Bush hates poor kids!

[Hanzo]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/25/washington/25health.html?ref=todayspaper

Congress has passed a bill expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program, and Dubya has vowed to veto it. Basically,the SCHIP is a program run by the states that helps poor families with providing health care for their children. The bill would allocate 35 billion dollars to expand the program. This money would help countless families, but Bush only wants to expand it by 5 billion. The bill that was passed has had overwhelming bipartisan support, has been backed by countless lobbies, and organizations (American Cancer Society).

Meanwhile, Congress just gave the Pentagon 9 billion under the table for the war in Iraq. Also, it has been estimated that 190 Billion dollars will be needed in 08 to fund the war. It's all making sense to me now. :nod:

[Icey]

are u really that suprised? I'm not.

[c69m]

people are crazy....

[fteezy11]

bush hates everybody!

[Curly]

Bush Vetoes Child Health Insurance Plan

By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - President Bush, in a sharp confrontation with Congress, on Wednesday vetoed a bipartisan bill that would have dramatically expanded children's health insurance.

It was only the fourth veto of Bush's presidency, and one that some Republicans feared could carry steep risks for their party in next year's elections. The Senate approved the bill with enough votes to override the veto, but the margin in the House fell short of the required number.

Democrats unleashed a stream of harsh rhetoric, as they geared up for a battle to both improve their chances of winning a veto override and score political points against Republicans who oppose the expansion.

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

"Never has it been clearer how detached President Bush is from the priorities of the American people," Reid said in a statement. "By vetoing a bipartisan bill to renew the successful Children's Health Insurance Program, President Bush is denying health care to millions of low-income kids in America."

Democratic congressional leaders said they may put off the override attempt for as long as two weeks to maximize pressure on Republican House members whose votes will be critical.

"We remain committed to making SCHIP into law _ with or without the president's support," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., referring to the full name of the State Children's Health Insurance Program.

The White House sought little attention for Bush's action, with the president casting his veto behind closed doors without any fanfare or news coverage. He defended it later Wednesday during a budget speech in Lancaster, Pa., addressing a welcoming audience organized by the Lancaster Chamber of Commerce and Industry in GOP-friendly Pennsylvania Dutch country.

"Poor kids first," Bush said. "Secondly, I believe in private medicine, not the federal government running the health care system."

But he seemed eager to avert a full-scale showdown over the difficult issue, offering that he is "more than willing" to negotiate with lawmakers "if they need a little more money in the bill to help us meet the objective of getting help for poor children.

"The program is a joint state-federal effort that subsidizes health coverage for 6.6 million people, mostly children, from families that earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford their own private coverage.

The Democrats who control Congress, with significant support from Republicans, passed the legislation to add $35 billion over five years to allow an additional 4 million children into the program. It would be funded by raising the federal cigarette tax by 61 cents to $1 per pack.

The president argued that the Democratic bill was too costly, took the program too far beyond its original intent of helping the poor, and would entice people now covered in the private sector to switch to government coverage. He has proposed only a $5 billion increase in funding. After Bush's speech, White House counselor Ed Gillespie said the president's offer of more money meant more than the $5 billion extra, but he wasn't specific about how much more.

Democrats deny Bush's charge that their plan is a move toward socialized medicine that short-changes the poor, saying their goal is to cover more of the millions of uninsured children and noting that the bill provides financial incentives for states to cover their lowest-income children first. Of the over 43 million people nationwide who lack health insurance, over 6 million are under 18 years old. That's over 9 percent of all children.

Eighteen Republicans joined Democrats in the Senate, enough to override Bush's veto. But in the House, supporters of the bill are about two dozen votes short of a successful override, despite sizable Republican support. A two-thirds majority in both chambers is needed.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said Democrats were imploring 15 House Republicans to switch positions but had received no agreements so far.

House Minority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo., said he was "absolutely confident" that the House would be able to sustain Bush's expected veto.

Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott, R-Miss., said Congress should be able to reach a compromise with Bush once he vetoes the bill. "We should not allow it to be expanded to higher and higher income levels, and to adults. This is about poor children," he said. "But we can work it out."

It took Bush six years to veto his first bill, when he blocked expanded federal research using embryonic stem cells last summer. In May, he vetoed a spending bill that would have required troop withdrawals from Iraq. In June, he vetoed another bill to ease restraints on federally funded stem cell research.

In the case of the health insurance program, the veto is a bit of a high-stakes gambit for Bush, pitting him against both the Democrats who have controlled both houses of Congress since January, but also many members of his own party and the public.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee launched radio ads Monday attacking eight GOP House members who voted against the bill and face potentially tough re-election campaigns next year.

And Gerald McEntee, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union, said a coalition of liberal groups was staging more than 200 events throughout the nation on Thursday to highlight the issue. The group, which includes MoveOn.org, and several unions, also has a goal of more than 1 million contacts to Congress through calls, letters and e-mails demanding that lawmakers override Bush's veto. The coalition is spending $3 million to $5 million on the effort.

This is just another in a long line of reasons to hate this rat-bastard mother-fucker. :nonono:

[FuriouStylez]

you muthafuckers must be stupid...

how is he gonna rebuild Iraq...

if he's giving you poor kneegros medicine?

you want some nyquil bitches?

ALL HAIL CHIEF BUSH?

[Bishop]

Bush dosen't hate poor kids. He (and his cronies) hate everyone below $50 million.

[sweety_baby]

hate bush 2 :mad::mad:

[Rambo]

Bush dosen't hate poor kids. He (and his cronies) hate everyone below $50 million.basically...

[Hanzo]

:nonono: He went ahead and did it. I thought he would cave on this one because this story was starting gaining some attention but at the end of the day he's still Dubya. Thanks for posting that article Curly, it helped me with viewing this man through his dislikes. He has been in office for 7 years now and the only bills he has vetoed are ones involving stem cells (which could help cure some forms of cancer and degenerative diseases), helping poor kids, and bringing some of the troops home. BUT HEY "Poor kids first." What a (bleeping) joke!

[toa]

Par for the course.

[Deus]

:think:
I don't know enuff about the bill to meaningfully comment but something ain't adding up ((Dude wouldn't commit suicide with 'o8's 2nd favorite weapon, just to do it) + (I'm reading articles implying that the bill is doing more than what it should do, with the Democrats playing more politics for '08 :nonono:).
...but if it really comes down to a fight, between privatized medicine(Bush)vs. government medicine (Dem.); then general government medicine makes more sense to me, anywayz (for the common public):neutral:

[Bishop]

Sorry Deus. I have to disagree with you on this one. This bill is not targeted towards the children of non-working poor families. It is an overhaul of the national, largely state-run program known as Schip which subsidizes health insurance for families that earn as much as twice the federal poverty level - $41,000 for a family of four. This is a "working poor" bill.

I'm not one to bash our beloved President :musicboohoo: but there are two reasons, in my humble opinion, why he vetoed the bill.

One; $0.60 tax added to cigarette purchases to pay for this program. I'm sure the Tabacco Lobby Groups had a big say in this.

Two; This bill would move millions of children out of private health insurance and onto a government program. I'm sure the Insurance Company Lobbist may have also had a word with the President.

To further my last point, Mr. Bush stated, "Congress's Schip plan is an incremental step toward their goal of governemnt-run health care for every American. Government-run health care would deprive Americans of the choice and competition that come from the private market."

Bush also stated that if $5 billion were added to the bill, he would consider passing it but most of the money would have gone to the insurance companies.

In his defense, some states such as New York and New Jersey, had Schip poverty levels set at $83,000 and $79,000 respectively. This is largely unfair to the other states but again, $83,000 for a family of four in New York on average spends nearly 50% of income on housing! By the time you add food, basic clothing, and transportation, nothing is left for healthcare.

Bush is at a point in his presidency where he does not have to care about what people think. He's a lame duck president, able to do what he wants. Does he care about the Republican Party? Not really. It's all about the money with this guy. Both he and Dick will leave office even richer than when they entered - at the cost of the rest of us.

[Hanzo]

^^^As always some great insight Bishop.

[Deus]

:think:
Appreciate that; (even though I stated I wasn't well informed) I did forget some of the key points that you brought back.
Also,Texas housing is nothing like NY; (I'm thinking of buying a house and I'm 20) I'm embarrassed I forgot about that.
I want to stay optimistic about those in power - often disregarding choices made that I don't agree with, as my not completely understanding the situation - but certain arguments - like yours - makes it difficult to stay that way; the addition just makes it to convenient for the profiteers.

So basically, I now hear what ya'll are saying :nod:

[BlakkJakk]

you muthafuckers must be stupid...

how is he gonna rebuild Iraq...
...[/COLOR][/B]
Shit that bitch can't build a muthafuckn bridge that lasts in Ohio how he gonna rebuild a whole damn country.:D

Aside from all the human impact of this veto, that pretend Texan from Connecticut has really shafted his own party. This is going to hurt the Republicans. Not has much as old toilet stale fondling Larry Craig hanging on for dear life but it does damage.

What kills me is he tries to pretend like he is being financial responsible but the truth is this administration went from a huge surplus to the largest debt this nation has every had. All just to prove that he is tougher than his daddy.

Can we agree on no more, C student, coke sniffing, born again former college cheer leaders! On that note, how the demos not run an ad with Bush in his old cheerleader outfit. If I'ld been running, I would have been feeding the talk show hosts and comedians on that one.

[Bishop]

Hey Deus, thinking of buying a house at the age of twenty is really a good thing. It amazes me how many of our 20-30 African-American age group really think ahead like that. Property is one thing that "usually" appreciates in value. Just think about how you want to use the home you purchase. Do you want to use it as a stepping stone to move to something bigger and better 5-10 years from now or do you plan to stay still and raise a family? If it's the latter, think about the neighborhood, schools, city services and such. In real estate, the three most important things are, LOCATION, LOCATION and LOCATION. When you are considering a family, quality of the schools, neighborhood safety, property taxes, and city services become real important - even more so than looking at an investment piece.

I can go on and on about this stuff but this is not what this thread is about...

Bush is by far the most horrible President I think this country has had - period! This guy has taken this country for a ride that we may never recover from. Denying healthcare to children is cruel.

Unfortunately, for some weird reason, no one in Congress (but maybe Cynthia McKinney) will challenge this administration. There have been idle attemps but really no real challenge has been made.

I can understand the reasoning to not impeach. I personally believe he should be put into jail for the rest of his life for the things he has done. Others have gone to jail for far less but impeaching him, at this point, would tie up the legal system for the next 18 months wasting too many resources and maybe even holding up the 2008 election until a decision could be made - by the Supreme Court - which is slanted in his favor. Impeachment should have started in 2005.

Saying that, there is no reason not to impeach Dick! This is the real power within the White House. Hey, he shot his buddy in the face with buckshot and made the guy go on TV and say "my bad". When the police arrived at the ranch where the shooting occured, the Secret Service would not let them into the compound.

If you disagree with Bush, you are considered an outsider. If you disagree with Dick, things happen. Ask Colin Powell, Ambassador Wilson and his wife, George Tenet (former CIA Director)...

These guys are scary. They have no regard for anything that dosen't feed into their plans. These guys are true believers - just like Osama Bin Laden, the President of Iran and any other terrorist that are willing to sacrifice the innocent lives of those they are suppose to serve.

The difference between a Revolutionary/People's Servant and a True Believer: A revolutionary will sacrifice his life for the greater good. A true believer will sacrifice your life for his good.

In summary, Bush could care less about healthcare, not just for children but for anyone who has less money than him.

I don't judge him by his background. Hell, he sounds like a fun guy to party with. I'm judging him by the actions of his Presidency. History will be hard on him.

At this point, the Dems are a shoe-in for the next President if the Repubs don't resort to dirty tricks such as the 2000 and 2004 elections but for some reason I think it will be business as usual.

Don't be surprised if you see an election commerical that shows OJ face with a banner that says "voting for a Democrat will never put this man in jail".

[Hanzo]

^^^Wow! Great post. I love that comparison "true believer" vs. revolutionary. As far as the '08 elections go, it has been my belief that Giuliani will be the elected our next President since he declared. Despite all belief that this country is very nearsighted I believe that most Americans still have 9-11 in their minds. It's been 6 years since the attacks, but most policy (with the exception of Afghanistan) and spending has been geared as if it happened yesterday. More than likely Hilary will win the Democratic nod and you don't have step far outside of this forum to see how little this country grown from it's good-ole-boy past. I really cannot see this country electing an African-American or a woman as President any time in the near (20-25 years) future. Hopefully I'm wrong.

[Bishop]

Thanks for the comments Hanzo.

Unfortunately, you are correct about this still being a good ole' boy game. I also agree with you that Hillary will get the nod but most likely Giuiliani will win the election. He's running on the fear of 9-1-1. Thompson has a chance but unless he gets more exposure, he is also out of the game.

[BlakkJakk]

Oh damn I think ya got it all wrong. If Giuiliani gets the nomination its game over for the Republicans. 30% of their base won't vote for him because of his views social views. It will split the republican vote the way Ross Perot did in 92 except on a larger scale.

Thompson is politcal burnt toast already. Unlike Arnie he ain't got that star power. He had a small window and simple stumbled and feel out of the gate. At this point he really need to pull some show stoppers and instead he was just an "also ran."

I seriously doubt either will get the nomination anyway. It will be Rommy or McCain when the dust settles. Probably Rommy. At that point it will be a tougher race but the way the Republicans are maching lockstep with Bush, I think either Hillary Obama would win.

The best way to see how things are going is to follow the money. Wall Street wants Hillary. Its clear in the number of donnors and the way the media covers her as the "candidate." The people want Obama as you can see by his large number of small donors. Both our fundraising the Republicans. Big money doesn't like the Republicans this round and that is pretty much the nail in the coffin.

Sadly, I don't think Hillary is much of an alternative. She is like Rupblican Light. Shit Bill is her only saving grace.

[Bishop]

Very interesting points. The analogy of Obama being the people's choice and Hillary being Wall Street's choice is head on.

As Giuiliani gets more and more exposure, it seems he is being protrayed (real or not) as a goof. His comments telling Obama that he is no Regan is about as dumb as you can be. Any Democratic trying to run on a Ronald Regan platform should be shot at close range with a Chey-Tac.

As I've stated before, Hillary scares me. I really could not put my finger on why but I just have an uneasy feeling about her. Your points about "republican light" may actually be true.

[Azeari]

I'm not trying to be an ass but I hate poor kids too.

[Bishop]

I'm not trying to be an ass but I hate poor kids too.


Just curious. Why?

[Azeari]

Just curious. Why?


Cause generally, they are too young to be able to do anything about it... and they skulk around cause they poor. That and I just hate children in general, for no very specific reason other then they are children. Heathens.

[Rambo]

did u hate urself yesterday? :lol: jk

[Azeari]

did u hate urself yesterday? :lol: jk

Nah, yesterday I was hating whiney ass bitches that complain about other people's relationships compared to their relationship.

[Rambo]

Nah, yesterday I was hating whiney ass bitches that complain about other people's relationships compared to their relationship.:lol: ur retarded...

[Azeari]

:lol: ur retarded...


Nah I hated retards three days ago.