Jax New Rules



Reading time – 2:47 seconds; Viewing time – 3:54  .  .  .

Safety note to readers and viewers: This commentary registers 7.4 on the Snark-O-Meter.

With honor to Bill Maher for the format, here are Jax New Rules starting on January 20:

electric-chair-2Jax New Rule – People have to stop saying they’re pro-life if they continue to support the death penalty.

Jax New Rule – Americans who demand the defunding of Planned Parenthood may no longer claim that they care about women, especially poor women, and they have to stand on street corners handing out condoms.


Copyright Stantis, Chicago Tribune, 2017

Jax New Rule – Now that the Republicans control the presidency and both chambers of Congress, they can vote for roughly the 62nd time to repeal Obamacare, even as they have nothing to replace it and won’t for at least two years – that’s according to their own calculations – they have to take ownership of the healthcare outcomes of the millions of people who will no longer have access to healthcare at all. Furthermore, the Republicans will be required to provide grave markers for these millions, bearing the inscription, “I arrived here early, thanks to the Republicans.”

stoned-womanJax New Rule – Absolutist Bible thumpers must stop their cafeteria use of biblical rules and henceforth must follow all of them and in their literal meaning. So, if on your wedding night you learn that your wife is not a virgin, you must stone her to death and return the body to her father. And when you yourself commit adultery, your friends and relatives must stone you to death.

And finally,

Jax New Rule – Republicans who don’t aggressively investigate and penalize Vladimir Putin and Russia for their computer hacking and selective leaks omj-3f what they found, and for attempting to influence our 2016 election and our democracy itself may no longer wear the label of patriot nor claim they’re for muscular national defense.

For decades the Republicans have been presenting themselves to the American people as the true patriots, the ones who believe in the most robust national defense and who always fought for more money for the Pentagon, regardless of whether the Pentagon even wanted it (e.g. the F-35 Joint Task Strike Fighter). Whenever some foolish Democrat would suggest using some of those billions of defense dollars for something non-military they were ridiculed by Republicans as being weak-kneed, unpatriotic and willing to sacrifice the lives of our brave military men and women.

wp-putin-ordered-hackBut now that we’ve caught Putin with his hand in our ballot boxes, only a small handful of legislators is speaking up. Where did all that chest thumping go? What happened to their boasts of patriotism now that the President will be of their party and he’s in Putin’s pocket?

We all understand Trump’s continuing denial of the Russians having influenced the election. After all, if they did sway the election, it would be clear thatwt-3 Trump doesn’t really have the mandate he falsely boasts of having. It would be clear that he’s an illegitimate president. No, Trump has to tweet his denials of Russian influence on the election because his overblown ego couldn’t handle the truth.

But what of the many Senators and Representatives who are much too quiet now and should be calling for retribution, sanctions and greater protections for our country? Where are they? Where’s that stiff patriotic spine they’ve bragged about since the start of the Cold War?

Jax new rule for this Congress is this: Put up or shut up.


Ed. note: There is much in America that needs fixing and we are on a path to continually fail to make things better. It is my goal to make a difference – perhaps to be a catalyst for things to get better. That is the reason for these posts. To accomplish the goal requires reaching many thousands of people and a robust dialogue.

YOUR ACTION STEPS: Offer your comments below and pass this along to three people, encouraging them to subscribe and engage.  Thanks!  JA

Copyright 2024 by Jack Altschuler
Reproduction and sharing are encouraged, providing proper attribution is given.

What do you think?

Your name and e-mail address are required, but your e-mail will not be disclosed.

Keep the conversation going by both adding your comments and by passing this along to three friends.
That´s how things get better.

5 Responses to Jax New Rules
  1. John Calia Reply

    I like your idea of stoning adulterers. Beyond that, I have an issue with almost everything you’ve said. (Well, not almost but a lot of it. See, I can be snarky too.)

    One can be pro-choice and against funding Planned Parenthood. The two aren’t necessarily connected. The former position is about rights; the latter is about the role of government. The government is not responsible for the individual health outcomes of anyone.

    Obamacare was sold to us as “affordable”. In practice, it has turned out to be a program that provides health insurance coverage to the poor at the expense of the middle class. It needs to be revised even if it takes two years.

    Suggesting that Putin had his “hand in our ballot boxes” is beyond any of the findings of the intelligence community. We need a(nother) reset with Russia. What Trump has up his sleeve is anybody’s guess. There is too much gnashing of teeth on this issue. Too many unknowns to be critical yet.

    Winning the electoral college but not the popular vote does not constitute a “mandate”. LBJ once said that sooner or later Congress takes its measure of every president. My guess is that this Congress will take its measure of this one before the mid-terms.

    • Jack Altschuler Reply

      Just one distinction: The pro-life and Planned Parenthood issues are separate.

      My point about pro-life is that if one wants to protect fetuses but not live human beings, then one cares more for unborn babies and not as much for adults. That would make such a person pro-fetus, not pro-life. To put it more crudely, for such a person it’s not okay to kill an unborn baby but it is okay to kill an adult. I understand the evolutionary imperative to protect babies, but the logic of pro-life falls apart.

      Planned Parenthood is a healthcare provider primarily for poor women. Cutting the financial legs out from under it will, then, disproportionately impact and harm poor women. On the other hand, there is a reasonable discussion to be conducted about whether the federal government should be funding any particular healthcare provider, although it’s done all the time for hundreds of them. See http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/total-fqhcs/?currentTimeframe=0

      The Planned Parenthood conflict is not about Planned Parenthood; it’s about abortion.

      Here’s a puzzler: If funding for Planned Parenthood is removed, the entire organization may fail. Some women will still want abortions – it’s always been that way – so what that means is that wealthy women will find a provider but poor women won’t have that option, leaving them with back alley abortions that my kill them or carrying the baby to term. That translates to the federal government declaring that we only want poor babies.

  2. Jim Altschuler Reply

    Rather than “Put up or Shut up”, I’d like to recommend the alternate position of “Step up or GET OUT”!

    Perhaps I have a misunderstanding about the process but I THOUGHT that the representatives and senators (as well as the President and the Vice-President) were elected by the will of the majority of the people within their designated area to act and vote the will of those who elected them.

    If my understanding of the operations of government is correct, and if that aforementioned representation is not willing or does not carry out the will and direction of those who elected them to office, then the only alternative that I see is that such elected representatives must resign from the positions they hold to allow the populace to elect someone else who WILL carry out the electors’ wishes.

  3. Kirk Landers Reply

    Perhaps the most disillusioning thing about today’s America is that half the people believe in a party that has demonstrated it cannot govern. It has also, as you point out, Jack, distinguished itself as a party that believes in and practices hypocrisy–ie, love war but won’t themselves serve or pay for the wars, revere life when it comes to bullying poor women, but pull out the Bible and spreadsheet when it comes to universal health insurance, etc.

  4. Paul winsor Reply


    What is it with these pinkos? Trump isn’t facist, he’s a skillful negotiator and outwitted crooked Hillary! He is now going to change Washington and the world and make America great again.

    So do you like that, any cackles up. The righty who might write that to you is very emotional. Your new rules are very emotional.

    To open dialog, challenging someone’s core beliefs, at first…may not be the way to go.