The Good Wife: Conservative Version

by Datechguy | December 1st, 2012

Readability

The Good Wife: Conservative Version

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.

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.

DaTechGuy on DaRadio

money matters 003

Get Cash for Your Pallets! 1-(800) 248-7543

aaron test

jeffrey’s

jeffrey’s

Buy Raspberry Ketone Here

American 023

Belanger Hardware 284 Water St · Fitchburg · (978) 342-2912

belanger 2

Try the Double Burger!

nashoba

Annie’s Book Stop of Worcester

Annies Book Stop of Worcester 001

Find Discounts at the Stores you Love

TOP STORES

pottery paintin place

pottery paintin place

The Navy Seals in their First Mission

The Navy Seals in their First Mission

Get yours for Kindle Here

Get yours for Kindle Here

Listen to your Granny

RWG

DH Gate Dot Com, Online Shopping

ecigarette

Bernard PC 774-322-6045

Bernard PC 774-322-6045

Support our favorite Charties

Read me at Examiner.com

Examiner badge2

Only 114 Million Hits to retirement!

Most Innovative Blogger 2013

Most Innovative Blogger 2013

Tags

Help a Brother Knight of Mine who needs a hand