PDA

View Full Version : Bush - America's Ongoing shame...


LadyMod at scam.com
10-03-2007, 12:13 PM
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy: My challenge to the President

I want to make sure you see the latest video from Families USA, one of the most important advocates in the ongoing battle to protect children's health care.

Families USA is part of the broad, bipartisan effort that achieved a solid initial victory last week, when both the House and the Senate approved a bill extending and reforming the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Unfortunately, President Bush vetoed the bill.

Earlier this week, a group of children pulling little red wagons went to the gates of the White House to urge the President to sign the bill, because it's so vital to good health care for the nation's children in the years ahead. I hope very much that President Bush and Congress will hear and heed their plea.

Apparently this President's priorities aren't the same as mainstream America's:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ql1vW0OK4YE

He says the bill costs too much. But for the price of one day in Iraq, we could cover 256,000 children. One week would cover 1.8 million children. And just over one month of the Iraq war would cover the full cost of the bill and insure 10 million children for a whole year.

Because the current SCHIP program falls far short of meeting the need, hundreds of thousands of children have lost their coverage on President Bush's watch. It's incomprehensible that the President would threaten to veto legislation that corrects this serious problem.

There's one thing President Bush and I do have in common, though - American taxpayers cover 72% of our health care premiums, because current law has long-permitted good insurance coverage for federal employees.
So I ask President Bush and the Members in Congress who support his veto:
Would you deny your own family what you'll be denying to millions of other families if this bill is vetoed? If you don't believe the federal government should support children's health care, how can you in good conscience accept it for your own families?

All Members of Congress have the peace of mind that when their children are sick, they can afford to take them to the doctor. Why doesn't every American family deserve that peace of mind?

The President's veto will have terrible consequences - just look at the faces on the Families USA video. It's time everyone understood what those consequences are.

That's why so many of us in Congress - Republicans and Democrats alike - are fighting so hard for this bill, to keep the faith with the millions of children who are counting on us for the healthy start in life that every American deserves.

Americanadian
10-03-2007, 12:34 PM
Unfortunately, Bush likely won't sign the bill. He would rather fund the destruction of Iraqi children while simultaneously permitting the health of American children to go down the tubes because of funding his carnage in Iraq. Iraq is his "baby" and Israel's welfare is much more important to him than Americans or their children. He just wants your tax dollars to fund his "war" presidency.

Linkster
10-03-2007, 01:28 PM
Well - since he already vetoed it the signing isnt an issue - although Im sure the dems will wait a few weeks to override the veto to get as much publicity out of it as they can

Im also very impressed with Kennedy calling for congress and the executive branch to also give up their childrens coverage that is given them if the bill doesnt get the override vote - although most think it will if the dems and reps that have already voted for it in the House get the other dozen or so votes - which they should pretty easily with the primaries coming up

LadyMod at scam.com
10-03-2007, 02:27 PM
Well - since he already vetoed it the signing isnt an issue - although Im sure the dems will wait a few weeks to override the veto to get as much publicity out of it as they can

Im also very impressed with Kennedy calling for congress and the executive branch to also give up their childrens coverage that is given them if the bill doesnt get the override vote - although most think it will if the dems and reps that have already voted for it in the House get the other dozen or so votes - which they should pretty easily with the primaries coming up

Ya that call for them giving up coverage was great. I think the President should have to give up his retirement pay on tax payers expense and all the free secret service protection he's supplied after leaving office too. In fact I think ANY perks that comes with the office should cease upon the day they leave.

Think what that would save the tax payers?

Lady Mod

radioguy
10-03-2007, 03:18 PM
Since you like making up titles, you ought to try using one like "Kennedy, America's embarrassment in the Senate". But that's another issue.

The entire bill is a joke. The democrats use the "Health care for the children" title to make the president out to be the bad guy, but the fact is the bill is a joke.

It is a massive tax increase that still if passed, wont begin to cover the costs.

It is just a way for democrats to pave the way for socialized medicine as laid out by a 1993 memo put out by Hillary Clinton:

Back in 1993, according to an internal White House staff memo, then-first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton's staff saw federal coverage of children as a "precursor" to universal coverage.

In a section of the memo titled "Kids First," Clinton's staff laid out backup plans in the event the universal coverage idea failed.

And one of the key options was creating a state-run health plan for children who didn't qualify for Medicaid but were uninsured.

That idea sounds a lot like the current State Children's Health Insurance Program, which was eventually created by the Republican Congress in 1997.

"Under this approach, health care reform is phased in by population, beginning with children," the memo says. "Kids First is really a precursor to the new system. It is intended to be freestanding and administratively simple, with states given broad flexibility in its design so that it can be easily folded into existing/future program structures."

The memo was sent to Politico by a Republican congressional office.

But the document is part of a trove of paperwork released as part of a 1993 lawsuit between the Clinton health care task force and the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1007/6111.html

Jennifer
10-03-2007, 03:27 PM
I'd feel sorry, but for a few things:

A) I'm amazed Bush actually vetoed something from the Democrats! Wow. There really is a first time for everything!

More Seriously:

SCHIP expansion was to give free health insurance for children of families earning in excess of $80,000 annually!!! What??? Common! The rich do not need SCHIP and the poor already have it!

SCHIP expansion was to give free health insurance to children up to the age of 25!?!? Huh? I thought you were legally an adult at 18!


Maybe the Democrats in power should write realistic laws and bitch if those laws are vetoed not write laws that they know have no chance of getting passed and then cry wolf when it's vetoed. Just maybe.

UserName
10-03-2007, 03:31 PM
You see, that's what is wrong with the fucking Republican mentality. They believe that life begins at conception and ends at birth. As soon as you are born in a Republican society, you are nothing and can be literally forgotten. You are nothing more than cannon fodder for the military machine, or a sheep to be shorn or a cow to be milked. You can be strapped to a gurney and poisoned, or sent to die in a useless war, it doesn't matter to a Republican. You body is not your own and should belong to the Government.
This is why these rat-bastards should be kicked to the curb and not allowed back.

Linkster
10-03-2007, 03:39 PM
Jennifer - Id read the bill instead of listening to rhetoric on it - as both of your statements are false - the current SCHIP already allows people (even way over 25) to be covered - and that was the bill that republicans and Bush initiated.
Second - the cap on families getting the coverage (and this is even kind of a misnomer as all it is is a subsidy to states - they are the ones that decide who gets the money) - is 2X the poverty level or around 40 something thousand - if you were to say that that is rich to people living in NYC or Los Angeles - they would laugh in your face as that amount doesnt even cover rent and food.
Most important about this bill - although I hate anything related to health insurance and think it should all be done away with - is that it doesnt raise anyones taxes except tobacco users through an additional federal surcharge on the price of tobacco - and that is the hidden reason that Bush has vetoed it - he promised the tobacco lobby he wouldbt raise surcharges on their products