Watching the left complain that Republicans have now done to one of theirs--
once--what they have been doing to conservative judicial nominees for 25 years
is just too much. Ordinarily I don't cross-post too many items from NRO's
Corner or the other two places I blog (I like to offer original material to
faithful Power Line and Corner readers), but this is an exception. Herewith
mostly crossposted from The Corner:
The subject of partisan opposition to judicial nominations is back in the news
this week, which sent me back to this complaint about the injustice done to
Robert Bork back in 1987:
> As Gene Meyer of the Federalist Society explained today, the Democrats who
opposed Bork's nomination "were completely ignoring what Bork testified to
under oath," instead relying on "a distorted interpretation of things he said
years ago in his scholarship." It was as if the sworn testimony had never even
happened. Bork testified not once but twice before the Senate Judiciary
Committee, and he was unfailingly temperate, scholarly, and sober. Yet from
the start Democrats depicted him as the Tim Riggins of the legal academy --
all beer-soaked hair and bloody knuckles -- ...
Source: http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stories/politics/top-stories/91908159?client_source=feed&format=rss
gabriel ping pong ratatouille elmo bradley manning movie times enchanted
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.