That's what National Review Online's Ned Rice recommends:
Right.
Here's Bork's take on the Second Amendment:
Bork that.
And Bork you, Mr. Rice, and all the other establishment neocons who would pass this fraud off as a strict constructionist.
Lest there be any doubt, this suggestion to resubmit Bork’s name for Senate consideration is no satirical flourish. I am absolutely, positively serious about this. Bork was abundantly qualified to sit on the Supreme Court when he was nominated (and rejected) in 1987 and he remains so today because he is widely acknowledged as one of the foremost legal scholars in the United States.
Right.
Here's Bork's take on the Second Amendment:
"The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that there is no individual right to own a firearm. The Second Amendment was designed to allow states to defend themselves against a possibly tyrannical national government. Now that the federal government has stealth bombers and nuclear weapons, it is hard to imagine what people would need to keep in the garage to serve that purpose."
Bork that.
And Bork you, Mr. Rice, and all the other establishment neocons who would pass this fraud off as a strict constructionist.