About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Quinn claims Kennedy "ruined Robert Bork's life, and Bork was probably the brightest justice that's ever been proposed"

September 01, 2009 1:47 pm ET

From the August 31 edition of Clear Channel's The War Room With Quinn and Rose:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED
Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by pete592 (September 01, 2009 1:54 pm ET)
      5  
      I interviewed for a job once. It turns out they hired someone else. It ruined my life.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (September 01, 2009 2:19 pm ET)
        4  
        Exactly. How did not getting appointed to the Supreme Court ruin his life?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (September 01, 2009 2:26 pm ET)
          3  
          Now come on shaggles, do you really expect a right wing crackpot to explain something with any factual information?

          I will just consider your remark as something said in a weak moment, okay?


          Report Abuse
    • Author by epkklk851 (September 01, 2009 2:40 pm ET)
      6  
      " Bork had more success as an antitrust scholar, where his once-idiosyncratic view that antitrust law should focus on maximizing consumer welfare has come to dominate American legal thinking on the subject. Currently, Bork is a lawyer, law professor, and bestselling author." This is from the Wikipedia article on Judge Bork. I happen to agree with everything that Senator Kennedy said. Bork is an originalist. He views the Constitution as a dead, immovable object, and we should only look at things as the Founding Fathers would have looked at them. There was no such thing as Judicial Review in their view either. I used to teach Government. The case that decides the power of Judicial Review is Marbury v. Madison. The case that decided Federal Supremecy is McCulloch v. Maryland. Most Constitutional law is based on these two cases. If Bork would have decided against these cases, all American law, based on them would be different or non-existant. Now, Mr. Quinn may not understand that, or maybe he agrees with Judge Bork, but I don't think he is smart enough or educated enough to hold this discussion with me, and I hold no candle to the intellect or education of Judge Bork. I may recognize a person's intelligence even if I disagree with them. The point is, the only person lying is Quinn, nothing new for him.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by neon desert (September 01, 2009 3:04 pm ET)
        3  
        You're right. I had to look it up on Wiki, because I thought Bork was that Swedish chef on the Muppets, but it turns out Bork was actually a real guy! Which makes much more sense as a candidate for the supreme court than a muppet.

        But I did prove one thing to myself: I have what it takes to do the necessary research to attain the knowledge required to be a radio host.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by epkklk851 (September 01, 2009 3:07 pm ET)
          3  
          Oh no, you'd never make it as a radio host, you actually went and looked something up. You're supposed to jump to some wild conclusion and defend it to the death with righteous indignation and blow off any facts as liberal lies. Researching something makes you a pesky liberal.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by The_Cat (September 01, 2009 3:58 pm ET)
            2  
            Yup, overqualified, neon desert. That was going to be my point. epkklk851 beat me to it. I'm shattered, and my life is -ruined-. Hey, maybe Quinn will mention me tomorrow on the radio!
            Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (September 01, 2009 3:05 pm ET)
        2  
        The other thing that originalists tend to forget, is that there is a mechanism within the Constitution to change it, and to make it moveable, and also to make it evolve as the country evolves.

        I think that is the real genius of the document is that our Founding Fathers didn't know really what the future was going to hold, or HOW exactly our nation, and society would end up changing through the years.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by epkklk851 (September 01, 2009 3:19 pm ET)
          2  
          My sentiments exactly. I marvel at what a good job they did every time I sit down and read it. It is fewer than 10,000 words and has only been amended 27 times. Amazing! And if the Founding Fathers really objected to Judicial Review and Federal Supremacy, why didn't they put something in writing when the precedents were being set? James Madison, you're my hero!
          Report Abuse
      • Author by mjh (September 01, 2009 3:34 pm ET)
        2  
        Damn you, epikkik; you beat me to it! :-)

        Only on Planet Wingnut does serving in a conservo think tank, participating in litigation, and being a visiting professor constitute a "ruined life" . . .

        Report Abuse
    • Author by williaminny (September 01, 2009 2:54 pm ET)
        5
      The point is, the lies Kennedy told about Bork. Did Bork
      continue to have a career, wrtite books, and comment from
      time to time? Yes. That isn't the same thing as being on
      the Supreme Court where he belonged. Kennedy's vicous, untrue,
      and demagogic attack on Bork deprived him of a job he
      deserved and the US of a great justice on the court.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by epkklk851 (September 01, 2009 5:15 pm ET)
        3  
        Sorry, I don't happen to think that Kennedy lied or distorted Bork's record, or the impact of his stance on law and legal precedent, nor do I think Bork belonged on the Court. I have a serious issue with the whole originalists point of view. I am not very fond of Justice Scalia, either. Bork was turned down with six Republicans voting against him.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by mjh (September 01, 2009 6:13 pm ET)
        2  
        "That isn't the same thing as being on
        the Supreme Court where he belonged."


        Let me fill you in on a little secret, minny: Bork didn't "belong" on the SC any more than Sarah Palin "belonged" in the VP's office just because both were rightwinguts . . .

        In this country, nobody's entitled to high executive, legislative, or judicial office due to family connections, money, or ideology . . .

        Report Abuse
    • Author by PurpleState (September 01, 2009 4:23 pm ET)
      3  
      Poor Robert Bork. I'll bet he can't even afford health insurance.

      /snark
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pilotshark (September 01, 2009 4:38 pm ET)
      1  
      Well jimmy my boy if not getting the job as supreme court and it ruined his life, well i have to say thats good then. i mean something as little as not getting a job ruins his life imagine how many life's he has ruined.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by antihannity2009 (September 01, 2009 6:39 pm ET)
      1  
      And because people on the right would never do anything petty or try to ruin someone's career by throwing out lies and slanders. Good one!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mary59 (September 01, 2009 11:22 pm ET)
      3  
      [http://www.slowpokecomics.com/strips/bork.gif]
      Report Abuse