Bork got an up or down vote.
And didn't get approved because they needed 60 votes back then and the Republicans only held a 53-47, so it wouldn't go anywhere. Harry Reid changed that to a simple majority.
The irony is that Kennedy got the position and Bork died in 2012, had Bork gotten the position, Obama would have been able to nominate another Supreme Court Justice.
Bork lost the vote 58 - 42. There is no irony, you're simply mistaken.
I think the point was that Mr. Bork attained room temperature in 2012, and if he would have died on the SCOTUS, Obama would have had the nomination
I think the point was to muddy the waters about Bork getting a fair shake and Garland not. When Bork died is irrelevant, he may very well have retired years before dying, many of them do, so it's pointless to speculate.
Garland did get a fair shake, however.
His name and reputation weren't dragged through the mud, even though he didn't have enough votes to get confirmed.
The Republicans weren't forced to sully his reputation, and didn't. We know nothing about alleged parties that Mr. Garland attended as teenagers, or anything about Garland's sexual history. And that, BTW, is good.
Had Mrs. Clinton won, he would have been put on the Court.