Joe Manchin believes James Madison is on his side. Especially re the filibuster issue.

He is not.

Jamelle Bouie wrote a revealing Opinion piece in the New York Times yesterday. Titled: “Joe Manchin Thinks James Madison Is On His Side. Nope.”

I share Bouie’s article with you.

The column rips apart Manchin’s reliance on Madison. Clearly evidences Manchin does not know what he is talking about from an historical perspective. Shameful since Manchin partially relied on Madison’s thinking when he voted against the voting rights and the Build Back Better bills.

Manchin exuded a confidence in rejecting the bills based on his filibuster beliefs routed in what he believed were Madison’s.

Manchin once again proved the ignoramus he is in many respects. This time historically.

When it comes to the Senate, Manchin should know its history well. He has served 11 years in the Senate.

Manchin showed a sickening illiteracy when he said: “Protecting the role of the minority – Democratic or Republican – has protected us from the volatile political swings that we have endured the last 233 years.”

Manchin cited James Madison to support his point: “Madison said the purpose of the Senate was ‘first, to protect the people against their rulers, secondly, to protect the people against the transient impressions into which they themselves may be lead,’ and that the Senate serves as a ‘necessary force against such danger.’”

Why is Manchin’s reliance on Madison without basis? Madison never was a member of the Senate (he did serve four terms in the House of Representatives).

The Madison quote Manchin relied on is found in Madison’s notes of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia dated 6/26/1787. Madison wrote, “The ends to be served…..were first to protect the people against the transient impressions into which they themselves might be led.”

There exists no mention of the word “filibuster” in Madison’s notes. In fact, “filibuster” at the time was not yet in common use or any principle of unlimited debate.

Manchin’s words and those of other filibuster defenders are confusing in view of the following.

Manchin and other filibuster defenders speak of protecting the “minority” in Congress. They mean a “partisan minority,” Democrat or Republican.

The problem/reality is that at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, “no one had any idea of political parties, much less a partisan minority. They did not exist and none of the framers even  thought they would.”

Another Bouie observation: “When Madison speaks of a ‘minority’ in the context of the Senate, he means an ‘economic interest,’ not an organized political faction.”

Political parties did not exist nor were they anywhere in the minds of the delegates at the Constitutional Convention.

Madison was not writing about different political parties. He was writing about the mass of the poor, working and indigent against the owners of property and wealth.

Bouie clearly points out that “the question of how to balance power between two partisan factions with in a legislature never came up. Which makes it difficult to use Madison in defense of something like the filibuster.”

Bouie added: “The debate over majority rule in the Senate is not whether the Chamber will have the power to stop any irrational exuberance in its tracks. It’s about whether over an extended period of time, internal deliberations and public debating, a partisan majority in the Senate can pass its agenda into law using a simple majority.”

Bottom line…..a “simple majority” was intended.

The concept has lost its way. And Manchin is not aware such was intended.

So smart is he!

The more I watch Manchin operate, the more convinced I become he is a pretty face hiding an empty head.

Enjoy your day!

______________________________________________________________________

EXECUTIVE BRANCH LIES, CONGRESS LIES, WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THE SUPREME COURT WOULDN’T LIE?

Lets begin with the premise that all branches of government lie. No question the Executive and Congress do. What would exclude the Judiciary, especially the Supreme Court?

Men in black robes have sexually abused thousands of children world wide. The black robes worn by Supreme Court members does not shield them from lying.

On 1/19, I read early morning the NPR article that things were not kumbaya on the Supreme Court. Mask wearing was the initial thrust of the column. The article was written by Nina Totenberg. Totenberg has been with NPR since 1975. She writes on the courts and legal matters. Very well respected.

I searched to see if anyone else was on the story. I could only find one small media outlet.

You may not be aware that over the years I have run “a breaking news story” 1 to 2 days before the major media outlets do. I have not mentioned this before, though I will admit I have been impressed with my research prowess.

I went with the story. I had no reason to consider it false. Titled it: The Supreme Court…..Tempers Ready To Explode.

After the furor that has risen nationally (with the topic, not my blog), I am not sure. At this point, it makes no difference however.

I have diligently followed the Supreme Court and Judiciary religiously over the years. In more recent years, I have been highly critical of the Supreme Court. Recall the number of times I have recommended that changes in the structure, rules, etc. had to be made.

Everything hit the fan on 1/20, the next day. Beginning with Chief Justice Roberts’ brief statement that Totenberg’s article was not correct. Backed up by Gorsuch and Sotomayor’s brief joint comment to the same effect.

The next day was 1/21. Southern Lady is a reader of my blog. She commented that I should check the facts, there was no truth to the story about the mask and the Supreme Court.

Southern Lady appears to have written the comment after she became aware of Roberts’. In effect, she took the word of the Chief Justice over mine. No problem.

It was later the same day and the next (which would be today) that the national media picked up on the story and went with it.

Turns out the furor is over one word. The word “asked.” Totenberg was not sure whether Roberts “asked” Gorsuch to wear a mask or made his position known to Gorsuch in a more subtle way. So she referred to it “in some form.”

The one word issue in a matter of hours turned into a monumental item with all kinds of ramifications.

I have not written as I have to absolve myself from sin. I do not consider I am guilty of any wrongdoing. In the slightest.

The purpose of today’s blog is to remind people that men and women lie, regardless of the position they maintain. Today the higher the position, the more the individual lies. Trump being the perfect example.

The Supreme Court is in trouble for many reasons. I repeat I have written so for several years. The Court has lost its way.

Lets start with Trump’s 3 nominations Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett. All testified under oath before the Senate Committee questioning them that they would respect precedent. The questions in this regard were especially concerned with Roe v. Wade. They all lied. The most recent abortion case involving Roe has been argued and will be decided in the next few months. I worry whether Roe will survive.

When Barrett was nominated, I wrote a blog spelling out my concerns about her. Her background. Which in my opinion made her selection highly questionable and should be denied.

The shame of her becoming a Justice is today reflected in talk that she will be the next Chief Justice were Roberts to leave. Woe beget the Court! Woe beget the American people!

Today’s Justices do not conduct themselves as those of yesteryear. The Republican Justices attend far right events. Weekend gatherings at a resort. They mingle with their own. Within the last 2 weeks, McConnell had such a gathering. The three I mention attended.

Such things were ethically prohibited when I was in law school in the 1950’s. Things have changed without anyone or entity saying it was against the rules.

The great Scalia who I respected for his legal minds but not his conclusions, used to attend many of these events.

Justice Thomas should never have been approved. His wife his problem. Even before he was approved, she was a far right member of the Republican Party. Still is. Considered MAGA. The many issues she is against, her husband is likewise opposed.

Justice Alito has been a problem for Roberts since he failed to be appointed Chief Justice by Bush. The man cannot forget Bush opted to choose another.

And on and on.

I apologize for no blog yesterday. I started working on it at 5:30 in the morning. At 8, I Only had 2 small topics competed. I was moving extremely slow. Doubted it was either COVID or the flu. My symptoms were not those. In fact, I had no symptoms. I was just plain tired and could not function mentally.

I closed down the computer and went to bed. Around 2 in the afternoon, I felt better. I have no idea what was wrong.

Enjoy your day!

[livemarket market_name="KONK Life LiveMarket" limit=3 category=“” show_signup=0 show_more=0]