Robert Bork dead

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Frazzled**

Robert Bork, failed Supreme Court nominee, dies at age 85
December 19, 2012, 8:10 a.m.
Robert H. Bork, whose failed Supreme Court nomination in 1987 infuriated conservatives and politicized the confirmation process for the ensuing decades, died Wednesday at the age of 85.

The former Yale law professor and judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit had a history of heart problems and had been in poor health for some time.

But Bork was a towering figure for an early generation of conservatives. In the 1960s and '70s, he argued that a liberal-dominated Supreme Court was abusing its power and remaking American life by ending prayers in public schools, by extending new rights to criminals, by ordering cross-town busing and by voiding the laws against abortion.

PHOTOS: Robert Bork | March 1, 1927 - Dec. 19, 2012

He was an influential legal advisor in the Nixon administration and served as a footnote to history in the Watergate scandal. When the embattled president ordered the firing of special counsel Archibald Cox, the attorney general and his deputy resigned in protest. Bork, who was in the No. 3 post as U.S. solicitor general, then carried out Nixon’s order.

But Bork’s biggest moment came during the Reagan administration in the 1980s. He left Yale and came to Washington when Reagan appointed him to the U.S. court of appeals in the District of Columbia. The job was seen as a steppingstone to the high court.

In 1986, Bork was passed over for a younger colleague when Reagan named Judge Antonin Scalia to the Supreme Court. A year later, Bork’s turn came when Justice Lewis Powell, the swing vote on the closely divided court, announced his retirement.

PHOTOS: Notable deaths of 2012

Democrats, led by Sen. Edward Kennedy, launched an all-out attack on Bork’s nomination, saying he would set back the cause of civil rights, women’s rights and civil liberties.

The summer of 1987 saw campaign-style attacks on Bork’s reputation. In televised hearings, the bearded, heavy-set professor tried to explain his views, but he won few converts. The Senate defeated his nomination by a 58-42 vote.

In his place, Reagan eventually chose Judge Anthony Kennedy, who was confirmed unanimously. The switch proved to have lasting consequences. Kennedy cast decisive votes to uphold Roe vs. Wade and to preserve the ban on school-sponsored prayers.

Bork stepped down from the bench a year after his defeat, but wrote several books renewing his criticism of liberalism. In the past year, he served as a chairman of Mitt Romney’s advisory committee on the judiciary and the courts.

Follow Politics Now on Twitter and Facebook

**feeder**

The Sword of Bork was a decent choice for a unit Champion in 4th ed, IIRC.

**Avatar 720**

feeder wrote:
The Sword of Bork was a decent choice for a unit Champion in 4th ed, IIRC.

That thing was so borken.

**JEB_Stuart**

Hats off to the third Ork god...

**feeder**

Avatar 720 wrote:
feeder wrote:
The Sword of Bork was a decent choice for a unit Champion in 4th ed, IIRC.

That thing was so borken.

Borking Bord, my 2nd favorite current TV show!

**hotsauceman1**

Well I just got a history lesson.

**azazel the cat**

Huh. Didn't know much about this guy. From that writeup, it seems like the world is better without him.

**Ahtman**

azazel the cat wrote:
it seems like the world is better without him.

What part of the write up makes you think the world is better off with him being dead?

**Frazzled**

Evidently strict constructionists of the Constitution do not merit breathing.

**djones520**

Ahtman wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:
it seems like the world is better without him.

What part of the write up makes you think the world is better off with him being dead?

The mention of him being conservative would be my guess.

**PhantomViper**

Since when as the OT forum turned into an obituary section for obscure Americans that no one as even ever heard about?

**Frazzled**

PhantomViper wrote:
Since when as the OT forum turned into an obituary section for obscure Americans that no one as even ever heard about?

Son, read a book. It may be a shock to you, but life didn't start in 1999.

**djones520**

Frazzled wrote:
PhantomViper wrote:
Since when as the OT forum turned into an obituary section for obscure Americans that no one as even ever heard about?

Son, read a book. It may be a shock to you, but life didn't start in 1999.

+1

**PhantomViper**

Frazzled wrote:
PhantomViper wrote:
Since when as the OT forum turned into an obituary section for obscure Americans that no one as even ever heard about?

Son, read a book. It may be a shock to you, but life didn't start in 1999.

I think you have my age a bit wrong, also I'm sorry to be the one to tell you this, but obscure American political personalities aren't really that interesting to the rest of the world's population neither was watergate.

**Manchu**

Just because you are not familiar with or interested in something doesn't mean it's "obscure."

**whembly**

That's where the term "Borked" came from with respect to judicial appointments....

**JEB_Stuart**

Frazzled wrote:
PhantomViper wrote:
Since when as the OT forum turned into an obituary section for obscure Americans that no one as even ever heard about?

Son, read a book. It may be a shock to you, but life didn't start in 1999.

Correct. It started with the iPhone! Years mean nothing so long as our great god Apple tells us what to think!

**Frazzled**

PhantomViper wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
PhantomViper wrote:
Since when as the OT forum turned into an obituary section for obscure Americans that no one as even ever heard about?

Son, read a book. It may be a shock to you, but life didn't start in 1999.

I think you have my age a bit wrong, also I'm sorry to be the one to tell you this, but obscure American political personalities aren't really that interesting to the rest of the world's population neither was watergate.

1. Not obscure. Bork was a major "event" in the 80s.
2. If it doesn't interest you, then you're not required to be involved in the thread no?

**whembly**

Frazzled wrote:
PhantomViper wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
PhantomViper wrote:
Since when as the OT forum turned into an obituary section for obscure Americans that no one as even ever heard about?

Son, read a book. It may be a shock to you, but life didn't start in 1999.

I think you have my age a bit wrong, also I'm sorry to be the one to tell you this, but obscure American political personalities aren't really that interesting to the rest of the world's population neither was watergate.

1. Not obscure. Bork was a major "event" in the 80s.
2. If it doesn't interest you, then you're not required to be involved in the thread no?

That's how Justice Kennedy got in SC.

**azazel the cat**

PhantomViper wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
PhantomViper wrote:
Since when as the OT forum turned into an obituary section for obscure Americans that no one as even ever heard about?

Son, read a book. It may be a shock to you, but life didn't start in 1999.

I think you have my age a bit wrong, also I'm sorry to be the one to tell you this, but obscure American political personalities aren't really that interesting to the rest of the world's population neither was watergate.

Watergate most definitely was interesting to the rest of the world. The Western world, at least. It's not very often the leader of the Free World declares himself above the law in a bid to tamper with his own election.

djones520 wrote:
Ahtman wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:
it seems like the world is better without him.

What part of the write up makes you think the world is better off with him being dead?

The mention of him being conservative would be my guess.

Then that would be a very poor guess.

But Bork ... argued that a liberal-dominated Supreme Court was abusing its power and remaking American life by ending prayers in public schools, by extending new rights to criminals, by ordering cross-town busing and by voiding the laws against abortion.

1. For a constitutional scholar, he seems to have missed the part about the separation of church and state.

2. I'm not sure exactly what rights for criminals this obit alludes to, but I can tell you that criminals do not currently possess any rights that they shouldn't, and I wouldn't be surprised if this article uses the term 'criminals' to refer to 'pre-conviction accused'.

3. Cross-town busing is a necessity in ending segregation, whether that be based upon race or socioeconomic status.

4. I currently do not consider any anti-abortion arguments valid as they all ultimately reduce to misogyny and magical thinking.

**Monster Rain**

azazel the cat wrote:
Huh. Didn't know much about this guy. From that writeup, it seems like the world is better without him.

What a nasty thing to say.

**azazel the cat**

Monster Rain wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:
Huh. Didn't know much about this guy. From that writeup, it seems like the world is better without him.

What a nasty thing to say.

Maybe so, but that doesn't make it incorrect.

**Monster Rain**

azazel the cat wrote:
Monster Rain wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:
Huh. Didn't know much about this guy. From that writeup, it seems like the world is better without him.

What a nasty thing to say.

Maybe so, but that doesn't make it incorrect.

Not sure why I bothered.

**Necroshea**

Someone dies
Let's make fun of his name
Good thing he's dead

Really guys?

**Avatar 720**

It's a midly amusing name.

**JEB_Stuart**

azazel the cat wrote:Watergate most definitely was interesting to the rest of the world. The Western world, at least. It's not very often the leader of the Free World declares himself above the law in a bid to tamper with his own election.

That wasn't what Nixon's involvement in Watergate was about. Try again.

azazel the cat wrote:1. For a constitutional scholar, he seems to have missed the part about the separation of church and state.

Please tell me, as a consitutional scholar yourself, where the separation of church and state come up in the U.S. Constitution.

azazel the cat wrote:3. Cross-town busing is a necessity in ending segregation, whether that be based upon race or socioeconomic status.

Why is it a necessity to end segregation? Bork was a firm defender of the court's decision of Brown v. Board of Education, but he did make a point to question the Constitutional authority of the courts to require cross-town busing.

azazel the cat wrote:4. I currently do not consider any anti-abortion arguments valid as they all ultimately reduce to misogyny and magical thinking.

Wow, very open minded indeed. Now, I am willing to entertain the idea that I am wrong on my stance regarding abortion rights, but your stance apparently can't be changed. And because of your own insecurity you resort to playground insults to demean the other point of view. You are no better then those extremists who assume that abortion is all about über-feminism and murder.

azazel the cat wrote:Maybe so, but that doesn't make it incorrect.

Being nasty doesn't make it wrong, but your mind boggling logic leads to ask you just who you were accusing of magical thinking? You have to understand that Bork's viewpoint of the judiciary was not only that it was dominated by liberal justices, but that the courts were actively "legislating from the bench." He saw it as nothing more then an oligarchy of unrepresentative, unelected, nearly unaccountable lawyers that were using the idea of an evolving Constitution to impose their own viewpoints on society. That is why he advocated a strict originalist approach to legal theory, because it removed the passions and ambitions of the individual and replaced it with the plain writing of the Constitution. Of course, that writing is not always so plain, and it doesn't always remove those items, but I can appreciate his ideas on the matter. I am not saying Mr. Bork was a man with no fault, but i think you are being overly rude in your remarks with very little understanding of who the man actually was.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Necroshea wrote:
Someone dies
Let's make fun of his name
Good thing he's dead

Really guys?

I for one support a good natured ribbing about someones name. Hell, imagine what I go through! Those other CSA types always thinking of new ways to get at me.

Now being downright rude and openly expressing your gratitude that he is dead? That is unacceptably childish and ill mannered.

**whembly**

JEB_Stuart wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:

azazel the cat wrote:1. For a constitutional scholar, he seems to have missed the part about the separation of church and state.
Please tell me, as a consitutional scholar yourself, where the separation of church and state come up in the U.S. Constitution.

Eagerly waiting too...

Oh... did you know Canada ration healthcare?

**JEB_Stuart**

whembly wrote:
Oh... did you know Canada ration healthcare?

Nary a clue! Come lads we must fight this Northern repression, but obviously must do better then we did against Northern aggression!

**Albatross**

Bjork's ok though, right?

Right!?

**hotsauceman1**

Wait, Isnt Bork the thing that the Chef in the muppets says all the time?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, To be honest i thought "Bork" came from breaking something so hard, you broke the word too.