Approximately one-third of Robert Bork's new book, "The Tempting of America," is devoted to attacking "the bloody crossroads" that were his confirmation hearings. A careful reading of the book as a whole, however, serves to vindicate the Senate's action in rejecting Bork for the Supreme Court. As the fullest elaboration of Bork's judicial philosophy to date, "The Tempting of America" shows that Bork lacks most of the attributes essential to a Supreme Court Justice. His positions on most issues are as extremist as his critics have portrayed them. His intellectual abilities are weaker than his opponents suspected. He is an abysmal historian, which-although not ordinarily a cause for concern-is a fatal flaw in a self-professed originalist. Bork has, moreover, no understanding of what Anthony Kronman, following Alexander Bickel, has called the "prudence" required of judges. I will deal with each of these problems in turn.