Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Wait, what? What did you ask me?
It is said that to immobilize a centipede, all you have to do is ask; “What foot do you lead with?” I don’t know if that works, but I do know that all you have to do to bring just about any kind of human activity to a halt is ask; “If we do this, what will they do in response?” It’s a trick question, because it implies the possibility of knowing an unknowable thing — what “they” will do.
In my opinion this question should be labeled the eighth deadly sin, right after “sloth,” as a serial killer of good ideas.
For example: Now and then during my career as a journalist, I have been told by lawyers that if I published or broadcast a story containing information reflecting badly on some public figure, I would be sued. The lawyers were, in every case, impervious to my assertions that I had solid, admissible evidence of the accuracy of the report; that I understood the five elements that any successful libel or slander suit had to satisfy in order to prevail and had solid defenses against all of them; and that in my opinion the public figure in question was a spineless wuss who would never dare to challenge any critic in court.
But here’s the thing: The lawyers recommending that I spike the story were not representing the public figure, they were working for my employers. I was required by certain employers to submit certain kinds of stories for prior legal review, and the legal review always concluded, “you can’t do that because they will sue us.”
I don’t remember ever giving in to such a challenge. I was able to prevail because my bosses were journalists, not lawyers. If the lawyers had been in the editors’ chairs, we would have had a lot of dead air and blank pages.
By the way, not once in my career was I ever threatened with legal action by a public figure.
“If we do this, what will they do?” Not only is it a trick question because it presumes knowledge impossible to have, it’s a coward’s question because it invites speculation about the absolute worst the antagonist can possibly do, and then suggests nothing is worth risking that. It’s a question that does its worst damage in politics and government.
Democrats are especially addicted to it — and its corollary, “What can we do that will make them treat us better?” It still pains me to recall that Barack Obama (whom I like and respect) during the primary season of the 2008 presidential election took advocacy of Medicare for All off the campaign table, hoping for a better deal from Republicans. As usual, he got their worst possible deal.
The Republicans have learned to play the Democrats around this question like a well-oiled piano. The Democrats propose some legislation, already neutered to avoid a harsh reaction, and the Republicans say, well we could go for that if it said this and this and this. So the Democrats put this and this and this in the bill, turning it into a Republican piece of legislation. Then the Republicans don’t vote for it anyway. If it passes without Republican votes, the Republicans take loud public credit for it.
They do this about as often as Lucy pulls the football away from Charley Brown’s kick. And just like Charley, the Democrats always come back to try again.
An estimate of how the opposition will react to a proposal is not a legitimate basis for evaluating the proposal. Is it the right thing to do? Does it help people? Is it necessary? These are the right things to ask, the questions that elicit the answers needed to make a decision. If it’s right, and helpful, and necessary, then do it, and the devil take the opposition.
The most fraught question on the Democrats’ table right now is, what will they do if Trump is prosecuted? Will they retaliate? Wrong question. The only admissible question is — what does the law require? (My personal nightmare is that Joe Biden, a nice guy all his life, getting close to the 2024 election, wanting Republicans to think well of him and wanting to spare the country any adverse experience, grants Trump a pardon.)
There are signs that the Democratic centipede has stopped thinking about its feet and is slowly untangling them from this disabling question. Democrats are mightily tired of being sledgehammered while bleating, “What about bipartisanship?” This is a good trend. Let’s encourage them.
I´m a regular reader and now sometimes commentator of your blog, and I agree with most of what you write here, but I simply can´t understand how you can like and respect Mr. Obama. Like his predecessor George W. Bush and his successor Donald Trump he personally signed every single attack command for every drone strike carried out by the US. These drone strikes execute people that are deemed terrorists by your government without the benefit of a fair trial. Additionally there are roughly ten completely innocent people (collateral damage) for every intended hit, just because they accidentally stand to close to the chosen target. The US government knows this and seems to think that it´s a price worth paying. To me as a German this practice is especially galling, because those drones are remote controlled from the Ramstein US military base in Germany, and our government seems neither willing nor able to stop this. I, for one, can only despise people who act like Mr. Bush, Mr. Obama or Mr. Trump (and now Mr. Biden who may be nice to his kids, but not so nice to people who are not US citizens, especially muslims).
greetings
Frank
I agree with everything you say here. Every president does some distasteful things, some presidents more than others, and some presidents under irresistible pressure. I detest drone strikes on civilians and assassinations by executive order without due process. But on balance, I still like and respect Obama.
The question in my mind is whether the Democrats are Charlie Brown, or whether they’re *playing the part* of Charlie Brown in the same way that the Washington Generals played against the Harlem Globetrotters. Considering that both Charlie and Lucy work for the same people, I suspect the answer is the latter.
Either that, or the Democrats are Lucy and it is the Repulicans that are Charlie Brown.
Which party now has the FULL backing of the Deep State big two, the CIA and the FBI? The Democrats. Which party receives more funding from Wall Street? The Democrats. From Big Tech? The Democrats. Big Pharma? The Democrats. Which party’s aligned – state – media has more generals, admirals, ex-CIA , FBI, global corporate CEO headliners and can boast having the most neo-con war hawk types on their payrolls? The Demcrats.
Which party is more pro-war? Toss up. Depends on which war. Which party is more pro-MIC? That’s a robust tie. More pro-censorship? The Democrats at the moment, but that could change. Both parties would obviously like to toss the 1st into fire, while pretending to squabble over the insignificant 2nd.
I could go on and on, but I won’t, because if it isn’t clear to all Americans at this point that Democrats are to the right of the Republicans on a majority of the issues that matter most to the survival of a democratic nation-state,* then I would suggest they are the ones who are being Lucy-fied.
” … on balance, I still like and respect Obama.” A man who as President of the United States, assassinated US citizens, ON THE RECORD.
What has become of my country I ask, when good democratic men accept such kingly doings.
*It is hard to fathom that the Democrats now exist to the right of the Republicans, because for so long it seemed, this was a theoretical impossibility, as on the right flank of the GOP sat only an abyss.
But it is not so clear anymore that there ever was an abyss, at least one that was nearby. There is apparently, still plenty-o-room to push further right.
I think the what is playing tricks on everyone’s minds (mine included), is the Democrats, on paper, continue to embrace some of those old timey leftist values, like for instance, all men and woman of any race or sexual orientation are created equal, and should be treated as such, whereas the Republican Party most certainly does not.
In other words, all American citizens, regardless of who or what they are or where they hail from, have a inalienable right to participate in the evil, that is the genius of the Democratic Party’s current position, and the sad old out-o-touch GOP can only defend itself by screaming WOKE!
Or by transforming itself into a environmental worker’s party. They could do that. Flank on them left, GOP! Lmao …
Late stage dyslexia. It’s brutal. “Flank on them left” should read, flank em on the left.
I would like to blame the onset of my troubles on the iPhone, but I don’t have one.