Cut the shit, Griffith.
Saturday Night Massacre Bork was a fucking mess from top to bottom, and even some of those in his own party rendered him a stunning loss in the total vote count/
Which he could have predicted with the 9 - 5 nay vote of the Judiciary Committee.
Thank the freaking lord that despicable creature, who showed himself after to be more extreme than anyone could have imagined, was never confirmed.
You're an extremist and a wingnut. Bork did not "show himself to be more extreme than anyone could have imagined." Rather, the Dems twisted and distorted a handful of his statements and ignored his record as a whole. His appellate decisions had a very high percentage of being sustained by the Supreme Court, hardly the mark of being "extreme."
Said the extremist wingnut who stated - and I quote -
"No one ever talks about the good aspects of slavery."
That's the same kind of smear attack that the Dems used on Bork. You've taken one comment, paraphrased it, and ignored everything I said before and after that statement.
We both know that if you quoted the paragraph in which that statement appears and the paragraph before and after it, reasonable people would read them and say, "Yes, that seems logical and fair. What's the problem?"
Judged by the Constitution and the Federalist Papers, Bork was in fact a somewhat mild conservative. He was not as conservative as Scalia or Alito. But he was too conservative for the Democrats, and so they smeared and blocked him, in spite of his indisputable qualifications and academic standing, not to mention the fact that he had been
unanimously confirmed to the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Look you nutcake -- there is zero, none, zippo, nada context that makes your oft repeated line (said in varying ways)
"No one ever talks about the *good* aspects of slavery."
You're quote is still legend at H, because it was such an appalling defense of slavery you made over and over, no one there can ever forget it.
You're a neo-confederate shitbag I debated for some 8 years, and I know enough about your views to say you are one of the most despicable persons I have ever traded words with.
One, why don't you quote the entire segment from my article instead of that one lone sentence? Humm? Why? Because you know that reasonable people will read it and instantly see how dishonestly you are using it, and will readily see that I was not at all defending slavery?
Two, many scholars--who, like me, condemn slavery and are glad it was abolished--have discussed the humane way that slavery was usually administered and/or the good aspects of that evil institution. Are these scholars--who include Ken Stampp, Eugene and Liz Genovese, James McPherson, Robert Fogel, etc., etc.--are they all engaging in a "defense of slavery"? Even a neo-abolitionist historian like McPherson is willing to admit that most married slave couples were not broken up by slavery.
Three, as numerous scholars have documented, and as anyone can read in the slave statements themselves, the majority of slaves who discussed the conditions of slavery said that their masters were decent people and that their living conditions were either acceptable or even good. Were the slaves engaging in a "defense of slavery" when they said those things?
Four, your views on the Civil War are driven and warped by your far-left political views and by your desire to demonize the South. Anyone who points out the evidence that in most cases--certainly not in all, but in most cases--slavery was administered humanely, you dishonestly accuse them of defending slavery itself, even though any honest, rational person can see the obvious difference between talking about the conditions of slavery and talking about the morality of the institution itself. Forced, unjustified bondage is wrong no matter how humanely it might be administered. I've said this a million times, but you just ignore it.
For those who want to see what this guy is talking about, here is the article from which he has pulled the statement about the good aspects of slavery:
SLAVERY AND SOUTHERN INDEPENDENCE:
And here's the entire segment from the article from which he is quoting:
So what are the facts about slavery in the South? Did any good come from slavery? Did slavery have any good aspects? Did all slaveowners mistreat their slaves? The subject of slavery in the antebellum (i.e., pre-Civil War) South is a delicate, highly charged issue because history books and documentaries have usually only told one side of the story. The recent PBS documentary Slavery and the Making of America is a prime example of the one-sided, misleading, and incomplete portrayals of Southern slavery that are usually presented to the public. I'm not trying to justify slavery. All I'm saying is that if we're going to talk about slavery, let's be factual about it.
Most history books and documentaries that discuss slavery are full of tragic stories about the bad aspects of slavery, but they rarely mention the good aspects of the institution. Historians typically cite the worst cases of mistreatment and abuse but ignore or minimize the far more numerous cases of humane treatment, mutual respect, and genuine friendship. True, the good aspects of slavery don't outweigh the fact that slavery was wrong, but they should be noted in the interest of fairness and historical truth.
Defending how slavery was usually administered is not the same thing as defending slavery itself. If my daughter were abducted, I would never condone her abduction; however, I would be willing to admit that her abductors did not abuse her, if that were indeed the case. To put it another way, I would never excuse her abductors for their crime, but I would acknowledge that they did not abuse her while they held her captive. Similarly, slavery was wrong no matter how humanely it was usually administered, but let us be willing to admit that most slaves were not brutalized, if that was in fact the case.
As for your smearing of Bork, your smears have been answered a hundred times over, and it's clear that you have no read any of the defenses of Bork. Here are a few for you:
Robert Bork's America
http://nypost.com/2012/12/20/behind-the-smears/
Remembering Judge Bork
