My belated condolences. I always enjoyed reading his posts and will miss his insight and wide ranging views. May hew…
What happens when you stop playing by the rules.
There’s probably a better word for it, but game seems to be the most apt. Everything in life has a game aspect to it. As a spouse, you should always support the other half, even when you’ve some serious doubts about their current judgement because they seem to be on a momentary insanity curve. You’ll discuss it later in private. It might just be one of those SciFi alien infestations or something, an invasion of the body snatchers kinda thing. You’re not that crazy kid’s parent for the next twenty weeks, but the next twenty years, or more usually forever. You keep overlook and care for them, even when they go through the usual adolescence hissy fits of hating you.
That friend you crush cuddle to let them know that though Heaven might drop down out of a clear blue sky on top of both of you, you’d always be there for them. Picking your way carefully through a minefield to come to a downed friend’s aid, because you know that’s exactly what he’d do for you. That handshake you made over a business deal is your word of honour, and the spirit of it will outdate any piece of paper with both of your lawyer approved signatures on it drag assing home two months later. Your word is your word.
That’s just a random selection of the various games, but what they’ve all got in common is a consensual agreement to comply with the rules by everyone involved. For whatever game, all the players have agreed to play by an understood set of rules. However, once someone decides to throw away the rules, that game is ruined, gone forever. The umpire has gone walkabout and the touchline judges turn their backs and walk away towards home to get their dinner, and they won’t be hurrying back any day soon. There’s no point to it now. Why should you play by the rules anymore when somebody else appears to have decided themselves totally unconstrained by any rules of the game and appears to be getting away with it?
Perhaps deal might be a better word. It’s an agreement whereby both sides get something out of it. It’s a logical analysis. A deal where you get nothing out of it except being screwed over is a walk on the Wally side. Sometimes you have to put up with a situation like that, but it always burns and you’ll be looking very determinedly for a way out, or at least some payback. It’s human nature.
Politically, the trend is that the world is moving to the populist nationalist right. The response by the swampy entrenched establishment and left whiners in general is to refuse to accept the will of the people expressed in the privacy of a voting booth. Brexit? Naw, we’re not going to have that one. Trump being elected? Howl and screech. He’s not my president! A UK general election that devastated the usual local political heartland of the Labour party’s traditional homeland? Forget about it, it was a one off, an aberration. They’ll find out retaking ground that they’ve lost is a lot more difficult than if they’d simply held on to it in the first place.
It’s even got to the point where people like Chuck Schumer, who know they’re losing badly at the ballot box, are openly appealing for physical violence against the opposition party. Standing on the steps of the Supreme Court of the USA naming judges is an intimidation, if not a veiled threat against the judiciary by the legislative branch of government. Nancy Pelosi making a big show of tearing up her advance copy of Trump’s State of the Union (SOTU) speech behind his back was just showing complete hatred and contempt for what is after all a national institution. If you can’t beat them inside the rules of the game, then ignore the rules and provoke people to just murder them. That’s what nearly got Steve Scalise killed. Once you’re arrogant or petulant enough to go down that route, you’ll find out a couple of things.
The first is that it’s actually a two way street. If you abandon the usual political discourse and advocate just simply killing somebody with different political opinions, what’s to stop them doing the same in return? Again, it’s human nature. You opened that particular can of worms, you’re going to have to deal with the results. The murders of Jack and Bobby Kennedy in conjunction with the violent loss of Martin Luther King threw America into a very cynical view about politics for over a decade. What’s the point of voting for anyone you like if it’s just going to get them murdered?
The second is more subtle and rarely considered, especially by the likes of the harridan pictured above consumed by the pure spite and hatred that’s plainly visible on her face. You may have destroyed a particular game, but rest assured, it’ll be replaced with another modified game, so you should have thought about that in advance. What’s the new game going to look like?
Will Nancy get an advance copy of the SOTU speech next year? I think not. It was always a political courtesy after all. In the aftermath of such a disgraceful disrespect to a national institution, he won’t be giving her even the steam off his piss. That’s the new game in town Nancy. Trump immediately afterwards announced he will not be attending the annual St. Patrick’s Day bipartisan dinner because of what he termed her disruptive behaviour.
Trump is a big draw wherever he goes, without him there she’ll be lucky to get more than fifty freeloaders at the thing. Instead he’ll be hosting a private party at the WH for the Irish PM amongst other notables, and Nancy is not on the invitation list. In the future, I think Creepy Chuck Schumer will not be getting much in the way of the benefit of the doubt when it comes to legal rulings from the judiciary.
Ignoring or abusing the rules is remarkably like being found out cheating at cards. Once the word gets around, you’ll be lucky to ever get another seat around a high stakes card table. Pelosi and Schumer, by their own behaviour, are getting frozen out from the top table.
©Pointman
Related articles by Pointman:
Pointman's 
Pointy – the rulebook was also thrown away during the “trial” of Brett Kavanaugh and the attempted character defamation that that involved. Ms. Blasey-Ford’s friends who were said to have been there at the time of the alleged almost-rape denied being there, and her memory of the event was “reconstructed” which has been shown to be, let’s say, unreliable as regards producing the truth. People can be induced to remember events that didn’t happen. Such evidence should not be accepted in any court of law.
Similarly, Schiff read a load of lies into the Congressional record as regards what Trump said.
Without honour in politics, there can be no trust either. It seems that promising Free Stuff still has a surprising success-rate, and people still haven’t realised that *someone* must pay for that free stuff, and there’s only one source for that wealth which is themselves. You can only borrow money so long without paying it back before the money-tree dies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The notion that the rule book should be ignored began, I believe, with the nomination in 1987 of Robert Bork for the SCOTUS. That was the first time a nominee’s character was purposefully and intentionally destroyed.
Of course that set the stage later on for the public political lynching of Clarence Thomas.
Joe Biden was involved in both these smear campaigns and, if I properly recall, so was the murderer of Chappaquiddick and total sleaze ball, Ted Kennedy.
Since that time established political / procedural protocols have been ignored – by who else, the demoncrats – whenever they wish to advance their agenda or to make a show of things.
This is just the beginning though; get ready for their push to abolish the electoral college as well as the Second Amendment; just for starters.
LikeLike
Picky point, but “veiled threat against the judiciary by the executive branch” should be “veiled threat against the judiciary by the legislative branch”. Pelosi and Schumer are legislative members.
Trump represents the executive branch.
LikeLike
Fixed & well spotted Spetzer86.
Pointy.
LikeLike
A lot of prior civil norms, such as courtesy, manners, respect, tolerance, to name a few, seem to be evaporating as we watch. Not to mention just simple old thinking.
The old adage of “sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me” seems to be lost in todays ever advancing feelings culture.
However while the left feel they are hurt by being called names and resort to mob violence, it is the conservatives who have some very significant sticks and stones. Once they get motivated it will be interesting.
Of course there is the so called right wing folk who really like sticks and stones.
If I were Antifa storm trooper I would be tad concerned about the eventual comeuppance.
LikeLike