Ruth Ginsberg: a brilliant, liberal narcissist who thinks she's irreplaceable

[pnwmom]

Last edited Sun Aug 25, 2013, 01:46 PM - Edit history (4)

In a recent interview, she reiterated that she wants to stay on as long as her health holds out because, in her 80's, despite two bouts of cancer, she's still at the top of her game. She doesn't care that if a Republican President is elected in 2016, s/he will replace Ginsberg with a conservative and change the make-up of the court to 6-3 conservative.

Despite what Ginsbert thinks, she is not that special. Three more years of Ruth Ginsberg is NOT worth taking a chance on a 6-3 Court for 10 or 20 years.

If she wants to do some real good, she should resign in time for Obama to nominate her successor and WRITE. Put all her passion and knowledge into her writing. Explain to the country the direction the Court has been going and her views on where it should go. Expose the corporate stooges for what they are. And let Obama appoint another progressive to replace her.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/25/us/court-is-one-of-most-activist-ginsburg-says-vowing-to-stay.html?_r=0


On Friday, she said repeatedly that the identity of the president who would appoint her replacement did not figure in her retirement planning.

“There will be a president after this one, and I’m hopeful that that president will be a fine president,” she said.

Were Mr. Obama to name Justice Ginsburg’s successor, it would presumably be a one-for-one liberal swap that would not alter the court’s ideological balance. But if a Republican president is elected in 2016 and gets to name her successor, the court would be fundamentally reshaped.

SNIP

Justice Ginsburg said her retirement calculations would center on her health and not on who would appoint her successor, even if that new justice could tilt the balance of the court and overturn some of the landmark women’s rights decisions that are a large part of her legacy.

“I don’t see that my majority opinions are going to be undone,” she said. “I do hope that some of my dissents will one day be the law.”

[BeyondGeography]

1. She's using Stevens as her role model but he stayed on to keep the seat safe

At least that was always my impression, the proof being that he bailed shortly after Obama was inaugurated.

It's a nightmare; I hope someone close to her can change her thinking.

[Bluenorthwest]

2. I'd love to see this incrimentalist bigot resign, she says it is wonderful that human rights for

some are left up to the States, she calls injustice against minorities 'balance' and for that she should step down and let a less antique thinker sit on the bench instead. Barf on her concept of 'balance' which reeks of centrist bipartisan 'let us please those in the wrong by sacrificing those they mistreat to further mistreatment'.
She's a conservative, which is why she wants her replacement to be made by 'not Obama'.

[factsarenotfair]

3. Power can do horrible things to people.

You have to wonder how some people, like Earl Warren, find more humanity in themselves when they are given power.

[OnyxCollie]

16. CA Atty Gen Earl Warren provided racist rhetoric to Lt. Gen DeWitt,

a factor in DeWitt's choice to intern the Japanese on the west coast, as per Personal Justice Denied.

[factsarenotfair]

20. He changed after Eisenhower appointed him to the Supreme Court.

And reportedly, Eisenhower was disappointed in him as Chief Justice.

[OnyxCollie]

26. Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren, chair of the Warren Commission.

Magic bullet, and all.

[Bay Boy]

63. There was no magic bullet...

...and all.

[factsarenotfair]

75. Also the one-man-one-vote decision.

I know he wasn't perfect, but he was far better than our current Chief Justice.

[cali]

4. I agree completely, but be prepared to get a lot of shit for this.

[SwampG8r]

5. toss that 80 year old liberal under that bus

ageist and anti liberal all in 1 post.....like a daily double
how many "progressive" sc judges have been named so far in this admin?......anyone who edges away from the dlc line?

[CrispyQ]

7. But, but, but, ...

we have to vote democratic for the sake of SCOTUS!

That is always the final argument to convince us to continue to vote for a party that no longer represents us.

[Logical]

9. Well, Obama was better than Romney. I don't like it either but it is the fact, sometimes.....

voting for the lesser of two evils is all we got.

[CrispyQ]

14. Voting for the lesser of two evils is getting me exactly what I'm voting against.

It's not just Obama, It's the entire democratic party. They've been doing this for 30 years.

[Logical]

47. I would love a 3rd party candidate. But how do you elect one.....

and not then lose to a GOP president candidate?

It is a catch-22, no one votes for a 3rd party unless we think they can win but they can't win unless we vote for them.

[Jim Lane]

64. Simple, you run in the Democratic primary.

If you have enough votes to win the general election, you have enough votes to win the primary, with no danger of splitting the progressive vote and thus electing a Republican.

You don't need to tell me there's no guarantee a progressive will win the nomination. I voted for Kucinich; I know all about it. The point is that, although we complain about the Democratic Party establishment, the U.S. now has open primaries. They can't keep you out. The smoke-filled room is gone.

True, they can throw money and biased media at you, but they'll do that whether it's the primary or the general. At least in a primary your supporters will vote for you, instead of deciding that they have to vote for a lesser-evil Democrat because the Republican is so horrible.

[mathematic]

12. Uh oh. Sotomayor and Kagan just failed the DU purity test.

One might even say you just threw them under the bus.

[OnyxCollie]

33. One might say that, if one wasn't paying attention.

Court Won't Hear Siegelman, Scrushy Appeals

Source: ABC NEWS

The Supreme Court will not take another look at the bribery conviction of former Ala. Gov. Don Siegelman and former HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy.

The high court on Monday turned away the two men's appeals. Siegelman was convicted of selling a seat on a hospital regulatory board to Scrushy in exchange for $500,000 in donations to Siegelman's 1999 campaign to establish a state lottery.

Siegelman's lawyers wanted to argue that campaign donations can't be bribes unless there's a clear agreement between the donor and the politician, and that there was no such agreement in Siegelman's case. Siegelman has been free on bond while appealing his conviction, while the courts refused to free Scrushy.

The appeals were turned away without comment.

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/court-hear-siegelman-appeal-16490322

...

Supreme Court Lets Stand Telecom Immunity In Wiretap Case

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court is leaving in place a federal law that gives telecommunications companies legal immunity for helping the government with its email and telephone eavesdropping program.

The justices said Tuesday they will not review a court ruling that upheld the 2008 law against challenges brought by privacy and civil liberties advocates on behalf of the companies' customers. The companies include AT&T, Inc., Sprint Nextel Corp. and Verizon Communications Inc.

Lawsuits filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and Electronic Frontier Foundation accused the companies of violating the law and customers' privacy through collaboration with the National Security Agency on intelligence gathering.

Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SUPREME_COURT_WARRANTLESS_WIRETAPPINGSITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-10-09-09-58-20

[pnwmom]

17. She wouldn't be tossed under the bus. She'd live a very comfortable and useful life

while not risking a 6-3 activist Court to undo everything good she has done.

If her legacy DOES matter to her, it should matter to her very much who replaces her. Her opinions aren't sacred scripture, as much as she appears to think they are invulnerable to being overturned.

[KoKo]

27. "One More Liberal Narcissist!" That is truly disgusting! n/t

[pnwmom]

28. Sad, but true. Narcissists exist across the political spectrum.

Ralph Nader is another example.

[NV Whino]

6. Even if she were to resign, and I think she should,

We would not get a liberal on the court. The best we could expect with this administration and senate is someone not absolutely raging right. And I'm not too sure of that.

[progressoid]

10. +1

[pnwmom]

13. Would you rather have another Justice Kagan or another Justice Scalia? n/t

[NV Whino]

15. It's not about what I would rather have

It's about what we're going to get.

[pnwmom]

19. Obama appointed two Justices. Those are the kind of Justices he would appoint, and they

are far more liberal than those that would be appointed by the next Rethug President.

[NV Whino]

23. I have no faith whatsoever at this stage of the game

That this administration would do the right thing.

[cascadiance]

37. Maybe she's waiting to see the 2016 primary field narrow down... If Warren is in...

... then perhaps she'll hold out with the strong hope that someone like Elizabeth Warren might get elected and therefore allow or her to retire and have Warren instead of corporatist Obama nominate her replacement. If Warren could provide us a great progressive justice to balance out that court and serve as a nucleus or a newer more liberal court later, that might make her wait be more worthwhile then.

If it doesn't look like we'll get any good reasonable liberal contenders for 2016 when the race heats up, then perhaps she might reconsider and retire to allow Obama rather than a Republican nominate her replacement then.

[bluestate10]

48. Your post shows the depth of how some people are failing to grasp reality.

The fact is that if Gingsberg waits until the 2016 primary to resign, republicans will then know that if they stalled President Obama's nominee, they could potentially get the seat filled by a conservative. It amazes me that the very same people who despise Hillary Clinton, the one democratic candidate who can win if she runs a good race, want Gingsberg to hold on until she either dies in office or until the risk that her replacement will be a conservative is unacceptably high. Again, this stands as an example of the far Left's low level strategic thinking, I don't understand that problem given the relatively high intelligence of people in that political group.

[cascadiance]

50. And your post shows a false sense that only you know what "reality" is...

WHY if Hillary Clinton is so "favored" to win, did she NOT win when people had "preselected" her to win in 2008? This is the MYTH that the corporatist DLC elements are trying to project on the party to prevent a good REAL progressive alternative that will work not just for the party, but for the PEOPLE of this country on issues that not only Democrats are interested in, but other independents and even some Republicans are interested in (prosecuting the banksters, fixing our electoral system with public financing, etc.). I for one don't want a candidate that is either a Republican or someone like Hillary who BOTH publicly want things like expansion of the H-1B indentured servant program to continue to destroy the middle class of this country for the wealthy that own parts of both parties.

I think Ginsberg has seen this having been involved with the innards of Citizen's United decision, and sees what Obama has been doing, and what Hillary likely would do, and is holding out to make sure she picks the best time to retire. She might feel that she'd be better off waiting for a Warren presidency, if Warren is running a strong primary race instead of retiring early.

Now, if the DLC elements of our party are TRULY interested in preserving some form of more progressive majority on the SCOTUS bench, and they know that this might be what is motivating her, and Warren is running in the primaries a strong race, but where they are still concerned that a Republican might win in 2016, then they might be WISE to negotiate behind the scenes with Obama to allow someone like Warren running a strong candidacy or the nomination to be a big part of selecting the replacement for a Ginsberg retirement, which if Ginsberg is aware of this effort, MIGHT persuade her to retire perhaps by the end of 2015, to allow Obama to replace her. Might not be what their corporate owners want, but they will at that point have to decide if the DLC/Third Way truly is any different from the Republican Party and should just move over to it to more effectively serve the 1% that own them, or if they want to start making a statement on why they are Democrats, even if they are corporatist Democrats.

[Sanity Claws]

8. Lots of stuff to get worked up about

but this is not one of them.

Why focus on this and denigrate her?

[pnwmom]

11. She just put the focus on herself when she gave the interview.

It's very unusual for sitting Justices to do that. Her statements deserve a response.


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/25/us/court-is-one-of-most-activist-ginsburg-says-vowing-to-stay.html?_r=0


On Friday, she said repeatedly that the identity of the president who would appoint her replacement did not figure in her retirement planning.

“There will be a president after this one, and I’m hopeful that that president will be a fine president,” she said.

Were Mr. Obama to name Justice Ginsburg’s successor, it would presumably be a one-for-one liberal swap that would not alter the court’s ideological balance. But if a Republican president is elected in 2016 and gets to name her successor, the court would be fundamentally reshaped.

SNIP

Justice Ginsburg said her retirement calculations would center on her health and not on who would appoint her successor, even if that new justice could tilt the balance of the court and overturn some of the landmark women’s rights decisions that are a large part of her legacy.

“I don’t see that my majority opinions are going to be undone,” she said. “I do hope that some of my dissents will one day be the law.”

[BeyondGeography]

25. Why not?

The prospect of a safe liberal vote in a Court that is divided 5-4 against us going over to a 40-something neocon isn't a real issue?

[Sanity Claws]

31. Notice the word you used, "prospect."

There are lots of possibilities. Here we are in the first year of Obama's four year term and you want her to resign now. She may resign in two years from now.
Another prospect -- the Republicans become a fringe group. There are certainly signs of that. That means there's no chance that a Republican will be elected in 2016.

In light of these other prospective futures, I see no reason to criticize Ginsburg for not resigning.

[pnwmom]

35. She's indicated that she won't resign ever except for reasons of health.

Not now, not three years from now. Because she hopes our next President will be a "fine President," and none of her opinions will be overturned by what she herself says is the most activist Court in history.

She's deluding herself, as narcissists tend to do.

[Stainless]

59. She may be a liberal narcissist

but she is also a Supreme Court Justice. Meanwhile, you're obviously a rude opinionated unknown who posts on an obscure liberal website. Guess whose opinion I value more!

[pnwmom]

60. She's in a position to do far more good or HARM than I am.

If her stubborn insistence on putting her own needs first results in a Rethug appointing her replacement, she'll have helped undo all the good that she has done in her years on the Court. She'll have helped to destroy her own legacy.

[SwampG8r]

73. if she is that dangerous

maybe you can get her on a drone list

[Brewinblue]

44. No such thing as a safe vote

when it comes to SCOTUS appointments.

Republican presidents in recent years have appointed quite a few outstanding liberal jurists to the Court:

- Warren and Brennan, by Eisenhower;
- Blackmun (author of Roe v Wade), by Nixon;
- Stevens, by Ford; and
- Souter, by Bush.

And JFK appointed Byron White, who turned out to be a reliable vote for the right wing of the Court.

[BeyondGeography]

57. It's a safe bet there will be no more Souters

If you'd rather trade the proven safety of an Obama-selected judge for the chance that his GOP successor might appoint someone comparable...well, feel free. The odds aren't with you.

[cali]

18. If she dies or retires under a republican president

and a scalia type is put on the bench, she'll screw her legacy.

I think she's selfish.

[pnwmom]

22. Apparently she thinks her opinions have been cast in stone, never to be overturned.

Even though she also says this is the most activist court in history -- with only a 5 - 4 majority!

From the link at the OP:

“I don’t see that my majority opinions are going to be undone,” she said. “I do hope that some of my dissents will one day be the law.”

[grantcart]

42. Have to agree.

[OnyxCollie]

21. Because the Party is more important than one's health.

FFS...

[pnwmom]

24. Because the country is more important than one's egotistical view that one is irreplaceable. n/t

[orpupilofnature57]

30. Only the corporations, not people .

[bluestate10]

49. Why do you insist on making this about party when women's rights, gay rights, minority

rights, issues of war and peace are one vote from being taken away for decades? The fight IS NOT about party.

[pnwmom]

61. +1000. n/t

[orpupilofnature57]

29. We need to repeal SCOTUS, for supporting plutocracy !!!

[elehhhhna]

32. Justice Ginsburg said her retirement calculations would center on her health

boom. LEAVE. If it hinged on lack of hubris she'd be retired.

[LittleBlue]

34. The title is extremely harsh, I admire her

far too much to call her those things. But the fact remains that she is an 80-year-old who has faced multiple bouts of cancer.

I think she should face reality for the good of the nation.

[pnwmom]

36. Narcissism is the fuel that drives the efforts of many brilliant, highly successful people.

It becomes a problem only when the aims of narcissist don't coincide with the broader good.

[Nye Bevan]

38. I don't like bullying a woman in her 80s into giving up a job she loves.

She has earned the right to stay in her job as long as she likes.

And it's surprising to see how terrified many DUers are of a Republican winning the next presidential election.

[CTyankee]

39. Hear, hear!

This woman did more for women than anyone else I can think of over her brilliant, long career. She was out there litigating for our rights with the ACLU Women's Rights Project back in the 70s. If it weren't for her fine work, we wouldn't be where we are today!

The lack of appreciation for her here is appalling.

[pnwmom]

43. The job isn't supposed to be a tribute to her. It's supposed to be for the benefit of

the whole country.

She's already acknowledged that the current Court is the most activist in history. If she stays so long that a Rethug appoints her replacement, she will have set the stage for everything she has worked for to come undone.

[CTyankee]

45. I didn't say the job should be a tribute to her. But we should respect her.

Last edited Sun Aug 25, 2013, 07:30 PM - Edit history (1)

IMO, her work is not yet done. And who knows, we might lose her at any time.

[Brewinblue]

40. Justice Ginsburg is to be applauded, not scorned, for leaving politics out of the equation.

We all scream foul when Scalia plays politics, and rightly so. But when one of our own refuses to stoop to that level, they are a "narcissist?" The judiciary only works when it is free of the pressures of politics, which is why federal judges are appointed, not elected, to life terms.

[pnwmom]

41. Her "legacy" would be destroyed by a 6 -3 activist court.

She's a narcissist to think her opinions are so bullet-proof that that will never happen.

[Brewinblue]

46. No, it wouldn't.

Just as Scalia's horrid legacy will not be undone should he retire and be replaced by a liberal.

[TransitJohn]

51. Bad post. She's entitled to stay as long as she wants. Stop putting Party over what's right. eom

n/t

[pnwmom]

53. When you're on SCOTUS, putting country over ego is what is right. n/t

[cui bono]

58. I agree. n/t

[MannyGoldstein]

52. She's waiting for President Warren to take office

who'll appoint a Liberal replacement for her.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1265&pid=745

[pnwmom]

56. If she waits till 2014 the odds are that the Senate will be even more Republican,

making confirmation of even a moderate leftist more difficult.

If she's betting that Senator Warren will decide to run in 2016, I'm not happy with the odds of that bet. There's far too much at stake.

[Stinky The Clown]

55. That sort of thinking shows me she is *not* still at the top of her game

As disappointing as I think have been Obama's picks thus far, they are infinitely better than what even the most liberal repubic would do.

[Octafish]

62. Gee. Justice Ginsberg disagreed with Scalia 5-4.

On the other hand, Justice Kagan helped put away Don Siegelman.

Go figure.

[Supersedeas]

69. then, there's that

[Octafish]

70. IMFO, the OP should call for the resignation of Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Kennedy.

And Kagan, too, on account of Siegelman, but, that's just me.

[RudynJack]

65. What a disgusting post.

She doesn't owe you a damn thing. She will serve as long as she's capable, and I will respect her for doing so.

[pnwmom]

66. She will have herself to blame if she undermines her legacy

by putting herself into a position to be replaced by a Republican.

[RudynJack]

74. No.

You should delete this.

[CAG]

67. Wow, wonder what du would have name-called

Thurgood Marshall who retired at age 81 in 1991 during the Poppy Bush regime

[pnwmom]

68. I don't remember. Did his retirement cause a radical realignment of the Court? n/t

[CK_John]

71. I believe she knows that Scalia will beat her out the door. He seems to have mind problem,IMO.

[MNBrewer]

72. Narcissist... the newest DU slander term.

[Myrina]

76. I do admire Justice Ginsberg, however given her age, I wish she'd retire ....

.... I personally would love it if POTUS would appoint a black woman as her replacement.
Especially one who's sat on the bench in the real world, not a former clerk/scholar/corporate stooge lawyer.
Someone who'd tell Fat Tony & Roberts where to put it when they need to be told.

[napkinz]

77. How about Elizabeth Warren?

Would love to see her put Scalia in his place!

[Myrina]

78. Perhaps. But I was thinking more of an African American "Judge Judy"

n/t