It seems that Hillary Clinton just can't get a break and anyone who tries to give her one is cannon fodder.
The latest media flap is over some answers Ruth Bader Ginsberg gave to some interview questions. Justice Ginsberg came out in public support of Clinton. Apparently the beltway believes that Ginsberg is not entitled to voice her opinions.
As if justices don't vote. As if the Supreme court is in reality impartial. If that were true, why is there a delay in appointing a new justice to replace Scalia?
A New Republic article notes that "no justices have campaigned against a presidential candidate in recent memory".
Was Ginsberg campaigning or was she just honestly answering the interview questions that were put to her? Would we expect anything less of a Supreme Court Justice. Would our expectation be that she cloud her opinions in ambiguity as Washington politicians are so often inclined to do?
"Last week, she told the Associated Press that she doesn’t want to think about the possibility of a Trump presidency. In a New York Times article published Sunday, she said she 'can’t imagine what the country would be — with Donald Trump as our president' and implied she would move to New Zealand if it happened. And on Monday, in an interview with CNN, she called Trump a 'faker' who 'really has an ego.' "(1)
Aside from her allusion to moving to New Zealand,which was reported that she said facetiously(2), what do you see in the above that isn't true? And which of the pundits who think they can "put her in her place" have ever been or even have the hope of ever being in her position?
This week, Senator Bernie Sanders finally came out in support of Hillary Clinton.
His endorsement might have only been given in order to unite the Democratic party and keep Donald Trump out of the White House. Yet an earlier Sanders quote still has strong resonance.
"On her worst day, Hillary Clinton will be an infinitely better candidate and President than the Republican candidate on his best day." November, 2015.(3)
Unfortunately, some of the Senator's supporters have joined the "Hillary is the lesser of two evils" bandwagon.
I was sad to see that one of my favorite stand-up comedians was one of them. On july 14, Lewis Black wrote the following on his FaceBook page:
"How good is democracy when you can actually end up with two candidates who have the two worst approval ratings (of any candidates ever)? I’m going to end up voting for someone I really don’t approve of. How is that even possible?"
For many years I have voted for the lesser of two evils, hoping I was right about which candidate was the better of two. Election 2008 was the first time I voted for a candidate I truly believed and that man was Barack Obama. I still believe him and if he supports Hillary (and he does), that's good enough for me.
I wish that people would just burn this bandwagon already. Hillary isn't perfect. News flash: She's human. She is also the most qualified person of all those who stepped up to the plate ready to accept the responsibility of leading this country. Despite all the Republican witch hunts that sought to disparage her character, this country's Democrats voted for her to represent their party.
- “What Is Ruth Bader Ginsburg Thinking?! Here’s What. | New Republic.” Accessed July 14, 2016. https://newrepublic.com/article/135062/ruth-bader-ginsburg-thinking-heres-what.
- “In Bashing Donald Trump, Some Say Ruth Bader Ginsburg Just Crossed a Very Important Line - The Washington Post.” Accessed July 14, 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/11/in-bashing-donald-trump-some-say-ruth-bader-ginsburg-just-crossed-a-very-important-line/.
- “Sanders: Clinton Will Be ‘Infinitely Better’ On Her Worst Day Than Any Republican On His Best | Crooks and Liars.” Accessed July 14, 2016. http://crooksandliars.com/2015/11/sanders-clinton-will-be-infinitely-better.