Behind the smears: Why they feared Robert Bork
Here’s something you may not know about the 1987 battle that kept Robert Bork off the Supreme Court: Opponents pursued a whispering campaign against him on the grounds that he wasn’t enough of a religious believer.
Back then, many Democrats still held seats in the rural South, and the religion angle gave them an easier way to explain their stance to constituents than, We’ve been asked to oppose him as a party-line matter.
Thus Rep. John Bryant (D-Texas) warned that Bork was “an agnostic who is not a member of any church.”
And Sen. Bennett Johnston (D-La.), while disclaiming any “religious test for judges,” advised “fundamental religious people” back home to “look, in addition to what he has written, at [Bork’s] statements on morals or lack thereof — and I don’t mean to suggest he is immoral — but his lack of occupation with morals and with religion.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
What?
“I don’t mean to suggest he is immoral” followed by “his lack of occupation with morals”. Which is it?
Bitter Clinger on December 20, 2012 at 12:14 PM
Bitter Clinger on December 20, 2012 at 12:14 PM
Political doublespeak, aka word games, aka, lying.
Logus on December 20, 2012 at 12:22 PM
It is simple really.
Democrats want power over everything you do.
If being pro-religion, anti-Christian, pro-Islam, anti-religion, pro-abortion, anti-abortion, or whatever it takes furthers their power over you then that is what they are for.
If it gives the power they do it. Don’t look beyond that.
GardenGnome on December 20, 2012 at 12:24 PM
“Behind the smears” is more smears? What a horrible summary, the full article is right, although nothing we didn’t already know. Except the part about Bork having the last laugh; the damage has been done.
Fenris on December 20, 2012 at 12:25 PM
When you’re the party of big government, you form coalitions with whoever is useful at the time. They pushed racism, they push civil rights; they pushed xenophobia, they pushed immigration rights; they push religion, they push secularism; they push blue collar union jobs, they push job destroying environmental policy; they push gun rights, they push gun control; they push nationalism, they push globalism; they push bipartisanship and civility, they push out the blue dogs in their own party; they push interventionism, then non interventionism, and now interventionism again.
Daemonocracy on December 20, 2012 at 12:38 PM
The lost opportunity of Bork on the USSC was a huge loss for this country.
May Ted Kennedy burn in hell.
petefrt on December 20, 2012 at 1:33 PM
Much of why the Left feared Bork is that he stood firm on his principles and had very clear beliefs of right versus wrong. Inconvenient to immoral communist sympathizers like Ted Kennedy or Louisiana Fast Eddie Edwards era pols like Bennett Johnston, Lindy Boggs and John Breaux.
Bork was the complete and polar opposite of judges of easy virtue such as Benedict Roberts, Sotomayor and Elena Kagan where their sole guide was to serve an overblown egomania (Roberts and Sotomayor) or to pimp boss Barack Kardashian (Kagan).
viking01 on December 20, 2012 at 1:44 PM
The irony, of course, being that they got Kennedy (not perfect, but fairly reliable for us) instead. Had they got Bork, they might be lining up a nomination to replace a conservative Justice right now.
Of course, they got a convert with Roberts.
Remember to include the continued good health of Roberts, Thomas, Scalia, Alito, and Kennedy in your prayers every night.
CycloneCDB on December 20, 2012 at 1:48 PM
Just be glad Bork got Borked.
Otherwise, Obama would be picking a SC Justice today.
Moesart on December 20, 2012 at 1:49 PM
Not necessarily. With a judge like Bork presiding our culture would less likely have rotted to such extent to elect a degenerate like Obama and perhaps not a degenerate like Clintoon, either.
viking01 on December 20, 2012 at 1:57 PM