previous post next post  

The new Democrat Strategy

1. Cross bridge.

2. Burn it.

Remember when Obie-Won opined that troops wounded in combat should have to pay for their own hospital care and rehab? And how rapidly he backpedalled when people were ready to rip his lips off he discovered how very unpopular that was with the American people?

Remember the uproar when HellCare folded TRICARE in with MediCare and remember what Secretary Gates said to calm everybody down?

"The president and I are committed to seeing that our troops, retirees and their families will continue to receive the best quality health care," the secretary [Robert M. Gates] said.

In case you missed it, John covered it here.

Welllll, it looks like the lying, crapweasel, scum-sucking, smackjob, jerkwad Democrats didn't get that message.

Remember when the lying, crapweasel, scum-sucking, smackjob, jerkwad Democrats said that the "flaws" in HellCare would be fixed through the amendment process?

Yeah. Right.

The Senate defeated three separate amendments offered to the health-care reconciliation bill on Wednesday night that would have abolished or limited the impact of a new tax on medical devices—including prosthetics, such as artificial limbs—that was enacted in the new health-care law President Barack Obama signed on Tuesday.

One of those bills would have completely repealed the new tax, another would have exempted those in veteran's health programs and members of TRICARE (the government insurance plan for military personnel, veterans and their families) from its impact, and a third would have exempted children and the disabled, including disabled veterans.

And if the lying, crapweasel, scum-sucking, smackjob, jerkwads try to claim that the amendments were defeated through the "democratic process"

Sen. Roberts’s amendment to repeal the medical-devices tax was defeated 56-42. Sen. Inhofe’s amendment to exclude children and the disabled was defeated 57-41. And Sen. Hatch’s amendment to exclude people insured by TRICARE or in veteran’s health programs was defeated 54-44.

The numbers say "Straight Party Line."

Oh, Secretary Gates? FedEx is here with a platter for yer nuts -- wave goodbye, they're going to be a wall decoration in Kansas.

Disclaimer: I am solely responsible for the rant. Anyone who wants to complain to John about me is free to do so -- but if you do it and threaten him because of something *I* said, I'll make you wish you'd never been born.

UPDATE: Almost forgot:

Speaking on the Senate floor in opposition to Sen. Inhofe’s amendment, Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D.-Mont.)said: “It exempts a certain group from the shared responsibility in helping finance health care reform.” Baucus opposed all three amendments, as did most Senate Democrats.

Baucus, you clueless idiot. Help finance health care reform? THEY ALREADY PAID!

The disclaimer holds -- in spades.

1 Trackbacks

TrackBack this entry at

Language warning applies to all Primal Redneck Urging Posts. If you are sensitive to such I suggest you quit now while your ahead. -BS Bill has an absolutely excellent rant over at the Castle regarding the Democrats actions on the Healthcare Bill and ... Read More


Hey, this is worth every penny I paid you for it.

Sad state if affairs. This should again mobilize the troops. Politically speaking.

So was my initial description of the lying, crapweasel, scum-sucking, smackjob, jerkwads.

I toned it down two notches.

Then I had to tone *that* down another notch.

Just in time for Korean War 2!   When is that crazy midget gonna do us all a favor and croak?
So was my initial description of the lying, crapweasel, scum-sucking, smackjob, jerkwads.

Unlike our elected officials I have some honor about me.

So I won't degrade Johns AO with a typical appropriate response that would probably be more warranted to a Private whose trying to march off the firing line with a loaded weapon.

But I think my blood pressure just went up about 20 points

MOTHAX of The Burn Pit just dropped me a comment

"I’ll give you 1/2 correct credit on this one. True, the Dem Senate voted down those amendments, but you may want to check on the Webb Amendment that read nearly identically and see that the GOP voted against that one. Both would have done the same thing essentially (clarified that all DoD and VA Health Care Delivery Systems qualified) but the Democrats wanted the credit, and so they tried to go with the Democrat one. The initial thinking by the Democrats in voting these amendments down was to avoid having to vote on the entire bill again in the house, so they tried to do it seperately. What happened subsequently though was that the Parliamentarian sent it back anyway, and it was passed.

Please email me at if you want some more info on all that."

Just playing middle man here. His comments not mine

Mothax knows what he's talking about.  Part of the great game involved in the Senate debate was Republicans trying to sneak through an amendment that would change the cost scoring so that the House would have to revote the bill.  Another element of it was to force votes that could be used against the Democrats this fall.

And, as Mothax notes via BS, the Dems were proposing their own amendments for their own purposes - mostly to have  some inoculation against what the Republicans were doing.

The key piece is that they passed an impenetrable bill, that is going to have to get nickel and dimed to death in order to fix the glaring flaws.

And not all of them will get fixed, of course, the devil being in the details.

But from the Dem's perspective that's still a win.  They passed health care - what had to be done to make it work, well, that's just tough noogies.

And if you happened to get crunched by the process, well, we're sorry, but that's just a sacrfice we were willing for you to make.

Since we exempted ourselves from it.

Because *we* get to be the guinea pigs for train wreck legislation, because, as Herbert Allison, assistant treasury secretary put it, " [the Democrats] did not fully envision the challenges that we would encounter," as he was explaining why I get to pay for even more people's mortgages, because more the fool I, I actually bought what I could afford.  Silly man.
Mothax fails for not reading Senator Webb's bill -- I did, yesterday.

Mothax has confused the proposed bills in the Senate with *Representative* Ike Skelton's HR 4887, which unties TRICARE from the 21% MediCare cuts scheduled to hit in June.

Webb's bill also unties TRICARE from the cuts, which is what the soon-to-be-de-nutted SecDef was chirping about.

It does not exempt *anyone* from the medical device tax.

Which is not to say that I don't expect Jim Webb to introduce such a bill. He's usually pro-troops. Usually.

Rant stands.
Well, what we have here, is a failure to commun- [turns off TV]. 

What we have here is exactly what we have writ large in DC.

Nobody is really sure of anything - but are damn sure they are sure of everything!
Short version from my seat.

Political parlence is screwing the guys who are or whom have  protected the political parlence.

Cam politicians

Are there any "WANTED" posters showing photos of "enemies foreign and domestic."

About 57 Senators may merit definition as such by people who pay close attention to their actions.

I love my country, butcan no longer trust my government.

The lying bastids passed a bill they had not read, and have no idea what they voted for (or against).  
Unlike you when pushed to the edge I do not get profane; I get quiet, very very quiet.  The Blonde Lady says the silence is deafening around here!
(Response self-edited to fit the required parameters of acceptable language on this blog)
I used to get very quiet, too.

I forced myself to change, because when I got quiet, I even scared the people who liked me.

When that fool spit at me forty years ago, I got very quiet.

During his windup to try to sucker-punch me, I was downright motionless.

And when the EMT's helped him onto the stretcher, I was quiet again..

I get quiet too. And it scares the people who like me as well. And the last time I got real quiet, there were EMTs involved as well.


This is why I've not blogged about the whole CF. I can't. I'm too mad.

I gots me zero legal eagleism and no more of worth in smart type thinkery, but I do has me some questions.

The Tricare and VA bennies were part of every enlistment package deal since the program was started.

Changing it now... isn't that breach of contract? At least as applied to those who are currently serving and those of us who served while it was in place. I mean.
Grimmy -- Historically, the Congers have already proved -- on several occasions -- that they believe they are under no obligation to uphold their end of *any* contract with the troops, implied, oral, or written. And the Nine In Black Dresses have upheld them.

Particularly when the Congers could claim they saved oodles of money by abrogating that contract.

Of course, the Congers promptly gave themselves hefty raises for doing such a swell job saving that money...

Jefferson's Tree and watering thereof.
With the waty Bibi was treated in the WH the other day ,and all of the "terrorists" that have been coddled lately, I would think there could be a good case made for TREASON in an impeachment trial!!The vote was taken and they came up with 300 members of the house that supported Isreal,that SHOULD be the same number to vote for impeachment if he throws Isreal under the bus.
 As I HOPE we can all see, the monkeyshines in DeeCee have taken an ugly turn, and we are in SEVERE danger of having our Constitution declared surplus to the process of Government, and completely abandoned.

Almost every reader of this blog and these comments is either a veteran of military service, or otherwise connected to the military in some fashion.

It is OUR time to act. We have to start PLANNING to actively oppose this hijacked government.

We have to PLAN to act together. We have to have an OBJECTIVE, which should be to do our level best to keep the military out of any action related to removal of this hijacked government. The US military is the only group which could save this government, once action to remove it begins. That removal action will succeed without the military's intervention.

We must now become an Army of Suasion, with our efforts aimed NOT at DeeCee and the corruptors there, but at our recent comrades-in-arms. If enough of us speak out, we WILL succeed, and then this government will fall, most likely with our Constitution intact to rebuild with.

If we fail, the removal will still happen, but it will be a sorry chapter in our Nation's history, our Constitution will likely be scrapped in favor of God-only-knows what, and the wrong men among us will gain control.

It's ALL up to us now. We alone can save this Nation from a horrible fate, but we will have to convince the military to refuse the orders that we all fear they will be given when the balloon goes up.

We'd better be thinking on how we will accomplish that, else this matter is going to be decided on the field of battle, and soon.

Promises made, promises broken.  What else is new?   

Twenty-four years of Reserve service, damn good service too.  We did a hell of a lot more than those time-serving scumbags in D.C.  Most of us hung on for the promise of medical care once we hit 60. 

Time to check the ammo can.

About the history of Congre perfidy:

Yeah. You are right. BUT!!! It is only because we've all and always allowed them to get away with it.
Now we're at the question of the ages. How far is too far? Has the camel breaking straw been loaded up yet?

Permanence is as bad as present-ism. Just because they've gotten away with it so far don't mean they'll keep getting away with it. For them to do so requires a conscious decision to play the punk and the coward by ALL the rest of us.
Good questions, indeed:

At what point, exactly, do you recognize that your political leadership IS a domestic threat?

And at what point do we recognize that peaceful protests and elections are not preserving the Republic and the Constitution from that domestic threat?

Tyrants rarely appear suddenly from out of no where. They usually cloak themselves in the legitimacy of existing legal structures and electoral processes to incrementally seize power.

Those who recognize the threat early are usually poo-pooed by everyone else, considered to be cranks and "conspiracy theorists", and silenced.

By the time the rest of the populace realize that their liberties and freedoms have been taken away, it's usually too late.
As has been well hinted at, and adumbrated, and foreshadowed, not to say mentioned, over at Jerry Pournelle's site for a while, The Republic is about done. The question is, who gets to be Caesar? (or Upton)

As a civilian, I can ask this kind of question. People proposed Jerry himself, but he declined, citing old age.  I think The Donovan is too nice, Bad Cat Robot is too scary (though she'd prolly be effective), BillT would be perfect for as long as he lives, Lex is too much of a straight arrow,  Skippy (both of them) seem to have leftish tendencies, Kim DuToit is way too grumpy.

I'm thinkin Rivrdog. The boy has administrative and LEO and military experience, I like his style... whoops, he's old, too, like me.

That's what really frightens me; the people who understand what's going on and want to resist it seem mostly to have gray hair, and the young'un's minds seem to be all soft and doughy-like.

Pournelle's a good guy, but he does tend toward "permanence". Read his old scifi stuff to get what I mean. What is today is to be always, as demonstrated by his writings where the USSR was concerned in the distant future.

He sees things drifting toward madness now and in the not too distant past, so everything will continue to drift toward madness.

That there are large numbers of men and women who see the drift for what it is and are also the sort that tend to take up arms to address such things when required, never enters into the mindset of such folk as Pournelle.

In the end, he does see humanity divided between serfs and elites. He may not be a leftard, but he has part of that mindset.
Re: Nuts, platter, FedEx...

They (nuts, that is) are regularly shipped but in this particular case (Gates, that is), I don't think they have a small-enough box (FedEx Express, that is). Trust me in this.

Insofar as the rest of the comments are concerned, the absolutely best way to scare Congress straight, so to speak, is to call for a Constitutional Convention. Risky, but at this point probably worth it. Besides, it rarely convenes but the shock waves have in the past, from what I've read, been enough to change behavior in the national legislature. On my wish list:

- Constitutionally mandated term limits;
- Mandatory application of all legislation to the Congress, i.e., no exemptions for the House/Senate vis-a-vis laws they pass;
- Earmarking prohibited;
- No bills passed out of the Senate without a 60-vote majority. No exceptions.
- Clarification of the Second Amendment to settle the dispute over an individual vs. militia-related right to keep and bear arms;
- Clarification of the 14th Amendment to halt naturalization by birth alone.

Then there's my one pie-in-the-sky change: any decision of the SCOTUS nullifying any legislation can be overridden by a two-thirds majority of the Congress. I call it the "F*** you. No, f*** YOU!" or FYNFY Rule (pronounced "Fin Fee").

I'll shut up now...
Grimmy -- Those promises will always be there. The names of the programs won't change, except to honor whichever Congresscritter has made the next change cut. They'll do this until they cannot do it.
Attila, you have the right to your opinion, you have the right to express that same opinion, I have the same rights. Before you talk of a Constitutional Convention, I would suggest you go *real damn slow*. Some of us might take exception to your ideas, we have sworn our lives to the protection of that document, in the present format, from all enemies foreign and *domestic*. This document has cost way too much treasure and the blood of our Military to have such an attitude.

Like every other Administration, I *have* issues with this one, like the one before him. But this concept keeps on going. Everything the Republicans accuse the Democrats of doing, the Republicans did in an earlier time. If it is wrong for one, it is wrong for both.

Attila, now, it's my turn,
"I'll shut up now."
Grumpy - I'm not sure we're reading the same thing?  At least not if I read your objections and tone correctly (which can be a problem in text).

Attila was calling for reforms to government that would apply to both parties equally, and which would reduce both the power of the slim majority (the 60 vote requirement) *and* the power of the entrenched minority (term limits) whereby we currently face the fact that about 12 House districts in the bluest of blue areas have managed, under the way the House operates, to put 60's era pie-in-the-sky liberals in charge of the House.

And Attila has proposed doing so in a manner fully consistent with the Constitution, invoking a clause the Founders inserted *precisely* as a mechanism to allow the people/States to address perturbations and usurpations relating to the national government.

And to get what he wants, Attila would have to convince 3/4ths of the States to go along with him.  Almost by definition this will go "real damn slow."  First the convention, then all the debates in the state legislatures as they went through the ratification process.

Or am I missing your point?
Grimmy, all the not-quite-kidding about Caesarism was to set up the last paragraph.  It does bother me that the people who see what's going on are mostly pretty old, and the young and dumb seem to be dumber than we were at that age,  or at least abyssmally ignorant of our history and founding culture.
30+ years of liberal indoctrination of our youth by Leftists in academia, Hollywood, the MSM, and Federal bureacracies have succeeded in helping to erase our cultural memory.

It was part of their long-term plan.
John,  As I look at your comment, with the exception of the second paragraph, I have no *real issue*.

Therefore, let's take a look at the second paragraph and find the troublesome portions, 'in context'. Now, let's start, I have no problem with the "(the 60 vote)" and "(term limits)", but I can see people in Red States having issues with it. 

At the end, you write, "...under the way the House operates, to put 60's era pie-in-the-sky liberals in charge of the House." Are you saying, there are no 60's era pie-in-the-sky conservatives?

By the way, if you're thinking of reforming this mess, start by putting POTUS and Vice POTUS on a tight leash, to and by law. As you can well see, my thinking on this has been influenced my the "Royal Bush/Cheney Phuster Cluck-Up". I think there were many people who had this same view. I wouldn't get too upset, I think Obama will be voted out at the end of this term. I also think you'll see a centrist gummit.
Grumpy - the only reason the VPOTUS needs to be on a leash is to keep him from chewing on the carpeting, but I digress.

I don't think you read me well.  I said:

"we currently face the fact that about 12 House districts in the bluest of blue areas have managed, under the way the House operates, to put 60's era pie-in-the-sky liberals in charge of the House."

In other words, those House districts, because of seniority, have put Pelosi, Waxman, Rangel,, in charge.  People who are wholly unrepresentative of the bulk of the country, even the blue parts. 

As for Red Staters not liking the 60 vote rule - exactly.  It should be just as hard for the Right Wing to push through a partisan agenda as we righties want it to be for the Left.  Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. 
@Armorer, I read you 5 by 5! Reference to VPOTUS = Cheney

The voters voted more against the Republicans because of their actions. The voters voted for the Democratic Party, as the only way to vote against the Republican Party. When the Republican Party was in power, don't just look at your statistics, look at their behavior. Let's see see how the Republicans behave as they treated like the Democrats. You are so correct, "Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander." They have screwed the pooch and now, he expects to be paid.
John, The more I think about it, the more I'm coming to the conclusion that you're right. I don't get it. But the real reasons go back 41 years ago. I can not go into details, but I can *Never* respect either Bush or Cheney. My body sorta talked with me, saying, "Enough, it's time to pull the plug on this issue. You're overlapping two concepts which should be separate. This is not be honorable with John or yourself."

I will monitor this thread for any reply that you might have, on this issue. You deserve the respect. Yes, I will continue to read the blog and interact on other subjects.
No worries, Grumpy.  It's all good.  And it's perfectly okay to not be a fan of Bush and Cheney.