Super Tuesday and the recent decisions by the Supreme Court seem like a perfect backdrop to the ultimate question in a representative democracy. I can filibuster here, but the question is a fairly simple one to ask, but a very hard one to answer. Do we believe that we are better off with the people (all of the people) being able to have unfettered choices in who represents them? I would say it is pretty clear that the answer to that question has been a resounding no throughout our history.

In the beginning, only land owners could vote and even then they had to resort to the electoral college. African Americans and poor people didn’t get the vote for nearly a century. Women had to wait almost 50 years after that. Finally, younger people could work, pay taxes, and go to war, but they couldn’t vote until after the Vietnam War. Fast forward to the present time and the biggest battles of our times have been the methods used to keep certain people from voting.

The efforts in Colorado, Maine, and Illinois represented the other guard rail that we could place on our democracy. If you don’t want to restrict who can vote then you can restrict who they can vote for. The last nine years has been a circle jerk where each party or group has waited for the other to do the dirty work for them. The Republican party hoped that he would lose at the ballot box and go away. They also said it was the responsibility of the Justice department. The Justice department clearly slow rolled their prosecutions and hoped he would just go away. The cabinet could have used the 25th amendment. Congress could have voted to convict once if not twice. Mitch McConnell himself said it was a job for the courts. Now, the courts are saying it is a job for Congress.

I’m not sure whose failure is the most egregious. Each institution taken by itself could explain its actions. I found the use of the 14th amendment to be problematic at best. At some point some recognized court or institution has to come to an official stance that he participated in insurrection. The January 6th committee danced around it. Jack Smith has been dancing around it. We have been calling it out on cable television and the blogosphere, but there has been nothing definitive or official.

That lands us right back at the opening question. Do we absolutely trust the people to make this call? If the answer is no then it is time to do some hard soul searching. I’d argue that if we were really about letting the people choose their leaders in an unfettered way then he has been told no twice already. That’s a tiny consolation. If we still think it is way too dangerous to allow ordinary people to have the unchecked ability to choose their leaders then we have to seriously reevaluate who we are. I personally think a number of Americans are too stupid to vote and understand the gravity of it. They are easily led and vote against their interests too easily. I also have to acknowledge that the same exact arguments were used against women, African American, and young people voting. Do we bring back literacy tests? Do we bar people with red hats or stupid bumper stickers? Obviously, I speak in jest but if you decide that some people are incapable of doing it properly then you are fundamentally responsible for finding a way to cull the voter rolls in a fair and equitable way. Otherwise, we have to let it ride and fight like hell.

Latest lie from the GOP and its official networks – “Colorados voting laws are like Georgia’s, so MLB shouldn’t have moved the All Star game there.”  As we all know, the controversy began when Georgia Repubs, not liking the results of the 2020 election, rammed through a whole new set of voting restrictions designed to suppress the votes of those they don’t like.  They lied that it was about “election integrity”, but we all know that’s pure USDA Grade A bullshit.  It’s about voter suppression, though they’re working hard to make it look like what it’s not.

In response to the bill, many large corporations belatedly condemned the law (after their customers and activists protested).  MLB announced they were pulling the All Star game from Atlanta and subsequently moved it to Denver.  The immediate response of Repubs?  Corporations should stay out of politics (except for donating money to us).  They also started lying about Colorado’s voting laws, falsely claiming that it’s laws are worse than Georgia’s.  Of course, that’s not true, not even close.

Jen Psaki was asked about that lie in the WH press briefing, and she set the record straight –

Boom.

Let’s decide once and for all what Fake News really is.  Remember when it was easy to tell the difference?

Well, now it can be a little harder but one thing is for sure — news is not fake simply because a Republican doesn’t like it.

And somebody is standing up to them.

The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel in Colorado is accusing state Sen. Ray Scott of defamation and threatening to sue. If filed, legal experts said it would be the first suit of its kind, potentially setting a legal definition for what is considered fake news and what is not.

The Sentinel published an editorial asking that the state senator go forward on bill to make it easier to obtain public records.  The senator did not take kindly to some damn body making legitimate requests.

Scott took issue with the column on Twitter. “We have our own fake news in Grand Junction,” Scott tweeted.

Boy Howdy, Sen. Ray Scott just poked the wrong publisher. He’s says he gonna take a few days to cool down but he damn well might sue.  A lawyer who has represented the Sentinel before has a say, too.

“We are seeing a trend, not just here in Colorado, but that politicians for a variety of reasons have taken to calling very legitimate media entities — whether it be The New York Times, The Washington Post or CNN — fake news,” he said. “It’s intended to delegitimize those sources for news.”

Oh, this might be fun.

Thanks to Brad for the heads up.