Why dosen't Congress get rid of this shitshow format?

I honestly think there have been two meaningful moments in them since tv's invention:

1. McCarthy's "Have you no sense of decency" moment and
2. The revelation of the White House taping system during Watergate.

So, they've produced two meaningful moments since 1950 and the last one was in 1973, before I was born.

Both sides are wedded to this format.

Look, I like the guy, but Cory Booker is trying to run for the presidency based on his 5 minute performance pieces in committee meetings.

Booker does nothing for me at all.

Also, he makes his eyes open too big, it makes him look like a sweet pickle.

I honestly didn't think of her, because she was so damn good the Kavanaugh hearing. It was a performance within an awful lot of competency.

Booker - to me - seems to be doing some kind "Truth to Power" schtick which is almost nothing but performance.

I'm a bit in love with Harris.

Dems ask Yes/No questions and get rambling nonanswers, Repubs ask irrelevant questions to give him a break. Flip the House and flip the above. It doesn't work.

1. Put a limit to how much of this can be on tv. We can tape it and play the transcripts later in order to have transparency. Nerds like me will listen. But it won't be pro-wrestling on CSPAN.

2. Designate one questioner from each side and give them each 30 minute questioning periods. Make these people work if they want to grandstand.

I think it combining those two ideas we might, you know, learn shit about our government.