By Jose Castillo, political columnist

If there’s anything I can look forward to in the upcoming year, it’s the return of HBO’s “Curb your Enthusiasm,” set to premiere this fall. Despite making recent waves for his Bernie Sanders impersonations on SNL, lead man Larry David channels his inner President Donald J. Trump by playing a fictionalized version of him that’s both oblivious and politically incorrect while challenging the unwritten rules that we’ve all agreed to follow, such as forced small talk, insincere apologies and obnoxious holiday traditions. To say the least, David’s return to the small screen couldn’t have been as better timed.

In an episode I watched recently, David complains about a policy at his doctor’s office that requires patients be seen on a “first come, first serve” basis rather than by appointment time. When David revisits the doctor’s office, the policy has changed to his disadvantage. After another patient is seen before him, David again raises his concerns to a nurse. When that nurse points out David’s hypocrisy and accuses him of only wanting a “You First” policy, David concurs, affirming that a “Me First” policy would, in fact, work for him.

Never has a bitter, balding man on television so eloquently described the convictions of political parties throughout the history of the United States (aside from Sen. Sanders, of course).

Despite George Washington’s warning on the dangers of political parties, politicians were quick to split into factions as soon the ink on the Constitution had dried. Those who sought for a loose interpretation of the Constitution were the Federalists, led by the likes of Alexander Hamilton and John Adams. On the other hand, Thomas Jefferson and his Democratic-Republicans opposed a loose interpretation and demanded a stricter following.

In his book “A Documentary History of the United States,” Richard D. Heffner remarks on the influence these factions had on the young nation:

“Although the antagonists joined in support of Washington’s efforts to set up the machinery of government, their intense struggle for control continued under the new Constitution, and soon political parties emerged to institutionalize old and deeply rooted antagonisms between classes and sections.”

One of the earliest conflicts between these two parties was on whether the federal government had the authority to commission a national bank. In a letter to Washington, Hamilton argued that the government had “a right to employ means requisite and fairly applicable to the attainment of the ends of such power.” Washington accepted Hamilton’s reasoning and commissioned the Bank of the United States.

However, after losing political control to Democratic-Republicans during the Election of 1800, the bitter Federalists became the first to adopt a “Me First” policy. As Heffner remarks:

“Desperate Federalists had abandoned their earlier nationalistic, loose interpretation of the Constitution, had protested the War of 1812 as ‘Madison’s War,’ and in opposition to the war had espoused the very doctrines of states’ rights and limited government they so vigorously opposed when in office. […] The victorious Republicans, now in office, spoke enthusiastically about a generously broad and nationalistic interpretation of the Constitution.”

Another use of the hypocritical “Me First” policy comes from the years leading up to the secession of Southern states before the Civil War, which many still argue was motivated by the issue of states’ rights rather than slavery. Again do we see David’s jerkish rhetoric invoked to justify slavery.

In his book “Lies My Teacher Told Me,” historian James W. Loewen writes:

“Slave owners were delighted when Supreme Court Chief Justice [Roger B.]  Taney decided in 1857 that throughout the nation, irrespective of the wishes of state or territorial governments, black had no rights that whites must respect. Slave owners pushed President Buchanan to use federal power to legitimize slaveholding in Kansas the next year. Only after they lost control of the executive branch in the 1860 election did slave owners begin to suggest limiting federal power.”  

Finally, as we await the return of a comedic savior, heretics continue to reference his teachings to justify selfish politics. During an interview with Chuck Todd on “Meet the Press” last Sunday, Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway criticized Senate Democrats of blocking cabinet confirmations, saying, “[Trump] went to the CIA. He thought he was going to witness the swearing in of his CIA director Mike Pompeo, but you know why that didn’t happen, Chuck [Todd]? Because the United State Senate won’t confirm Mike Pompeo as CIA director. Ask Senator [Chuck] Schumer about that.”

If this complaint sounds familiar, it’s because it’s the same complaint Democrats had of Republicans in 2009 when confirming former President Barack Obama’s cabinet picks.  According to an article from ThinkProgress, Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell—who was minority leader at the time—demanded thorough proceedings and complete financial disclosures in order to delay cabinet positions. He also sent a letter listing his demands to then-Senator Majority leader Harry Reid.

So after 200 years of engaging in great political discourse, what have we learned as a nation? That adopting a “Me First” policy undermines any type of changes a party may make when it assumes power? Give confused party members whiplash as they to keep up with party stances? Help undecided voters choose a third party that will surely come to haunt either Republicans or Democrats in an election year? Well, not any of these lessons yet, but at least one thing can be certain: Larry David jokes aren’t as funny when our politicians recite them.