Skip to main content
  • CNSNews.com
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • TimesWatch
  • Take Action!

Join Us @:
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Kindle

Free email alerts!

NewsBusters logo
May 20, 2013
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Take Action
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • RSS

Hot Topics

  • IRS Targets Tea Party
  • Benghazi Fiasco
  • Gosnell Trial
  • Censoring the News
Home » Blogs » Tom Blumer's blog
  • BREAKING: WashPost Reports Obama DOJ Also Spied on James Rosen of Fox News
  • Crowley to Obama Advisor: 'Why Didn't the President Just Say, Yeah, Benghazi Was a Terrorist Attack?'
  • CBS's Sharyl Attkisson Says Team Obama 'Perfected' Delaying Info Release And Has 'Quit Talking to Me Altogether'
  • Fareed Zakaria Howler: 'Obama’s World View is Rooted in American Exceptionalism'
  • Video: Brent Bozell Cautions Media Will Quickly Revert to Defending Obama, Attacking GOP Over Scandals
  • Bozell Column: 'Progress' Gets Canceled
  • CNN's Banfield: 'Take Me Off the Ledge' and Tell Me IRS Audits Weren't Political
  • NBC's Williams Ready to Move On: 'It's Tough to Know the Staying Power of Any Given Scandal'

Justice Ginsburg to Egyptians: 'I would not look to the U.S. Constitution'; AP, NYT Ignore

By Tom Blumer | February 04, 2012 | 11:35

A  A
Tom Blumer's picture

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, on a trip underwritten by the U.S. State Department (aren't justices expected to keep their distances from the government to protect their perceived impartiality?), was in Egypt on Wednesday at a Cairo University law school seminar. While there, according to the Associated Press's Mark Sherman, she told students that (in Sherman's words) "she was inspired by last year's protests that led to the end of Hosni Mubarak's regime" and to speak to them (in her words) "during this exceptional transitional period to a real democratic state." The news that Muslim Brotherhood and Salafist parties now control about 75% of the seats in the country's parliament seems not to have registered with Ginsburg or Sherman -- or, for that matter, the State Department.

Sherman's AP story failed to note what Ms. Ginsburg said about the U.S. Constitution in an Egyptian TV interview, as did virtually all of the rest of the establishment press. ABC's Ariane de Vogue is currently the most notable exception, but as readers will see, she clearly buried the lede. Here are key paragraphs from her report (the related video is at Hot Air; the relevant portion begins at the 9:28 mark; bolds are mine):

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Ginsburg Likes S. Africa as Model for Egypt

Amid fresh clashes in Egypt, the U.S. Embassy in Cairo has posted an Alhayat TV interview of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

... “It is a very inspiring time, that you have overthrown a dictator, and that you are striving to achieve a genuine democracy,” the U.S. Supreme Court associate justice says. “So I think people in the United States are hoping that this transition will work, and that there will genuinely be a government of, by, and for the people.” She says that after meeting with the head of the election commission, she was pleased to see that the recent elections in Parliament’s lower chamber were considered free and fair.

... Asked by the English-speaking interviewer whether she thought Egypt should use the Constitutions of other countries as a model, Ginsburg said Egyptians should be “aided by all Constitution-writing that has gone on since the end of World War II.”

“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.”Ginsburg, who spent her career before taking the bench advocating for gender equality, praised

the U.S. Constitution and the founders, saying, “we were just tremendously fortunate in the U.S. that the men that met in Philadelphia were very wise.” But “it’s true that they were lacking one thing, that is there were no women as part of the Constitutional Convention, but there were women around who sparked the idea.”

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.”

Historians with deeper knowledge than yours truly can perhaps enlighten us all as to who these women were who "sparked the idea" of America's Constitution, and without whom we apparently would never have had one.

A Google News search at 9:30 this morning Eastern Time on "Ruth Bader Ginsburg constitution" covering the past week (not in quotes, sorted by date, with duplicates) returned 120 results, the vast majority of which were Sherman's report carried at different AP outlets. Of the roughly eight remaining results besides de Vogue's ABC report, only one story at the International Business Times might arguably be considered a mainstream media report.

Of the others, the reaction from the Liberty Counsel's Mat Staver is noteworthy: "Justice Ginsburg failed to respect the authority of the document that it is her duty to protect. When given the opportunity to promote American liberty abroad, Justice Ginsburg did just the opposite and pointed Egypt in the direction of progressivism and the liberal agenda." Good point, especially since South Africa's constitution, as Hot Air's Allahpundit observes, "includes welfare-state guarantees like the right to housing and the right to health care." I would also bet against the idea that South Africa's constitution has anything like our Second Amendment. If no such provision is there, Justice Ginsburg, based on her position in the Heller vs. DC case, would consider that a feature, and not a bug.

The reaction of lefty David Weigel at Slate ("Ruth Bader Ginsburg Makes Banal Point, Destroys the Republic") is a predictable straw man argument: "I don't see how you could argue the opposite -- all transitional democracies should start with the Constitution we wrote in 1787! -- unless you're writing a Toby Keith song or something." It's as if Weigel doesn't really believe that the amendments passed since the original Constitution was drafted aren't even part of it.

The New York Times, based on the results an advanced search on the justice's name which shows no stories about her during the past week, at least has the lame excuse that it didn't cover Ginsburg's visit at all.

Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.

  • Bias by Omission
  • Judiciary
  • Labeling
  • Egypt
  • Foreign Policy
  • Media Bias Debate
  • Ariane de Vogue
  • Mark Sherman
  • Ruth Bader Ginsburg
  • Online Media
  • Wire Services/Media Companies
  • ABCNews.com
  • Associated Press
  • Foreign/Non-English Media
  • Google
  • New York Times
  • Slate
  • Major Newspapers
  • Tom Blumer's blog
  • Login to post comments
  • Printer-friendly version
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Comments

Geez, Ruthie, come to think of it...

Submitted by KyWriter on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 11:44am.

...I wouldn't consider you the model of a Supreme Court Justice either.

  • Login to post comments

Who cares, right?

Submitted by jon_torlin on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 11:59am.

That's actually grounds for impeachment and removal, but who cares anymore these days, right?  I miss the US Constitution.

-Jon

  • Login to post comments

This remark alone should be

Submitted by killa37 on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 2:40pm.

This remark alone should be enough to give this over-the-hill ACLU commie spinster the boot. But where have I seen this before - an upper-echelon representative of the USA, standing before a moooooooooooooooooslem audience in Egypt (the 'real' cradle of democracy, freedom, and tolerance, right??) and degrading the USA in a very serious way. Oh yeah........it was, ummmmmm,
lemme think for a minute..........hmmmmmmmmm...............BOY BARRY!!!!!

  • Login to post comments

This to me is a direct

Submitted by ricklail on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 12:03pm.

This to me is a direct violation of the oath she takes. She needs to be impeached by the House. We know that won't happen because Bonehead does not have a pair. None of the countries she mentioned have 1/3 of the freedoms we enjoy.

Outside the economy the picks to the SC are the most important thing in this election. The margin is already 5-4 constitution. If one of the 5 should leave then that is gone if Obama gets to make the pick.

A well regulated militia being necessary to a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
  • Login to post comments

Take them out!

Submitted by MaximusBraveheart on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 9:26pm.

Congress needs to take their job & the Constitution seriously. Courts provide OPIONIONS, not law. Congress IS higher when they disagree with the court. The judges on the court can be impeached and removed if they breach their oath. I suggest Congress start taking our Country back!

-- Maximusbraveheart -- Is TRUTH knowable? Moral Relativism is the abandonment of Truth. Truth is knowable. Truth conforms to Reality. Reality is observable by evidence & witness in this day & from history. Relativism is Sesame Street play land.

  • Login to post comments

"exceptional transitional period to a real democratic state."

Submitted by Newsbubba on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 12:00pm.

Yeah, Ruthie, want to bet how that will turn out, you dumb bitch?

I saw this on Fox News this morning and could absolutely not believe my ears, until I slapped myself and realized that it was Justice Ruth Master Bader Ginsburg speaking!

If there is any way in hell to kick someone this hostile to the Constitution of the United States, (who I believe takes an oath to "protect and defend,") off of the Supreme Court, it needs to be done!

Besides, she is REALLY ugly; not just a little unattractive, but REALLY ugly.

Comrade Bubba
  • Login to post comments

They all lied to get

Submitted by ricklail on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 3:57pm.

They all lied to get confirmed. Look at Kagan and Sotamayor. They both just slobered all over on the issue of the 2nd amendment and how Heller V DC was settled law. When it comes time to uphold the right to keep and bear arms in McDonald v Chicago they shred the 2nd amendment.

A well regulated militia being necessary to a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
  • Login to post comments

I would never expect to hear

Submitted by ThatDude on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 12:08pm.

I would never expect to hear Ginsburg cheerlead American ideals or the US Constitution. Her opinions on the court have shown quite a bit of distaste for them. I question the validity of her argument. I suppose I should read up on the South African Constitution to see if there's any merit to her opinion.

The answer to 1984 is 1776.
  • Login to post comments

Ginsberg and her integrity problem

Submitted by needle on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 12:26pm.

Ginsberg, in discussing the activity in Egypt concerning their constitution writing, complained “…. there were no women as part of the [US] Constitutional Convention, but there were women around who sparked the idea.”

Does Ginsberg seriously think that women will play the slightest role -- including "sparking" ideas -- in writing whatever claptrap the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood cobbles together for their constitution; and does she think or even care that Egyptian women will have equal rights with Egyptian men once their constitution is written?

And what has Ginsburg, ‘who spent her career before taking the bench advocating for gender equality,” even done to advocate Muslim women’s rights, which at this point are comparable to animal rights??? If anything, it has never been more than a whisper in a hurricane of Political Correctness the categorically ignores Muslim women’s rights; and she is very much part of that hurricane.

- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.

  • Login to post comments

Fantastic ...

Submitted by Tom Blumer on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 1:28pm.

... point.

We should revisit this down the road after Egypt turns into what so many of us expect, which is not an individual rights-respecting regime.

  • Login to post comments

It appears to me Ginsberg was advocating quite vigorously

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 02/05/2012 - 2:40am.

for Muslim women's rights by the very nature of her remarks at Cairo University.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

Good luck finding that, Jer. The new regime is fundamentalist.

Submitted by drsamherman on Sun, 02/05/2012 - 2:48am.

I fear that the incoming Muslim Brotherhood Wahabi Islam sect is quite fundamentalist. A number of the gains for women that were made when Sadat was President are simply gone. They vanished overnight with the downfall of Mubarak and the imposition of the strictest intepretations of Sharia law, if embedded into their new constitution, will completely evaporate any progress they might have made.

One need only look at the treatment of Coptic Christians under this and previous regimes to see how they will treat women. While they are struggling for what they consider democracy, giving only half the population any equality under the law is not only dangerous but backwards.

The revolutionary Islam movement in Iran used the modernization of women's rights as one of their major pillars in why they wished to overthrow the Shah, the politics and his brutal SAVAK notwithstanding. In a Muslim country that is hell bent on bringing back 11th century legal concepts, such as Egypt (or Libya for that matter), the rights and welfare of women citizens is sure to be diminished if not completely eroded.

  • Login to post comments

Women's rights in egypt

Submitted by jon_torlin on Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:33pm.

And the helluvit is that those women, especially where you see the pictures of long lines of them waiting to vote previously, they either don't know, don't realize, or don't care that they are voting away their rights and freedoms.  It's heart-breaking to see those women smiling as if they were doing a good thing, saying good things about the bro-hood, when they are in fact the exact opposite and those women are in for a RUDE awakening.

The Muslim Brotherhood is an evil group just like anything associated with Islam, it's just plain EVIL.  No matter what people like Rima Fakih says.(I'm real surprised there wasn't an honor killing done on her yet despite all the stuff she's been doing)

-Jon

  • Login to post comments

There's not much to disagree with regarding either your or jon's

Submitted by Jer on Sun, 02/05/2012 - 9:32pm.

pessimism over the expanding role and influence of the Muslim Brotherhood following the ouster of Mubarak.  A possible glimmer of hope lies with the fact that the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood is said to be somewhat less fanatical and religiously authoritarian than many of its counterparts in other predominantly Islamic states and may--and I emphasize may--be moderately amenable to the egalitarian aspirations of the more liberal, modernistic and democratic groups which were a significant force driving the Egyptian iteration of the "Arab Spring"--and are adamantly opposed to the imposition of an Islamic theocracy.

The Brotherhood and the democratic alliances were fundamentally different genies unleashed from the same revolutionary bottle, and it will be extraordinarily difficult to stuff either movement back inside.  The MB clearly has the upper hand as of now and that raises legitimate concerns for Egypt's future.  One hopes it will see the wisdom in accommodating rather than suppressing the desires of the democratists.  For the time being, the military is calling--and occasionally firing--the shots, and its ability and wherewithal in ensuring a relatively smooth transition is becoming more and more problematic.  US influence--perhaps our only leverage--remains predicated upon the billions in annual aid to Egypt, but recent events demonstrate even such major and long-standing financial ties may be of little use in directing the course of that nation's political future to any meaningful degree. 

We're walking on a risky and dangerous diplomatic tightrope, and thus far the Obama administration's attempts to navigate it have been pretty wobbly.

Jer

  • Login to post comments

⇒ Agreed, Jer

Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 02/05/2012 - 9:39pm.

Mubarak was going to fall sometime and neither side of our political set was going to be capable of engineering a suitable result.

I hope our American civilians come home unscathed.

  • Login to post comments

"Treatment of Coptic Christians"

Submitted by NL207 on Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:42pm.

An interesting way to describe murder.

  • Login to post comments

Just what one would expect from a radical, America-hating...

Submitted by Dave. on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 12:36pm.

...communist b*tch.

Comrade Ginsberg was nominated by Billy Jeff and confirmed with the help of a bunch of idiot RINO traitors, as the Senate put her on the court with a final vote of 96-3.

She should be removed from the SCOTUS for the good of America, right along with fellow comrades Kagan (68-31 - 9 RINOs voted to confirm her) and Sotomayor (68-31 -  9 RINOs voted to confirm her as well), but that won't happen in Obama's post-constitutional Amerika, as the republicans in congress only pay lip service to their "support" for the Constitution, while doing all they can to help the America-hating left undermine it at every opportunity.

The Dear Ruler could nominate Roland Freisler for the SCOTUS, and the traitor Mitch McConnell would immediately set about rounding up enough RINO support to confirm him.

Little wonder America is all but dead.

-Dave

Vote for the American in November

  • Login to post comments

ginsberg

Submitted by grammajane on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 12:44pm.

A very sad day for America and what it stands for, by her remarks. It kind of says a lot about a liberal way of thought, and that is a disgrace. Unbelievable!!

  • Login to post comments

If anyone is curious what

Submitted by redfish on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 1:16pm.

If anyone is curious what type of constitution she prefers... the South African constitution is 77 pages; is legalistic in using bullet points, referring to "schedules", "schedules" "subsections"; has a charter of positive rights, rather than negative rights, including a right to education, health care, and housing; and has very vague, generalistic language about those rights which give the courts a lot of power to write the law.

  • Login to post comments

Sounds about like what I'd

Submitted by ThatDude on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 1:39pm.

Sounds about like what I'd expect from her. Even so, I'll read up on it for myself and see how far it digs into socialism.

The answer to 1984 is 1776.
  • Login to post comments

Supreme Court Justice

Submitted by NewLife56 on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 1:42pm.

A Supreme Court Justice that doesn't believe in a Constitution she is sworn to uphold. Liberals are ignorant and so mis-guided

NewLife56
  • Login to post comments

This odious woman should

Submitted by Slyrr on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 1:52pm.

This odious woman should trade her robes in for a burka and go join the islamo-fascists if she thinks they're the cat's meow.

Let her try living among them and peddling her brand of liberal bilge. They'll have her tied to a post being lashed with a whip before the first day has passed.

If a Liberal/Democrat politician/media figure wants to put their arms around you, or pat you on the back, all they're doing is looking for a good place to stick a knife.
  • Login to post comments

Ginzy should take a vacation in Johannesburg.

Submitted by SickofLibs on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 2:19pm.

I'm sure she'd love it.

  • Login to post comments

Ginsberg

Submitted by mmilesll on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 3:28pm.

This is what we get when RINOS vote for a Supreme Court Justice that was an attorney for the ACLU-you know, they had to "just get along". Lugar, Alexander, etc need to be gone.

  • Login to post comments

Lugar

Submitted by needle on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 3:59pm.

Every time I see Lugar on TV, I think I am looking at a live version of Howdie Doodie: the looks, raw brain power, the strings, the mechanics, the works.

- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.

  • Login to post comments

Impeachment proceedings should begin......

Submitted by GregE on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 7:08pm.

........immediately. Of course any newcomers could still think this way but never voice it. Imagine a SCOTUS nominee saying this to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

  • Login to post comments

Impeachment proceeding should NOT begin

Submitted by NL207 on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 7:11pm.

until Obama is out of office.

 

I would respectfully submit that Kagan and Sotomayor are actually worse than Ginsburg.  While we are impeaching Ginsburg, we should also broom out Kagan and Sotomayor since they were appointed by a Constitutionally ineligible President.

  • Login to post comments

You are correct.

Submitted by GregE on Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:50am.

How sad of a position we're in that we'd rather keep her in place than to impeach immediately, due to the current Marxist having the nomination keys. I'm living in the freakin twilight zone.

  • Login to post comments

Should use other Constitutions........

Submitted by GregE on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 7:15pm.

.............because they institutionalize big government Leftism. The US Constitution does nothing of the sort, and she does not like it and it shows.

  • Login to post comments

A REAL President of the United States

Submitted by NC Boy on Sat, 02/04/2012 - 8:08pm.

Would ask for her resignation on his desk by Monday morning.

  • Login to post comments

Boy Barry would probably give

Submitted by killa37 on Sun, 02/05/2012 - 12:58am.

Boy Barry would probably give her a letter of commendation, as opposed to a letter of comdemnation, since he's basically done the same thing as this bug-eyed hag has done.

  • Login to post comments

Once appointed they are in

Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Sun, 02/05/2012 - 11:52am.

Once appointed they are in for life and cannot be dethroned unless impeached.

Nuke em til they glow; then shoot em in the dark
  • Login to post comments

Ruthie

Submitted by angelann1 on Sun, 02/05/2012 - 1:42pm.

Liberalism is truly a mental disorder !!! Iy's too bad that she has a life time appointment !!She is not qualified to be a justice of anything !!

BDK
  • Login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Editors' Picks

  • WashPost vs. WashPost on IRS probe (Ed Morrissey)
  • Media too prone to fall sway to Obama's referrent power (Salena Zito)
  • Five reasons to keep government out of Internet governance (Eli Dourado)
  • Is asking about what you pray for inappropriate for IRS? IRS commish not sure (Say Anything)
  • Another fed court invalidates Obama's NRLB recess appointments (Politico)
  • Former SecState Hillary Clinton's record leaves much to be desired (Kondracke)
  • Sen. Boxer is lying about impact of budget cuts on Benghazi security (WashPost)
  • Left-wing actor Cusack attacks Obama, Holder over AP scandal (Twitchy)
  • Dopey Chicago gun laws prevent museum from displaying unloaded WW2 relic (Fox News)
Walter E. Williams's picture
Walter E. Williams
Walter E. Williams Column: Hating America
Michelle Malkin's picture
Michelle Malkin
Malkin Column: Obama's Emptiest Benghazi Talking Point
Ann Coulter's picture
Ann Coulter
Coulter Column: Sorry, Sen. Rubio, But Your Immigration Plan Is Still Problematic
David Limbaugh's picture
David Limbaugh
David Limbaugh Column: Partisan Obama Culture Spawned a More Abusive IRS
Walter E. Williams's picture
Walter E. Williams
Walter E. Williams Column: An Honest Examination of Race
More >

RSS FeedAmazon KindleFacebookTwitter

Stop Censoring The News!

ObamaCare's a Real Pain in the Neck
more cartoons
  • Morning Joe Meteorologist: Tornado Averted 'By The Grace of Whatever'
  • Bowling for Dollars....to Pay for Baby Deaths
  • Romney: ‘I’m Not a Fan of the President’
  • Krauthammer on IRS Testimony: ‘You've Got to be a Knave or a Fool to Say That and an Idiot to Believe It’
  • Media: Obama Down But Not Out
More >
NewsBusters

Executive Editor
Matthew Sheffield

Editor at Large
Brent Baker

Senior Editors
Tim Graham
Rich Noyes

Managing Editor
Ken Shepherd

Associate Editor
Noel Sheppard

Contributing Editors
Tom Blumer
Geoffrey Dickens
Dan Gainor
David Limbaugh
Mithridate Ombud
Clay Waters
Scott Whitlock

Senior Contributor
Mark Finkelstein

Contributing Writers
Matthew Balan
Michael M. Bates
Erin R. Brown
Jack Coleman
Kyle Drennen
Douglas Ernst
P. J. Gladnick
Stephen Gutowski
Matt Hadro
D. S. Hube
Kathleen McKinley
Dave Pierre
Amy Ridenour
Julia A. Seymour
Terry Trippany
Rusty Weiss
Brad Wilmouth

Publisher
Brent Bozell

Site Design
Dialog New Media

 

  • Home
  • Blogs
  • About
  • Forum
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Search
  • Account
  • rss
  • CNSNews
  • MRC TV
  • Biz & Media
  • Culture & Media
  • Take Action!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Amazon Kindle
  • Advertise
  • Jobs

Copyright © 2005-2013 NewsBusters.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use