#39 Musings Beyond the Bunker (Wednesday May 26)
Good morning,
THE FILIBUSTER, REDUX
The filibuster and its anti-democratic effect is terrible for our country and the rights of its citizens. Plus, it helps ensure that the policy decisions of those elected by a majority of the citizens can be thwarted by a minority determined to undermine and prevent legislation. It is pernicious and its time has come. For another rant on this, here’s David Lash:
“I used to think the filibuster was a tradition that had enough historical precedent that it should be preserved, that it served to encourage compromise, so it had some value. No more. Now I’m against it, for all the reasons you have articulated. I would just expand on one aspect of your argument -- the filibuster’s most important use, most impactful use, was, and continues to be, to stymie civil rights legislation and protections of the minority. Its historical practices are replete with misuses (not exclusively of course, but too much), mostly targeting minority rights and positions.
I would also add to your discussion about the Merrick Garland debacle. It was the most brazen anti-Constitutional, anti-democratic, blatantly political and unfair act that I have seen in Congress. It also was brilliant in that it worked to perfection for Mr. McConnell and his thieves. But his “doctrine” was that the president should be stripped of the right to have a nominee heard during the last year of a presidential term. In fact, history shows us the fraud behind his position. Throughout our history there have been 23 (or so) instances where a president has nominated a Supreme Court justice in the last year of his term. Twenty-one times that nominee not only was processed but was approved. The Constitution sets out a president’s term as being four years. There is nothing in the Constitution that limits presidential powers to only three years. Simply, McConnell violated the Constitution. He lied, cheated and stole to advance his own political purposes. And then, of course, his disgraceful conduct was exposed for all to see when he permitted action on Trump’s nominee during Trump’s last months in office. Yet he got away with it. No person, no governing body, of good will could act in such a fashion.
All told, it is time to install fairness and Constitutionality into our Congress. Get rid of the filibuster, get rid of those who ignore the Constitution, let’s stick to what we know works -- the provisions of our Constitution, the threads of our history that honor those provisions, and honest brokers of the same. “
A COUPLE OF OLD TV SHOWS WITH LESSONS ABOUT TRUTH—AND CONSEQUENCES
A few weeks ago, The New York Times had an article about warm places to vacation away from the crowds. One of the places mentioned was the oddly named Truth or Consequences, New Mexico. The town, formerly known as Hot Springs, accepted the promotion to rename their town in return for a cash payment.
Truth or Consequences was hosted by Bob Barker, famous in later years for duking it out with Adam Sandler in Happy Gilmore:
. The game had contestants answer questions that, if answered untruthfully, had them suffer “consequences,” which were embarrassing gimmicks. It would seem to me that the idea of telling the truth—or suffering the consequences—ought to be applied to our politicians today.
Earlier this year I watched a show called The Stranger, the premise of which is there is a woman (the stranger) who tells people in a small town the secrets that are being held from them, with profound consequences. It reminded me of the TV show from the 60s called I’ve Got a Secret. The premise there (a Mark Goodson/Bill Toddman production, originally conceived by Allan Sherman—let’s test your trivia here…) was that a person would come on and the celebrity panel would ask questions, trying to ascertain some sort of secret the contestant was concealing.
It seems the idea of a deeply embedded secret that is teased out over time is pervasive in current shows—such as Capitani (a Luxembourgian show), The Bureau (French), and The One (British). They’re all worth a viewing. By the way, listening to an English subtitled show in Luxembourgian highlights an interesting language that is a mix of French and German, consistent with its geography and history.
As I watched these shows and considered the idea of a TV show predicated on keeping a secret, I was taken by the notion that, with the expansion of data mining, location tracking, and increased surveillance, we are heading down a road that leads to not having secrets to keep at all. It troubles me.
Amen,
Glenn