Posted on 10/04/2005 3:20:22 PM PDT by Richard Poe
HARRIET MIERS OUTSHINES BORK
Unlike the Patron Saint of Originalism, Miers Will Defend Our Freedom
Judge Robert H. Bork has come to represent in many conservative minds the gold standard of legal sagacity against which provincial upstarts such as Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers must be weighed. In truth, however, Bork provides a poor example of conservative jurisprudence. Even as simple a phrase as, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" has long confounded Judge Bork. Harriet Miers suffers no such confusion.
Following a July 1, 1992 incident in which a crazed gunman slew two lawyers and two judges in a Texas courtroom, Miers wrote in the Texas Lawyer, "How does a free society prevent a man from entering a courtroom and opening fire?" (hat tip, David Kopel)
The very liberties we hold dear, such as, "access to public places, the right to bear arms and freedom from constant surveillance" make such crimes possible, noted Miers. Yet, she concluded, "We are not willing to sacrifice these rights because of the acts of maniacs."
By contrast, Robert Bork dismisses the Second Amendment as a useless relic of bygone days. In his 1996 book Slouching Towards Gomorrah he writes that, "The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that there is no individual right to own a firearm" — a statement which is demonstrably untrue. Bork also writes:
"The Second Amendment was designed to allow states to defend themselves against a possibly tyrannical national government. Now that the federal government has stealth bombers and nuclear weapons, it is hard to imagine what people would need to keep in the garage to serve that purpose.''
Perhaps if Judge Bork had found himself besieged by gangs in post-Katrina New Orleans, he might have gained a healthy appreciation for the utility of SKS rifles and AR-15s in modern life. How much more would he have appreciated such hardware, had he found himself surveying the smoking ruins of an American city flattened by nuclear terror attack, devoid of police and swarming with brigands.
But Judge Bork is one of those men who cannot "imagine" what he has not personally experienced. And so the "brilliant" jurist discarded James Madison's handiwork as casually as he would a soiled Kleenex.
If this is brilliance, how exactly should we define stupidity?
In today's American Thinker, Thomas Lifson exposes the snobbery which underlies so many conservative denunciations of Harriet Miers. He writes:
"Thus we hear conservatives sniffing that a Southern Methodist University legal education is just too non-Ivy League, adopting a characteristic trope of blue state elitists. We hear conservatives bemoaning a lack of judicial experience, and not a single law review article in the last decade as evidence of a second rate mind."
The outrage certain conservative pundits have displayed in the face of President Bush's decision to elevate Harriet Miers over their Ivy League classmates may be understandable. But it is not helpful. Nor is it admirable.
Well said!
Hillary wrote a book, too. Does that make her more qualified than Miers.
I'd welcome reasonable criticism. Instead, she has been ripped as being a possible lesbian, not qualified (when Rehnquist had no prior judicial experience), Bush's crony (that's MSM spin), or a closet Dem because of campaign contributions she made in 1988. Do you consider those reasonable?
"Brilliant? It is not brilliant to get your side more upset with you than the other side - unless you are dim-witted."
When "my side" is insisting on being dim-witted, I don't give a damn if they're upset.
What was it like when Bush picked Cheney? I was not here then and the situation seems so much the same I was wondering about it all day today. The Cheney choice has turned out pretty well, maybe President Bush knows something the rest of us don't.
"However, should not reasonable criticism of Miers be allowed?"
Let me know when there is a reasonable criticism, as opposed to the gossip and rumormongering (aka "bearing false witness") that's been the rule here.
This nomination has done one very valuable service: it has outed a bunch of FReepers as "Christians in Name Only."
"I've recently noticed a lot of Freepers being critical, if not intolerant, of fellow Freepers who criticize or dissent from President Bush."
I'm generally intolerant of stupid people. And the criticisms of Bush over Miers are really stupid.
I scratched around with Google a bit, but was unable to find your reference. This was the best fit:
It's an interesting point. I am not sure from it that Judge Bork actually disagrees with the policy of personal firearms ownership when it appears that his opinion is historical in nature.
Have you something that is a better example of what you said or is this a conclusion based upon a composite of Judge Bork's statements?
"Hope you enjoy standing in line to vote, because 'your side' is losing a lot of voters because of comments like yours."
Your stupidity is your problem, not mine.
The bash bush crowd is no different from the Bash Reagan crowd of 20 years ago.
I was shocked at the responses when she was announced.....people were going to vote for Hillary, people turned Democrat right then and there, calling Bush all kinds of names....it was unbelievable....the immaturity was eye opening for me.
DITTO!
This is why it's important to have someone who has functioned in the real world on that court. There is a whole different mind set from those who have been nurtured in the cocoon of Ivy League.
"I was shocked at the responses when she was announced.....people were going to vote for Hillary, people turned Democrat right then and there, calling Bush all kinds of names....it was unbelievable....the immaturity was eye opening for me."
This nomination has outed a bunch of "Christians In Name Only" on Free Republic.
I was just expalining this very thing on MArc Levins thread and here you are with a nice little dust up. Nice work.
I was just expalining this very thing on Marc Levins thread and here you are with a nice little dust up. Nice work.
Yes ...brilliant! The people who immediatly bashed him had NO REASON TOO...as they knew NOTHING ABOUT MIERS. They ASSumed and jumped to conclusions because they were DIM-WITTED!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.