Bush vows to veto kid's health care
By Libby
Our Feckless Leader is philosophically opposed to funding health care for children of poverty. He signals he will veto a bi-partisan plan that took six months to hammer out because he would rather force the legislature into adopting his own scheme for total privitization of health care. A Ponzi scam that would surely kick poor children completely out of the insurance pool altogether.
One wonders if he is trying to destroy the GOP with this incomprehensible intransgience. One can't help but remember his own calls for bi-partisan co-operation in moving the people's business forward. I guess in the Bush family dictionary, co-operation means everyone has to do what I say and like it. He certainly can't object on the grounds that it will raise the deficit. They figured out how to fund it with a cigarette tax.
As I said in Detroit, I'm no fan of balancing the budget on the backs of people addicted to a drug that was actively subsidized by their own government in order to get them hooked but still, it's seems to me to be a responsible and humane plan and since smokers use more health services, it doesn't strike me as entirely unfair that they should shoulder the burden.
In any event, this is exactly the sort of bi-partisan co-operation that should be encouraged, not thwarted by a man who has no problem spending $60 billion in three months time to kill people in Iraq. I don't think it's asking too much to spend that much over five years to save the lives of innocent American children.
[Thanks to Michael Linn Jones for the link.]
Our Feckless Leader is philosophically opposed to funding health care for children of poverty. He signals he will veto a bi-partisan plan that took six months to hammer out because he would rather force the legislature into adopting his own scheme for total privitization of health care. A Ponzi scam that would surely kick poor children completely out of the insurance pool altogether.
One wonders if he is trying to destroy the GOP with this incomprehensible intransgience. One can't help but remember his own calls for bi-partisan co-operation in moving the people's business forward. I guess in the Bush family dictionary, co-operation means everyone has to do what I say and like it. He certainly can't object on the grounds that it will raise the deficit. They figured out how to fund it with a cigarette tax.
As I said in Detroit, I'm no fan of balancing the budget on the backs of people addicted to a drug that was actively subsidized by their own government in order to get them hooked but still, it's seems to me to be a responsible and humane plan and since smokers use more health services, it doesn't strike me as entirely unfair that they should shoulder the burden.
In any event, this is exactly the sort of bi-partisan co-operation that should be encouraged, not thwarted by a man who has no problem spending $60 billion in three months time to kill people in Iraq. I don't think it's asking too much to spend that much over five years to save the lives of innocent American children.
[Thanks to Michael Linn Jones for the link.]
Labels: Bush, health care
posted by Libby Spencer at 10:46 AM
4 Comments:
I wrote about this same subject today and agree totally with you about Bush's "intrangience" as you say.
Once I suggested this line for his state of the union speech: "I'm willing to meet anyone halfway who totally agrees with me."
I differ only the methods used to fund this program, but that is a small point within the bigger picture of securing a decent future for children.
Bush would privatize sewege treatment plants if he could. That would be appropriate too, since they smell a lot like his policies.
Good post.
It's interesting to try to mesh Tom Delay's statements that abortion has eliminated 40 million "children" who could have grown up to be soldiers and English speaking migrant fruit pickers, with his party's reluctance to do anything about supporting the indigent kids already here. Perhaps the plan is to have them out picking cotton as soon as they can walk or putting them in diminutive uniforms as the Busch Jugend.
Not that I'm really going to try to make sense of anything either or these two idiots has to say.
Bush's primary objection to the plan is that it would enlarge the role of the federal government at the expense of private insurance. In other words, he's protecting his buddies in the insurance industry at the expense of children. He doesn't really care about the "enlarging government" part since he's grown government every year he's been in office, he only cares about seeing that insurance companies continue to make record profits.
Michael - good point on the funding. As I said, I don't really approve of the funding method either but given the importance of the program, it certainly should pass without a veto.
Fogg - I gave up on trying to make sense of these fools a long time ago. I've had to settle for outrage.
Kathy - so good to see you here. It's always about protecting corporate profits with these cretins.
Post a Comment
<< Home