Thank You For Standing Up Against Lazy Kids President Bush!

Only a leader like George Bush would stand so bravely against those lazy children.

Comments

[CyberCitizen]

A health care plan for a family of four costs about $13,000 on the open market, according to some web site. If you get paid $5.80 per hour minimum wage, you will earn $11,600 minus taxes. And if you both work at minimum wage, you will receive $23,200, which leaves you with $10,200 for food, rent, clothing, taxes, etc. Good luck.

[starboymikey]

So what about "socialism" for the poor, downtrodden oil companies, who get billions a year as subsidies, taken of course from our tax dollars?

Hey, they need it, guy. These poor companies are bearly scraping by. Besides, they funnel millions a year back to our politicians in campaign contributions. When is the last time sick kids or their families did anything meaningful for congress or the white house?

[mrcontinental]

Don't forget the poor farmers who are paid NOT to grow crops.

[Overd0g]

Agreed. So no more subsidies for oil companies AND no more subsidies for "the children". Then we'll be morally pure.

[djthedj]

He sure didn't seem to mind the cost much when he passed his $800 billion drug company give away. If we want health care for kids, we better figure out how Bush's corporate owners can make huge dough off of it.

[drblack]

Bush should have vetoed this bill because it should NOT use taxes on smokes to fund it. Enough with the sin tax already.
If it had taxed the rich I would support it.
When American smokers are all but non-existant what will fund all these programs which depend on Americans smoking?

[JRWhit2]

Good point, but why would they take money out of their own pockets? I smoke and am happy to pay my share if the funding is used properly. The lobby of smokers is miniscule compared to the oligarchy.

[darker]

Yeah, like GWBush knows something about REALITY??
I don't think so! He's a brainless, angry MOUTHPIECE FOR CORPORATE WELFARE QUEENS getting rich and richer off the USTaxpayer dollars Bush-Cheney shovel into their pockets daily.
Particularly in the FOR PROFIT IRAQ INVASION.

[JoeBlough]

Bush has been a bully all his life. Only now, he can bully and frighten on a mass scale. No more of the one-on-one of his youth. His veto is only a reflection of his dementia.

[godlessclif]

And people keep saying Bush is like Hitler.

Hitler that National Socialist had health care for all the Hitler Youth. Bush is not going to be like Hitler, Bush Youth can get a paper route if they plan to get sick and put money in medical savings accounts at Citicorp.

[JoDeeVa]

Addendum to my comment:
While I do understand that SCHIP would be funded by tobacco taxes (btw, I think it is unfair to focus on smokers alone for that windfall..how about some of the fast food or meat-eating heart diseased-causing industries or smog factories or pharma-phixes, if we are going to penalize citizens for their habits?)..it would be unnecessary to seek these funds from behavior based penalty taxes, if we sought to penalize the military-industrial complex for all of the societal ills their behavior causes, both in the human conditions psychologically and long-term physical prognosis for the war-injured. Not to mention cost overruns, lies, inept facilitation, no-contest bid contracts and the general "come and get your BOOTY-liciou$" mentality that rules in that industry.
Or, just plain ole decreased funding, said saved funds to be designated for such wasteful programs as healthcare for our citizens.

Still, even so..$20 billion/five years for healthcare~vs~$40 billion/year for Iraqi war? It's a bargain that we can't afford NOT to pass. We pay anyway when the uninsured freqent ERs for primary care or worse, don't seek care until their illnesses are more costly, both in $$, prognosis and mental/social well-being. If only those american citizens making all the $$ and not able to qualify for assistance COULD designate where their tax $$ would go..healthcare would be a given!

[woodchips]

$40 billion per year? Try again. According to a recent report from the Congressional Research Service:

"For the first half of FY2007, CRS estimates that DOD"s average monthly obligations for contracts and pay are running about $12 billion per month, well above the estimated $8.7 billion in FY2006. For FY2007, obligations are about $10 billion in Iraq, $1.9 billion in Afghanistan, and less than $100 million for enhanced security."

When it's all said and done, the Iraq debacle, Afghanistan, lifetime care of wounded vets and other related costs will be in the TRILLIONS.

[JoDeeVa]

Thanks Ryan, for beating the "it's their own fault" drum, don't you know? Really, if their lazy parents can't afford their own private coverage, with the BIG $$ they're raking in and can't get Medicaid, it's their own fault! What are those crazy democrats thinking? We must not steal from the war chest billion$$ to provide healthcare for lazy americans and their children! No, we must tell them to quit their jobs and leech from the government properly! That's the scam that those lazy americans deserve, just like their lazy fellow-americans without jobs and resources. Jeez, they will bleed america dry with their lazy snot-nosed kids. We must not let them get away with it!

Bravo, El Commandante Bush, way to keep those impoverished masses from destroying our ameriKan way of life! And, a BIG shout out to the insurance industry and their lobbying power to influence such stellar policy. If we don't watch out, what next?..healthcare for ALL americans? Tell it to the military-industrial complex and they will tell them why it is necessary to spend those billion$$ to self-procreate and protect their interes..er, uh nation from the lazy americans who dare to tap into their warchest billion$$ for children's healthcare.

PUH-LEEZE!! We have hegemony to focus on, not sniffling brats. We're about the business of world domination, not domestic programs for our citizens!
So, yeah, thanks for nothing..nothing like sticking it to working-class Americans and the taxes they pay. Nothing says "we care" more than for their president to deny healthcare for their children! Nothing says "no child left behind" better than that, eh?

[Overd0g]

Interesting. I didn't see Bush banning all health care for children. I thought they were free to buy health care for their children like I do. I stand corrected.

[Camel54]

And on top of that, we can't allow a few hundred thousand people who are over 18 to have access to health care they probably can't afford elsewhere just so we can provide it for millions of children. It's the principle of the thing. People who want to live should do so through the proper channels.

[ZingoBonMot]

While I support the SCHIP program, I can't help but wonder WHY it's to be paid for by RAISING TAXES on an-ever shrinking segment of the population - smokers.
Why not carve this money out of Bushie boy's next "Supplemental War Funding Request" instead?
Congressional Dems are not doing themselves any favors by RAISING TAXES to pay for a program their opposition will most certainly label "An Entitlement Program" (read: WELFARE).
Bad idea, Dems, bad idea.

[BigGayAl]

Lazy children? I thought he was standing up to the idea of providing health care for kids who's parents make $50k or more? I mean, if I made $50k a year, or more, I would NOT want the government paying for my kids' health care. Is it just me? Am I the only one who understands this?

[stlrfan]

Pay a mortgage buy gas and groceries and be able to afford health insurance on 50K in you dreams.

[mrcontinental]

Since when did $50K become a lot of money?

[JRWhit2]

You could pay for health insurance in Wyoming with 50k...or Lubbock...or Jackson...or Tulsa...or Roswell...or Minot. It is not so easy, BigGayAl, when you live in L.A., Austin, San Francisco, New York, Miami, or any other city that has an historically high cost of living. They have used the exceptions to criminalize the bill as offering services for families that make two and three times the poverty level (wrongfully placed around 22K). Less than 25% of Americans make over $80K a year...so if $35B is going to cover all the children under these circumstances, why are we not screaming for socialized health? This $35B is supposed to cover 10M children over the next 5 years. The insurance and health industries have spent more in lobbying efforts. If my calculations are correct (35B/10M/5yr)...it will cost $700 a year to insure these children. I pay $250 a month for insurance on my son right now in Texas. The government can run the program for much cheaper due to no investors asking for higher returns. I would much rather pay an extra $700/yr in taxes and know that my son is taken care of, than pay $3000/yr for a service that might be denied because I failed to read the fine print of my policy that is designed to deny claims. I'm crazy, though...why would any one want save that much money?

[dadw5boys]

Yeah pay for health insurance but not a house payment too. or no food and but helath insurance. walk to work no car insurance if you have health insurance.

[woodchips]

A lot of people seem to think that government paid health care is somehow antithetical to the American way. Get real. Just this morning I was listening to a hospital CEO who stated that two-thirds of their patients are either uninsured or covered by government programs. Since the government plans reimburse the hospital less than the cost of providing the service and the uninsured often pay nothing, people with commercial insurance make up the difference by paying hugely inflated prices.

My point is that we're already paying for government health care through taxes, insurance company profits, higher than necessary administrative costs, and over-priced services.

[dawlishgal]

Over 1/3 of the cost of our health care system comes from the redtape battles between insurance companies who don't want to pay for care of policy-holders and providers who are trying to force insurance companies to pay. Our system already costs twice as much as countries with single-payer healthcare, countries that have higher life-expectancies and lower infant mortalities than we do. It hasn't helped, either, that the Republicans' deregulation of the insurance industry has forced policy holders into the role of adversary every time they have a legitimate claim.

And, the Bushies gave big pharm a blank check to continue to rip us off here, while keeping in place the breaks they give to Canada and other countries that permit bulk-purchase rates that allow these countries to pay two to ten times less than we must pay for the same drugs. If they can still make a profit on what they charge Canadians and Europeans, why do we have to continue to be gouged, and if they can't make a profit--then stop selling to those countries. Americans, who already pay way more for healthcare than everybody else on the planet, are being forced by Republicans to subsidize the countries that get the bargains.

What about THAT kind of welfare...the kind that fills the pockets of big pharm and big HMOs at the added-expense of our own people?