With sincere apologies to William Shakespeare:
Friends, Americans, fellow defenders of liberty, lend me your ears.
I come to bury Ginsburg, not to praise her.
The very little and well-disputed good she has done will be celebrated, living long after her.
The evil she has enabled shouldn’t be ignored by interring it with her bones.
Let that not be so with Ginsburg.
Harsh words. Harsh words indeed. From my seat, however, they are more than deserved. I understand senior political leaders acting presidential, senatorial, or whatever. I get that they have to mouth certain platitudes to avoid leftist outrage and pearl clutching from our own side. I also understand that it is customary to wait some dignified time after the funeral to castigate the deceased. Not this time.
I’m truly tired of the left canonizing certain figures because of their sex or melanin content, using the excuse of long-past accomplishments, real, imagined, or of dubious value to do so. All that does is allow them to designate undeserving persons as beyond reproach, thus tying conservative hands. One of my long time Army buddies put it this way (with minor edits for innovative language):
What’s all this RIP stuff coming from Conservatives? How about BIH?
Have y’all even read Lady Creepo’s decisions, or evaluated the Luciferian effects of them on our society? WTH?
Oh! I see; You are trying to show human decency for the opposing team. You are above the fray. Hearts & Minds (how’d that work out in Iraq) Love thine Enemy, etc.
Do you think this “kindness” is really gonna put a dent in the thinking of the Left that is intent on destroying this country?
This is the same mentality that got Bush 1 unelected, got Romney and McCain slaughtered in elections, for their “above it all” attitude—and also why Iraq is now fully in the hands of Iran.
My Pal is right. Ruth Bader Ginsburg indeed might have been involved in a couple of minor decisions that negligibly advanced women’s rights. But when you balance the books, she’s not fit to be viewed as some sort of respected American judicial icon.
For one thing, the philosophy that Ginsburg actively promoted and defended has been and continues to be responsible for the deaths of more Black babies than the Holocaust or Soviet pogroms. Some folks might assert that she never directly ordered the murder, rendering asunder, or later sale of “usable parts” of unborn children. I agree. However, when you review her advocacy and later rulings from the bench, the best thing you could say about her is that she hid behind the artificial construct of Stare Decisis while others did and profited from the dirty work.
For those of you who claim to hate some/most of her opinions but somehow can still respect and be friends with her, I’d ask you this,
Could you still respect and admire her if she believed in a philosophy that based on one attribute or another, say skin tone or birth status, you were not human and thus not due protection under the law? Would you still like and admire her if she held the view that due to said attributes, you could be bought, sold, or discarded in a trash can?
The left has one and only one purpose in canonizing Ginsburg. You can see it in the language they use and their strident screeching over the past 3 years, as they realized that President Trump might get to name her replacement. There have actually been folks who volunteered to donate their own (I think) organs to keep her alive —and they are very clear why. They don’t want Roe versus Wade overturned. That is their single-minded purpose. Pure and simple evil.
