Tuesday, February 05, 2019
Ruth Bader Ginsberg: Setting Up Her Sainthood
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host
The Supreme Court Justice who once said to other countries not to use America's Constitution as a model for their own has been hitting some rough health patches, of late. For some, it is a surprise that the 85-year old supreme court justice, who was appointed back in 1993 by President Bill Clinton, has not been welcomed into the open arms of the hereafter. Many suggest that her death in the next few years is imminent due to her age and poor health, and that should be a rallying cry loud enough to place Donald J. Trump back into the White House in 2020.
The liberal left progressive commie Democrats are fully aware that the elder-justice may be living in the sunset of her years, and that the loss of life's twilight sunlight may bathe her darkening world very soon. So, they are doing all they can to deify her, and to crown her the patroness saint of the United States Supreme Court so that her funeral, whenever that may be, can be something extra special . . . a downright coronation of her new deified self.
In the theaters with the movie "On The Basis of Sex" (released Christmas Day, 2018) we have seen on the screen a Ruth Bader Ginsberg rewrite of history. They have rewritten her life so that they can deify her and radicalize a new generation of women who don't just want women's rights, but in the code pink mafia vein of things, wish to destroy what they consider to be toxic masculinity, and the overbearing control over society by the male side of humanity. To do so, Ginsberg is being falsely portrayed as a courageous heroine of rights, with a complete denial that any rights for women existed before Ginsberg came on the scene.
Sounds like a story my grandfather told me about World War II. "I got there in 1942," he told us kids. "That's about when the war began to turn in our favor. Word got out that I was there."
The history of women in America, and the true heroes of women's rights, are being pushed aside and ignored so as to rewrite the history books so that they basically say, "women's rights were a mess, but things began to turn in our favor when word got out that Ruth Bader Ginsberg was on the march."
The truth is, despite the requirement that the judges on the Supreme Court are supposed to be apolitical, Ginsberg is anything but. She is a political activist, and the Democrats believe she is an effective one. Don't get me wrong, all people are entitled to their own individual political opinions, but in the case of Ginsberg, she uses her position on the court to smear her opinion in our face, and to influence the path of this country. As a justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, she is forbidden from allowing her political opinion, if it is not in line with the U.S. Constitution, to renegotiate American law, or to re-navigate our path as a country away from the liberty secured by the U.S. Constitution.
In the video (trailer) below there is a scene that, in fact, shows her character rewriting the U.S. Constitution.
In the scene a judge says to then-lawyer Ginsberg, "the word 'woman' does not appear even once in the Constitution." The Ginsberg character quips back, "nor does the word 'freedom'." (2:16-2:23)
Uh, actually "freedom" appears in the First Amendment. Perhaps Ginsberg and her leftist allies don't believe the First Amendment is a part of the Constitution. That would actually explain much of what they believe and say.
That said, the words "man" or "men", like "woman," are not in the Constitution. Could that be, perhaps, because the Framers realized that someday culture would change and women would be considered in a manner different than they were during the founding era?
Radical feminists like Code Pink and Hollywood crazies who drool after women like Ashley Judd want you to believe that early America treated women, and looked upon women, like Islam does (and then they want you to think that Islam does not). The reality is, sex is not a basis used in any part of the U.S. Constitution. If you read it, you will understand that it is not about sex, race, or national origin. The founders, and many of the amendments, used the word "people" and "citizens" to refer to who the Constitution was written for.
The problem is that for statists like Ginsberg, and the knuckleheads around the creation of the movie "On The Basis of Sex," this whole political thing is about leading America towards a more authoritarian model that forces people into boxes, forces them to get along, forces them to act a certain way, and forces them to only speak in a manner acceptable to the ruling politically correct collectivist cabal. It is their goal to eliminate the Constitution, and to eliminate anyone who opposes them. They seek a one-party rule system. They seek a communitarian type of system. Behind the curtain, they are socialists.
The movie is about forwarding that agenda, and further poisoning the younger generation with propaganda from their leftist ideology. And, they are willing to re-write history (in other words, lie about history) in order to achieve that.
They understand that the younger generation is the battlefield upon which they have a chance to win. Like fascist leftist characters of the past, the liberal left Democrats understand that the older generation rejects what they have to offer, but thanks to a life-long presence in the overwhelming indoctrination culture of the Democrats, the younger folks stand in the new camp. Their camp. The leftist revolution's camp (or should I say, Marxist coup's camp).
Ruth Bader Ginsberg, when it comes to the Constitution, is exactly what the liberal Democrats need when it comes to a defender of their leftist agenda. In fact, Ginsberg, and her colleagues of the leftist persuasion who share the judicial bench with her, are so off the charts crazy in their anti-constitutional stances, that each and every one of them should be impeached, and removed from the U.S. Supreme Court. All of them have voiced their belief that international law supersedes the American System. They are not Americans, they are invaders from a foreign ideology that embraces worldly collectivism rather than American liberty.
Furthermore, they believe in Federal Supremacy over everything. Like their legal-eagle colleagues, mostly who are leftists, and even a large number of conservatives and moderates believe this, they believe it is the federal government's job to force fairness and good behavior upon our society. They believe it is their job to punish those who don't play nice, are discriminatory, or are flat-out racist or sexist. The reality is, these internal issues are none of the federal government's business. While they misuse and misinterpret the 14th Amendment as their evidence that they can, there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to dictate to the States, communities, business owners, or individuals regarding their behavior.
The power to interfere with our private business or personal affairs has never been granted as an authority by the Constitution to the federal government, nor should it ever be.
The federal government has no authority to control private business, or personal activity.
Ruth Bader Ginsberg disagrees.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary