When’s the last time you made one of those decisions that you lived to regret? Perhaps it was something simple such as telling your children they couldn’t have ice cream cones at 5:00 in the afternoon because it would spoil their dinner. Then you had to throw away your own double-scoop chocolate cone two days later when you thought no one was looking, but they busted you.

Or maybe you were with some friends while visiting your old hometown and told everyone to come visit you at your mountain cottage. Which they all did. At the same time. For two weeks.

Politicians, to the shock of no one, seemingly tend to make those kinds of not-thinking-things-through errors much more frequently than anyone. Virtually everyone running for public office will promise the voters anything and then, once elected, walk back or even deny making the solemn pledges that encouraged rabid support on the campaign trail.

Right now, Democrats in the U.S. Senate are making very loud noises about wanting to do away with the filibuster in that august body. You’ll recall that a filibuster is a unique tactic available to any of the 100 senators which allows just one member (or more) to prolong a debate on proposed legislation (usually via run-on speeches) in the hopes of delaying or preventing a decision on the matter.

That tactic is nothing new. But right now, it’s the Democrats’ turn to try to excise the filibuster since they presently have the majority (slim as it may be). The minority Republicans are adamant that won’t happen, but they themselves tried the same thing a few years back when they held the most seats. (See my initial sentence in the first paragraph above.)

If the Democrats were to succeed in abolishing the filibuster now, what would they say if the Republicans regain control of the Senate (which could happen as early as January, depending on the November elections)? They could well regret giving up that maneuver as an arrow in their constitutional quiver.

The same look-before-you-leap decision might also apply to the Biden administration’s choice to send a squad of paper collectors into the home of former President Trump. Obviously, someone thinks there’s something nefarious going on. And who knows? There could be a document uncovered that would put The Donald in a precarious legal condition.  Certainly, right now, it looks like a smart way of casting aspersions at a potential powerful 2024 rival for the White House.

But . . . and it’s a big but . . . suppose, just suppose that some of those Mar-a-Lago manuscripts contain information about a certain laptop that a certain presidential son happened to leave at a computer repair store. That revelation came to light during the 2020 campaign. And it’s not out of the realm of possibility that results of opposition research might be part of the government’s haul.

So far, we average Americans haven’t been privy to information contained in any of Hunter Biden’s laptop files. There’s rampant speculation, of course, that financial dealings damaging to members of the Biden family might be detailed. That might be when the whole idea of regrettable decisions comes into play.

Republicans need to think about what if there turns out to be information that brings down the Biden administration. That makes Kamala Harris Chief Executive. (Did Rs just squirm in their seats a bit at that thought?) Democrats need to ponder the scenario of unlawful activity putting Trump in a courtroom. Removing him from contention might produce a smile or two, but the Rs have a pretty deep bench of young and vigorous candidates ready to take on an 80-year-old man trying to explain how 10% inflation and a $31 trillion debt are good for the country.

Perhaps it’s best for the survival of the Republic that We the People don’t know everything that goes on behind the big green curtain. In 1960, the fact that Jack Kennedy won the state of Illinois raised a few eyebrows, especially when Mayor Richard Daley held off reporting vote totals from Chicago until the rest of the state had been counted. It was strongly hinted that multiple residents of the city’s cemeteries cast ballots. But Richard Nixon chose not to contest the outcome. He didn’t think it was good for the country. (Or maybe there were shenanigans in other states that he won. You decide.)

The point is, maybe it’s best to avoid jumping on a bandwagon that seems like a good idea at the time without thinking twice. Not only might you have to throw away a perfectly good chocolate ice cream cone, but you may also get bitten in a place you’d prefer not to be.

©MMXXII. William J. Lewis, III – Freelance Writer