Steve Doocy can always be counted on to express slobbering praise for anything and anybody connected to right wing Republicanism. But this morning, he outdid himself in his gushing paean to conservative judicial icon, Robert Bork died earlier this week. In introducing his guest, the dean of the law school at the uber conservative Catholic AveMariaUniversity, Doocy said Bork "never made it to the Supreme Court; but his contributions to America were great." Really, Steve? What was great, however, was Steve's valiant efforts to advance the patented right wing propaganda that is a staple of the patented, propaganda pushing Fox & Friends.
Steve's guest, Bernard Dobranski, talked about how, after Bork's Supreme Court nomination was blocked, became "one of our leading commentators on culture" and authored "classic" books. He asserted that "his insights into our culture were important." Doocy twitched with glee as he cited how, when Ave Maria was setting up its (fourth tier) law school, Antonon Scalia said "hey, you need somebody big, try to get Bork and ya asked him four times and he said no,no, no until he said yes and that really made a big difference for ya." (Bork was a visiting professor). They chyron advanced the agitprop: "A Lasting Legacy, How Robert Bork Influenced the Legal Field."
Doocy continued the homage with a barely coherent rant: "The great thing about having him as a part of history, teaching the law students there at Ave Maria was, you know, he could recount things that he was actually witness to, for instance, aside from him becoming a verb and getting borked by the senate, there's a lot of misconceptions about his role with Watergate because he was part of the Saturday Night Massacre where a couple of guys got fired and people said he was a bad guy; but people actually said his intention was to do something better than simply carry out President Nixon's request." As Doocy spoke the chyron promoted the awesomeness of Bork: "Defender of the Constitution, Bork Supported a Strict Interpretation of Law."
Doocy's interpretation of events is typically confused. Attorney General Elliot Richardson resigned rather than comply with Nixon's request that he fire Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox who was being ordered, by Nixon, to stop obtaining White House tapes. Richardon's deputy, William Ruckleshaus also resigned at that time. Bork, then Solicitor General, fired Cox.
After having been tossed the pro-Bork ball, Dobranski ran with it, claiming that Bork saved the Justice Department from "going into chaos." He explained that Richardson and his deputy resigned, so "there was only Judge Bork...and he had to do something." He continued that "it's not well known" but Bork has pointed out that Elliot Richardson said "Bob, you've got to stay there because someone has to take care of this place." Steve said "true." Dobranski added that Cox was replaced with Leon Jaworski who was a good prosecutor.
As far as Bork's "great contributions" to America, Steve didn't tell us. He also didn't mention that Bork, in criticizing "Griswold," felt that the right to privacy (in this case, birth control) was not in the Constitution. He said that only political speech is protected by the Constitution. He also said that "homosexuality is obviously not an unchangeable condition like race or gender." He attacked the Warren Court (school prayer) for being liberal. He opposed Roe v Wade as an "abomination." If he had been on the Supreme Court, in 1992, when Roe was reaffirmed, he would have been the vote to bring it down. He also said that the Civil Rights Act was "unsurpassed ugliness."
So if Bork got "borked," there was a reason. I'm thinking that we should coin a new phrase for the experience one has when watching Fox & Friends - getting Doocied!
Bemused wrote: “Dork’s [sic] big mistake was being born too early, at a time when Republicans were a respectable party.”
Yes, it appears Bork was ahead of his time, so to speak — the Republican party of 1987 hadn’t yet gone full neocon or full teabagger, so while Bork’s beliefs that Civil Rights were evil, and that it should be more difficult for average people to both use the courts and to vote seemed extreme back then, they’d be hardly noticeable today . . .