Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Dear Senator Dianne Feinstein: This is not about you. [View all]grantcart
(53,061 posts)109. Lol You don't think that she would call it an error, I find that hilarious
The young Ginzburg certainly would, she played hard ball and detested sentimentality.
The older Ginzburg was hoping that it wouldn't turn it into the disaster it did but the statements you quote are a sad attempt to justify a terrible decision. Unlike Stevens she had 5 serious episodes of cancer. Bravo on her courage to fight but she put the seat at risk and she lost. Besides the 5 serious bouts of cancer she had circulatory problems as well.
She had very serious cancer twice before Obama with the Democratic Senate could have nominated and confirmed a young rising Ginzburg and liberals at the time begged her not to take the risk.
Despite two bouts with cancer and public pleas from liberal law scholars, she decided not to retire in 2013 or 2014 when Obama and a Democratic-controlled Senate could appoint and confirm her successor.[5][6][7] Ginsburg died at her home in Washington, D.C., on September 18,
The statement you quote is disingenuous at best. 1) People were asking her to retire when she already had near fatal cancer twice her suggesting that it was after Dems lost the Senate is disingenuous 2) She said that she would retire when she couldn't do it full time. She had stopped doing it full time long before she died in office. She had cancer in 1999 and in 2009 (when Obama was President and Democrats controlled the Senate), she again had it in 2018, 2019. 2020 and she missed both public sessions and conferences.
When Obama was President and Dems controlled the Senate she was the oldest serving Justice and had very serious cancer in 2009. She publicly stated that she stayed because it helped her deal with the loss of her husband. That is the kind of self indulgence we cannot afford at the very pinnacle of power. She could have retired from the court and seen her chair replaced with a younger version of herself and inspired a generation as a professor and honored legend of the court.
When John Paul Stevens retired in 2010, Ginsburg became the oldest justice on the court at age 77.[125] Despite rumors that she would retire because of advancing age, poor health, and the death of her husband,[126][127] she denied she was planning to step down. In an interview in August 2010, Ginsburg said her work on the Court was helping her cope with the death of her husband.[125] She also expressed a wish to emulate Justice Louis Brandeis's service of nearly 23 years, which she achieved in April 2016.[125]
Several times during the presidency of Barack Obama, progressive attorneys and activists called for Ginsburg to retire so that Obama could appoint a like-minded successor,[128][129][130] particularly while the Democratic Party held control of the U.S. Senate.
She took the risk. She had a brilliant career. Her fight was heroic on many levels but partisan politics is both a team sport and a relay especially on the Supreme Court. You not only have to forge a majority you have to make the decision to hand off the seat in a way that will keep it on our side for another 4 decades. Her decision to stay as the oldest member of the court having two very serious bouts of cancer was hubris. She gambled and lost the final chapter and we lost a seat for 4 decades. I have no doubt that the young strategic Ginzburg would not be sympathetic.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
116 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I will tell you what we are paying for, those self-identifed progressives who refused to vote for
JohnSJ
Apr 2023
#18
Really? The SC was at stake. Which part of that didn't those stupid voters understand? In every
JohnSJ
Apr 2023
#90
The US is facing one of the most serious times in our history. We need all hands onboard.
Irish_Dem
Apr 2023
#4
I think those reports, like the overwrought reports about Feinstein (and McConnell)
onenote
Apr 2023
#114
So as far as you're concerned, she's totally sane, right in the head, and
NotVeryImportant
Apr 2023
#115
So far as I'm concerned, apart from being unable to participate after she got shingles,
onenote
Apr 2023
#116
This is totally what it's about. There could have been respectful conversations with
Nixie
Apr 2023
#15
Thanks to you also for your very informative posts and exposing the distortions that
Nixie
Apr 2023
#27
Your posts have been so incredibly informative and completely expose the disinformation
Nixie
Apr 2023
#26
Thanks again for your factual posts that counter the hyperbolic ridiculousness DU is so prone to.
emulatorloo
Apr 2023
#67
You're absolutely right. These kinds of threads are not only reasonable discussion,
FoxNewsSucks
Apr 2023
#45
"Of the 58 votes Feinstein has missed while ill, 25 were for judicial nominees..."
SunSeeker
Apr 2023
#50
how is so pressing when there are still nominees waiting for votes from the full Senate?
bigtree
Apr 2023
#73
Give me one example of a judicial nominee who hasn't been confirmed because of Feinstein's absence?
onenote
Apr 2023
#16
Thank-you. In addition, she will be back soon. She has also instructed Schumer is she is needed on
JohnSJ
Apr 2023
#21
Good. And that needs to keep up, or even increase. NOT come to a standstill.
FoxNewsSucks
Apr 2023
#48
Then shouldn't pressure be put on Schumer to bring the 18 pending nominations to the floor?
onenote
Apr 2023
#57
Whether she resigns or just leaves the judiciary committee, we're still screwed
Fiendish Thingy
Apr 2023
#34
Same here. And said he did a "masterful job" on that hearing while hugging him.
FoxNewsSucks
Apr 2023
#49
Cyrano said perfectly what I have been thinking. Nicely done. I just want to add that a significant
flashman13
Apr 2023
#38
Just a guess, but some of the same folks declaring Feinstein incapable of recovering
onenote
Apr 2023
#105