A note by Maynard

As events like this transpire, we get fed an endless stream of little details until our eyes glaze over. Headlines scream when someone like Kucinich commits this way or that way, as if that’s what it’s all about.

I suppose the battle is won or lost based on such technical minutia. But as you listen to reports of the skirmishes, don’t lose sight of the war, or of its meaning.

It troubles me that the Democrat strategies, first of the “nuclear option” and now the “Slaughter Rule”, which seemed so outrageous at first blush, quickly settle down and become part of the normal political landscape. I guess that’s the way it is with outrages: After a while, you just take them in stride.

That’s a problem for us. The anti-democratic tactics of the Democrats are the stuff of Third World strongmen, or maybe Chicago politics. But we can’t allow the law of the jungle to become the new Washington norm.

I recently posted a blog note of the YouTube clips of Obama promising to bring about health care reform through a national consensus. But things did not move forward as Obama had told us they would. As it became clear that the emerging law was tilting hard left, the nation began to get spooked. Elections in New Jersey and Virginia and Massachusetts, in direct reaction to Washington’s bad path on health care, altered the political landscape.

By the rules of traditional American lawmaking and politicking, Washington would have listened to the people. Obama’s plans for health care reform would have halted. The work-in-progress would have been considerably amended, or even restarted, to bring the political center on board.

But Obama wasn’t having any of it. Rather than working with the people, he chose instead to throw out the lawmaking rulebook. This was done for the explicit purpose of thwarting the election results. Thus we moved into the previously-illicit territory of “nuclear options” and “Slaughter Rules”. This is without precedent in modern American democracy.

Maybe that’s the way major laws get passed in various undemocratic hellholes. We cluck our tongues at the corrupt systems of such places, and we bask in our smug superiority. But not here, no. It can’t be happening here.

I would hope that our representatives in Washington would object in principle to the hijacking of the American republic. This strikes me as much more important than the law being considered. If the thugs win and the law goes through, the relationship between Washington and the people will never be the same. And the conflict that lies ahead may well become uglier than anything we’ve ever seen.

This section is for comments from tammybruce.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
7 Comments | Leave a comment
  1. thierry says:

    the thing that bothers me the most out of the whole gross cluster f of obamacare is the very thing that is rarely mentioned: the individual mandate. it flies in the face of the bill of rights and the constitution and those gutless pukes the republican’ts hardly ever mentioned it. it’s the crime against the constitution all the rest of the crap in the bill hangs off- meaning it’s deeply flawed right out of the gate.

    that it’s rarely mentioned by opponents to the bill gives me the uneasy feeling they don’t mind the mandate one bit because they understand they too might want that sort of power over the people- so they just focus on what a disaster the bill is financially.

    why the mandate hasn’t been challenged in MA is beyond me- although you can exempt yourself from it for ‘ deeply held religious beliefs’. how about deeply held ideas about your own personal freedom as an american- freedom to buy or not buy what you wish concerning your own mortal being? maybe no one is left in MA with the money to be able to hire a lawyer to defend them. after all ,when you can’t afford health insurance and the state fines you because of it it’s not like you have the time or inclination to fight one of the most corrupt states in the union.you just move to new hampshire. we’re going to lose a representative in the house because the state’s voters and tax payers are fleeing. but romenycare is working fine, you go barry girl.

    the mandate’s the thing- destroy it utterly and emperor urkel o’bambi augustus has his whole agenda terminated. romney should have the mandate clubbed over his hairpiece too. everyone who voted at any point ‘yes’ for the mandate needs to be exiled and dropped with queen barry into the nearest banana republic or drug cartel controlled mexican city. if you voted for slavery you are not an american- get out- that should be the postbarrry reconstruction of the republic.

    “A martial nobility and a stubborn commons, possessed of arms, tenacious of property, and collected into constitutional assemblies, form the only balance capable of preserving a free constitution against the enterprises of an aspiring prince.”- edward gibbon on the constitution in rome under emperors, the decline and fall of the roman empire

    • Maynard says:

      Yes, it’s of paramount importance that individual liberties not be curtailed without some compelling interest. Getting a letter claiming some woman is using her dead sister’s dentures does not justify the intrusion of these morons into my private life.

      I understand it’s technically possible to be conscientious objector from the Socialist Security program, although I’ve heard they’ll reject your filing unless you’re Amish and working in an old-fashioned saddle shop or the like. I suppose it may be theoretically possible to “work the system” by getting involved with the proper religion, or maybe even founding a new one like L. Ron Hubbard did with his “Diuretics” thing. But I really hate to play those games; they leave me feeling unclean, and of course the Feds will hound you forever. I just want to get on with my stupid life without having to jump through anyone’s arbitrary hoops any more than is necessary. Unfortunately, this isn’t an aspiration that gains me any useful political allies.

      • thierry says:

        the sad thing is- the federal program doesn’t appear to have romneycare’s religious exemption. i think this is because every other religion and god can be over ruled by urkel-jesus and his commie apostles, nan the pseudo-papist and dirty harry of the deserts. the omnipotent barry and his bumbling minions trump allah or the real jesus or g-d or isis.

        MA is the home of the christian scientists and their big awesome building and reflecting pool so romney’s precious- precious would have been run right to the supremes upon passing if there wasn’t the exemption. frankly i know it was a dry run for the next dumbocrat president as kennedy was heavily involved in its passing even though he was not in state government. having the white worm romney as gov. was an unplanned blessing for them as he was using the state to give him some liberal blue baubles to flash during his potus run.

        people should know MA passed romeny care with little public input aided largely by a media cone of silence. there were no townhalls, there were no postings of the bill. it was a blitz attack in cover of darkness beneath the whale like shadow of teddy. ironically one of the republicans running against the dreadful patrick for gov. is a f’ing health insurance executive. i bet he’ll be real responsive to repealing the mandate in MA- the mandate that lines his pockets.

        i take the religious exemption for real- romenycare does violate my religious beliefs and much of modern western medicine is in direct violation of them, although i do not belong to an organized religion the government would be aware of. as an adult i have never had medical insurance, as a child we never had it either. in MA they have yet drag anyone to court to deny them the exemption but they have the audacity to posit that if you get medical care they’ deem’ medical care even if you pay for it you lose your exemption for that year. i don’t think dear leader will be so lenient to objection to his fabulous “rights” and mandates except, of course, like taxes, for those whom he employs in government positions.

  2. eMVeeH says:

    Well, The BotoxBiddy must’ve had quite a “debate” with the Congress Gals, yesterday. In a news short I heard on the radio this morning, Pelosi sounded very hoarse. Poor thing. She probably shrieked talked a bit too much.

  3. mrcannon says:

    Maynard, it already is ugly. I am so polarized I will not talk about politics with the other members of my family, all of whom are left-leaning or worse. I won’t talk about politics at work, either; it’s a county road crew and they all vote Democrat. I am on the verge of saying something I can’t take back. I have come to the inescapable conclusion that I am unpersuadable and my adversaries don’t have the brains to be persuaded. I even accused my congressman of treason, just because of his intention to vote for this unconstitutional piece of (expletive deleted). I’m usually a pretty tolerant guy who doesn’t get offended by anything–thank goodness for talk radio to keep me grounded–but I am still human and I have my limits.

    • Maynard says:

      I know the feeling. I try to resist the temptation to launch (or respond to) an argument that will merely be unpleasant and leave a bad taste in my mouth but accomplish nothing positive. Some people seem to enjoy that sort of blood sport, and they’re good at it. Not me. As you note, it’s comforting to know there’s an entire world of people with more sense, even if you happen to be surrounded by the other sort a lot.

  4. MRFIXIT says:

    What’s important? Lowering the actual cost of healthcare is important, and can be done. The cost could be lowered somewhat, but not slashed by half or even a third. First, one must understand the cost inputs and whether they can be reduced or not.

    Input#1. Labor. Not likely to drop. Medicine is largely a one on one labor intensive endeavor. We are not big screen TVs. You can’t toss heart patients on a conveyor belt and have a machine prform a bypass, or a transplant. That said, there are less invasive techniques that reduct recovery time, but surgeies by these methods take longer. More skilled labor, Mo Money. Also bear in mind that all the support labor is unionized and that labor increases 2-3% above the CPI rate. If your wages track the CPI or as in most cases fall a little behind it, and their wages move ahead of it, a 5% spread is a 50% increase in 10 years. Overall labor is probably more than 70% of heathcare costs. (I’m estimating here.)

    2.) Plant and equipment. This is not a cost that can be monkeyed with too much. However costs of smaller “urgent care” facilities are far lower than the big municipally, or institutionally built monolythic hospitals. They really spare no expense on those, and construction costs compare to corporate headquarters, city halls and churches. Do you need a marble lobby the size of a gymnasium, and a reflecting pool to take care of sick people? Maybe you do.

    3.) Malpractice insurance, junk lawsuits, and crazy settlements. Also can put medical insurance in here, as they are intricately linked. Junk lawsuits, or any malpractice suit increases both health insurance and malpractice insurance. Defensive medicine can be twice or more expensive than just the necessary medicine. Caps on settlements are one way to lower the cost. Having the offender’s licence pulled until they demonstrate proficiencey in that area would cut costs and improve medical skills. That would work in conjunction with a cap on pain and suffering as well. Settlements are welfare for attorneys. They don’t have to slug it out in court, and they still get paid a chunk. Competition is key to lowering costs. As long as there is some agreement of what the coverage is, pricing succumbs to efficiency.

    4.) Lack of doctors and nurses. Nursing is a rough job, the schedules suck and even though they are paid in accordance with other skilled professions they are scarce due to the demands of the job. Not sure where to go with this one. Doctors on the other hand are scarce because of a self imposed rationing system through limited medical school slots. Competition would help here, but it would require states to recognize and licence doctors from new medical schools outside the AMA. The current answer is to allow foriegn nationals to come in. They have to come from real medical schools, and take tests. If Obama care goes through we will probably go the way Canada did and flood the market with doctors from the four corners of the earth, without a lot of pesky questions. In England, veteranarians earn more than doctors. Vet insurance is practically non-existent, and outside of licencing, the market is practically unregulated. As a result, Vets are plentiful, costs are low, and run 1/10 of human medical services, and everybody manages to make a living. Kinda makes you think.

    The nation is older and we will need more care, not less. The dems are looking at this like Lennin would. If you spend twice a much in the last year of life as you did during the first 75 years of life, you don’t need that last year. Sad, but that’s how they look at it. As they fracture families, and destroy faith and family identity, perhaps Obama will unite the promise of youth against the subborness of the old. Perhaps this will be the class that he will march off to the camps. In about six years, Hitler created three main Big Lies. First he identified “ethnic germans” (no such thing, really). He then “elevated” them to the Uber status of “Arians”, or derived of arians (blond, blue eyed caucasian) which was wrong, because the norsemen were mostly where blond hair and the light eye colors emerged. Then he turned to the Jews to identify the villain to be driven to extinction. Of course he seized their property along the way. Will the Aged be the new Jew?

You must be logged in to post a comment.