Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Gmofftarki

Justice Ginsburg: "I would not look to the US constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012"

Rate this topic

24 posts in this topic

I actually re-read it several times just to make sure I was reading it correctly. Another hate America leftist shows their colors.

 

Another Republican in full crackpot cry. (Not that I mean to exclude Little, of course, it's just the overstatement that catches my eye.)

 

The American constitution was framed in a context within which states that had plenty of experience in democracy, and which states had operated their own affairs for a century (closer to two, for most). The new Government could draw on a political class that was used to debate - often fierce and nasty - in the legislatures of the several States. The political format of the new United States reflected that experience, and it reflected the failure of the Articles of Confederation that preceded the Constitution.

 

Egypt comes from a totally different background. The country's been run from Cairo as a highly centralized state. The new United States was thoroughly mistrustful of an institutional military and none of the states had been ruled by a military class. Egypt has an Army that doesn't intend to give away ultimate authority to any elected body.

 

The message is not separable from the audience. Egyptian provinces don't have even minimal experience of self-rule. An American Federal model probably isn't plausible.

And if she HAD said they should follow our lead, local anti-American politicians would've proclaimed it another foreign Zionist attempt to control Egypt. Would you have preferred that? So you'd have more to froth at the mouth about? What she said was discreet.

 

Democracy starts with "by the people, for the people, of the people." She pointed the audience towards constitutions of countries about which Egyptians don't have as many mixed emotions as they do about the U.S. She was also discreet in not remarking that both those Constitutional documents were strongly influenced by us, the Bill of Rights in particular. I'd call that well done.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another Republican in full crackpot cry.

The American constitution was framed in a context within which states that had plenty of experience in democracy, and which states had operated their own affairs for a century (closer to two, for most). The new Government could draw on a political class that was used to debate - often fierce and nasty - in the legislatures of the several States. The political format of the new United States reflected that experience, and it reflected the failure of the Articles of Confederation that preceded the Constitution.

Egypt comes from a totally different background. The country's been run from Cairo as a highly centralized state. The new United States was thoroughly mistrustful of an institutional military and none of the states had been ruled by a military class. Egypt has an Army that doesn't intend to give away ultimate authority to any elected body.

The message is not separable from the audience. Egyptian provinces don't have even minimal experience of self-rule. An American Federal model probably isn't plausible.

And if she HAD said they should follow our lead, local anti-American politicians would've proclaimed it another foreign Zionist attempt to control Egypt.

 

It would've been nice to hear a qualifier from her at least. "while I think the US Constitution is the greatest founding document in the history of mankind, I'm not sure it's the model you should use." She seems disgusted by the document rather than proud of it. Not only that, her implication is that the Constituion is anti human rights. I'm no crackpot sir and her record of leftist, activist rulings speaks for itself.

 

Why do you rarely, if ever hear our left leaning leaders talking about how great this country is, particularly when they're overseas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brian, if that were the case, why would she have put in this zinger?

“I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a Constitution in the year 2012. I might look at the Constitution of South Africa,” says Ginsburg, whom President Clinton nominated to the court in 1993. “That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, had an independent judiciary. … It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done. Much more recent than the U.S. Constitution.”

 

as well as

Ginsburg said “we are still forming the more perfect union” and noted that “when the Constitution was new in the 1780s, we still had slavery in the U.S.”

 

and then

Native Americans were left out, certainly people held in human bondage, women, and people that were new comers to our shores

 

as well as talking about Canada? If we were discussing countries that have more in common with Egypt's "Rely on a strong military in the streets to keep peace, bake bread for the people, and subdue riots", I'm not sure that Canada would be anywhere near the top of the list.

 

Ginsburg meant exactly what it sounds like she meant- you might agree with it, but she was saying "The US constitution is flawed, despite being the oldest in the world, and other countries have done it better since".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I actually re-read it several times just to make sure I was reading it correctly. Another hate America leftist shows their colors.

 

The horror! Perish the thought that the US Constitution is not the most perfect governmental document ever written. Burning at the stake is too good for her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The horror! Perish the thought that the US Constitution is not the most perfect governmental document ever written. Burning at the stake is too good for her.

 

So Joe, which "constitution" would you want? USSR, PRC, Cuba's? She tells us all we need to know about people like her and people like you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, we have to keep this red diaper yenta until she decides to quit or dies in her robes. BTW, while nothing made by the hand of man is "perfect", our constitution is both flexible and rock ribbed enough to stand the test of time. Its greatest enemy is our own leftists who look upon the constitution as a barrier to their dreams of left wing utopia.

 

But they will keep trying to kill it, get around it, make it inconsequential via left wing judges and unconstitutional laws. And when they do, we will cease to be the nation that we were or that the founders envisioned. We will become another kept underclass like the Europeans, ruled by our betters and told what to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do believe I will pinch my nose and vote for Romney, if for no other reason than potential SCOTUS nominees. I can't abide the Politically Correct nominees of the Borg Collective. :scared: If Ruth Bader Ginsburg is an example of the 'progressive' best, then we're all in a spit load of trouble should Obama eek out a 2nd term. :scared:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The horror! Perish the thought that the US Constitution is not the most perfect governmental document ever written. Burning at the stake is too good for her.

 

Nobody said she should burn at the stake. It would be nice to hear her do more than criticize it though. The fact of the matter is, it IS THE GREATEST founding document ever written. The founders were very aware of the perils of an overbearing central government and took measures to stop that from happening. Unfortunately, the last 80 years of progessive assault on it have turned America into something the founders wouldn't even recognize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She can use Mitt's excuse;

 

Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said Thursday he "misspoke" when he told CNN on Wednesday he was "not concerned about the very poor."

 

In an interview with Nevada political reporter Jon Ralston, Romney sought to downplay the comments, which have been widely criticized.

 

"It was a misstatement. I misspoke," Romney said.

 

"I've said something that is similar to that but quite acceptable for a long time. And you know when you do I don't know how many thousands of interviews now and then you may get it wrong. And I misspoke. Plain and simple," Romney added. :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.