Entering the conversation mid-interview:
The public asks a few Questions of our legal system.

Question: so you’re saying this is democracy?
Answer:  yes of course
 
Question: so why do we have courts of law to decide issues when we could put everything to a vote?
Answer: ‘cause them rascals framers of the constitution understood that without courts then power flows to the majority and then very quickly moves to an oligarchy that ignores the rights of minorities.
 
Question: so our framers didn’t want us to be like other nations where minorities are run over by the excesses of the majority.
Answer: exactly, and sometimes that’s very inconvenient.
 
Question: inconvenient?
Answer: well obviously we can’t give everybody a voice.
 
Question: why not?
Answer: the majority don’t want that.
 
Question: but wait, I thought the courts were there to prevent the majority from locking out the voice of the minority?
Answer: yes, and I don't want to speak too trendy but that’s why the Rapulican party are workin’ hard to label the courts ‘activist’
 
Question: oh, so when the Republicans convince people that the courts are bad, then the true majority can come to power?
Answer: yep, and that’s good ‘cause nearly 50% of the people want that.
 
Question: but wait, nearly 50% is not a majority.
Answer: of course it is, because thems the peoples got money.
 
Question: so the court is there to protect the minority from the excesses of the majority, but when rich people reduce the court, then the rich people can exert oligarchic power?
Answer: it makes the world is simpler.
 
Question: simpler?
Answer: hell yes, ‘cause the rich people don’t want to answer to anybody.
 
Question: dang.
Answer: was that a question?
 
Question: no, I’m estimating the reader is laughing at the predictability of this conversation.



Gene Haynes