Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (159121)	1/28/2003 5:46:16 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580450

There is such a thing as principle. I believe the firing was an act based on principle for Bork. That doesn't mean you have to agree with his principle here but from what I have read he didn't do it for selfish reasons. "Yes and such opposition was a good idea solidly grounded in law constitutional and otherwise." But he was in opposition to existing laws of the US based on his personal beliefs. Actually no. The constitution says nothing about a right to abortion. And affirmative action is in direct conflict with a lot of civil rights law and arguably the 14th amendment particularly when it amounts to government imposed quotas. I think the only free speech that should not be allowed is the kind where you yell fire in a crowded theater. Are you really sure about that? I think perhaps you are for anything you would call speech besides the fire in a crowded theater type speech (and things like extortion and fraud through the spoken word), but a lot of what is considered by some people to be speech or at least expression ("freedom of expression") would be stuff that you might not support. Do you support an unlimited right to publish porn? Even if kids might see it, or it contains kiddie porn or beastiality and such? Do you support the unlimited right to make political speech including advocating issues and supporting candidates at any time in the election cycle? I can easily believe you are a strong 1st amendment supporter. I am as well. But there are areas where most strong first amendment supporters would not seek to protect. Bork's probably would go further then either one of us but he isn't an extremist on this. A lot of people would probably go further then him including some high ranking judges. Mr. Bork sounds like a part time anarchist He is not even a libertarian let alone an anarchist. He also doesn't have a long history of brown nosing, the only thing that might be called that is firing Cox and I think you miscatergorize his motivations in that case. But getting back to the original point he was the subject of character assassination. You might decide you don't want him as a judge but that decision doesn't erase the facts about what happened in the hearings. Tim