Sunday, July 30, 2017

Don't Mistake The Narrow Victory Against The Republican War On Americans For Winning The War They Don't See It As Having Ended Their Attempts

The Republicans are still trying to kill the healthcare of Americans, this time the ever sleazy Lindsay Graham is in consultation with the worst caucus of the House, the tea party, neo-fascist "Freedom Caucus" to see if they can come up with a scheme to block grant it back to the states where it will be killed off state by state.  It's an old Republican strategy, one derived from the arguments of the slave holders before the civil war that slavery should be decided on a state by state basis, it has been used for all manner of depravity ever since.  Here's a description of what's going on, since they haven't come up with the text:

The group is trying to write legislation that could get 50 Republican votes, according to multiple administration and Capitol Hill sources. The proposal from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) would block grant federal health care funding to the states and keep much of Obamacare’s tax regime. White House officials also met with House Freedom Caucus chairman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) to brainstorm how to make the idea palatable to conservatives, according to two sources familiar with the meeting.

The White House-health care huddle came just hours before Trump savaged Senate Republicans in a series of Saturday tweets for failing to repeal Obamacare. If the Senate doesn't pass a bill soon, Trump warned, he may halt Obamacare payments subsidizing health plans for low-income individuals — an idea adamantly opposed by Republicans and Democrats alike.

Yeah, like those guys are going to come up with something that won't be a disaster that will crash and burn killing people and destroying the lives of many others.  Remember, the people working with Graham ARE THE ONES WHO THOUGHT THE HOUSE BILL KEPT TOO MANY PEOPLE ALIVE.  

Lindsay Graham is one in the line of the worst South Carolina politicians going back to the early years of the country.  His popularity with the national media, who certainly know what a hypocrite he is pretty much shows what they like in a politician.

If they do something like that it's time for states with Democratic legislatures and governors to try to get together and come up with state single-payer insurance for all.   If they could do it without involvement with insurance companies, that would be ideal.   If they could provide insurance to all of their residents in the same way Canadian healthcare was supposed to work, in which you only had to present a card to get treatment, it would be enormously popular and no one who endangered it would ever be elected, again.   That could be the problem of doing it on a state level because it would attract people to those states, the reason that it really has to be done on a national level.  The examples of Vermont and Massachusetts before the ACA passed need to be studied to see what could be found out from their experimentation. I think if enough states could do it they would force change to single payer on a national level.

If Trump tries what he threatened, and there is every reason to believe he might or might not, it is on the Republicans in Congress to do something about it.  I doubt that the leadership they've got would do anything but they might be forced to with enough backlash from people in their states.  If they do that it's time for the two Republican women in the Senate, those few in the house who acted most responsibly when it came to the Kill the Americans bills,  to consider their membership in such a party as would do all of that.  Do they really want to be part of that because it is their party and the leaders they supported putting in charge of the House and Senate who have done this.  Ultimately they share responsibility in whatever happens because of that.


  1. Porn is cool, unless it's your daughter, or your girlfriend, or your mother, or somebody.

    And then it's just obscenity. Unless you're a sleaze bag who wants the women in his life in porn. Nobody wants to be a sleaze bag; so it's obscene.

    Otherwise it's porn, and a beautiful expression of something to wank off to. Because if you don't know who they are, who cares? It's not like you have to believe their children of God, or something!

    1. I think there's more than a bit of class bias in the traditional stand taken by pseudo-liberals because many of them are well off enough to not have to worry about their daughters or sons being forced into some kind of sexual bondage, porn or prostitution. I always remember a discussion I heard in Boston where the white liberals all favored the legalization of prostitution while the black people on the panel, most of them more liberal than the white people, opposed it because they knew people who had fallen into prostitution whereas the white, affluent panel members certainly didn't.

      The lists of people who appeared in porn who died of AIDs or had terrible psychological problems, many of whom committed suicide are certainly relevant. So is the porn industry opposition to regulations requiring condoms, even with the statistics on infections with HIV hepatitis C. etc. among those who appear in porn, is all anyone should need to know about it. The excuse that if that's required somewhere production will go somewhere else isn't an excuse to allow that, it's a reason to get rid of porn or, at the very least, ban the showing of porn involving unprotected sex .

      I always remember at Eschaton, while Ken Burns prohibition documentary was on TV, I outraged some people by saying the only problem with prohibition was it didn't work and it enabled organized crime. There is a kind of alternative set of bluestocking scruples of the pseudo left, you are not supposed to say that sobriety is better than drinking, fidelity is better than screwing around, prostitution and porn are dangerous exploitations that harm the people involved in them and a few dozen others. I violated the one that said The Aristocrats was an unfunny and disgusting party game for lousy comedians and Little Lord Duncan banned me. Though I'd said I was tired of the place earlier the same day. I'd stopped participating most of the year and had gone back for a few days to see if it had changed. It hadn't. I'd pretty much dumped it over the misogyny during the 2008 campaign. I don't miss it or need more of the lessons I learned there. Mostly what not to do.

  2. With all the typos and putting this on the wrong thread, you can see it's been a long day. Your comment about blacks being against pornography because they knew the industry better made me think of Trump's "tough cop" speech no Democrat, apparently, can condemn. Can't be soft on crime to white voters, right? Not like whites are put in cop cars....

    1. Oh, my eyes are so bad that I'm pretty much typing in the dark these days. I'm hoping that we get single payer so I can find out if it's worse than just my bad eyesight getting worse.