Ruth Bader Ginsberg to Egyptians: Don’t Look to The U.S. Constitution; It’s ‘Too Old’

It’s time for the old hag to retire.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has caused a storm of controversy by saying in a television interview that the people of Egypt should not look to the United States Constitution when drafting their own governing document because it’s too old and there are newer examples from which to draw inspiration.

“I would not look to the U.S. Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012,” Ginsburg said in the interview, which aired on Jan. 30 on Al-Hayat TV.

Her comments have stunned writers across the conservative blogosphere, though many major media outlets have not given much attention to it.

In the interview, she argued that the United States has the “oldest written constitution still in force in the world,” so instead “you should certainly be aided by all the constitution-writing that has gone one since the end of World War II.”

“I might look at the constitution of South Africa,” Ginsburg said. “That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, had an independent judiciary.”

Ginsburg, appointed to the Supreme Court by former President Bill Clinton, said South Africa’s constitution is “a great piece of work that was done” and cited other documents outside America’s constitution that Egyptians should read.

“Much more recent than the U.S. Constitution, Canada has a Charter of Rights and Freedoms,” Ginsburg said. “It dates from 1982. You would almost certainly look at the European Convention on Human Rights.”

“Yes,” she concluded, “why not take advantage of what there is elsewhere in the world?”

Yeah, that “old document” that has served us so well for over two centuries,  is archaic and obsolete.  So much so, that Obama and his merry band of Dem Left thugs in the legislature rammed through an unconstitutional takeover of healthcare.
The Anointed One also wishes to hell he could bypass Congress and make his own laws.  Those damned pesky checks and balances. We have entirely too much democracy in this country. The Constitution doesn’t matter because it’s like so 225 years ago.
Some lawmakers even use their wild-assed imaginations to claim that illegal aliens can be a U.S. President.

Canada, a country that sanctioned persecution of author Mark Steyn for criticizing Islam and the way the Cannucks kowtow to their radical muslim population, is such a glowing example of “rights and freedoms”. They hauled that man up in front of a totalitarian “human rights” tribunal, and he fought them tooth and nail until he was finally vindicated.

Canada also installed PC police in its universities.

One author at Foreign Policy blog suggests that Ginsberg and Cass Sunstein, for that matter, are enamored with the recent (socialist-leaning) South African constitution because:

What makes the post-apartheid document, which came into effect in 1997, so unique, is its inclusion of positive rights. In addition to freedom from discrimination — including on the basis of sexual orientation, disability or religion — and freedom of speech, under chapter two of the constitution, South Africans have the right to “make decisions concerning reproduction,” “form a political party,” or “form and join a trade union.”

And here’s the real kicker:

It also stipulates that citizens have the right to housing and adequate healthcare.

We have laws on the books against discrimination.  Americans have the right to control their own reproduction, form political parties, and join unions. The  constitution also guarantees freedom of speech.  And unions have caused enough damage to this country. Anyone who suggests that they be amended to the constitution has a crap factory for a brain. So his point is?

The founders had the common sense to compose the constitution so that no one entity would have complete power.  It’s those kinds of “negative” things that bug the Left; limited government.  That’s why the constitution does not stipulate that the government owes you a living or can dictate what kind of health care you will purchase.

That’s why ObamaCare will be argued before the SCOTUS.

Unfortunately, Ginsberg will get to weigh in on the decision.  Hopefully, the constitution will survive the attack.  It’s up to the conservatives on the court—Samuel Alito,  John Roberts,  Antonin Scalia,  Clarence Thomas, and Anthony Kennedy— to stave off the leftwing cabal of Ginsberg, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Stephen Breyer.

Ginsberg is sworn to uphold the constitution of the United States whether she likes it or not. The day she can’t fulfill that obligation is the day she should hand in her black robe. Secondly, Cass Sunstein?? Please. He’s not a fan of the constitution or free speech.

The number of leftwing nihilists in our government is frightening.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Social Media Auto Publish Powered By :
Wordpress Social Share Plugin powered by Ultimatelysocial