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.
- Comment registration is now open! Ed Morrissey 49 minutes ago
- Video: Alabama widows kicked off of insurance because of ObamaCare Ed Morrissey 1 hour ago
- Putin: Yeah, we had soldiers in Crimea before the plebiscite Ed Morrissey 1 hour ago
- Quotes of the day Allahpundit 11 hours ago
- Enjoy Sec. Donald Rumsfeld’s Tax Day letter to the IRS Mary Katharine Ham 12 hours ago
- Is the wind lobby’s most precious subsidy finally losing steam in Congress? Erika Johnsen 13 hours ago