One-Liner Wednesday — Injustice and Hypocrisy

“Of all forms of injustice, none is more flagrant than that of the hypocrite who, at the very moment when he is most false, makes it his business to appear virtuous.”

Marcus Tullius Cicero, Roman lawyer, writer, and orator

Cicero was famous for his orations on politics and society. He was beheaded by order of his political rival, Mark Antony, in December 43 BC.

These words, spoken by Cicero more than 2,000 years ago, seem to be quite relevant in the second decade of the 21st century in the United States.


Written for Linda G. Hill’s One-Liner Wednesday.

22 thoughts on “One-Liner Wednesday — Injustice and Hypocrisy

  1. Marleen July 20, 2022 / 9:49 am

    Joe Manchin is a great face for corporate Democrats

    {I don’t actually know if the environment legislation was good,
    but the game or show goes on as one guy is ready to take the fall.}

    Liked by 1 person

    • Marleen July 20, 2022 / 4:43 pm

      I was looking for a video or some way to show how Manchin speaks, calmly and quietly, when he’s sticking it to everybody. The photo, here, pretty much shows how he looks (with a little hostility in his demeanor but entirely under control and camouflaged). Just so happens “they’ve” got him putting his weight behind so-called reform, today, “reform” I’m not sure will help anything… or much anyway.

      https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/20/politics/electoral-count-act-reform-january-6-response/index.html

      Bipartisan group of senators cuts deal to change election laws in response to January 6 attack

      Liked by 1 person

      • Marleen July 23, 2022 / 4:03 pm

        Do Proposed Reforms of Electoral Count Act Go Far Enough?

        Liked by 1 person

        • Marleen July 29, 2022 / 2:30 pm

          In the above link, I like that the guest points out the proposed “reform”/legislation is behind [and possibly counterproductive or dangerous]. It’s important to notice that the election of MAGA types to state position who can mishandle the upcoming elections, as they wish to, will put “fake electors” in front of someone like Kamala Harris will be up against the new bill telling her she can’t question anything. More brain power has to be put into these concerns if we care.

          Oh, what the hell… this is CONTINUING.

          DEMS are Pouring Money into MAGA [!]

          Liked by 1 person

          • Marleen July 29, 2022 / 4:26 pm

            Reinserting missing wording: … will put “fake electors” in front of someone like Kamala Harris who will be [with the laggardly wording based in either dull minds or minds purposely motivated toward knowingly-insufficient responses] up against the new bill telling her she can’t question …

            People involved in the MAGA “show” to steal the election by pretending it had been stolen and needed to be taken back, themselves, used the wording for their own proposed slates — of “fake electors.” Economic right-wingers are busy trying to make it possible to offer fake electors, unchallenged.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Marleen July 29, 2022 / 4:38 pm

              Better: who would then be

              { The wording I’ve chosen isn’t meant to direct,
              one way or any other, whether powerful Democrats
              would actually want her ( or whomever ) to challenge. }

              Like

          • Marleen July 30, 2022 / 10:08 am

            Why is AIPAC Spending Millions in Primary to Defeat
            Rep. Andy Levin, a former Synagogue President?

            Liked by 1 person

    • Marleen July 20, 2022 / 5:12 pm

      I have an excerpt, here, from about midway through a longish article. It’s icky, to me, that we are so dominated by something that isn’t required by The Constitution of the United States.

      https://theintercept.com/2021/06/16/joe-manchin-leaked-billionaire-donors-no-labels/

      In June, he told CNN, when asked if he was committed to maintaining the 60-vote threshold, that he wanted to “make the Senate work,” a sentiment he repeated each time he was pressed. Once again, he followed it up with an op-ed, this time in the local Charleston Gazette-Mail, saying that he had no intention of weakening the filibuster.

      Manchin’s openness for filibuster reform on the call is notable given it flew in the face of many attendees’ hopes. Asked about a proposal to lower the threshold to beat back a filibuster to 55 votes, he said that it was something he was considering, but then quickly referred back to his earlier idea of forcing the minority to show up on the Senate floor in large enough numbers to maintain a filibuster.

      “That’s that’s one of many good, good suggestions I’ve had,” he said of lowering the cloture total from 60 to 55. Manchin went on to discuss the last time the cloture threshold was lowered, in the 1970s.

      “I looked back … when it went from 67 votes to 60 votes, and also what was happening, what made them think that it needed to change. So I’m open to looking at it, I’m just not open to getting rid of the filibuster, that’s all,” he said.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Fandango July 20, 2022 / 5:52 pm

        There is no constitutional justification for the filibuster. It’s undemocratic and purely ideological. It should be abolished.

        Like

        • Marleen July 21, 2022 / 5:52 am

          It’s dawning on me more all the time that we don’t even have a republic. For decades, conservatives have made a big deal to correct anyone who speaks of democracy. But we’re supposed to have something that at least gives a nod to democracy. Taxation with representation, right? Once in a while (on a state or county or city level), we have direct referenda on one subject and another… so there is that. But, in general, even the idea that we elect representatives to do the work for us pulls the wool over our eyes. We have gerrymandering, big-money lobbying and campaign contributions and pacs, and the filibuster. Then there’s the electoral college system, when it comes to the presidency. Having senators is to block whatever the more representative House comes up with, even if we were to get rid of the filibuster. And that blockade is not enough to satisfy those wishing to be overlords; they do what they can to make our representative districts less reasonable, too. Yet, getting rid of the unconstitutional filibuster would be an improvement. {That and maybe make representative districts rectangular.}

          Liked by 1 person

      • Marleen July 23, 2022 / 3:04 pm

        Democrats [quote Scalia and] Target Dark Money’s Effect on Federal Courts

        Liked by 1 person

    • Marleen August 9, 2022 / 11:24 am

      This Is Not a Climate Solution: Indigenous Land Defender Warns Senate Bill Will Aid Fossil Fuels · 3 hours ago

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Lauren July 20, 2022 / 12:26 pm

    Sadly, this is very true of our country.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Nope, Not Pam July 20, 2022 / 1:19 pm

    Or just an indication that politics never changes

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.