Dems snuck unrelated spending into veterans’
bill, then ‘unleashed pseudo-celebrity’
Jon Stewart to trash GOP for opposing it
BizPac Review,
by
Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
Original Article
Posted By: Imright,
8/1/2022 5:13:08 PM
Republican Senator Pat Toomey hotly defended his vote against the burn pits bill on Sunday, calling out “pseudo-celebrities” such as Jon Stewart for attacking him and Democrats for using vets as political pawns.
The bill would have ostensibly expanded healthcare benefits for veterans exposed to burn pits during their service. However, Democrats reportedly inserted legislation that had nothing to do with that. When Republicans were not allowed to amend the bill and voted against it, the left then proceeded to insinuate they hate veterans.
Stewart targeted Toomey after the vote and excoriated Republicans for standing against the bill.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
john56 8/1/2022 5:28:32 PM (No. 1234871)
A friend of mine took to Facebook to trash Sen. Cruz for opposing our veterans in this bill.
I suspected that the bill probably had all sorts of hidden "burn pits" implanted by Democrats, and that they were snuck in just prior to the vote under fixed Senate rules. However, it would have been nice for Sen. Toomey or the author of this piece to show some examples of the non-related spending snuck into the bill.
You know something I'd like to see when the Democrats lose power and the Republicans take over. A "truth in legislation" act or something like that. One of the key parts of the law would be
* No bill can be adopted unless the final version of the bill is available for public inspection for at least 7-10 business days before the House/Senate can vote on the bill. If amendments are passed during that period, the 7-10 day clock gets reset.
* If there is a pressing reason for such a law to be passed, an emergency provision could allow the passage of the law, but only allowing the law to take effect for no more than 90 days. Unless the Congress passes an identical bill with the 7-10 day provision, the "emergency law" is null and void after 90 days.
54 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Namma 8/1/2022 5:31:28 PM (No. 1234874)
the failure of people to read the WHOLE bill shows how ignorant they can be. I don't believe congress has EVER passed a bill that is not loaded with "pork" Ole johnny should have checked things out before opening his mouth and showing everyone how ignorant of government spending he is
30 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
bobn.t 8/1/2022 5:34:04 PM (No. 1234878)
Snuck?
Really? Why not sneaked?
Not professional.
Kinda of like "coulda went"
12 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Newtsche 8/1/2022 6:45:45 PM (No. 1234926)
Jon (sic) left the Daily Show with a questionably golden reputation. But he couldn't let it go, had to seek the spotlight once again. He now has an unnoticed pod cast, acting out as a complete tool regularly. He's a nasty, pathetic little man and it's wonderful watching him self-immolate.
25 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
JrSample 8/1/2022 6:53:10 PM (No. 1234932)
Isn't it nice of them to use us Veterans as hostages to their socialist spending plans.
46 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
DVC 8/1/2022 7:21:19 PM (No. 1234962)
Stewart is a piece of garbage, and never was funny.
32 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
downnout 8/1/2022 8:22:30 PM (No. 1235017)
This is standard operating procedure for the ‘rats. I’m glad at least one Republican smacked down smarmy Jon Stewart. I only wish every Republican on the hill had done the same.
26 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Birddog 8/1/2022 9:00:01 PM (No. 1235052)
how many pages is the Bill now? How many pages when it was 1st passed? How many when it was passed by the Senate?
Including how many $$$ in each of those iterations?
22 people like this.
That historically is the democrat trick for getting their corrupt legislation passed, sticking it into something they think republicans won't vote no on. When republicans do vote no, the dems immediately run to the media and lie through their teeth. This yet again is on democrats for putting another in their long line of poison pills into legislation that really needs to be passed on its own merits.
20 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
tootall 8/2/2022 7:32:37 AM (No. 1235291)
Specify wasteful spending. I'm sure its true, but will no longer trust anything ANY Pol says.
13 people like this.
Please read post No. 1 again and again; I, for one cannot wait for something like this to become bona fide LAW!!!
11 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
red1066 8/2/2022 9:09:08 AM (No. 1235419)
You can't sneak anything into a bill if someone actually reads the bill. Apparently, everyone in D.C. is in such a hurry to get out of town for vacation, that trash amendments can be added without anyone knowing what's going on.
14 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
lindaluka 8/2/2022 9:14:29 AM (No. 1235424)
"Snuck" is a perfectly acceptable word. Research it.
8 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
donnaclaire 8/2/2022 9:17:13 AM (No. 1235429)
When are these idiot big shots going to learn they need to have ‘all the facts’ before making complete fools of themselves in their zeal to trash others? Stewart’s vicious, uninformed tirades prove he is a proud, card-carrying moron.
5 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
MDConservative 8/2/2022 9:21:38 AM (No. 1235433)
I'm shocked...SHOCKED! Hey, this is how the game is played. And then come the campaign ads, complete with small print references to the bill number, with perfectly scornful voiceover, telling how Candidate X "opposed spending on our veterans". And the boobwazie gets all wound up...Candidate X screwing veterans like that! She's off my list. And if it's not veterans it's poor children and their single mothers (generally starving), first responders (being defunded, and no respect), "working Americans" (living paycheck to paycheck), and the elderly (fixed income squeeze), among the list of sympathetic victims of heartless office holders and candidates.
9 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
bigfatslob 8/2/2022 9:45:50 AM (No. 1235454)
What happened to the 'good old days' when you had to sign the bill first to find out what's in it. Nancy Pelosi said it.
8 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
Speedypetey 8/2/2022 9:59:34 AM (No. 1235470)
I would love to be in the product marketing department that decides to pay millions for 30 second spots on nightly narrative, zero comedy Jon Stewart when....there is very low viewership ratings. Why not put the cash in a pile and set it on fire!
4 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
Zigrid 8/2/2022 10:19:26 AM (No. 1235494)
Here's the democrats' game plan...pass legislation that is called "pork spending" at the last minute and then blame republicans if they veto it...label it "veterans" so they look really bad...WE figured them out...it's not working...America woke up to the democraps....can't wait till they're gone...
4 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
paral04 8/2/2022 11:12:21 AM (No. 1235574)
"Dems snuck"? There is no such word as snuck. They sneaked. Good Grief!
3 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
janjan 8/2/2022 2:05:50 PM (No. 1235750)
This is all deliberate and all timed to get people ginned up against Republicans before the election.
4 people like this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
StrikingViking 8/2/2022 4:21:52 PM (No. 1235853)
Attn #3 and #19: According to Merriam Webster, sneak had the past tense form sneaked when it first appeared in the late 1500s, but about 300 years later, in the late 1800s, the form snuck started showing up in the United States.
The Brits, of course, hate it.
5 people like this.
You know that when the Demoncrats, the Presstitutes and the Fauxleberties begin screaming at Conservatives that the legislation is tainted. That is so in this sordid case, Nanzi and ChuckU are responsible for this snide charade.
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Imright"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)