Skip to main content

Congress can Filibuster all it wants. Talk is cheap. But it ain’t free

Written By | Mar 20, 2021
Mr. Smith, Filibuster, Democrats, RINOs, Republicans

Actor Jimmy Stewart in a scene from the 1939 movie Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, which popularized the notion of a “talking filibuster.” Even under changes negotiated in the Senate, the talking filibuster remains a thing of the past

Republicans are ablaze with worry that the filibuster will end, therefore ending the rule of law in the United States. The majority will now rule. The majority as we know is no more than a mob. Nevertheless, there will be a new “republic,” akin to a modern French Revolution.

Apparently, they feel the filibuster is the only glue holding the republic together. Only the famous cliché of “checks and balances”  Republicans and RINOs use, never was true.  That wonderful belief in CO-equal branches of government, each with the singular ability (of checking or balancing) to save the people from a despotic government has been misguided for a very long time.

Such as the government of the King of England who once ruled over us (as colonies) with disfavor.

Or the modern socialistic composite of the compost of the 20th and 21st-century political parties of Democrats/Republicans, who as George Wallace often said, had “not a dime’s worth of difference.”

The King, nor the crown, nor the British parliament for that matter was particularly despotic, but that is the tale of woe by modern historical wannabees and their political lackeys. Probably it is no accident that it is these same “historians” who claim a “civil war” as opposed to a war for Southern secession, 1861-65.




A civil war, by definition, is one where two factions fight for control of a single government. The South defended the C.S.A. from invasion by the U.S.A. They wanted no part of the U.S.A. government.

Why didn’t the South just filibuster?

The South supposedly started the “Civil War.”  A war that was supposedly the result of the only stain on this great land. Or as more of these moronic historian wannabees put it, “Our original sin.”

The South, having fought (this great civil war) simply because they didn’t think that black lives mattered (we are told) unless they were beaten into the dust through their unpaid labor.

The South lost and we are told richly deserved to be left with their lands confiscated, their homes largely looted and burned and their politics to be determined by scalawags, carpetbaggers, and Yankee bankers. These were, of course, the same Yankee bankers who financed the Yankee (Rhode Island, Mass., Connecticut, New York mostly) slave traders who bought the slaves from African-slavers (blacks enslaving and selling blacks) and sailed them to the Western Hemisphere.

Slavery was wrong, but it was not just the South’s wrong

It is this Lewis Carrol sort of jabberwocky that actually is the cause of the present close-to-the precipice of doom U.S. government. That is the “national” government many have come to believe was born in some 1776 magic moment of “all God’s children got to be free.” Nonsense.


Read More from the South’s Native Son Paul H. Yarbrough


The precipice of a new Civil War is where the government finds itself. 

And with it, led by a corrupt congress, a cowardly court, and a loon for a president it probably is going over this precipice and crash in the canyon of dooming socialism, communism, fascism, whatever. The people who force it over, don’t believe in filibusters because they don’t believe in debate. They do not believe in free and sovereign people.

They believe in the garbage in the canyon wherein they will push the people.

So the people led by the Republicans and RINOs are pleading to keep the filibuster? This is the strength of a republic? Does a Senate rule? Talk, talk, talk. Republicans may be useful to other Republicans but to conservatives, they are as useful as hot air in a flat tire.

That’s why the South left. They were free to do so and they weren’t going to rely on some temporary senate rule. That is why the colonies left the British Empire. They were free and sovereign and weren’t going to rely on a parliament 3000 miles away forcing them to live under British mercantile economics and faraway unlawful governance.

Once the filibuster is disposed of, Republicans will get what they have bargained for.

And the Democrats will get what they have wished for at least since Woodrow Wilson. This is so, simply because there is nothing magic about the “sacred” filibuster. It is not the final check on anything. The filibuster is nothing more than a senate rule, changed or not at the senate’s whim.




The only check or balance we ever had died years ago in the so-called “civil war.”  That was the war whereby the idea of check and balance was destroyed by socialistic nationalists like Lincoln and his political ilk, and psychopaths like Sherman.

No?

Let’s examine what the framers of the Republican Union understood.

Perhaps if more time were spent on reading the Anti-Federalist Papers as opposed to the nationalistic, Hamiltonian leaning Federalist Papers the answer would be more enlightening. However, the Federalist Papers are God-like to conservative wannabees. So, any nod to the Anti-Federalist Papers isn’t likely, hence the precipice. U.S.A., U.S.A.!

But just for the record, let’s look at this magic concept of  “checks and balances” that is so often bandied about, particularly by so-called conservatives and, as often, by Republicans (posing as conservatives).

According to the constitution, congress passes a bill or bills, and if the president signs the appropriate bills, they become law. Then, if these laws are brought before the courts and these courts in their omniscient legal brain trust declare these same laws constitutional then, voila, the deed is done.

Therefore, for example, if Congress passes a bill which says all patriots must be burned at the stake, the president signs it and upon final appeal, the Supreme Court says it is constitutional (appropriate), then voila, let the burning begin.

Again, no? What’s to prevent it? The “checks and balances” ran their course.

The only alternative for patriots to do would be to leave. That is, the same thing the 13 colonies did in 1776 by decree, i.e. The Declaration of Independence (DOI). But no more.

This Declaration of Independence alternative was tried in 1861

And secessionists had their families murdered, their homes burned and their lands consumed by foreign rot. And anyway, the Republicans state: The Declaration of Independence was not a secession document, it was a national declaration of a unitary state.

Like the old Soviet Union, without the “union.” Like burning at the stake without “the” trial.

So, what’s left to do? Filibuster? Yeah, right. Just keep talking. But don’t count on not getting kicked over that precipice. After all, you can join a club voluntarily but you can’t leave one the same way. The SCOTUS said so in 1867 (Texas vs White) just to make sure no one tries to do any sinister check and balance route again. Of course, the SCOTUS had ruled the opposite in 1866 on West Virginia’s secession from Virginia, but they (SCOTUS) are about as whimsical a check and balance as one will find.

Irony: Slaves were freed by the 13th amendment in 1866. Re-enslaved in 1867. Dang!

But don’t ask the Democrats, they are totalitarians by nature.

Ask the Republicans. They are the claimants of conservative principles. These are the same Republicans who wanted to gain the abolitionist system to prevent blacks from moving into the territories. These are the same Republicans who have Mitch McConnell and Mitt Romney as “conservatives.”

To assume Republicans are conservative is to bring us back to our old friend known as “nonsense.”

At the bottom of the gorge of doom will be the same political, congressional, and media vermin that is praised and populated night after night on the so-called news. Enjoy. Just don’t forget to write a check to get your balance.

As Yogi said: “It ain’t over til it’s over.”

But it’s damn close! Well over seventy-five million people are in the 9th inning with two outs and down by 10 or 12 runs.

Read More at:

A Constitutional History of Secession: John Remington Graham, Donald Livingston: 9781589800663: Amazon.com: Books

 

Texas v. White – Wikipedia

It Wasn’t About Slavery: Exposing the Great Lie of the Civil War: Mitcham Jr., Samuel W.: 9781684512232: Amazon.com: Books

*************

Paul Yarbrough writes novels, short stories, poetry, and essays. His first novel. Mississippi Cotton is a Kindle bestseller.

His author site can be found on Amazon. He writes political commentary for CommDigiNews.

Paul H. Yarbrough

Paul H. Yarbrough

Born in Mississippi, now calling Texas home, Paul H. Yarbrough is bringing his writing talents to the political arena. Yarbrough has completed three novels. He is also the humorist behind the weekly column, Redneck Diary.