Bush Right to Veto SCHIPS : Lone Star Times

Bush Right to Veto SCHIPS

by BigJolly · 10/03/2007 11:29 am

President Bush has vetoed the expansion of SCHIPS, a government program that provides insurance to children.

President Bush, in a sharp confrontation with Congress, today vetoed a bipartisan bill that would have dramatically expanded children’s health insurance.

Talk about a tough one to veto. Already, the Democrats and some Republicans are portraying the President as a wild eyed children hater.

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. “

No, President Bush doesn’t hate the children. In fact, what he is doing is trying to send a message, finally, that we are broke and must stop putting our children’s future in jeopardy. We’re flat broke. In debt. Credit cards are to the max. Etc.

The country cannot continue to spend away the future in some misguided effort to “help” the children. I doubt that the politicians pushing for this bill, be they Democrat or Republican, care much about the children. They want to solidify their power base and see this as a way to keep and increase their hold on Washington.

Hopefully, this is the first of many spending vetoes. We simply must get back to fiscal responsibility and accountability. For the children.

Filed Under Uncategorized ·

Comments

14 Responses to “Bush Right to Veto SCHIPS”

Katfish on October 3rd, 2007 at 11:31 am

WOW - did Dubbya get a ‘huevos transplant’?

This incessant “for the children” caca was old ages ago - I’d be real interested to hear or see what other PORK might have been on that vetoed bill………
hamous on October 3rd, 2007 at 11:34 am

WOW - did Dubbya get a ‘huevos transplant’?

He has a Democrat-controlled Congress. Had this been a Republican-led congress there would have been an elaborate signing ceremony in the Rose Garden.
duhmoose on October 3rd, 2007 at 11:56 am

You mean some one in politics knows how to say no to spending? I think Bush is going to be a hard President for the historians to classify.
Robert M on October 3rd, 2007 at 12:17 pm

More “fearmongering” by the Dimwits whose “get control now and screw the future” mantra is doing great, thanks to a liberal media. The Dimwits think they have a bottomless pit of money to use. What they don’t tell you it’s coming from you or as they tell it, taking from the rich to give to the poor. I guess “the poor” need not try to succeed because the Dimwits will take it away from you.
dcgirl on October 3rd, 2007 at 1:44 pm

In line with the “for the children” thought on this program and the “it’s hell to be poor” idea - here is the wacky SF idea on dealing with those without health insurance. Straight from the Mayor’s webpage.

In 2005, Mayor Newsom pledged that San Francisco would undertake Universal Healthcare for all San Franciscans. In 2006, in partnership with Supervisor Tom Ammiano, the groundwork for Newsom’s plan began to take shape and in July 2007, the Health Access Plan (HAP) will launch, ensuring that all 82,000 San Franciscans currently without healthcare insurance are guaranteed comprehensive, high-quality healthcare.

Now, if I lived in San Francisco and currently shelled out a good percentage of my income to be a responsible individual and have my own health insurance, I would deep-six it immediately. Why pay for your own if you are guaranteed comprehensive, high-quality healthcare… FOR FREE!

This is what will happen if the feds try the same type of nonsense. We will have noone shelling out of their own pocket, expenses will skyrocket, access will be slim, and, alas, we won’t even have the good ol’ US to come to for healthcare like the Europeans and Canadians do.
raiderdav on October 3rd, 2007 at 1:52 pm

It’s a little late for GW to start becoming a fiscal conservative…
klayman on October 3rd, 2007 at 1:59 pm

While I’m not in the business of telling the middle class (myself included) what to do with their money, I would not be surprised if many of these same people who don’t purchase health insurance for their families drive late model cars, have cable tv, go out regularly, drink and or smoke more than occasionally, and go on vacation every year. Families who choose to have children need to also choose to provide for them
dcgirl on October 3rd, 2007 at 2:04 pm

#7 - you are correct. If they can afford those things you speak of, then they can afford to provide properly for themselves and their children. I drive an 8-year old car, built my house myself, only recently got the satellite dish, don’t go out to dinner or the movies, and, yes, I also pay my own way. Help the 2 older kids with college expenses (it helps that they do receive some scholarships, work part-time, and son gets the GI Bill) No government handouts in our house!
Katfish on October 3rd, 2007 at 2:06 pm

#6 - no way - it’s NEVER too late!
raiderdav on October 3rd, 2007 at 2:28 pm

#9 - I wasn’t saying that its too late to save money, I just meant its too late for him to change his stripes and expect many conservatives to believe his intentions. He’s a BIG spender and this doesn’t change my mind about him.

That being said, he should keep vetoing most every spending bill until the end of his term. He should have had that pen in hand the previous 6 years…
monkeyincognito on October 3rd, 2007 at 2:46 pm

Hi guys, I am not yet comfortable with linky goodness, but the web site free market cure has a great video on exactally who “the uninsured” are. Great eye opener.

Uninsured in America

This one? LST Moderator
Shannon on October 3rd, 2007 at 3:05 pm

2 LOL
monkeyincognito on October 3rd, 2007 at 3:23 pm

Thanks mod. I don’t know the rules yet or the site protocol. I don’t want HAL to eat me.

HAL eats everyone at one time or another. Don’t worry, it’s quick. LST Moderator
KRogers on October 7th, 2007 at 8:15 pm

Do we really need to start making the middle class part of the “entitlement” class? I’m going to argue this issue with my favorite Democrat foil Wednesday, Oct 10 at 7:30 at http://www.LeagueCity.biz