I will make just two claims: 1) The political-journalistic assault on Judge Bork was indecent, slanderous, and hysterical -- a disgrace to ethics and standards all across the board; and 2) it ought to have warned us...
"was even opposed to the legality of contraceptives for MARRIED couples." Your post betrays your ignorance. Bork was not opposed to the legality of contraceptions. He was opposed to the Court's decision in Griswold v. Connecticutt, which substituted the court's personal opinion for a state law. The beauty of this country used to be that states could be laboratories, and people would be free to live in the state they want. Over the last 50 years, the court and federal government have forced the states to become more and more alike, so now it is getting very hard to try new laws and see if they work or not.
It's always best, I find, not to talk too rapturously about Ye Olde Days: days which, on careful inspection, yield evidence of problems aplenty. I won't assert, therefore, that no public figure ever received in earlier times a public evisceration comparable to that inflicted on the late Robert Bork, presidential nominee in 1987 to a seat on the U. S. Supreme Court.
- Quotes of the day Allahpundit 2 hours ago
- DeBlasio faces three lawsuits for trying to shut down charter schools Mary Katharine Ham 2 hours ago
- European countries to US: Give us your gas Erika Johnsen 4 hours ago
- Venezuelan protesters digging in for the long haul Erika Johnsen 5 hours ago
- “Walking Dead” grumble thread: Maybe we should talk about “True Detective” instead Allahpundit 6 hours ago
- Finally: Young liberals ready to explain the news to America Allahpundit 6 hours ago