Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

Bush vetoed a "children's health bill" today. this bill utilizes the classic political trick of naming a bill in some innocuous way that sounds wonderful for all, like the "clean air and water" act which provided access to timber for logging companies.

It's got the word "Child" in it so opposing it means you are evil.


In a nutshell, this bill is designed to expand government coverage to families that can already afford it. Some families earning as high as 80k would have qualified.

Bush rightly denigrated this bill as a big step toward socialized govt-provided health care and vetoed it. but of course, it really just means that he hates children and wants them to suffer and die from untreated diseases.

As expected "Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., decried Bush's action as a 'heartless veto.'"

The bill rides on another typical political trick which is to make the continuation of one policy dependent upon a bill which expands it. My hats off to the democrats for creating this incredible opportunity for grandstanding, blowharding, and shamelessly pandering. Very nicely done.



natedogg

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

I'm still waiting for the "Cute ethnically diverse children and small fluffy animals act" Which will probably be proposing a mass genocide of some kind.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

The Dems actually have a shot at overriding this veto. It passed the Senate with a veto-proof majority and they need 15 more GOP votes in the House (they have 40) to override.

As for the merits, you all know my view on health care. If grandstanding and blowharding results in more accessible health care, I'm all for it.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

In calling for Congress to pass a “clean, temporary extension” of the current State Children’s Health Insurance Program, Mr. Bush argued that the Democratic bill would raise taxes and allow children whose families earn up to $83,000 a year to enroll.

The chief Republican sponsor of the bill in the Senate, Senator Grassley of Iowa, said Mr. Bush “is getting bad information.” He said Mr. Bush’s reference to the $83,000 limit was drawn from a proposal put forth by New York State to receive an exemption from the program’s restrictions, which the administration recently denied.

Mr. Grassley said he appealed to the president directly Thursday morning, telling him that a long-term extension of the current law would leave children uncovered, and that the $5 billion increase in the program the president has proposed is not enough to cover more children.

“Drawing lines in the sand at this stage isn’t constructive,” Mr. Grassley said, adding, “I wish he’d engage Congress in a bill that he could sign instead of threatening a veto, and I hope he’ll still do that.”

Bush is among the bigger blowhards on this issue.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

Of course, Bush pushed for the Medicare prescription plan which was a much bigger waste of money and unfunded to make things worse.

wtf old people > children


(I guess children can't vote is the reasoning used here)


<<--doesn't support either of the two packages. I am saying if someone is two faced, he should turn the other cheek once in a while.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

Politics saddens me because it reminds me of how stupid the vast majority of the unwashed masses are.

Probably 5% -10% of people see through the smokescreen / BS of how these bills are named and reported, or should I say twisted, in the media.

"The Patriot Act": anyone who doesn't vote for it is clearly unpatriotic OMG!

"Children's Health Care Bill": omg you don't want kids to have health care?

I wish people actually put some thought into these things.

Any time anyone appeals to your emotions, you know they have no real substance.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
Probably 5% -10% of people see through the smokescreen / BS of how these bills are named and reported, or should I say twisted, in the media.

"The Patriot Act": anyone who doesn't vote for it is clearly unpatriotic OMG!

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually its about 39%. Link

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

nate- why aren't you thanking the republicans as well? They do the same exact thing..

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

Nate,

Why do you hate children?

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

Politically its another horrible move by Bush. Just when i thought its possible he may have turned a corner by just mentioning any troop withdrawals and nominating someone decent to AG he goes back to 2005 GWB.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
nate- why aren't you thanking the republicans as well? They do the same exact thing..

[/ QUOTE ]

I despise all of them. Believe me I am the farthest thing from a republican partisan.

natedogg

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

Wouldn't a democratic partisan be the farthest thing from a republican partisan? .. Just kidding.

So far, the Dems have managed to not pass a We <3 the Troops bill and a We <3 Children bill, while passing a We Hate Moveon.org resolution that the Republicans started. And now they're even starting to name bills like they're Republicans. It really is time for a second party in Washington.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

This is just an extension of medicaid to some middle class taxpayers more or less. Cap is actually at 61,000+ without a waiver.

A look at children's health insurance

Bush drew the line in a different place than others. That is all. Why should the line be moved higher i.e. why should people making $41,000 or less get this government hand out?? Why not make it $100,000? Where do people draw the line?

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

They probably draw the line based on how much money it takes to support a family. A 3 person family could probably very easily be supported on $100k a year, someone making $41k may not have such an easy time, especially if they have lots of medical bills for their child.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
They probably draw the line based on how much money it takes to support a family. A 3 person family could probably very easily be supported on $100k a year, someone making $41k may not have such an easy time, especially if they have lots of medical bills for their child.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this determination made do you think?

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

I'd hope thru some calculated study or research. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out that someone living on $41k vs $100k has less money to spend on medical bills.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd hope thru some calculated study or research. But it doesn't take a genius to figure out that someone living on $41k vs $100k has less money to spend on medical bills.

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all it's for insurance and second of all what kind of coverage should a family have exactly? What about if I have family, work, get coverage from my employer, who and what determines what adequate coverage is? It's not clear to me that a family making $41,000 can't afford health insurance while a family making $45,000 can. I'm fairly certain that it is easier for a family making $100,000. That way the $45,000 guy is included too. I'm not saying it's $40,000 or $100,000, I'm asking as how the cut off point is determined. Why not up it to $45,000 or $50,000? How do we know the study is accurate or valid? Sorry just too much faith here for me.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
The Dems actually have a shot at overriding this veto. It passed the Senate with a veto-proof majority and they need 15 more GOP votes in the House (they have 40) to override.

As for the merits, you all know my view on health care. If grandstanding and blowharding results in more accessible health care, I'm all for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

If lying to the people gets them to pass laws they don't actually want, you're all for it? How very democratic of you.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Probably 5% -10% of people see through the smokescreen / BS of how these bills are named and reported, or should I say twisted, in the media.

"The Patriot Act": anyone who doesn't vote for it is clearly unpatriotic OMG!

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually its about 39%. Link

[/ QUOTE ]

39% on one specific issue, but most of those are going to be just as brainwashed when it's their party doing it, so it's really just being anti-other party than actually seeing through the fog. Even the 5-10% is probably too generous as most of those are going to just be people who hate the Republicans and Democrats and are freely brainwashed by Libertarians or Greens or whoever.

My faith in humanity is nearly overwhelming. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't a democratic partisan be the farthest thing from a republican partisan? .. Just kidding.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they're practically the same.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]

As for the merits, you all know my view on health care. If grandstanding and blowharding results in more accessible health care, I'm all for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

not caring who pays for it or who runs it? Iron, have you ever set foot in a VA hospital?

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
The Dems actually have a shot at overriding this veto. It passed the Senate with a veto-proof majority and they need 15 more GOP votes in the House (they have 40) to override.

As for the merits, you all know my view on health care. If grandstanding and blowharding results in more accessible health care, I'm all for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is accessible health care tied to health insurance? The main beneficiary seems to be health insurance companies, not children. The government should guarantee fair pricing of services to all citizens. Health insurance is a protection racket in the US. Many healthy Americans don't want or need health insurance.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

Well you (healthy American) may think you don't need it until the next drunk runs a red and it's game over for you. Just because you're currently healthy doesn't make a bit of difference five minutes in the future.

That said, I agree it is a protection racket and frankly if I'm going to be forced into paying for insurance (i.e. car insurance), I don't think companies should be making money off of me. Sure there may be some efficiencies if GEICO is competing against Allstate and State Farm but how much "competition" is really going on? Does anyone think it's anything unlike three people trying to divide up a swimming pool full of cash?

And it's not like the insurance companies are being forced to cover us in return. They can drop us whenever they want.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well you (healthy American) may think you don't need it until the next drunk runs a red and it's game over for you. Just because you're currently healthy doesn't make a bit of difference five minutes in the future.

That said, I agree it is a protection racket and frankly if I'm going to be forced into paying for insurance (i.e. car insurance), I don't think companies should be making money off of me. Sure there may be some efficiencies if GEICO is competing against Allstate and State Farm but how much "competition" is really going on? Does anyone think it's anything unlike three people trying to divide up a swimming pool full of cash?

And it's not like the insurance companies are being forced to cover us in return. They can drop us whenever they want.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, but I must tell you this. You are completely confused. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

natedogg

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]


And it's not like the insurance companies are being forced to cover us in return. They can drop us whenever they want.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's car insurance. Never said I was against car insurance. Still millions drive without this insurance.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is just an extension of medicaid to some middle class taxpayers more or less. Cap is actually at 61,000+ without a waiver.


[/ QUOTE ]


I don't care what it is an extension of!

Why can't people pay for there own freaking kids for once?

Did they not choose to have the kid? Seems they need to pay for there life choices. McDonalds is hiring.

Why am I suffering because some horny morons need cough medicine for the baby?

Why are we encouraging people to have children they can't pay for?

If we are going to give money foolishly to these imbeciles, then why does the government need to take the money first, and stamp ever dollar into .50 c, and then give it back?

Nothing about this idea makes any sense morally or economically.

GOOD VETO DUBYA !! NOW DO ABOUT 100 MORE.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is just an extension of medicaid to some middle class taxpayers more or less. Cap is actually at 61,000+ without a waiver.


[/ QUOTE ]




I don't care what it is an extension of!

Why can't people pay for there own freaking kids for once?

Did they not choose to have the kid? Seems they need to pay for there life choices. McDonalds is hiring.

Why am I suffering because some horny morons need cough medicine for the baby?

Why are we encouraging people to have children they can't pay for?

If we are going to give money foolishly to these imbeciles, then why does the government need to take the money first, and stamp ever dollar into .50 c, and then give it back?

Nothing about this idea makes any sense morally or economically.

GOOD VETO DUBYA !! NOW DO ABOUT 100 MORE.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

Too bad Bush didn't veto a single wasteful bill the Republican controlled Congress passed.. =/

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
Too bad Bush didn't veto a single wasteful bill the Republican controlled Congress passed.. =/

[/ QUOTE ]

/agree

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
Too bad Bush didn't veto every single bill that got put in front of him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well you (healthy American) may think you don't need it until the next drunk runs a red and it's game over for you. Just because you're currently healthy doesn't make a bit of difference five minutes in the future.

That said, I agree it is a protection racket and frankly if I'm going to be forced into paying for insurance (i.e. car insurance), I don't think companies should be making money off of me. Sure there may be some efficiencies if GEICO is competing against Allstate and State Farm but how much "competition" is really going on? Does anyone think it's anything unlike three people trying to divide up a swimming pool full of cash?

And it's not like the insurance companies are being forced to cover us in return. They can drop us whenever they want.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, but I must tell you this. You are completely confused. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

natedogg

[/ QUOTE ]

I worked 10+ years in the industry. You hurl opinions and insults on a message board.

My points, made simpler:

1) You don't get health insurance just to cover you against you. You also get it to cover you against someone else.

2) Mandates like (currently) auto insurance and (proposed) HillaryCare don't encourage competition. Rather, they promote monopolistic behavior.

3) Not everyone can get health insurance for $60/mo just because it says so on some banner ad on ehealthinsurance. Weren't you the one who in the past said someone working minimum wage could afford to insure their family?

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
Weren't you the one who in the past said someone working minimum wage could afford to insure their family?

[/ QUOTE ]

People working for minimum wage shouldn't be having families. Having children should be a decision into which a couple should factor their financial situation. If they fail to do this or choose to have a child knokwing that they cannot fully provide for its care, they are being irresponsible and the rest of us should not have to forcibly bail them out.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Weren't you the one who in the past said someone working minimum wage could afford to insure their family?

[/ QUOTE ]

People working for minimum wage shouldn't be having families. Having children should be a decision into which a couple should factor their financial situation. If they fail to do this or choose to have a child knokwing that they cannot fully provide for its care, they are being irresponsible and the rest of us should not have to forcibly bail them out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not if they're Catholic.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Weren't you the one who in the past said someone working minimum wage could afford to insure their family?

[/ QUOTE ]

People working for minimum wage shouldn't be having families. Having children should be a decision into which a couple should factor their financial situation. If they fail to do this or choose to have a child knokwing that they cannot fully provide for its care, they are being irresponsible and the rest of us should not have to forcibly bail them out.

[/ QUOTE ]

[censored] I hate when idiots say "You cant raise a family on minimum wage!" (heard alot by politicians, yes they are idiots)

No [censored] dummy. You are not supposed to raise a family on min wage. Have kids when you make more money....if you cant get a job paying more than min wage, you are too stupid or too young to become a parent.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Too bad Bush didn't veto every single bill that got put in front of him.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, his fourth veto was a good one. Why the hell wasn't it his 400th veto?

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
No [censored] dummy. You are not supposed to raise a family on min wage. Have kids when you make more money....if you cant get a job paying more than min wage, you are too stupid or too young to become a parent.

[/ QUOTE ]


I hate when people stay stuff like this. Yes, people should only have kids if they can afford them. All you have to do is convince every [censored] person in the country to act this way. While you're at it, why not get every criminal to stop commiting crimes.

Our choices in the real world are between letting a bunch of kids have horrible to no health care or to steal money from other people to get them health care. None of those sound great but thats the place we are in.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The Dems actually have a shot at overriding this veto. It passed the Senate with a veto-proof majority and they need 15 more GOP votes in the House (they have 40) to override.

As for the merits, you all know my view on health care. If grandstanding and blowharding results in more accessible health care, I'm all for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

If lying to the people gets them to pass laws they don't actually want, you're all for it? How very democratic of you.

[/ QUOTE ]
From Non-Partisan Factcheck.org:
http://www.factcheck.org/bushs_false...insurance.html

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The Dems actually have a shot at overriding this veto. It passed the Senate with a veto-proof majority and they need 15 more GOP votes in the House (they have 40) to override.

As for the merits, you all know my view on health care. If grandstanding and blowharding results in more accessible health care, I'm all for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

If lying to the people gets them to pass laws they don't actually want, you're all for it? How very democratic of you.

[/ QUOTE ]
From Non-Partisan Factcheck.org:
http://www.factcheck.org/bushs_false...insurance.html

[/ QUOTE ]

How wonderfully irrelevant.

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
People working for minimum wage shouldn't be having families. Having children should be a decision into which a couple should factor their financial situation. If they fail to do this or choose to have a child knokwing that they cannot fully provide for its care, they are being irresponsible and the rest of us should not have to forcibly bail them out.

[/ QUOTE ]

That may be fine as a morality issue, but basing public policy on the theory that poor people shouldn't have kids is every bit as misguided as basing it on the theory that everyone should want to give all of their disposable income to the less fortunate.

(That said, I have no opinion on the bill in question because I'm not sufficiently well informed.)

Re: Bush\'s 4th veto of his presidency is a good one
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No [censored] dummy. You are not supposed to raise a family on min wage. Have kids when you make more money....if you cant get a job paying more than min wage, you are too stupid or too young to become a parent.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate when people stay stuff like this. Yes, people should only have kids if they can afford them. All you have to do is convince every [censored] person in the country to act this way. While you're at it, why not get every criminal to stop commiting crimes.

[/ QUOTE ]

And try getting criminals, pokerbobo, who are rapidly increasing because you didn't give a [censored] about them when they were young to listen to you now. That's the problem with you [censored] ideologues who think, as is here, everyone is going to or should do exact financial analysis of their respective situations before having children. People have sex. Accidents happen, but if someone makes a mistake, f 'em. (According to you) Be realistic. Go ahead, ignore all the poor people now, and in 20 years you will have a bunch of people our age ready to [censored] your ass up because they have to eat, take care of their family, and oh by the way they do not give a [censored] about any law established by a government that completely neglected them when they needed the government most. Then come talk to me about your bull [censored] ideologies of people living like robots by ignoring natural instinct and never making mistakes.