Outrageous. And people wonder why we’re going to heck in a handbasket. When a sitting US Supreme Court Justice tell an emerging nation that the US Constitution is not something worth copying, it exposes the utter depravity of leftists everywhere. After all, how can you expect justice and fair interpretation of the Constitution by someone who doesn’t even hold the document in high, or any, regard? Another reason why we must have a Tea Party Revolution on November 6, Imagine what the message this comment sends Egyptians, and Islamists, everywhere? Even one of our own justices doesn’t think highly enough of our founding document to recommend it. It gives cave men everywhere aid and comfort. Allahpundit has some excellent comments about this over at Hot Air as well.

This section is for comments from tammybruce.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
18 Comments | Leave a comment
  1. Timbo says:

    unbelievable…well not really…retire please Justice Ginsburg..with all do respect…Yea, why use the one document that has changed the world for the better and endured…and secured a nation for for nearly 250 years..duct tape please..

  2. flaggman says:

    “We use a very old constitution…but you Egyptians are much older and wiser…but you should use a new constitution like South Africa’s…” WTF?!?!? This woman make Joe Biden sound like Albert Einstein. But she’s a perfect representation of the mindset of Obamians. Tammy’s right, Obama was like the activator switch that let these leftist crazies come out of the closet and proudly show what raving lunatics they are. I feel for your country. Highest court in the land…

  3. dennisl59 says:

    My $0.02…

    Why is a sitting Supreme Court Justice giving an interview to Egyptian TV in the first place? In other words, did she ‘go rogue’ and decide to do this or was she sent by the Administration for some perverted political motive? What was this supposed to accomplish? Is there any follow up interview, anywhere, that asks her? Did I miss something?

    Also, note the Arabic translation/subtitles; hasn’t anyone considered that ‘the wrong people’ could, literally, put words in her mouth, and some English words/concepts just don’t translate or even exist in the retrograde Middle Eastern Arabic and Persian Cultures?

    Another point is that she DOES mention that unless ‘the people’ want freedom and liberty, any constitution is just words on paper. True. But I think I didn’t hear the word ‘democracy’, because that is an anathema to Islam and the Sharia law of the barbarians.

    Finally, am I surprised? Not really, if you consider her education, activist political background, who nominated her(The disgraced, impeached, adulterer Clinton) and now her history of votes on the Court.

    We can only hope she doesn’t decide to ‘retire’ before the election.

    posted 2/3 945pm Texas[Tea Party] Time.

    ps-Little did I know(when I wrote this) that this topic would be discussed by ‘The Great One’ just today.

  4. AniMel says:

    If Clarence Thomas had done something like this, the left would have verbally flayed him nine ways to Sunday. This harpy, however, tells us exactly what she thinks about the very laws that she is sworn to uphold and she gets a free pass.

    I am thoroughly nauseated.

  5. Maynard says:

    Sorry, I’m going off topic here. That was pretty obnoxious, the way Obama said that Jesus and Mohammad and Moses would all agree with his plan to raise taxes, as if governments were holy entities. And this at the same time his administration is declaring war on actual religious institutions.

    When Jesus spoke of giving back when much has been given, I think he was speaking of a fire that comes from within that will motivate personal acts of goodness and charity. Does having your money seized by the government fall into that category? If Obama wanted to cite scripture, it would have been much more reasonable to point to that line about rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar’s. Or maybe Obama should have referenced Saul of Tarsus, who was a tax collector who found Jesus and immediately quit the IRS.

    There’s also the line in Daniel 4, in which it is explained to King Nebuchadnezzar that the Lord is supreme, and that earthly power is often in the hands of scoundrels. (“…the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.“)

    Oh, yeah, while I’m on the subject, it’s worth mentioning those bumper stickers that read “Pray for Obama” followed by “Psalm 109:8”. Here is one on eBay.

    What is Psalm 109:8? Here is a link. “Let his days be few; and let another take his office.“.

    This product has been condemned by some pundits and banned by some sites such as Zazzle because it is said to advocate the assassination of Obama. The basis for this accusation is that other verses in this chapter speak in terms of prayers that a despicable leader be taken by God (e.g., “Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.“)

    • otlset says:

      I’ll go off topic with you Maynard and agree with the important distinction you bring up here between the personal sacrifice that Jesus sought to inspire men from within to willingly do according to their conscience (render unto God), versus the sacrifice demanded by rulers and governments of the external world outside of each man (render unto Caesar…or Obama).

      When man is inspired to sacrifice voluntarily from within, the friction and discomfort this may cause his external being strengthens and grows his internal spirit (sense of “I”). By contrast when external worldly governments or rulers force men to sacrifice they are merely slaves, and have no personal choice in the matter thus no spiritual “growth” due to the inner-inspired decision to voluntarily sacrifice (go against nature and physical desires, so to speak).

      Jesus taught man to become “inner-directed” by which such voluntary activity goes against physical nature and desires and the resulting “friction” grows the spirit. Obama is trying to externally force from man sacrifice that makes him a slave without any inner choice, thus weakening his spirit instead and leading to a more animalistic state of dependency on the external world (Obama’s big daddy government, where Obama is the “messiah”).

      In a sense then, Obama is blasphemous to suggest that Jesus would agree that more of Caesar’s worldy demands will lead to men’s individual spiritual growth and salvation. Obama’s inference then that government control can lead to men’s salvation is truly evil in my opinion.

    • naga5 says:

      odd furkel didn’t go to 2 corinthians 9:7

    • imacat says:

      Amen, Maynard, Oslet, and naga5! Strange also that Urkel did not refer to 2nd Thessalonians 3:10, which says: “…if anyone will not work, neither let him eat.”

  6. Sailing_J says:

    I’m sorry, I couldn’t listen to her. The headline matches the woman and her history. Not surprised.

  7. dwbinder says:

    The US Supreme Court has had all sorts of outright lunatics in the past all the way back to the start. We will weather this storm simply because nothing is new under the sun. Evil people die eventually and so does their depravity. God and His love for those who believe continues forever.

  8. […] US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg To Egypt: Don’t Use US Constitution As A Model (tammybruce.com) […]

  9. SoCalGal says:

    Where is the Tea Party? They/we should be out there rallying and carrying signs and marching like we did in 2009/10. Who and where is our leader?

    If Obama wins again, and he very well could, he can choose at least two or three more of these lefty justices who will be young and on the court forever. And they will change our constitution and country beyond repair. I thought Ginsberg was already retired, but she definitely will if Obama wins again, opening up a spot for a younger left-wing justice. Sucks!!

  10. strider says:

    Off topic. Can the Egyptians be polled to see what they think about this or are polls taken by making cold calls on peoples land lines at dinner time?

  11. RuBegonia says:

    New Media is a “Godsend” for understanding the anatomy and physiology of the players that have the power in our world. Thanks for your ongoing commitment to sorting and reporting Tammy.

  12. LucyLadley says:

    I really like reading all the TAM comments. I watched this on utube, I got quite irritated at some of the comments from progressives that were posted there. It’s
    a reality check to see that some people watching utube actually agree with her thought process. Keep moving forward TAMS – Our Country Needs Us!

  13. Charles_TX says:

    Good grief! What a twit! On the other hand, this woman is showing us why it is a bad idea to appoint judges for life without having some sort of review of their “good behavior” every decade or so.

  14. FrankRemley says:

    Lifetime tenure for Federal judges was the biggest mistake of the Founding Fathers.

  15. makeshifty says:

    It sounded like she was making a multicultural argument. Even though I disagree with her reason that they should not model their constitution after ours, I agree that they shouldn’t. She gave several examples of parts of the Constitution that she liked, and was trying to provide guidance, such as that liberty lives in the hearts of the people, and if it isn’t there, no constitution can save it. That’s from Judge Learned Hand. It’s true. We should keep that in mind. She also talked about how the Constitution was formed, and how it was discussed and ratified, seemingly suggesting that for the Egyptians’ formation and ratification process.

    I would feel inclined to recommend the key principles on the Constitution to the Egyptians, without copying the document verbatim, since there are some provisions that were specific to our situation at certain points in time, and wouldn’t make sense in the situation Egypt finds itself in, but my recommendation would be tempered by the reality of Egyptian culture.

    Her progressivism came out, and it made me cringe. She subtly communicated that our constitution is an old historical document, and that we have modernized our social and legal culture *despite it*. I resented that. She complimented the Founders for being men of superior intellect, but she doesn’t give them the credit I think they deserve, that they wanted to create a framework for government that was timeless, that as we changed as a country, we would have the ability to change the Constitution, and thereby our government to match. By that measure, it’s only “out of date” by about 40 years. There was an amendment ratified in 1992, but that was a one-off incident I know about that came out of a grassroots movement. It didn’t come from the political class. They’ve abandoned the amendment process, choosing instead to “liberally” interpret the Constitution to allow them to do whatever the hell they want.

    What made no sense to me at all was Ginsberg said, “We still have provisions in it such as the Fugitive Slave law … which are still in there, but no longer enforced.” I was thinking, “What??” The Fugitive Slave law was not part of the Constitution. It was a federal law passed by congress, and would be just as easily rescinded. I assume its force was nullified by the 13th Amendment.

    The thing is, her point about freedom living in the hearts of the people has a larger meaning, though I think she probably missed this: The culture of freedom would have to exist already for something like the U.S. Constitution to work in Egypt. Looking at the situation there, I don’t see it. So I think she’s right not to recommend it be copied as-is. But whatever they found agreeable? Sure.

You must be logged in to post a comment.