Skip to comments.McCain: Bork Was No "Maverick Jurist"
Posted on 07/08/2008 2:05:44 PM PDT by Maelstorm
McCain: Bork Was No "Maverick Jurist"
John McCain is planning to be in North Carolina tomorrow where he is scheduled to give a speech on judicial nominations:
John McCains campaign said Friday that Fred Thompson and Sam Brownback will join the presumptive GOP nominee in North Carolina next week for a major speech on judicial appointments.
Both Thompson and Brownback have endorsed the Arizona senator, and both Republicans presented themselves throughout the Republican primary battle as consistent conservatives, particularly regarding social issues and judicial appointments.
The speech, to be held Tuesday at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, will be just one element of a broader outreach to conservatives next week, according to the campaign.
McCain is expected to discuss the kinds of judges he would appoint up and down the federal bench.
Why he is doing this on the day of the Democratic primary in the state is hard to understand. Perhaps he is hoping to work his way into the press coverage or perhaps he is hoping to keep a rather low profile while he delivers remarks designed solely to, once again, assure the GOPs right-wing base that hell appoint justices like John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court without attracting too much attention from the media.
Either way, hes probably hoping that the press wont bother to actually write about his record on judges as exemplified by, say, his 1987 support of Robert Bork [PDF]:
I would like to explain why I am going to vote of favor of confirmation [of Robert Bork], and why I do so without any hesitation I believe that what the Senate should appropriately examine in a nominee are: Integrity and character, legal competence, and philosophy and judicial temperament. I believe Robert Bork is well qualified in all four respects Judge Borks honesty, integrity, and diligence are above reproach [he] demonstrates that he is not some intellectual loose cannon on deck, or a quixotic maverick jurist , but is a thoughtful, reasonable, jurist [he] is hardly a radical, but is rather a very thoughtful judge in synch with the vast majority of his colleagues on the bench.
First, and most importantly, is the question of Judge Borks view of the role of the judiciary. Judge Bork is clearly a believer in judicial restraint. He believes that the courts should not create social policy or arbitrate social policy disputes unless the Constitution clearly speaks to the issues. He believes that in our republican form of government such decisions are properly left to legislatures elected by the people, not Federal judges appointed for life. I have no problem with that view, because I wholeheartedly agree with it.
I have no problem with my colleagues voting against Bork if they truly believe he is unfit for the Supreme Court although I personally cannot conceive of how you could reach that conclusion I believe Robert Bork will be an outstanding Justice and contributor on that Court Robert Bork deserves our support and will be a great Supreme Court Justice.
In his endorsement, McCain delivered a lengthy defense of Borks controversial views, stating that Roe v. Wade is "the clearest example of judicial 'legislation'" and that the rules it set out are "nonsense." Nor did McCain appear to be a fan of the right to privacy, stating that it was entirely "created by Justice Douglas in the Griswold case."
Joining McCain will be Fred Thompson, who shares McCains affinity for Justices like Roberts and Alito and is already out making the pitch for McCain on the issue of judges, and Sen. Sam Brownback, who endorsed McCain after his own presidential campaign folded in the early-going, in part to help pay off his campaign debt, but also because he was promised that he would play an advisory role in helping decide who he should nominate for the Supreme Court. That undoubtedly appealed to Brownback because, as he repeatedly stated when he was campaigning, he wanted nothing more than to be the president that appoints the justice that's needed vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade." While he wont get that opportunity to do that directly, advising McCain on Supreme Court nominations will still allow him to play an important role in finding a Supreme Court nominee that will finally eliminate the right to choose.
McCain should wear this criticism by “People for the American [sic!] Way” as a badge of honor. Long Live Bork!
You tell em!
McCain voted against Ginsberg right?
Looks like McLame might be getting a scent of the roses and skewing toward the right just a bit.
If only.... if only...
—Bork is one weird dude who doesn’t understand the first thing about the Second Amendment—
The company he is keeping is much more honorable.
“I think those of you who wish to cast doubt on McCain and judges should take a look at history.”
I know that those of you that use judges as reason to vote for the jerk purposefully “forget” who runs the Senate. Even if the jerk nominated an acceptable judge to you and I, Leahy on the judicial comittee will just say “no” and then we get the Juanito doing what he does best, working with his (actual) political party to (once again) screw America.
Libs didn’t like Bork because he was much smarter than they. Hmmmm, guess that’s why libs don’t like most of the people they meet.
How are we supposed to get excited when he touted that he also voted for the likes of Ginsberg?
“A President McCain will find he can only appoint (and get confirmed) judges the Dems approve. They will most probably have an even bigger control in the Senate.”
And people were saying that Juanito would have no coat tails, LOL!
True...imagine how intimidated then the founding fathers brilliance would intimidate today's 'Rat and RINO cretins!
The four liberal justices are the most likely to leave the court during the next presidential term. Should two of them or one plus Kennedy go, McCain could appoint the most conservative replacements he could find. The Senate could refuse to bring the appointees up for confirmation vote if they wanted, but the remaining four conservative justices would control the court. A four to three decision is just as good as a five to four one. Since there is no constitutional requirement for nine justices, a president could leave a vacancy unfilled if he wanted. There would be no reason for the president to compromise.
If John McLaim is elected President... the victory party over at Teddy Kennedy house would quite a shindig.. You know with all his liberal friends..
Bork is no friend of the Constitution. Sorry folks. Flame on.
You only vote for conservative Presidential nominees, right?
You are absolutely correct. Bork has denounced what he calls the “NRA view” of the Second Amendment, something he describes as the “belief that the constitution guarantees a right to Teflon-coated bullets.” Instead, he has argued that the Second Amendment merely guarantees a right to participate in a government militia. (Life Magazine, Vol 14, No. 13.)
“You only vote for conservative Presidential nominees, right?”
No, I voted for Bush. Twice.
“I’ll vote for McCain because the prospect of an Obama administration filled with ACORN, ACLU, SEIU, and outright commie types is too horrible to consider.”
I won’t, because on the issues that are near and dear to my heart, McJackass agrees with the enemy.
Agreed. He had a section in his book which exposed his poor thinking on the subject. Fortunately for his reputation as an "originalist", not many of his fans have bothered to read his writings.
“McCain’s American Conservative Union rating is around 83.”
That is lifetime. Check the numbers for the last ten years. Quite different.
“You think Obama will be better for our country?”
Either man is going to be a complete disaster. Only thing is with McJerk, he has that R next to his name, so the Party will be forever blamed for his madness. It makes me physically nauseous when I think that I could still wind up voting for the pro-illegal alien creep. Literally makes me ill.
Courage, my good fellow! Courage!
You hate McCain so much you equate him with the Marxist Obama. I'm sure it soothes your conscience, but it is beyond silly.
Obama will kiss the ass of Islam. McCain will kick it.
History won't record for whom Grunthor or Jacquerie voted. It may very well record that the democrat party was given total power because good people like you did nothing to prevent it.
Gah -- worse and worse. Is he proposing that the American government has a positive obligation to find you some position if you show up and volunteer (similar to the the Federal Service system of earned franchise in Starship Troopers)?
The vote to confirm GInsburg was overwhelming and bipartisan. 96-3. Do you want to bash all the other Republicans and conservatives who voted for her? They were stupid, of course, but McCain can’t be saddled with the blame.
The last conservative nominee was Ronaldus Magnus, 24 years ago.
I'm not willing to turn our country over to the radical Left while we wait for a mythical, imaginary conservative savior to set us free.
Don’t think that’s what he had in mind, no. Many here think they like Bork because he was up front that he thought Roe v. Wade was a bad decision. I have to agree with Bork on that one, but it turns out Bork is one of those so-called conservatives (in reality authoritarians) who want the Chinese menu school of constitutional law. Me, I want the whole thing including all of the BOR. All of it.
I can frgive McCain for this...afterall, 97 senators voted to confirm Ginsburg.
But you must put it in the proper historical context.
Ginsburg was only the second female nominee and it was early in the Clinton administration, back when both sides were promising to play nice...
Also, when you know that someone has the votes to be confirmed what is there to gain by voting against them. It would only make mcCain look sexist.
It’s gonna take a clothes pin for me before and a shot after, but that’s the way things go some times.
The democrat party respects power and nothing else.
If McCain could be trusted to only nominate conservatives, it wouldn't matter too much whether the Senate approved them or not. 3+4+Kennedy would be better than 4+4+Kennedy; 2+4+Kennedy would be better still.
Do you think the government will turn around without first going through a crisis of legitimacy? Barring miracles at both the Republican Convention and the General Election, I can imagine no plausible scenario by which that could occur.
If there is to be a crisis of legitimacy, I would suggest it would be better triggered by a big overreach than by a small one. The bigger the overreach, the more likely the enemies of the Constitution could be forced to surrender peacefully.
I do have a serious problem, with the tactics of distortion, hysteria, and politicized paranoia that many of the special interests have used and exploited to oppose this man.
If John McCain is not elected President, lets hope he doesn't get reelected in Arizona.
Jerry Doyle has been hammering away at the fact that
the FOUR SCOTUS judges that gave us the recent legislating
from the bench ... John McCain voted FOR them all!
Hey if it works. I do think there is a lot to vote for McCain.
1. He is committed to smaller government and the only tax on record that he has voted to increase is one on cigarettes. I don’t agree with sin taxes but this is a small thing in comparison to his other votes which I think most here would find admirable.
* A 2006 amendment to cut $74.5 million for various agriculture programs
* A 2006 amendment to cut $6 million for sugarcane growers in Hawaii
* A 2003 amendment to reduce funding for the Yazoo Basin Backwater Pump Project in Mississippi
* A 2002 amendment to eliminate $2.5 million for coral reef mapping of the waters off the coast of Hawaii
* A 1998 amendment to cut $78 million in projects from an emergency supplemental appropriations bill
* A 1994 motion to kill an amendment to provide $40 million for the conversion of a New York City post office into an Amtrak train station
* A vote against the 2003 Medicare prescription drug plan
* A vote against the Farm Security Bill in 2002
* A vote against the 2005 Highway Bill, one of only four senators to object to the pork-stuffed bill
* A vote against providing Amtrak with an extra $550 million for the fiscal year 2007
* A vote against $2 billion in milk subsidies
* One of fifteen senators to vote for Senator Tom Coburn’s (R-OK) amendment transferring $223 million for the “Bridge to Nowhere” to the repair of a Louisiana bridge damaged by Hurricane Katrina. Senator McCain was also one of only thirteen senators to vote for an amendment by Senator Coburn to eliminate $950,000 for a parking lot for the Joslyn Art Museum in Nebraska
* A vote for welfare reform
(* The above came from the Cato Institute)
2. He has strongly opposed special rights for sexual activists in employment and supports the marriage as being being a man and women. He believes that the legislature and the people not the courts should decide this issue.
3. He has been a consistent Pro-Life vote. There may be some who question his purity but his voting record shows someone who clearly believes in the Right to Life.
I think I’ll stop there. He does have black marks especially on immigration and campaign finance but for those who think he doesn’t have clear redeeming value other than the fact he is running against Obama should take a look with an unbiased eye. No one is saying McCain is perfect but the more I look at his record the more it becomes clear that he is more conservative than GW Bush especially on the key issue of government spending. Wouldn’t be to nice to reclaim some credibility on that issue as a party?
Thanks for an important post.
“Obama will kiss the ass of Islam. McCain will kick it.”
Not the most important issue in this election.
Someone should ask Senator Maverick if he regrets any of his votes.
Works for me. I'd LOVE to hear his answer to that one.
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.