Blackwater more important than American children
Surely you aren’t surprised to hear that Bush followed through with his threat to veto the SCHIP bill? After all, the man has proven time and again that he’s a heartless bastard who only cares about keeping his business partners in business.
Blackwater is an excellent example of how Bush’s priorities rank. Treating Iraq’s government as the sovereign entity he claims it is falls much further down the list than keeping Blackwater in business in Iraq. For that matter, protecting Blackwater appears to be more important then just about anything else these days.
Did you know that while the FBI is in Iraq investigating Blackwater they will be provided security by. . . Blackwater? Yep, there’s bound to be a full, complete, and candid investigation coming out of that situation.
Okay, that whole rant makes no sense. Sorry, but I’m exhausted and pissed. It’s a bad combination.
Andy Glover:
While I am growing less and less fond of "dubya" every day and I think this program should be continued, I have to say I do NOT agree with everything they were trying to add to the program.
I agree all children need to be covered if their family cannot be covered by medicare and other insurance is unavailable, BUT, this bill would have increased spending in ways to numerous to count and had loopholes which would have allowed me to have MY child covered, even though I am financially able to cover him with my insurance from work.
Also, funding this with a punative tax on cigarettes, which is not a constant source of income, is not a good way to pay for anything. The higher the tax you place on these "sin" items drives more people away and negates any increase in revenue after the initial bump when it is first enacted. While, in the end, you end up with fewer smokers, which is good, you also end up with less funds for a growing program which will pull funds from other needed projects and programs, like schools.
Blackwater and Bush's ties to them are a whole other matter and I am not attempting to even try to defend that because it can't be done. and I also don't like this Veto a lot, but I don't like everything that was "tacked" on to this bill either.
If a compromise can be found with a better funding option and tightening the loopholes, I'd love it. If the House can override the veto, well, it's not the best solution but it IS better than the program ending outright.
4 October 2007, 12:10 pmWayne:
I saw that news cast. the Prez said that the kids that the bill covered was for house holds making 80,000 or more . What poor kids are you talking about.
4 October 2007, 7:43 pmLaura:
$80,000 is twice the income that was in that bill. Lies about who the bill would help doesn't make Bush right.
Andy Glover:
Laura,
4 October 2007, 9:49 pm$40,000 was the base. With the provisions for reducing income that counted against a family and additional amendments to the bill, that limit went to $80,000 and there was even some wiggle room higher than that depending on how you read some of the amendments added near the end of it’s time in committee.
Like I said, I am all for the bill, but let’s keep it within reason. Tighten the loopholes, fund it with reliable income and THEN pass it.
Jenn:
Not only was it for families who make up to $84,000 a year, which is hardly poor, it extended the age of the "children" covered to 25. Now I know Britney Spears should still be considered a child, but in my book, 25 aint a kid.
All this is is another attempt by the left to force this country, this REPUBLIC, into socialized healthcare and more support for criminal invaders.
It is NOT the government's responsibility to hold your hand,. That is not what made this country great. People doing on their own is what made this country what it was.
8 October 2007, 1:31 pm