Listen to “Time Is a Great Thickener of Things — But Not This Time” on Spreaker.
“Time is a great thickener of things.”
That’s a line penned by playwright Tony Kushner for the movie Lincoln. For some reason, the underlying meaning has always intrigued me. It’s the sort of line meant to be pondered.
Events rarely remain as simple as they first appear. In the moment, decisions are made quickly, often under pressure, and the motivations behind them can seem obvious. But as time passes, the story surrounding those decisions begins to grow thicker. Motives are debated, consequences unfold, and new perspectives emerge. What once looked straightforward begins to gather layers of meaning as people revisit the moment with the benefit of hindsight.
Political decisions, perhaps more than anything, accumulate these layers over time. The public sees the negotiations, the arm-twisting, and the deals required to move a proposal forward. Those tactics can look uncomfortable in the moment. Yet history often judges those same actions differently once the full consequences become clear. What seemed like maneuvering at the time can later be understood as the necessary work of governing.
That seems to be the deeper point of the line in the film. President Lincoln is defending the political bargaining and moral compromise required to secure the votes for the Thirteenth Amendment abolishing slavery. In the heat of the moment, the process looks imperfect — perhaps even troubling to some. But Lincoln understands that history will not remember every political trade or procedural maneuver. What will remain, once time has thickened the story, is the larger achievement: the nation choosing to end slavery and redefine its moral foundation.
For some reason that line popped into my head this weekend while reflecting on the West Virginia Legislature — particularly what happened Saturday night in the House regarding Raylee’s Law. I suppose it was summoned to help me find some redeeming meaning in the day’s events.
Sadly, I couldn’t.
Raylee didn’t win. The greater good didn’t prevail making the search moot. Her memory — and the welfare of children — were lost to silly political gamesmanship.
Has it really broken down to the point that we can’t find agreement over a 60-day period on putting children first ahead of politics?
Advocates say they’ll try again next year. Opponents appear ready to kill any similar legislation just the same.
NEWS from Brad McElhinny: Key figures in debate vow to revisit ‘Raylee’s Law’ to slow school transfers in child abuse cases
The answer — the sweet spot — still evades me. What is clear, however, is that innocent children will remain at risk because adults can’t reach agreement. That’s not good governing, and it’s certainly not standing up for children.
Surely if the state’s legislature can purpose its police powers to ban certain ingredients in certain foods, it can do so to protect children?
It’s time to do better. If they can’t do better, it may be time for some new lawmakers who can.