinks an employer can ask an employee to be sterilized, among other things.

Why couldn't an employer ask this?

 

[squinch]

Yep, Romney will use Bork to advise him on Supreme Court appointments. He thinks an employer can ask an employee to be sterilized, among other things.

Why couldn't an employer ask this?

You can ask anything; you just might not like the answer.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yep, Romney will use Bork to advise him on Supreme Court appointments. He thinks an employer can ask an employee to be sterilized, among other things.

Why couldn't an employer ask this?

You can ask anything; you just might not like the answer.

Zackly. As long as it isn't threatening or harassing what's the problem?

 

[ecinicola]

You people should know you can't believe anything you hear today or in politic's. C'mom are you a product of the convienced by false things said just for the politicians gains.?
The bottom line is we are all in bad situations and this administration is causing it, along with the voters that are incapable of seeing it. We all need to stand together for our own sakes and vote this bunch out of office.....for all our sakes. Our livelyhoods depend on it. To heck with what party wants to win the election, is just a matter that we can't go another 4 yrs with this administration and we sure better make a change.

 

[Si modo]

If Romney is elected, we’re gonna have Bork on the Supreme Court, as soon as there’s a vacancy.

Romney and Bork, a Dangerous Team: People For the American Way Campaign Exposes Romney

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

To the bolded, no he didn't. Someone told you something and you believed it without checking.

That makes you one who surrenders thought. You should be proud at that mainstream Democratic characteristic.

Bork found, in 1964, and today, that any legislating of morality, from Congress and/or the bench, is ugly.

I agree.

 

[The Rabbi]

If Romney is elected, we’re gonna have Bork on the Supreme Court, as soon as there’s a vacancy.

Romney and Bork, a Dangerous Team: People For the American Way Campaign Exposes Romney

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

To the bolded, no he didn't. Someone told you something and you believed it without checking.

That makes you one who surrenders thought. You should be proud at that mainstream Democratic characteristic.

Bork found, in 1964, and today, that any legislating of morality, from Congress and/or the bench, is ugly.

I agree.

In any case I dont know who "Richard Bork" is.
I know that Robert Bork was solicitor general and one of the msot outstanding scholars in legal circles.

 

[Si modo]

If Romney is elected, we’re gonna have Bork on the Supreme Court, as soon as there’s a vacancy.

Romney and Bork, a Dangerous Team: People For the American Way Campaign Exposes Romney

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

To the bolded, no he didn't. Someone told you something and you believed it without checking.

That makes you one who surrenders thought. You should be proud at that mainstream Democratic characteristic.

Bork found, in 1964, and today, that any legislating of morality, from Congress and/or the bench, is ugly.

I agree.

In any case I dont know who "Richard Bork" is.
I know that Robert Bork was solicitor general and one of the msot outstanding scholars in legal circles.

LMAO! I didn't even notice that.

That's twice now for this poster......

 

[Political Junky]

If Romney is elected, we’re gonna have Bork on the Supreme Court, as soon as there’s a vacancy.

Romney and Bork, a Dangerous Team: People For the American Way Campaign Exposes Romney

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

To the bolded, no he didn't. Someone told you something and you believed it without checking.

That makes you one who surrenders thought. You should be proud at that mainstream Democratic characteristic.

Bork found, in 1964, and today, that any legislating of morality, from Congress and/or the bench, is ugly.

I agree.

Romney Advisor Robert Bork: Civil Rights Act Is 'Unsurpassed Ugliness,' But Contraception And Porn Bans Are Fine | ThinkProgress

on Aug 3, 2011 at 9:50 am
Yesterday, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) announced his presidential campaign’s “Justice Advisory Committee,” along with its co-chair Robert Bork.
The Senate rejected Bork’s 1987 Supreme Court nomination in a bipartisan 58-42 vote, but Bork has since emerged as the slain martyr at the center of the conservative legal movement’s creation myth. In this sense, Bork’s involvement is a coup for a campaign that is struggling to prove Romney’s hard right credentials in the face of his decision to ensure that all people in his state enjoy access to affordable health care.
For the majority of Americans who are uninterested in hard right governance, however, Bork’s record raises very serious questions about whether someone who would take legal advice from him has any business appointing judges and Supreme Court Justices:
Opposition To Civil Rights: One year before President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which banned whites-only lunch counters and other forms of discrimination, Bork criticized the Act as a moral abomination. “The principle of such legislation is that if I find your behavior ugly by my standards, moral or aesthetic, and if you prove stubborn about adopting my view of the situation, I am justified in having the state coerce you into more righteous paths. That is itself a principle of unsurpassed ugliness.”
No Right To Contraception: In Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court held that married couples have a constitutional right to use contraception — a decision that was later extended to all couples. Bork called this decision “utterly specious” and a “time bomb.”
Banning Porn, Art and Science : Bork also called for shrinking the size of the First Amendment until it is small enough to be drowned in a bathtub. “Constitutional protection should be accorded only to speech that is explicitly political. There is no basis for judicial intervention to protect any other form of expression, be it scientific, literary or that variety of expression we call obscene or pornographic.”
Believes Government Can Criminalize Sex: In its landmark Lawrence v. Texas decision, the Supreme Court reached the obvious conclusion that it is none of the government’s damn business who anyone is having sex with — overruling a previous decision in Bowers v. Hardwick. Bork, however, wrote that “Bowers v. Hardwick, which upheld the community’s right to prohibit homosexual conduct, may be a sign that the Court is recovering its balance . . . . I am dubious about making homosexual conduct criminal, but I favor even less imposing rules upon the American people that have no basis other than the judge’s morality.”
No Constitutional Protection for Women: Bork also claimed that the Constitution does not shield women from gender discrimination. In Bork’s words, “I do think the equal protection clause probably should be kept to things like race and ethnicity.”

 

[Si modo]

If Romney is elected, we’re gonna have Bork on the Supreme Court, as soon as there’s a vacancy.

Romney and Bork, a Dangerous Team: People For the American Way Campaign Exposes Romney

You might recall that Richard Bork saw the Civil Rights Bill as unconstitutional

To the bolded, no he didn't. Someone told you something and you believed it without checking.

That makes you one who surrenders thought. You should be proud at that mainstream Democratic characteristic.

Bork found, in 1964, and today, that any legislating of morality, from Congress and/or the bench, is ugly.

I agree.

Romney Advisor Robert Bork: Civil Rights Act Is 'Unsurpassed Ugliness,' But Contraception And Porn Bans Are Fine | ThinkProgress

on Aug 3, 2011 at 9:50 am
Yesterday, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) announced his presidential campaign’s “Justice Advisory Committee,” along with its co-chair Robert Bork.
The Senate rejected Bork’s 1987 Supreme Court nomination in a bipartisan 58-42 vote, but Bork has since emerged as the slain martyr at the center of the conservative legal movement’s creation myth. In this sense, Bork’s involvement is a coup for a campaign that is struggling to prove Romney’s hard right credentials in the face of his decision to ensure that all people in his state enjoy access to affordable health care.
For the majority of Americans who are uninterested in hard right governance, however, Bork’s record raises very serious questions about whether someone who would take legal advice from him has any business appointing judges and Supreme Court Justices:
Opposition To Civil Rights: One year before President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which banned whites-only lunch counters and other forms of discrimination, Bork criticized the Act as a moral abomination. “The principle of such legislation is that if I find your behavior ugly by my standards, moral or aesthetic, and if you prove stubborn about adopting my view of the situation, I am justified in having the state coerce you into more righteous paths. That is itself a principle of unsurpassed ugliness.”
No Right To Contraception: In Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court held that married couples have a constitutional right to use contraception — a decision that was later extended to all couples. Bork called this decision “utterly specious” and a “time bomb.”
Banning Porn, Art and Science : Bork also called for shrinking the size of the First Amendment until it is small enough to be drowned in a bathtub. “Constitutional protection should be accorded only to speech that is explicitly political. There is no basis for judicial intervention to protect any other form of expression, be it scientific, literary or that variety of expression we call obscene or pornographic.”
Believes Government Can Criminalize Sex: In its landmark Lawrence v. Texas decision, the Supreme Court reached the obvious conclusion that it is none of the government’s damn business who anyone is having sex with — overruling a previous decision in Bowers v. Hardwick. Bork, however, wrote that “Bowers v. Hardwick, which upheld the community’s right to prohibit homosexual conduct, may be a sign that the Court is recovering its balance . . . . I am dubious about making homosexual conduct criminal, but I favor even less imposing rules upon the American people that have no basis other than the judge’s morality.”
No Constitutional Protection for Women: Bork also claimed that the Constitution does not shield women from gender discrimination. In Bork’s words, “I do think the equal protection clause probably should be kept to things like race and ethnicity.”

Yet another poster who hasn't a clue about precedent and the First Amendment.

And, I see you WANT to legislate morality. I hope you realize that Christians outnumber any others in the USA and are prepared for THAT precedent, as well.

Idiot.

 

[Listening]

To the bolded, no he didn't. Someone told you something and you believed it without checking.

That makes you one who surrenders thought. You should be proud at that mainstream Democratic characteristic.

Bork found, in 1964, and today, that any legislating of morality, from Congress and/or the bench, is ugly.

I agree.

Romney Advisor Robert Bork: Civil Rights Act Is 'Unsurpassed Ugliness,' But Contraception And Porn Bans Are Fine | ThinkProgress

on Aug 3, 2011 at 9:50 am
Yesterday, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) announced his presidential campaign’s “Justice Advisory Committee,” along with its co-chair Robert Bork.
The Senate rejected Bork’s 1987 Supreme Court nomination in a bipartisan 58-42 vote, but Bork has since emerged as the slain martyr at the center of the conservative legal movement’s creation myth. In this sense, Bork’s involvement is a coup for a campaign that is struggling to prove Romney’s hard right credentials in the face of his decision to ensure that all people in his state enjoy access to affordable health care.
For the majority of Americans who are uninterested in hard right governance, however, Bork’s record raises very serious questions about whether someone who would take legal advice from him has any business appointing judges and Supreme Court Justices:
Opposition To Civil Rights: One year before President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which banned whites-only lunch counters and other forms of discrimination, Bork criticized the Act as a moral abomination. “The principle of such legislation is that if I find your behavior ugly by my standards, moral or aesthetic, and if you prove stubborn about adopting my view of the situation, I am justified in having the state coerce you into more righteous paths. That is itself a principle of unsurpassed ugliness.”
No Right To Contraception: In Griswold v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court held that married couples have a constitutional right to use contraception — a decision that was later extended to all couples. Bork called this decision “utterly specious” and a “time bomb.”
Banning Porn, Art and Science : Bork also called for shrinking the size of the First Amendment until it is small enough to be drowned in a bathtub. “Constitutional protection should be accorded only to speech that is explicitly political. There is no basis for judicial intervention to protect any other form of expression, be it scientific, literary or that variety of expression we call obscene or pornographic.”
Believes Government Can Criminalize Sex: In its landmark Lawrence v. Texas decision, the Supreme Court reached the obvious conclusion that it is none of the government’s damn business who anyone is having sex with — overruling a previous decision in Bowers v. Hardwick. Bork, however, wrote that “Bowers v. Hardwick, which upheld the community’s right to prohibit homosexual conduct, may be a sign that the Court is recovering its balance . . . . I am dubious about making homosexual conduct criminal, but I favor even less imposing rules upon the American people that have no basis other than the judge’s morality.”
No Constitutional Protection for Women: Bork also claimed that the Constitution does not shield women from gender discrimination. In Bork’s words, “I do think the equal protection clause probably should be kept to things like race and ethnicity.”

Yet another poster who hasn't a clue about precedent and the First Amendment.

And, I see you WANT to legislate morality. I hope you realize that Christians outnumber any others in the USA and are prepared for THAT precedent, as well.

Idiot.

Excellent !

Bork was a purist and sometimes that causes people to squirm when he points out that the Constitution was there to protect us....not do "what is right". I it supposed to keep people from deciding what is right and shoving it down others throats.

Hilbert "Borked" Romney.

And I hope Kennedy rots in hell for the way he treated Bork in 1987.

 

[The Rabbi]

Bork was one of the smartest jurists in America. His analysis of the cases was excellent, but the conclusions didnt lead to where people wanted.