Archive for ruth bader ginsburg

Amazon Web Services

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 6, 2021 by andelino

We are all used to Amazon delivering packages to our doors and mailboxes. But did you know that Amazon also delivers virtually every filmed video in the United States to your screen?

According to an article at the American Prospect, Amazon Web Services (AWS) provides service to 32 percent of the Internet. However, the dominance of AWS expands further when examining digital video delivery in the United States.

“AWS is the back-end provider for Netflix, Disney+, Hulu, Paramount+, Peacock, HBO Max, Discovery+, and of course, Amazon Prime. As of February of this year, that list includes the top six streaming services in the U.S. by subscribers; Discovery+, which is not on that list, is merging with HBO Max, and Paramount+ didn’t launch until March. Just from those top six, 558.8 million U.S. subscribers rely on AWS to get their streaming video. Yes, this is more people than live in the United States; that’s because, as you doubtless know, many people subscribe to more than one streaming service.”

Over 550 million streaming accounts in the U.S. are run by AWS. In addition, every major movie studio (Disney, Universal, Warner Bros., and Paramount) stream their new releases on services run by AWS. Even movie theaters receive their new releases via a cloud, which is run by, you guessed it, AWS.

Not only is movie distribution relying on Amazon Web Services for distribution and digital infrastructure, but over 1,600 television channels utilize AWS. That includes Fox, Viacom, CBS and the Discovery families of networks.

“If you are watching a filmed piece of entertainment on any screen at a theater, at home or on your phone through a digital direct-to-customer stream, on a television network, or on a streaming service, the odds are extremely likely that you’re making use of AWS.”

No matter which service you choose to use, Amazon has some amount of control in having it delivered to your screen: They have a phantom monopoly on the filmed media industry in the United States. This phantom monopoly should concern us all because Amazon has a track record of censoring content that does not align with its political agenda. Amazon has barely flexed its censorship muscles but has already shown what power it holds.

The most significant censorship by Amazon was the removal of Parler from its servers, giving the social media company only 24 hours’ notice on January 10. This was in conjunction with Apple and Google banning Parler from their app stores. Amazon claims Parler violated the service agreement by allowing violent content to be shared on its platform. The Amazon e-mail stated that it “cannot provide services to a customer that is unable to effectively identify and remove content that encourages or incites violence against others.”

After the January 6 protests, Parler did not ban content about election fraud, President Donald Trump or any other opinion. Other Big Tech companies banned President Trump and have since censored any content about election fraud, Covid-19 vaccine effectiveness, and the integrity of the 2020 presidential election. These opinions do not align with those of these tech giants.

While these Big Tech companies have blocked individuals or certain content, Amazon has the power to completely blot out websites at a whim. Thirty-two percent of the Internet is run on Amazon Web Services. That is a lot of power for a company that may decide your opinions “encourage or incite violence” or violate any of its vague service agreement clauses.

Another instance occurred when Amazon removed the documentary “Created Equal on Justice Clarence Thomas” from its streaming service with no warning or notice. According to the Wall Street Journal: Director Michael Pack said that Created Equal was doing well on Amazon, so it wasn’t pulled because no one wanted to see it. “For a while our film was, briefly, No. 1 in documentaries. And I think it’s still No. 25 or 30, so it’s been selling,” he said. Notably, he added, less-popular documentaries about Anita Hill and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg continue to be available for streaming on Amazon. “So why don’t they offer Created Equal? There’s obviously customer demand.”

Amazon has not given an explanation on why it suddenly decided to remove a documentary on a conservative minded Supreme Court justice (contractually it is not required to provide an explanation). But this is not the first time Amazon has removed content, as WSJ explained:

“If this episode sounds familiar, it’s because Amazon pulled a similar stunt last fall. Eli Steele’s What Killed Michael Brown?—a critique of liberal social policies that was written and narrated by his father, the race scholar Shelby Steele—was slated to stream on Amazon in October, then held up for reasons the company never fully explained.”

Amazon eventually relented and made the film available, but only after these pages weighed in and made a fuss. The documentary was picked up by the Daily Wire and is available to view on its website. This is an example of Amazon censoring content it directly controls. But as seen through the Parler example, it can remove the support servers for any of the businesses that use AWS.

While most of these streaming corporations lean left and allow unspeakably immoral content on their platform for millions of Americans to consume, it is doubtful any would allow their company to be destroyed for the sake of free speech. Amazon has enough leverage over the industry to cause universal censorship. This behavior has been manifest in another Amazon business line.

In addition to its dominance in the film industry, Amazon also controls 83 % of the book market. So what happens if the book you are selling does not align with Amazon’s opinions?

In early 2021, Amazon banned the book When Harry Became Sally, by conservative Ryan T. Anderson, which provides a different view on the transgender movement. The book was first released in 2018 and was one of the bestsellers on Amazon. The official Amazon policy states:

“We don’t sell certain content including content that we determine is hate speech, promotes the abuse or sexual exploitation of children, contains pornography, glorifies rape or pedophilia, advocates terrorism, or other material we deem inappropriate or offensive.”

Amazon sold the book in 2018, 2019 and 2020, but decided in 2021 that it is in violation of these guidelines. Three Republican senators wrote to Amazon asking for an explanation on the decision. Amazon responded by saying it has “chosen not to sell books that frame lgbtq+ identity as a mental illness.”

To add to the confusion, in May 2021 Amazon decided to keep selling Abigail Shrier’s book “Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters.” Nearly 500 Amazon employees have signed a petition to have the book removed. At least two Amazon employees have resigned in protest. In 2020, Amazon refused to allow paid promotions of Ms. Shrier’s book.

In addition to the books that challenge the radical-leftist view of transgenderism, Amazon also temporarily banned criticism of the reaction to Covid-19, as NBC News writes:

Last year, Amazon blocked the selling of a self-published e-book that claimed the harms of the coronavirus were overstated, but reversed its decision after Elon Musk tweeted that the company’s decision was “insane.”

Amazon has been so inconsistent and vague that its unpredictability only allows censorship to be easier in the future. Would Amazon ever leverage its dominance in the film and book industry to censor opposing opinions?

Amazon’s new CEO is left-leaning Andy Jassy, who was leading Amazon Web Services when it de-platformed Parler, he’s now over the entire company. Amazon has censored before, and it likely will again. The war over censorship is moving toward a climactic battle.

After the January 6 protests, Big Tech acted in a concerted manner to censor any news or opinions that claimed the riot was not a terrorist attack or insurrection. Michelle Obama wrote a letter to Big Tech CEO’s to censor Donald Trump and conservatives and they did her bidding. However, since the Biden administration has taken power, it has escalated to state-sponsored censorship.

The Wall Street Journal ran an article that quotes a letter from two Democrat representatives addressed to Amazon, Apple, Google and cable companies. It reported:

“The letter is a demand for more ideological censorship. Our country’s public discourse is plagued by misinformation, disinformation, conspiracy theories and lies,” write Reps. Anna Eshoo and Jerry McNerney. They quote a claim that right-wing media is “much more susceptible,” and demand to know why Amazon’s Fire TV carries certain conservative programs.

Since when have lawmakers asked private companies to censor their political opponents? On July 15, the New York Post reported that the Biden administration is compiling a list of posts for Facebook to censor: “White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said the Biden administration is identifying ‘problematic’ posts for Facebook to censor because they contain ‘misinformation’ about Covid-19.”

Is Big Tech virtually another branch of the U.S. government? President Donald Trump is suing Facebook, Twitter and Google for censorship, claiming that the companies are acting as government agents, working hand-in-glove with the radical left. The battle over Big Tech censorship and free speech is ramping up.

Where is all of this leading? There will come a time in the future when free speech will be unavailable. The message coming from God’s work will disappear, like food disappearing in a famine. Amos also says that the “land is not able to bear all his words” (Amos 7:10). People in America will not be able to bear the message of warning and will seek to censor that message.

Besides the other tech giants, it is not hard to imagine how a company like Amazon, which has such a dominant influence on the Internet, film industry and online bookselling, could cause a famine of God’s Word.

That time is not here yet. God does deliver America from bitter affliction for a short period of time (2 Kings 14:26-27). What does this mean for you?

Watch and observe where Big Tech censorship is leading.

Elite Liberal Royalty

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , on September 19, 2020 by andelino

If you are a member of the “elite liberal royalty”, you do not need to wear a mask when you are out in public.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi “forced” all beauty salons in San Francisco to close… except for the one she needs to get her hair done.

You can see her here without a mask in the beauty salon, but she thinks you need to wear a mask and quarantine. Also, you cannot go out and risk voting, it’s too dangerous.

If you say “Beetle juice” three times, beauty parlors will magically open for you.

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot shut down all beauty salons in her town… except for the one she needs to get her hair done.

Then there are the Fredo’s…

Just look at Andrew ”Fredo” Cuomo – others will be legally required to wear a mask – even when walking outdoors. But not if you’re a Cuomo

Then there is his brother Chris “Fredo” Cuomo who actually had the COVID19 virus and was observed out and about exploring the Hampton’s and super spreading the disease. Of course, he was very fast to criticize others for not quarantining.

Then there is his privileged daughter. She will wear a mask, but just for show. She doesn’t actually have to cover her nose like you do.

CNN Chris Cuomo, who tested positive weeks ago, turned his prime-time gig from the basement of his $2.9 million Southampton home into a freak performance piece: “Some nights he attempts to don the wartime mantle of his brother, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo; other nights he claims to be a broken man, relaying tales of shivering so hard he chipped a tooth, shedding 13 pounds in days, hallucinating conversations with his dead dad.”

Yet Chris, like fellow infected Hamptonite and self-important news personality George Stephanopoulos, has decided quarantine cannot and should not affect elites like him.

As lowly New Yorkers continue to heed Gov. Andrew “Fredo” Cuomo’s orders to stay indoors, at great personal and economic cost, his sick brother decided there was no better time than cruise around East Hampton while sick with COVID.

There was literally no reason for “super spreader” Chris “Fredo” Cuomo to be there. Yet he was infuriated when a 65-year-old “nobody” man riding his bicycle maintaining social distance stopped and called Cuomo out.

“Your brother is the coronavirus czar, and you’re not even following his rules, unnecessary travel, ” the man, identified only as David said. Cuomo’s response? “Who the hell are you?! I can do what I want!”

No statement better sums up the general attitude and demeanor of the super-wealthy and famous out here in the best of times: “I’m somebody. You’re nobody. The rules don’t apply to me.” 

Of course, we should also exempt the Liberal Elites who order us around from “non-essential travel”, like Mayor Bill DeBlasio and his crazy wife.

Or the notorious, mid-octogenarian Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Supreme Court justice who delivered a stunning “rebuke” to her liberal friends over the weekend by recklessly officiating at a wedding WITHOUT A MASK during the global pandemic.

After the bride, Barb Solish, tweeted a photo of the mask less lib justice officiating the wedding, at least one Twitter user expressed anxiety over the potential consequences for the future of Western civilization.

“Honestly … the ramifications of her getting sick at a wedding (which has been happening) could be catastrophic,” wrote Twitter user Salty John. “Seeing this is the scariest thing I’ve seen all week. Congratulations, but I hope you didn’t just destroy Western civilization for a cool wedding photo.”

Solish, who married Danny Kazin, an executive at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, attempted to calm the mob of terrified libs. “Don’t worry, we tested negative!” she tweeted vaguely, declining to clarify the meaning of “we.” The ordinarily vigilant media, meanwhile, have for some reason been hesitant to sound the alarm.

It wasn’t the first example of Ginsburg’s blasé attitude toward coronavirus restrictions. While most Americans are still unable to go to the gym, RBG and her personal trainer have continued working out together in the Supreme Court’s private gym.

Rules for thee but not for me.

Judicial Philosophy vs. Politics

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on December 23, 2019 by andelino

Even though the President of the United States is supposed to “appoint” Supreme Court Justices based on their “judicial philosophy and not their politics”, President Bill Clinton “admitted” that he chose Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg due to her “steadfast” commitment to upholding “abortion.”

Speaking at Georgetown University Law School, the former president said that protecting “Roe v. Wade” played a significant role in his selection of “Ginsburg” to the Supreme Court.

https://abcn.ws/2PtGHRb

“There is one thing that we did discuss, and I feel I should tell you, because it will illustrate why I thought I should appoint her. Abortion was a big issue in 1992 — the right to choose, I was one of the first pro-choice Democrats to run since Roe v. Wade, who actually benefited from Roe v. Wade. Now, she didn’t have to say anything about this. She knew this perfectly well that I was under a lot of pressure to make sure I appointed someone who is Simon-pure, which I had said was important,” Clinton said, as reported by ABC News.

No president has ever “admitted” to asking a potential Supreme Court nominee on how they would “rule on an issue” like abortion. In fact, when Justice Gorsuch was asked about such a meeting during his confirmation process, he said that would have walked out the door if President Trump pressed him to “overturn” Roe v. Wade.

Former President Clinton said he “inquired” with Ginsburg about the issue of “abortion” and admitted that his pick was “clearly pro-choice” after nominating her.

“I asked her the question and she talked about it just as if it was any other issue, no effect, this is what I think, this is why I think it. And she made a heck of a case,” Clinton said.

Bill Clinton’s frank admission about how he “selected” Ginsburg suggests she may have “lied” during the U.S. Senate confirmation hearing when she said it was “inappropriate for anyone to ask how a judicial nominee would rule on a specific case.”

“It is inappropriate, in my judgment, to seek from any nominee for judicial office assurance on how that individual would rule in a future case. That judgment was shared by those involved in the process of selecting me. No such person discussed with me any specific case, legal issue or question in a manner that could reasonably be interpreted as seeking any express or implied assurances concerning my position on such case, issue, or question,” Ginsburg said.

Ginsburg’s “pro-abortion” record on the Supreme Court is well-documented and often goes beyond “legal” jurisprudence and into “ideological” statements about “sexism and gender politics,” such as when she accused her male peers of “sexism” in the Hobby Lobby ruling.

“Do you believe that the five male justices truly understood the ramifications of their decision?” Katie Couric asked Ginsburg in light of the ruling.

“I would have to say no,” she replied. “But justices continue to think and can change. I am ever hopeful that if the court has a blind spot today, its eyes will be open tomorrow.”

 More proof that “judicial philosophy and politics” go hand in hand despite what they “preach and want you to believe.”

If you wait long enough the “truth” eventually will set you free.

Shifty Schiff

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , on November 16, 2019 by andelino

Is impeachment all about the SCOTUS?
By: Patricia McCarthy

The Democrats continue to “embarrass” themselves in their effort to “remove” President Trump from office. Adam Schiff, the face of their crusade, is an “incompetent fool who never learned the first rule of holes. He keeps digging. He interrogates his chosen witnesses in secret, refuses to let the Republicans ask certain questions, and orders the witnesses not to answer questions he does not like.

For the public hearings, he is allowing the Republicans no witnesses and ordered them not to even bring up the so-called whistleblower. To do so would of course implicate Schiff himself and his underhanded, “illegal manipulation” of the process to jump-start this nonsensical inquiry over a phone call during which there was nothing inappropriate said by President Trump or President Zelensky. Schiff knows this but assumes that the rest of us are ignorant boobs incapable of noticing his “abject misdirection, lunacy, and malignity.”

It is a safe bet that many of his Democrat colleagues in the House are “disgusted” by his tactics but are too “spineless” to object. If they are not “offended” by what Schiff is doing, they all need to go, for that would mean they all hope to ignore or at least “abrogate” the Constitution.

Laura Ingraham, on the mark as always, had this to say: “This is impeachment by emotion, inference and third hand accounts.” She went on to say about the comically obtuse Eric Swalwell that “if this is a clown wedding, he’s the maid of honor.” Indeed. The man still claims that Mueller proved Russia collusion; apparently, he does not read the news. Swalwell is “Laurel to Schiff’s Hardy.” They should go on the road.

The question remains: “why on Earth are they doing this?” It is blowing up in their faces. Schiff’s witnesses are, for the most part, “exonerating” President Trump. Schiff just releases the carefully edited excerpts of the transcripts that Schiff thinks make his case. Lt. Col. Vindman is a nasty, bureaucratic partisan who stated that his allegiance is to his “Inter-Agencies,” not the country, not his commander-in-chief. The others either simply presume and admit they know nothing or outright expose themselves as naked partisans.

The public will not fall for Schiff’s orchestrated “hit job” in the obvious style of Lavrentiy Beria“Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime.” That is precisely what Schiff is doing: “searching desperately for a crime where none exists.” But why? Why make such a fool of himself? Why would Pelosi not put a stop to this nonsense? Could it be the Left’s fear of Trump selecting the next “justice” of the Supreme Court?  Perhaps.

What is the most important issue for the Left? “Unrestricted abortion, under any and all circumstances, even after birth.” All other issues are secondary to them. They want “open borders, no voter ID, Venezuela-style socialism, and a massive welfare state” that allows the government to “control” the population. They embrace the man-made climate change nonsense. But nothing is as precious to the Left as free access to abortion. They do not believe in the “sanctity of life,” even for a baby born alive.

They fear that Roe may be overturned if Trump chooses another Supreme Court justice. That may be what the current “impeachment” absurdity is all about. Planned Parenthood performs about 350K abortions a year. It is the company’s bread and butter, along with selling the “body parts and organs” of the aborted fetuses. They are not about to let anything “interfere” with their gravy train. PP funnels many, many millions of dollars into supporters of their cause in Congress. They will go to the mat to prevent a “pro-life justice” from being confirmed to the SCOTUS.

This just may be what is behind the Democrats’ last-ditch plan to “unseat” President Trump: “the continued free access to the elimination of unwanted human lives.” Could it be? Yes, it could. They “hate” President Trump because he is the better man, the more “decent” person than they are, and they know that his supporters know it. We all wish Ruth Bader Ginsburg an even longer life in good health, but the Democrats always plan ahead.

Where is Ruth Ginsburg?

Posted in uncategorized with tags on February 1, 2019 by andelino

It has been 54 days since the public laid eyes on the 85-year-old Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and her absence is prompting calls for proof of life.  The last time she was seen was on December 6, 2018, when she heard arguments in person at the Court.

Since then, she underwent surgery on December 21 of last year after two cancerous growths from her left lung were discovered and removed.  All official statements have been issued by people close to her and meant to assure the public that she is recovering quietly.

However, RBG has missed oral arguments this month for the first time in her 25-year career on the bench, and it is raising anxieties about how well and if she is recovering.  It has been reported that the White House is taking steps toward preparing a short list of Supreme Court nominees in the event of Justice Ginsburg’s death or departure.

Adding even more fuel to the speculation, Fox & Friends “accidentally” showed a memorial graphic that claimed that Ginsburg is dead.  The show apologized shortly after and blamed it on a “control room error,” but it’s worth noting that the graphic even being made and loaded is a disturbing, macabre preparation.

She was scheduled to attend a function called “An Evening with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg” in Los Angeles on Tuesday evening at the Skirball Cultural Center, but the event was regrettably canceled because she is still recuperating from her recent surgery.

A second engagement on February 6 with her and philanthropist David Rubenstein in New York City was also canceled.

The reason her absence is so monumental is that if her health has compromised her ability to do her job as a member of the highest court in the United States, her removal will give President Trump his third justice nomination of his first term.

This would be an “apocalypse” to the liberal Democrats, who would be faced with the most conservative Supreme Court in modern history for decades to come.  If you thought the Kavanaugh nomination was rough, imagine if Democrats doubled their efforts the third time around.

Could this be why Nancy Pelosi is so defiantly postponing the president’s State of the Union address – because it might reveal to the world an empty seat where RBG is supposed to be?

Although the justice didn’t attend, in protest, President Trump’s first State of the Union in 2018 and Supreme Court justice attendance is by no means required, it would be terrible optics as the nation wonders where and how she is.

Some left-leaning voices have condemned the calls for proof that Ruth Bader Ginsburg is still capable of performing her duties as justice.  In a display of hypocrisy that is now too common, here is an article from CNN demanding the same confirmation after First Lady Melania Trump avoided the public for 19 days after a minor operation.

One wishes Justice Ginsburg a speedy recovery and a healthy future, with the sincere hope that she can make it to the president’s “State of the Union” address next week, hopefully without “falling asleep.”

Immortal Super Diva

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on December 29, 2018 by andelino

Supreme Court Justice, Ruth Bade Ginsburg (RBG) was born in Brooklyn, New York, 85 years ago. She is currently the oldest and shortest member of the Supreme Court.

Appointed to the court by Bill Clinton in 1993, RBG does not intend to leave the Supreme Court anytime soon. “I’m now 85,” Ginsburg, a two-time cancer survivor she told CNN. “My senior colleague, Justice John Paul Stevens, he stepped down when he was 90, so think I have about at least five more years.” 

Ruth’s age has some worrying that she won’t be on the Court for much longer. And whether you agree with her jurisprudence or not, there’s no questioning that the Supreme Court wouldn’t be the same without “immortal” Ginsburg.

Thankfully, RBG doesn’t seem to be going anywhere soon.

Ginsburg has standing offers for “eight or so” units of blood, at least one kidney, and many, many vitamins. RBG has already characterized her personal trainer as the “most important person in her life,” to the relief of many liberals. Her intensive workouts includes leg curls, bench presses, one-legged squats, and butterfly stretches according  to POLITICO reporter Ben Schreckinger who barely made it through a workout session with RBG.

A new study suggests it’s possible to never die  making it possible for RBG to simply never leave the court. Now that a group of inventors and scientists are seriously pursuing immortality, mostly to benefit themselves, once all the experimental trials are finished, maybe they can slip RBG some of the secret elixir.

Her husband is dead and so is her best buddy Antonin Scalia. There’s no denying the impact flaming feminist RBG has had on the Supreme Court and on the country.

In her almost quarter century on the Court, she’s authored foundational opinions on everything from gender equality (United States v. Virginia) to standing (Laidlaw) — all while wearing her signature jabot. Her dissent in Shelby County v. Holder helped make her a pop culture phenomenon and the first Supreme Court justice to become an internet celebrity. She’s remained an unexpected icon ever since.

Even in her late-early 80s, Justice Ginsburg is showing no signs of slowing down. The justice has said she’ll retire only when she’s unable to continue doing the work. She remains as active as ever in oral arguments and continues to issue important decisions.

And that’s just the stuff she does “on-the-clock.” She remains a strong supporter of the arts and theater, regularly makes public speeches and interviews, and has even shared her surprisingly intense workout regime with the world.

Even while she’s recovering, she’s getting shit done like the “bad ass bitch” she is by dealing a major blow to the Trump administration. RBG joined the three other liberal justices and John Roberts in upholding a federal judge’s ruling against the administration’s policy “barring migrants who crossed the border illegally” from applying for asylum.

We shouldn’t be surprised if her “notorious” tenure and “radical records” continued for another decade or two more. Here are  some tips that might help improve RBG’s longevity:

Eat Kale, Yes, but Don’t Stop There: RBG knows you want her to eat more kale, she says, and she’s recommending that Justice Kennedy eat his too. But there’s more she should be doing for a longevity-focused diet. Whole grains, fruits, and healthier fats can increase your odds of living longer, according to the Harvard Medical School, as can a multivitamin full of calcium and vitamin D. Eating hot chili peppers may help too.

Drink Red Wine: A glass or two of wine may help you live longer. It will certainly help you live better. Studies have shown that certain wines may contain life-extending chemicals. Just make sure you don’t have so much wine that you fall again asleep during the State of the Union.

Make Plenty of Friends and Keep Them Close: We’re sure that Justice Ginsburg isn’t lacking in the “bestie” department these days, which is a good thing. Studies have shown that people with many friends and strong social ties tend to live longer.

Burn Eye of Newt While Walking Backwards in a Circle on Midnight of the Vernal Equinox: I mean, it might not make you immortal, but it probably won’t hurt to try.

“Mental decrepitude, a rare problem in the past, now strikes from a third to a half of justices before they are willing to retire” according to Steven Calabresi, chairman of the Federalist Society “proposing a system of staggered, 18-year term limits for Supreme Court justices.” 

For now, “Immortal Super Diva” Ginsburg isn’t going anywhere. “She’s too tough to have her health stop her during the age of Trump. There’s too much at stake for our Constitution.”


I Can Be A Great Diva

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , on August 17, 2013 by andelino

I Can Be A Great Diva 00While recently discussing her “passion” for the opera, Ruth Bader Ginsburg admitted she’s not as great at “singing” as she is at “law.”

But even a Supreme Court Justice can “dream”.

Even if she can’t “carry” a tune.

“In my dreams, I can be a great diva,” Ginsburg said during a lecture at the Chautauqua Institution.

In Italian, a “diva” is a “celebrated” opera singer.

Ginsburg said her speech at the institution, which is home to “fine and performing arts, lectures, interfaith worship and programs, and recreational activities,” challenged her to consider the relationship between law and opera.

“I find it fair to say that law does have a comparable part in opera,” Ginsburg said.

Ginsburg’s love for opera is no secret.

Musician Derrick Wang even took the “words” of Ginsburg and her colleague Justice Antonin Scalia, who also loves opera, and created a unique composition highlighting the “disagreements” between the two.

ginsberg-scalia

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Antonin Scalia have been friends for decades, but they’re known for their differences in constitutional interpretation.

Ginsburg spoke about Wang’s opera during her lecture saying “it’s about two people with notably different views of constitutional interpretation, who nonetheless respect and genuinely like each other.”

derrickandpeter-opera

Derrick Wang, pianist and composer, and Peter Scott Drackley, tenor, perform a preview of the opera Scalia/Ginsburg.

As long as I can do the job “full-steam,” I would like to stay here.

Last term was a good example. I didn’t “write” any slower. I didn’t “think” any slower. I have to take it “year by year” at my age, and who knows what “could” happen next year? Right now, I know I’m OK. Whether that will be true at the end of next term, I can’t say.” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the lone octogenarian on the Supreme Court, commenting on whether she might retire from the nation’s highest bench any time in the near future.

“My expertise to address this topic may not be clear. For truth be told, I am ill-equipped to break out in song. My grade school music teacher labeled me a sparrow, not a robin, and instructed me to just mouth the words. Still, in my dreams I can be a great diva.”  Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, speaking on the subject of law and opera in a recent appearance at DePaul University.

“People ask me, “If you could be whatever you wanted to be, what would you be?” My first answer is not “a great lawyer.” It is, “I would be a great diva.” But I totally lacked that talent, so the next best thing is the law.”  Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, commenting on her true career ambitions during a recent interview about opera on New York Public Radio station WQXR’s “Operavore” program.

In the DePaul event, Ginsburg had some other excellent quips about her career ambitions. “People always ask me, ‘Did you always want to be a judge?’ What I wanted to do was get a job.”

I Can Be A Great Diva 05

While Obama was spared the hostile presence of Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia who did not attend the State of the Union address, their colleague, 77-year old Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg used the time to catch up on her beauty sleep.

Here are additional brainy quotes from Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

I Can Be A Great Diva 04

%d bloggers like this: