Quote:
Originally posted by taxwonk
The resignations/firings were not symbolic gestures of protest. They were the result of those men being principled enough to do the jobs they were hired to do and try to uphold the law and serve teh interests of justice.
Bork, whore that he was, was not burdened by such a thing as a conscience. He chose expedience and self-advancement over the pursuit of the truth.
|
(A) They were surely gestures of protest. Symbolic? I think so, because they knew Cox would surely be fired in the end -- so their protest would have little or no practical effect in the short term.
In the mid to long term -- they had to know their resignations would harm Nixon immensely -- so if they had the intent to harm Nixon perhaps the gestures were not merely symbolic.
(B) You apparently speak out of ignorance, as well as extreme dislike for Bork. Mr. Richardson wrote a book (I think his biography) in which he is much kinder to Bork that you would seem to think is appropriate -- and set forth the basic facts as I recited them.
(C) It is hard for me to take your analysis seriously if you truly think that Bork is unprincipled and without a conscience. Seems the opposite to me (if anything, too strict an adherent to principle, without being sufficiently informed by reality).
S_A_M
