If libs had Supreme Court death panel, Ginsburg would be gone

Conservatives deeply dislike Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg – but it’s liberals who are dying to see her go.

Her usefulness is running out.

ruthbaderginsburg1007That’s the message of a fawning profile in the Washington Post Magazine about the 80-year-old jurist, a piece that somehow manages to combine what feels like heartfelt hagiography with an equally heartfelt desire to see the old bird fly the SCOTUS coop, opening up a perch for President Obama to leave a more lasting mark on the high court than he already has with Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotermayor.

(The story is headlined: “The question facing Ruth Bader Ginsburg: Stay or go?” When people ask that question, the preferred answer isn’t, “stay.”)

The Post article describes a night at the opera in Santa Fe, N.M., Ginsburg’s home when she’s not leading the liberal wing of the Supreme Court (two of them women appointed by Obama). And one anecdote is telling:

“But in the wake of her slow and steady movements, there is the debate that is a constant companion for the 80-year-old leader of the court’s liberals, soon to begin her 21st term.

“‘We need her to stay forever,’” says one woman after Ginsburg walked past.

“Or,” her companion replies, “leave right now.”


Because she’s not part of the liberal future any more. And the most liberal president in the history of the United States has only three short years left to appoint more “progressives” to the high court – and process of elimination (figuratively, for the moment) makes the octogenarian the one to go.

They really are a heartless bunch.

Proving the point by trying to disprove it was Salon writer Joan Walsh, who felt it necessary apparently to say how happy she is that Ginsburg is still around and hint darkly that the people who want Ginsburg to go (“all of them men as far as I can tell,” she writes) are motivated by sexism at least as much as ideology.

People who aren’t being pressured by their supposed allies to get out don’t have 3,000-word pieces in the Washington Post written doing exactly that. And they don’t need supporters to write essays saying, “OK, she is an old bat, but we think she’s good for another term or two.”

The funny thing is, the libs won’t deny they’re actually slavering for Ginsburg to get her 80-year-old behind off the Supreme Court. (Try to imagine conservatives openly rooting for an intellectual giant like Antonin Scalia to step down.)

They just chalk it up to cold-eyed pragmatism – maybe even denying to themselves that it just proves they really care nothing for human beings at all beyond what service they can offer to the state.

If the libs could come up with a death panel for the bench, it wouldn’t be Scalia or even the race-traitor (to them) Clarence Thomas that would be on the list.

It would be Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

She’s expendable.

[poll id=”116″]



Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Latest Articles