Skip to comments.Bork’s Replacement
Posted on 12/20/2012 12:49:47 PM PST by Shout Bits
Yesterday the Hon. Robert Bork passed away. Bork was targeted politically and his Supreme Court nomination crushed because he was a Constitutional originalist (i.e. The Constitution means what it says in plain English based on the common sense language of the day - radical). The list of GOP Senators who voted against him is a who's-who of RINO traitors to liberty: John Chafee (RI, socialized medicine), Bob Packwood (OR, not so bad, but don't hit on your assistants outside the Oval Office), Arlen Specter (PA, wrong on nearly every issue every time. The worst GOP Senator ever), Robert Stafford (VT, a Prescott Bush statist), John Warner (VA, leftist, endorser of Dem politicians, USSR 'détente' apologist) and Lowell P. Weicker, Jr. (CT, endorsed Howard Dean for Pres.). Whenever Dems blast 'politicizing' the judiciary, remember that to them, Borking is a one way street, a street they invented.
Less well remembered is the failed Court bid of Bork's replacement, the Hon. Douglas Ginsburg. He was forced to withdraw his name from consideration because of some minor ethical conflicts, but mostly because he had smoked Marijuana. Nobody accused Ginsburg of being a burnt-out chronic, a wake-and-bake hippie, or a dealer. No, Ginsburg had smoked the MJ most recently ten years prior to his nomination, and reportedly only on occasion prior to that. Yet, his aspirations were ruined by the scandalous disclosure.
Think on Ginsburg's story, freedom lovers. A man with good potential had probably his highest goal in life taken away because he did what the past three Presidents are known also to have done. Shout Bits is going out on a limb and risking a lawsuit, but Pres. Clinton did indeed inhale. Further, there is credible evidence that the past three Presidents also enjoyed cocaine. By Pres. Obama's own account, he smoked a lot of the evil weed and snorted a lot of the jazz salt.
Ginsburg was forced to withdraw because of the obvious conflict in adjudicating the drug laws he once violated as a recreational user. Nobody likes a hypocrite, except the past three two-term Presidents, each of which escalated the war on the very drugs they once enjoyed. Apparently the electorate is OK with such blatant hypocrisy after all.
Ginsburg's story, freedom lovers, is a milepost on the road to restoring personal responsibility and liberty in the category of libation. Today, nobody would demand court nominees to have never smoked MJ. Indeed, short of someone as sober as Gov. Romney, people are skeptical when anyone claims to have never tried it.
Looking back 25 years, MJ's place in the culture has undergone a sea-change. As always, the Federal Government is the last to get the message. In large part driven by federal policy, arrests for simple MJ possession continue at a record pace. States like WA and CO do not need looking after by a Federal Government that cannot pass a budget. The People do not need to be dictated how to lead their lives by Mayor Soda Fountain, AG Gun Runner, or Pres. Choom Gang. As distant and irrational as Ginsburg's story seems today, perhaps so too will be the story of these nanny-state hypocrites after another 25 years.
Shout Bits can be found on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/ShoutBits
I was goin’ to the Supreme Court, but I got high,
I had Ronald Reagan’s support, but I got high,
They withdrew my nomination, and I know why,
Because I got high
Because I got high
Because I got high...
Bill Bennett had a hand in that.
The Court's current Constitutional originalist, Justice Thomas, has stated that the Wickard v Filburn "substantial effect" test in which the Controlled Substances Act is rooted is a "rootless and malleable standard."
I recall that during the Bork nomination fight, as it drew to a floor vote, Bork was called to the White House to speak with Reagan, who gave him the news that they couldn’t manufacture the votes. The media, covering this from outside the White House, assumed that Bork would ask the White House to pull the nomination an avoid a rejection. Instead, he insisted on a floor vote. I admired Robert Bork for many reasons, one of which was his insistence that these bastards be forced to go on the record in voting against him. Our nation missed out on the service of a man who would have been a great Justice.
You call him an orginalist, but there are different kinds. Bork was an original intentist, and set back our movement because of it, in my opinion. Original meaning is the thing. He also picked and chose what language to follow. I will never forgive him for pretending the 9th and 2nd amendments don’t exist, and for badmouthing Lochner.
This is not about Judge Bork, it’s about cannabis. Change the title or take a break, eh?
The title of the article is “Bork’s Replacement.” The article is about that person, Ginsburg whose significance was his MJ use. What more do you want?
Eff ‘em all who voted against Bork. None of those dimbulbs even register on the wattage scale. God probably has a nice seat ready for Judge Bork on the Supreme Court of Heaven’s bench.. Bork will be judging the godless drecks who rejected the Almighty Judge of us all.
I believe the “substantial effect” test came from the earlier Shreveport Rates Case. Or maybe it was substantial relation and Wickard turned it into substantial effect. It must be noted, also, that it was a theoretical substantial effect. One farmer growing wheat for himself will not effect interstate prices so far as anyone can measure. The idea was what if everyone in his state, for instance, did the same thing. Which is ridiculous.
The Shreveport case was wrong, and Wickard was an inappropriate extension of it. At least in the former interstate commerce was actually involved. Wickard didn’t even apply to commerce. It applied to an action that was neithercl commerce nor interstate. It is rootless to, like, the third degree.
It would be exactly the type of poetic justice which St. Peter himself might appreciate.
Packwood was an ardent pro-abort SO*. I grew up in Oregon and he did a great deal to get me out of the Republican party.
Oh, you are so right, and I didn't catch the whole drift. I beg your forgiveness and apologize for my stupid error. Maybe I thought it was about the deep and critical thinker, Judge Bork, of whom I have three of his popular works. I have read them cover to cover. But I will say that though another was chosen, no one could replace him. IMHO.
Appreciate your patience --
Today his MJ use wouldn't even be considered a minor issue.
And what "gem" did we end up with on the SCOTUS? Anthony Kennedy.
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.