Robert Bork is particularly known for his role in the Watergate scandal. When the existence of Nixon's secret tapes was disclosed, Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox demanded production of the tapes. Nixon instructed his Attorney General, Elliot Richardson, to fire Cox. Richardson refused and was himself fired. Richardson's deputy, William Ruckleshaus, also refused to fire Cox and was likewise dismissed. Third in command was Robert Bork, who was willing to fire Cox.
When Bork was nominated for the Supreme Court, his views went somewhat beyond traditional conservatism. He is rather fixated on the concept of the culture wars, suggesting that all in the U.S. was fine until the 1960's when those darn liberals ruined the nation. Here's a quote from his opening remarks in 1987:
"What we sense is that something has gone very wrong with America's moral
and social infrastructure. Our real problem is the cultural revolution that
swept America in the '60s. That is not to say that economic issues are not
important, but that the cultural and social issues are far more important to
Americans. We must re-fight the [cultural] battles we lost in the '60s. The
counter-march will not be easy; but if conservatism is to live, we must do
it."
In addition, Bork had taken various positions which caused a great deal of concern to liberals, moderates, and even several conservatives. Here's a quote from what he wrote in 1963, arguing against a law prohibiting racial discrimination at public restaurants:
"The legislature would inform a substantial body of the citizenry that in
order to continue to carry on the trades in which they are established they
must deal with and serve persons with whom they do not wish to associate."
He also strongly disagreed with the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Griswold v. Connecticut, in which the court found a constitutional right of privacy precluding regulation of the use of condoms by adults in the privacy of their bedrooms.
He also questioned Supreme Court decisions invalidating racially
discriminatory poll taxes, on the grounds that these laws were
"democratically enacted" and therefore should not be overturned.
As I say, many of all political persuasions were deeply disturbed by much of this background, and the nomination of Bork was opposed successfully.
Bork's later writings seem to justify the earlier misgivings. In Slouching to Gomorrah, 1996, Bork writes: "[m]odern liberals ... have a need to lie, and do so abundantly, since many Americans would not like their actual agenda."
Also from StG: "The fact that men, who did not cry ten years ago, now do so indicates that something has gone high and soft in the culture."
And: "For most people, only revealed religion can supply the premises from which the prescriptions of morality can be deduced."
And: "the fossil record is proving a major embarrassment to evolution".
One more: "There is no symmetry of `left' and `right' in religion, in our culture, or in our politics. The Left, as has been apparent throughout our history, and never more so than in the Sixties, is alienated and hostile to American institutions and traditions. They will destroy those institutions and traditions if they can. There is no group of comparable size and influence to balance the extremists of modern liberalism, no `right' that has a similarly destructive program in mind."
In my mind, Bork is far from a true political conservative. In any event, to suggest that the principled opposition to Bork was somehow unfair and out of keeping with historical precedent is, to put it charitably, a dubious proposition.
Andy Weill
Powered by hypermail