McMegan is bright enough to figure out what the S&P nonsense is about (BECAUSE S&P TOLD US), and in a post pointing her fingers at the Republicans for their stupidity, we get this instant classic in beltway “Both Sides Do It”:
And yes, the Democrats had their own role to play–both in starting this monstrous game of tit-for-tat that we’re now all trapped in (liberal pundits moaning about partisanship and norms seem to have wiped the name “Bork” from their consciousness), and in getting the progressive caucus to make tea-party like noises.
Megan was 14 when Robert Bork was nominated. TWENTY FOUR YEARS AGO. But that, and apparently the 12 members of the progressive caucus kvetching helplessly about the deal equals the entirety of the Republican instransigence.
I think the Democrats started it when Lincoln was shot.
Steve
Wow! There was no partisanship before Robert Bork. I must have imagined that guy with the cane (who was probably a Democrat too, come to think of it).
Maude
Bork was batshit crazy.
J
Also let’s not forget that Bork was a true extremist freak who should never have been nominated or confirmed.
Jinchi
I would have thought that Bork’s public comments over the last 24 years proved Ted Kennedy was right in his opposition.
Bork has got to be one of the most horrible people in the country.
JPL
@Maude:
Romney is proud to have him as a supporter.
Alex S.
Also, Obama once said he went to 57 states. That means he’s as dumb as Palin, Bachmann, Santorum, Bush,etc… all together.
These guys are running on empty, always have, always will.
And Bork is advisor to the Romney campaign, by the way.
Sko Hayes
We are trapped by Republicans who think it’s a good idea to play games with our economy.
According to CNN, the White House has challenged S&P’s figures, and they are admitting some errors and going back over their numbers. A downgrade is still possible.
Warren Terra
People’s conceptions of the Bork nomination battle serve as a useful litmus test: there’s a whole constellation of fact-challenged beliefs about what happened to the Bork nomination (most obviously: that his rejection was in some way unjust) that, if propounded, will tell you that your interlocutor has been thoroughly steeped in the conservative bile – that they have a low metaphorical pH, and all too often a low actual IQ.
Robert Bork is an obvious and unhinged reactionary. More to the point, he is proud of this: at the time of his nomination, he was on record that federal Civil Rights protections were unconstitutional. He was also the person that agreed to fire the Watergate Special Prosecutor, after two more senior Justice Department officials resigned in preference to perverting the course of justice in this way (including Nixon’s not previously notably fastidious Attorney General). The debate over Bork’s nomination was fought largely on these highly substantive, highly relevant issues – issues that deservedly torpedoed his candidacy. And, finally, he wasn’t filibustered. His candidacy was rejected by a majority vote in the Senate.
I’m not saying all was the stuff of civics textbooks: apparently some DC video store employee leaked his movie rental history to the gutter press. But that was hardly the deciding factor.
Now, the Bork nomination has perhaps had an effect, in that the tradition since then has been to nominate ciphers, people who stand before the Senate and insist they’ve never in their lives held an opinion. This is especially true for the recent Republican nominees, who have tended to be extremists who have spend decades doing their utmost to leave as few ideological fingerprints as possible. But that’s because of the damage done to the Bork candidacy by his legitimately disqualifying track record – not because he was in any way treated unfairly.
JPL
So am I to assume that Megan has no idea that Bork thinks that females should be treated as slaves with limited rights?
trollhattan
@JPL:
Yup, he never went away. Can you imagine him teamed with the likes of Thomas and Scalia? Yeesh.
Tonal Crow
Bork is crazier than crazy. I seem to recall him advocating a constitutional amendment to allow Congress to overturn any federal court decision.
dmsilev
Robert Bork was, as part of the standard nomination process, asked questions about his legal philosophy. He answered those questions. Subsequently, his nomination received a vote on the Senate floor. A majority of Senators having voted in opposition to said nomination, it failed.
Why, again, was this so so bad that conservatives are still whining about it a generation later?
kdaug
@JPL:
FTFY.
The Other Chuck
@dmsilev:
They’re not big on that whole “democracy” thing.
patrick II
The democratic rejection of the Bork nomination was not the same partisan, unthinking intransigence hostage taking lately displayed by the Tea Party congressmen. It was the necessary decision to keep a extreme right wing radical from a lifetime appointment to the supreme court. To say that the Democrats were against something, so it is equivalent to the republicans being against something, is just simple minded. What it is they are for or against actually matters.
LT
She actually seems to think that the Birk thing was
JPL
@kdaug: thanks. When Romney wins the nomination, I assume he will agree to three debates. The way I picture the debates is the first one is the evangelical Romney, the second debate will be the MA Governor (except for the jobs part) Romney and the third will be a mix of the two.
dmsilev
Objection! Assumes facts not in evidence! It’s very possible that McMegan was right simply by random chance.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@dmsilev:
Because the Dems won.
LT
She actually seems to think that the Bork thing was THE VERY FIRST TIME EVER the special glow of angels departed from the U.S. Senate. MM inteh comments:
Holy fuck, what a fucking lunatic. Is this an old Republican “truth”? I missed that one.
Erin
FYI everyone, Robert Bork just joined Romney’s campaign.
joeyess
Sadly, this is largely true. In many ways it’s the same battle in a different century.
trollhattan
O/T Ouch, even my ears are bleeding, so loud is this dogwhistle.
http://thinkprogress.org/media/2011/08/05/289203/fox-nation-reports-on-obamas-birthday-obamas-hip-hop-bbq-didnt-create-jobs/
Jackasses
Maude
@Erin:
This could be a lot of fun. Imagine how crazy his campaign is going to get.
LT
What in the fuck of all fucks? I hit “tab” accidently and I get fifty partial comments. Sheeesh.
Sorry.
dmsilev
@Erin:
As did a couple million dollars of completely untraceable money. At least.
Unless he proves otherwise, I think we should all assume that Romney’s campaign is at least partially funded by Ukrainian child-pornography distributers. It would, after all, be irresponsible not to speculate.
The Other Chuck
@trollhattan:
That’s not a dogwhistle, that’s a god damned megaphone.
Turgidson
Many above already covered it, but the Democrats were doing their goddamn patriotic duty in sinking Bork’s nomination. That guy’s a fucking lunatic and should be kept 100 miles from the Supreme Court at all times, via restraining order if necessary.
But, sure, preventing an extremist psycho from getting onto SCOTUS 20+ years ago is EXACTLY THE SAME THING as holding the full faith and credit of one’s own nation hostage to a cruel, stupid, and unpopular ideological crusade. Exactly the same fucking thing.
God, every time I think McMegan has finally hit rock bottom with her stupidity, she proves me horribly wrong. What a fucking twit.
Warren Terra
@LT:
Oh, indeed. The Martyrdom Of The Bork is an article of Republican faith (also, because IOKIYAR, it’s inconceivable that the Republicans could have been unkind to any Democratic nominee ever). That the facts are totally at odds with the popular Republican narrative about the course of the Bork Nomination is of course immaterial. That Bork was nominated by Saint Ronnie (and that he was most memorably – if, as they conveniently forget, substantively – attacked by Ted Kennedy) no doubt helps.
The Other Chuck
@LT:
Spoken word performance art courtesy of WordPress… I think now we all think the Birk thing was :)
dmsilev
@trollhattan: After that dog whistle blew, there were bats falling out of the sky across a 100 mile radius.
trollhattan
@LT:
Not to mentioned she really gave the thesaurus a workover tap-tapping that post, trying to sound soooo veddy clever.
JPL
@Warren Terra: Really? I don’t remember that part. I simply remember his male white supremacist answers. Thomas had a video store problem and the owner was not allowed to testify because they decided not to defend Anita Hall testimony. We can actually thank ..ah nevermind..
Dennis SGMM
I blame Harry Truman. He said mean things about the Republican Congress and Thomas Dewey back in 1948.
Omnes Omnibus
@dmsilev: Six Republicans voted against him ( I know, they were RINOs, but still…).
chopper
it’s like when they point out that democrats are just as racist, and point to the dixiecrats of old.
Amanda in the South Bay
Ah, so McMegan proves yet again the equivalency of libertarians and Republicans.
LT
Oh the Bork thing I’ve heard plenty, but not that it was THE FIRST TIME EVER!
And for that unsane woman to use that to try to justify what Repubs did with the debt ceiling? Holy crap, Atlantic. Holy crap.
Mark B
Bork was a nut that Reagan nominated to see how far he could go in nominating a pure ideologue who had no respect for established principles of law for a lifetime appointment. Turns out that he could go pretty far, but not THAT far.
But Clarence Thomas was equally bad, and a pervert to boot, but he skated by brazening it out at his confirmation hearings. It’s probably the last time he ever said anything, and while he had blanket complaints about the process, he never specifically denied any of the allegations against him.
But neither of these things have fuck all to do with the Republicans taking hostages over their refusal to pay the bills they ran up by spending money and not raising taxes to pay for their expenditures.
Turgidson
Also, obviously, she’s unwittingly undermining her own “both sides are mean” argument when the example she cites is more than 2 decades old and actually did not violate any norms. The Senate advised (the confirmation hearings) and based on those hearings, refused to give its consent. There, done. There was no filibuster, no hostage taking, and even members of the President’s own party recognized that the man was batshit. The system worked.
If that’s the best example of Democrats being mean that she can think of, she proved her own point wrong within the same fucking sentence. Quite a feat.
jl
Democritus was a scientific atheist, a leveler, and a pragmatist, AND wanted the rich to give to the poor.
The rot started way back.
I will take a time out to reflect on my wicked ways and vile heritage.
Perhaps the advice of McArdel will soften (or should it be harden? soften.. or harden…) my heart.
Tresy
The ur-Borking wasn’t of Bork (who, yes, deserved it anyway). It was of Abe Fortas, LBJ’s pick for chief justice. It was a classic GOP smear operation, and it worked. But no one remembers the Fortas fight, which is a pity.
Villago Delenda Est
You know, if we’re going to play this “tit for tat” game and go back decades, let’s talk about Abe Fortas. Or, better yet, let’s talk about the impeachment of Bill Clinton vs. the absolutle certitude of an impeachment AND CONVICTION of Richard Nixon for ACTUAL CRIMES as opposed to less than perfect candor about a fucking blow job, for which the impeachment of Bill Clinton was, and Republicans actually came out and said, “get even” time for Nixon.
BGinCHI
Leave Megan alo–!
No, wait, don’t.
Megan, if you’re reading this, it’s time to fake your own death. Just jump out the window, I’m sure you can calculate how to do it without hurting yourself.
Mark B
And the broken calculator lady’s defense of the Republicans’ behavior is ‘Nyah, nyah, the Dems did it first’? Even a kid in grade school knows that’s a weak argument. I know she can’t add worth a crap, but now I’ll add inability to reason to her long list of shortcomings.
Nutella
No, no, no. It was Bill Ayers acting up in 1970 (before McMegan was born) that’s responsible for partisanship. Jeez, doesn’t everyone know that?
Omnes Omnibus
@Tresy: Tresy Johnson is right. I don’t know why people don’t remember Fortas.
JPL
@Villago Delenda Est: well as a good Boortz supporter told me with Clinton it was the lies and I said…hmmm
MikeBoyScout
Robert Bork is not now and has never been fit to judge anything more than talent on The Gong Show.
But McMegan is on to something. The Founding Fraternity Brothers never wanted to hear her opinion on the constitution’s meaning of Advise & Consent.
kth
McArdle, with her amnesia and aversion to reading, probably doesn’t have strong feelings one way or the other about Robert Bork. But everyone she talks to has that view, so she assumes that’s history’s verdict.
Slogan occurs to me: Obama should demand that his nominees be “borked” (Republican term of contempt for supposed Dem obstruction), i.e., given an up-or-down vote. Really needs to be a meme, more I think about it.
FlipYrWhig
@Warren Terra:
Apparently their martyrologies and hagiographies don’t include Abe Fortas, 1968.
ETA: Villago got there first. I would threaten to destroy him, but, well, you know.
ETA2: Also, Tresy. I don’t have any bad puns at the ready for that nym.
ETA3: Also too, Omnes. Sigh.
beltane
@Omnes Omnibus: Wow. It really wasn’t my imagination telling me that there used to be some sane Republicans out there. Too sane for McMegan, who is obviously into the hot, frothy, teabagging, let’s exchange genettic information while reading Ayn Rand, side of Conservatism.
This woman doesn’t even rise to the level of a joke any more. She is a mere troll and ought to be treated like one.
lamh34
S&P told White House it would downgrade U.S. – source
I’ll admit, I’m totally clueless about this type of thing. Can anyone tell me in laymen’s term what exactly a downgrade will mean? I think I know, but I’m sure I’m wrong. And it doesnt pay to google something if u can’t really tell if its good information or not.
Turgidson
@FlipYrWhig:
Fortas was appointed by a Democrat. Thus he was presumptively a commie traitor and everything was fair game. And IOKIYAR of course.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@Omnes Omnibus: Because that very liberal media machine keeps forgetting to remind them. Duh.
Meredith
Who is this person you all keep harping on? No, on second thought, I don’t think I want to know.
gocart mozart
@Alex S.:
Relax, Bork is advising him on how to better attract young minority voters.
Villago Delenda Est
@JPL:
Yeah, Nixon lied to his own lawyers about his involvement in a conspiracy to obstruct justice. Lies not about his sexual behavior with anyone at all, but about something of substance having to do with the performance of his duties as President.
But, I forget, that lies about blow jobs are INFINITELY more serious than lies about sending the entire US military into a optional war of aggression which results in hundreds of thousands of casualties and the lost of trillions in treasure.
How silly of me.
Linnaeus
Bork? Really? Because rejecting a Supreme Court nominee is just like holding the nation’s economy hostage.
LT
@FlipYrWhig: MM mentions Fortas in the comments. That doesn’t count, she says, as it was bipartisan. I don’t know if that’s true.
Villago Delenda Est
@FlipYrWhig:
In fairness, Tresy’s post was first.
So I owe her a refreshing fizzy beverage.
Omnes Omnibus
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q): Oh yeah, that’s it.
OT: I saw your comment overnight about your medical situation. Hang tough. I am sending good thoughts your way.
gocart mozart
@Warren Terra:
Not certain, but I think this was Clarence Thomas.
Turgidson
@LT:
Jesus, the stupid burns. Bork getting shitcanned was bipartisan too. It’s right there on the wikipedia page.
Omnes Omnibus
@LT: Bork’s rejection was bipartisan as well. Next.
beltane
@Linnaeus: Well, we all know that in the wingnut world of false equivilency, telling a Republican that he or she is wrong is JUST LIKE HITLER. Using this logic, rejecting a Supreme Court nominee is even worse than Hitler, it’s like Hitler/Jimmy Carter/Al Gore/Bill Clinton’s male member combined. Got it?
Linnaeus
@beltane:
Silly me. I forgot.
FlipYrWhig
@LT:
Megan’s problem, not yours, but FWIW as Omnes pointed out above… so was voting against Bork.
ETA: Jeez, people, you’re all way too fast for me today.
MikeBoyScout
Was Robert Bork treated harshly during his SCOTUS nomination? Maybe. But had he been confirmed we’d have a SCOTUS right now who thinks like this
And let’s not miss McMeagan’s dog whistle here. Had the thoughts and philosophy of Bork prevailed we would not have a Kenyan-Muslim-Socialist president, cuz that bastard never would have attended a proper school.
F*ck Bork
Comrade Luke
Has this been posted here?
Who Rules America: An Investment Manager’s View of the Top 1%
A great read.
PeakVT
@lamh34: Probably nothing, as long as the other ratings agencies don’t downgrade. Some funds may be legally or contractually obligated to hold a certain amount of AAA assets, but at the same time they are probably not required to look to just one agency for ratings. If all of the ratings agencies downgraded things would get messy.
Linnaeus
@lamh34:
Try this link here.
The “grade” that agencies like S&P give to institutions is intended to reflect those institutions’ ability to pay back their debts and hence their soundness as investments. The higher the grade, the more sound the institution is and the lower the risk in lending money to it. The AAA grade is the highest.
A downgrade would mean that S&P thinks that U.S. government bonds have become a (relatively) less safe investment because S&P thinks there’s an increased chance that the U.S. will not make good on the debts it incurs by borrowing via bonds. So in theory that would, among other things, make borrowing more expensive because interest rates would go up to reflect the greater risk in buying U.S. bonds.
ETA: PeakVT is right to point out, however, that S&P is only one of three agencies. If all three downgraded the U.S., the effect would be more serious.
John O
The ritual humiliation of McArdle in the blogosphere is one of my guilty pleasures.
She’s obviously a very self-confident young woman. (Read: brat)
Omnes Omnibus
@John O:
Unless I am mistaken she is pushing 40.
Carolina Dave
The nomination of Robert Bork began the first stirrings of liberal leanings in my college days. Up until that time I was a Reagan guy starting in 1976. Some activists in the student union had put together some of Bork’s rulings and quotes out for view.
For the first time I realized, “this is not how I think, and certainly not how I feel about the law and the constitution of the United States” My first political act (after voting) was to write my then Senator Terry Sanford and urge him to oppose Bork’s nomination. It would have been futile to write my other senator, Jesse Helms (who I despised then and now, peace be upon all who piss on his grave)
All of this caused me to begin to reacess where I was politically and to detox the myths and lies that had begun to calcify in my young brain.
The myth that Bork was “Borked” is a totem of right wing belief. I recall it was more of a real grass roots revultion to the man and his ideas. “up or down vote” we can only hope for such in these times of true obstructionism.
JPL
@Villago Delenda Est: Boortz lies every day which I gladly point out but you have to understand that Boortz says double check my facts so that’s okay..
Donald G
Omnes: 40 is the new 20. Remember, Eric Cantor is 48 and looks and acts like an 18year old College Republican in a Student Government Association.
PhoenixRising
Gocart Mozart, you are the winner and I’m out. Seriously, man, that WAS the last word.
Menzies
@gocart mozart:
I think they did it to both of them. The difference was that Bork’s video rental history was utterly unremarkable.
Ol' Dirty DougJ
John Wilkes Booth was a liberal. Did you ever check out his writing? He sounds just like Al Gore.
Omnes Omnibus
@Ol’ Dirty DougJ: John Wilkes Booth was not fat.
James E. Powell
No, the Democrats started it when they embraced Lincoln’s legacy by enacting the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act, the Fair Housing Act.
trollhattan
@BGinCHI:
Just throw yourself at the ground, and miss.
Bruce S
Lincoln? Hell, the Democrats started this back when Aaron Burr shot Alexander Hamilton.
Carolina Dave
OK I see S&P gave us the downgrade. discuss in a new thread
Robert Waldmann
Silly you. Democrats started it when Hamilton was shot.
Robert Waldmann
Only missed frist by two comments.
On the contested point of fact,
Bork’s video rentals were made public. They were very boring.
I mean I didn’t watch the films to be sure, but the list of films was boring.
Triassic Sands
She really should have blamed it on the Civil War. Or should I say the War Between The States or is it The War for Southern Freedom and Dignity or maybe The War for a Righteous Biblical Society?
Anyway, not confirming Bork just opened up all the barely scabbed over wounds from the War of Northern Aggression.
Lefties have such short memories.
piratedan
when will someone tell that stupid bitch (McMegan) to stfu?
Triassic Sands
@piratedan:
I think you just did.
Raenelle
Didn’t they used to call that an “abuse excuse”?
Halcyan
Breaking News:
there is current speculation that “Romney’s campaign is at least partially funded by Ukrainian child-pornography distributers.”
Caz
I see the Cole Irrelevant Post Streak is still going strong. I look forward to hearing what’s for dinner this weekend, what some unknown pundit says on an unknown blog about a non-factor politician, and why the republicans are ________ (insert repetitive insult here, e.g. “asshole”).