[Jacquerie]

Didn’t watch his senate confirmation hearings did you? You obviously haven’t read his books on the constitution either.

Keep on trucking in your ignorance.

[Galleria]

Ignorance is a charge admirers of Robert Bork should not make lightly. If Robert Bork is a Constitutionalist, it must be another constitution than the one I'm familiar with. He claims the First Amendment only applies to political speech, which rewrites the free speech clause. He denies the right to bear arms to the very “people” listed in the Second Amendment, and he even throws the Ninth Amendment out of the Constitution itself. He resisted the notion of a general principle of racial equality in the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause right up until his confirmation hearing - but that's no surprise since he was a race segregationist in the early 1960s. Moreover, original understanding is only his latest judicial philosophy. He was a (supposed) libertarian, a process theorist, a judicial restraint advocate, a neutral principal champion, a “law and economics” man and a devotee of original intent (as opposed to original understanding which differs somewhat). In short, the man changed his views more times on the Constitution than some people change their socks in a month. He's either a total flake or an intellectual fraud.