In my last post I explained how TV shows like last week’s The Good Wife is used as liberal cultural propaganda.  Now lets look at how it would play if it was done the other way around.

What if even one scene from that show had been written with a conservative slant instead a liberal one?

Let’s re-set the stage  Supreme Court Lawyer Jeremy Breslow (Bruce McGill) is arguing for spousal privilege on a wiretap involving a gay couple in a federal tax fraud suite.   He has just finished cross-examining the former US AG who maintains it’s the Administration’s opinion the Defense of Marriage Act discriminates against same sex marriage and is unconstitutional  and therefore is not enforced.

We pick up the revised action just as Breslow finishes and Judge Claudia Friend (Cheers’ Bebe Neuwirth) turns the witness over to the Federal prosecutor Bucky Stabler (played by Brian Dennehy)…

Attorney Breslow: I tender the witness

Judge Claudia Friend:  Bucky.

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler: (getting up from his desk walks toward the witness) So Attorney General Shipton it is the opinion of the current administration that Defense of marriage act discriminates against same-sex marriage and it should not be enforced?

Fmr Attorney General Shiption:
Yes sir as I said.

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler: So, tell me Attorney General Shipton, if this is the case why has the administration not removed the law from the federal code?

Fmr Attorney General Shiption: Excuse me?

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler:
Well you have testified that it is the opinion of this newly re-elected President that this law is unconstitutional. If it’s Unconstitutional why hasn’t the executive branch used it’s authority to simply removed this law from the books as Unconstitutional?

Attorney Breslow: (Rising) Objection your Honor: Basis

(the shot briefly flashes toward the judge)

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler: (Turning to Judge) The Basis your honor the Attorney general is stating the law is unconstitutional surely he can explain to the court why the administration does not declare it so?

Judge Claudia Friend: Sustained. Bucky the court is aware the executive does not have such authority.

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler:
Attorney General Shipton as the law can’t be declared unconstitutional by the executive branch, surely it can impose a new law to replace it?

(camera pans briefly to AG Shipton looking uncomfortable)

Attorney Breslow: (Rising) Objection your Honor

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler:
I withdraw the question, your honor.

Judge Claudia Friend: (annoyed) Mr Stabler let me remind you one more time we are not before a jury. I know the powers of the executive branch, you don’t have to explain them to me.

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler:
Very well your honor, (wearing a slight grin walking toward the witness.) , So Attorney General Shipton it is the opinion of this administration that this law is unconstitutional and while you can’t unilaterally change the law or remove the law you can decide not to enforce it, is that right?

FRM AG Shipton That is correct.

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler: Tell me what is the administration’s opinions of the current Federal Gun laws?

(AG Shipton taken aback)

Attorney Breslow: Objection your Honor Relevance?

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler: (Approaching the bench looking entirely serious )Your honor the defense asserts because the administration has an opinion that this law is unconstitutional based on the position of the administration it is entirely proper for the law not to be enforced. If the administration claims such power is valid we would like to establish what other laws this administration believes it doesn’t have to enforce.

Judge Claudia Friend: (Surprised, Pausing, serious and thoughtful) Overruled. (Turning to AG Shipton) You may answer.

Attorney General Shipton: I, (pausing) I’m not currently in the administration so I certainly can’t speak for them on such a matter.

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler:
Well you certainly has no problem speaking for them on Gay Marriage…

Attorney Breslow: Objection…

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler:  I withdraw the statement.   Attorney General Shipton can you speak for the time you WERE in the administration.  What was the administrations opinion on current gun laws at the time you were there?

Attorney General Shipton:
It was our opinion the Gun laws was not strict enough.

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler:
So those laws were enforced?

Attorney General Shipton: Yes.

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler: What about laws involving Religious Freedom?

Attorney General Shipton:
Of course we enforced the laws.

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler: Really, the Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church would disagree.

Attorney Breslow: Objection!

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler: (before the Judge can rule) Withdrawn. What if a subsequent administration believed Social Security or Medicare or the Voting Rights act was unconstitutional? Could they simply ignore them?

Attorney General Shipton: Ah..

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler:
What about the The Freedom of Information act? Did you enforce that law for everyone or only the people you agreed with?

Attorney General Shipton: I resent that implication…

Attorney Breslow: Objection, counsel is badgering the witness!

Judge Claudia Friend: (Looking Exasperated) Sustained! Bucky…

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler: ( ignoring all else)Tell me Attorney General it’s the function of the executive branch to enforce the laws lawfully passed by the people’s representatives, What were the other laws you as Attorney General, decided just weren’t worth enforcing?

Attorney Breslow: Your HONOR!

Federal Attorney Bucky Stabler: (going to the Bench and speaking with passion) Your Honor if the Executive branch can arbitrarily decide what laws count and what ones don’t, why bother having a legislative or judicial branch at all? Why bother having elections? Why bother having you at the bench? This is civics 101, (turning to the crowd and toward the camera) either the laws of the land mean something or they don’t, if the administration doesn’t like this law they can submit a repeal bill to the congress and push for its passage, either this republic and our constitution means something or it doesn’t!

Judge Claudia Friend: (All business). That’s enough! (She pauses to Composes, Camera briefly goes to Bucky and the Defense table, she turns to the Former AG.) Attorney General Shipton, you are excused. Thank you for your time. (the now rattled AG gets up from the stand and laws out , the camera follows him as he stare at Stabler with a look of disgust) I’m ready to make my ruling.

Judge Claudia Friend: ( Looking very serious and speaking in a tone lower than before.) During the late election I supported this administration. Their opposition to DOMA was a part of my reason for that support but if this administration was defeated at the polls, I would have expected its replacement to enforce the laws as written even the ones like the abortion laws, they disagree with. If a law passed legally by the elected representatives of the people and signed by a duly elected president, ANY president can simply be discarded on a whim then we have ceased to be a representative republic and a country of laws.

Until the congress repeals this law, or it is struck down by a qualified court DOMA is the law of the land and it will be obeyed. It is the ruling of this court that under federal law as written recognized Marriage as the Union between a man and a women and spousal privilege is NOT allowed. The wiretap may be played.

Imagine for a moment what the effect of such a scene acted out by quality actors would have on the viewing audience? Well that is what we are fighting every week on every channel on the Television.

I submit and suggest that this has to be fought and I have a proposal to do so.

I would suggest a weekly show, a web cast where the three or six scenes like this from various shows are re-written from the conservative view, shot and presented as a parody/alternative. Such speech would be protected by the first amendment.

I think fans of these shows would watch, I think it would be a YouTube sensation, I think the MSM and Hollywood would go nuts objecting and I think it would generate more buzz than a beehive hit by a baseball bat.

You can’t change the culture until you get the attention of the people in it. I say it’s time to do so.

One of the functions of the liberal control in Hollywood the to pass on the liberal mindset hidden within drama. It’s done with some subtlety, to make sure it is not too obvious, but like Joe Morgan and the pitchout one you know the signs you spot it every time.

Last Sunday’s  episode of the The Good Wife is no exception. The primary storyline of this weeks was a case of a spousal shield in a federal court. You have two execs who are accused of defrauding the IRS, After an objection a gov wiretap of the CEO’s conversation with his wife is disallowed under spousal privilege, a second wiretap of the CFO’s conversation with his gay spouse causes a dispute because of DOMA.

And of course this is the week when the protagonist, lawyer Alicia Florick Gay brother happens to show up saying how proud he is that she is fighting this.

A well-known Supreme Court Lawyer Jeremy Breslow (Played by Bruce McGill) wanting to overturn The Defense of Marriage Act volunteers to join the defense as it is considered an excellent chance for overturn the law. This leads to an interesting exchange where Judge Claudia Friend (Cheers’ Bebe Neuwirth) and both sides argue the “validity” of both the law and of the gay couple’s marriage.

There is a sequence where Breslow brings in a former Attny General to testify about the current administration’s opinion of DOMA. The Fmr Att General states the Administration considers the law unconstitutional and therefore it should not be enforced.

The Federal prosecutor (played by Brian Dennehy) then comes back with a litany of benefits that the federal government doesn’t allow showing the government enforces the law when it comes to money.

The judge seeing this asks for evidence as to the “marriage” of the gay couple.

This is a clever moment, by listing the benefits “not allowed” it paints a picture of an evil government denying equal protection to people because of sexual orientation rather than a group of people redefining an institution for their own narcissism. It allows the show to attack the law in the guise of defending it.

In the end after during testimony over fidelity and “Free Fridays” the judge (Bebe Neuwirth) rules that DOMA is the law of the land and the wiretaps can be played.  Of course considering her argument the entire sequence asking for evidence is meaningless, but the point was to argue the unfairness of DOMA  to the viewing audience not to make a realistic court drama.

So the point is made Violins play and the audience is shown just how HORRIBLE DOMA is. The liberal writers had done their work.

And that is what we are fighting against 100 times a week on Network TV.

How would this work if things were different? How would this pay out if it had been written by a conservative?   Well that’s my next post…


Update:  How a conservative would have written it

Update 2: Removed the words “on a regular basis” from the 3rd to last sentence.

Today on DaTechGuy on DaRadio we’ll be talking about the bipartisian “Fiscal Cliff” and sequestration and the wonderful things it will lead to.

We’ll also be talking about the brand new Bill of Rights that’s I’ve modified to cover the new realities of the Obama administration

We’ll be doing all this today at 10 AM EST on WCRN AM 830 Worcester and we’d love to have you join the conversation at 508-438-0965 or 888-9-FEDORA anywhere in the country.

if you are outside our 50,000 Watt Range you have a lot of streaming options.

You can listen live using the three different links for the WCRN live stream

If you are using Windows media player click here
If you are using Winamp clip here
If you are using real player click here

If you are using something else, then go to Tune-in.

No matter how you listen, make sure you do.

Merry Christmas to all.