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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (887978)	9/15/2015 1:51:14 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573922

Like I said, Bork was a bad candidate. It was unprecedented because previous appointees were not appointed as a payoff for actions taken. I see you are playing less-like word games and making false equivalences. It would only be equivalent if the Democrats went and blocked all appointees. Which they did not. Bork was the only one. I also note that there was an earlier usage of bork. There was an earlier usage of bork as a passive verb, common among litigators in the D.C. Circuit: to "get borked" was to receive a conservative judicial decision with no justification in the law, reflecting their perception, later documented in the Cardozo Law Review, of Judge Bork's tendency to decide cases solely according to his ideology. [38] en.wikipedia.org Like I stated earlier. Bad candidate and lots of reasons not to put him on the court.