Bush to Poor Children: Fuck You

[SirNitram]

You, however, had the immediate response of hallucinating a reason that leads to anything but the inevitable result of looking at the past seven years.

That would make you a credulous moron.

[Lord of the Abyss]

What, I don't like the idea, so I'm a fucking moron? Brilliant.

When you give that as a reason for not believing something, AND for accusing the Democrats of something else ( a "fine print attack" ), then yes, it's not a bright thing to say. Especially when the thing you don't want to believe fits so well with the observed evidence.

[dr. what]

This legislation is a wholesale, unapologetic move to government-run health care for large classes of children (including “children” up to 25 years old

Huh? Age 25? What is he babbling about?

[Patrick Degan]

Reality doesn't care if you like it.

Your powers of observation do astound me, Captain Obvious.

Edi undoubtedly doesn't like it either. Doesn't seem to qualify him (or her... whatever) as a fucking moron.

The difference between Edi and you is that he won't argue that something isn't so just because he can't bring himself to believe it can be so.

[Darth Wong]

What, I don't like the idea, so I'm a fucking moron? Brilliant.

No, you claimed that the idea must be wrong because you don't like it. That's what makes you a moron.

[Sea Skimmer]

Brilliant. I love it. How's it taste, Mein Fuhrer?

Be fair, Hitler would have been aghast at the idea of the state not funding healthcare for everyone, particularly the new generation of Aryan super boys.

[Beowulf]

Well... the text of the bill isn't on thomas.loc.gov yet.

[Shinova]

Hmm, probably spoke too soon. I ought to have included this. This is his veto statement as of October 3. link

TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:

I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 976, the "Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007," because this legislation would move health care in this country in the wrong direction.

The original purpose of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) was to help children whose families cannot afford private health insurance, but do not qualify for Medicaid, to get the coverage they need. My Administration strongly supports reauthorization of SCHIP. That is why I proposed last February a 20 percent increase in funding for the program over 5 years.

This bill would shift SCHIP away from its original purpose and turn it into a program that would cover children from some families of four earning almost $83,000 a year. In addition, under this bill, government coverage would displace private health insurance for many children. If this bill were enacted, one out of every three children moving onto government coverage would be moving from private coverage. The bill also does not fully fund all its new spending, obscuring the true cost of the bill's expansion of SCHIP, and it raises taxes on working Americans.

Because the Congress has chosen to send me a bill that moves our health care system in the wrong direction, I must veto it. I hope we can now work together to produce a good bill that puts poorer children first, that moves adults out of a program meant for children, and that does not abandon the bipartisan tradition that marked the enactment of SCHIP. Our goal should be to move children who have no health insurance to private coverage, not to move children who already have private health insurance to government coverage.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

October 3, 2007.

The only part of this that makes sense is the part about it covering people who earn 83,000 a year, who definetly don't need government-assisted health care within the context of our current healthcare system.

Assuming he wasn't just making things up.

[SirNitram]

The only part of this that makes sense is the part about it covering people who earn 83,000 a year, who definetly don't need government-assisted health care within the context of our current healthcare system.

Assuming he wasn't just making things up.

I believe that's restricted to certain locals where the cost of living is high enough that.. Guess what? 83k just isn't going that far.

Any anyone who believes that 83k is 'definitely don't need assisted health care' is someone whose not had to deal with many health bills.

[Patrick Degan]

The $83K coverage level was part of an earlier draft of the bill put in by New York congressmen which was rejected from the final compromise version. This little inconvenient fact, however, has not prevented a black-hearted liar like Bush from repeating the falsehood —up, down, and sideways, and at every opportunity. Just as his party's media flacks will repeat endlessly over the next several months and which will get further unquestioned repetition by the steno pool from the loyal, puppy-dog press.

[Shinova]

Any anyone who believes that 83k is 'definitely don't need assisted health care' is someone whose not had to deal with many health bills.

I do not see how someone who takes good care of oneself can have so many health bills that even with a 83k income they just don't have enough money for it, even if it's a family.

I go to the dentist occasionally, and get an occasional eye check, maybe a general checkup once every two or three years, and have had immunizations before but other than those things I've never had to visit the doctor's.

I just don't see how many times you'd have to go to a doctor's office or a hospital to be spending that much money on healthcare, unless you're old or have some special case dieseases or disabilities, and so on.

[Darth Wong]

Any anyone who believes that 83k is 'definitely don't need assisted health care' is someone whose not had to deal with many health bills.

I do not see how someone who takes good care of oneself can have so many health bills that even with a 83k income they just don't have enough money for it, even if it's a family.

And how many families have you raised?

[Eris]

Any anyone who believes that 83k is 'definitely don't need assisted health care' is someone whose not had to deal with many health bills.

I do not see how someone who takes good care of oneself can have so many health bills that even with a 83k income they just don't have enough money for it, even if it's a family.

I can, and easily, too. Take this, according to which the average debt for medical reasons was at $13,460 amongst the relevant group. And there were the people with insurance. This can be all kinds of things that aren't your fault, as well. Maybe you were hit by a drunk driver and not only had spinal damage, but had to quit your job as a result. Maybe you got food poisoning that led to complications. Maybe you got cancer. It does happen to non-smokers after all, and, according to the same study, puts your average medical debt up to $35,878. That's nearly half the yearly income before taxes of the family described. That's a hit that most people just can't absorb.

Also, tack on other things like prescriptions. And not ones that are avoidable by good health, but things like medication for a hypothyroid disorder, and things like that. It adds up very quick, and all this on top of the rapidly growing insurance premiums, if you have health insurance.

Let's not even get started on if your child is born with a week heart or other problem like that. Neo-natal care is mindbogglingly expensive.

[Napoleon the Clown]

Any anyone who believes that 83k is 'definitely don't need assisted health care' is someone whose not had to deal with many health bills.

I do not see how someone who takes good care of oneself can have so many health bills that even with a 83k income they just don't have enough money for it, even if it's a family.

I go to the dentist occasionally, and get an occasional eye check, maybe a general checkup once every two or three years, and have had immunizations before but other than those things I've never had to visit the doctor's.

I just don't see how many times you'd have to go to a doctor's office or a hospital to be spending that much money on healthcare, unless you're old or have some special case dieseases or disabilities, and so on.

Ever heard of cancer? Getting hit by a fucking car and paralyzed? Having shitty health despite your best efforts? Hm? What about heart problems? Not everyone who has major heart troubles is a lazy fuck that throws down Crispy Creams and soda like they're starving to death. Some people get boned by genetics or accidents. You're out of the ordinary in that you almost never need to see a doctor for something other than a check-up.


And of course prescription medicine. A great number of them are still under patent. That means the manufacturer tells you to bend over so they can fuck you up the ass. Just so you can feel decent enough to live your life. Or keep you alive, in many cases. And with the way the laws are written in the US, it's disgustingly easy for the drug companies to extend the patent beyond the five years they're automatically given.


And then there's the people who fuck up early on and are far enough in debt that 83k is barely enough to pay bills, food, house payments, and the debt. It's all well and good to say that they can suffer for their own stupidity, but what about their kids? Should innocent children be screwed out of basic health care because mommy and daddy were idiots when they were young?

[Darth Servo]

Any anyone who believes that 83k is 'definitely don't need assisted health care' is someone whose not had to deal with many health bills.

I do not see how someone who takes good care of oneself can have so many health bills that even with a 83k income they just don't have enough money for it,

Two words: shit happens.

even if it's a family.

Even with the best care, kids get sick. They pick up all sorts of germs from their friends at school

[PeZook]

You people are forgetting the bigger picture!

America needs that 30 billion dollars for bombs and fuel and ammunition! You are fighting the War On Terror, rememebr? You can't beat the terrorists with communist ideas like national health care programs. You beat terrorists with bombs!

It's fucking horrible that Bush can just spend 500 billion dollars on war just like that, but object to a bill that "favors state expenditure over private health care". What, he's suddendly concerned about spending now? Please.

[Keevan_Colton]

As I recall, isnt the "tax raise on working americans" just an increase in tax on cigarettes?

[[R_H]]

As I recall, isnt the "tax raise on working americans" just an increase in tax on cigarettes?

It was just a tax on cigarettes. From 0.39$ to 1$

[Big Orange]

You people are forgetting the bigger picture!

America needs that 30 billion dollars for bombs and fuel and ammunition! You are fighting the War On Terror, rememebr? You can't beat the terrorists with communist ideas like national health care programs. You beat terrorists with bombs!

It's fucking horrible that Bush can just spend 500 billion dollars on war just like that, but object to a bill that "favors state expenditure over private health care". What, he's suddendly concerned about spending now? Please.

Because he and his compatriots are cruel, heartless, selfish and sociopathic, seeking to cause more problems than they solve through their blatant stupidity and outright malice - it is as simple and straight forward as that. Thousands of people saw through Bush and seen him as the sadistic, incompetent bungler and plodder that he always was and always would be, long before he became POTUS and was the governor of Texas in 1990s.

[Cairber]

I do not see how someone who takes good care of oneself can have so many health bills that even with a 83k income they just don't have enough money for it

My son had an allergic reaction to cow's milk and his eyes puffed shut and his mouth ballooned up as well; he also broke out in hives. So we went to the ER. The bill was nearly $5,000. Yeah, our insurance covered it, but imagine if we hadn't had it or hadn't had such good coverage...

Hell, my hospital birth cost 14,000....I can only imagine what a NICU stay would be...[/quote]

[mr friendly guy]

As someone in a country with socialised health care I never imagine the costs would be so high for the patients who aren't fully covered by insurance. At least Michael Moore's Sicko gave me a better idea.

And for those (well one person actually so far in this thread) who just can't seem to imagine people who aren't overweight or smoke or drink needing a hospital, I suggest they actually volunteer to help out and then they can see that patients come from various demographics.

[Darth Wong]

As I recall, isnt the "tax raise on working americans" just an increase in tax on cigarettes?

Technically, a tax increase on cigarettes would be a "tax raise on stupid Americans", but I guess that would be too honest for a politician to say.

[Stravo]

I do not see how someone who takes good care of oneself can have so many health bills that even with a 83k income they just don't have enough money for it

My son had an allergic reaction to cow's milk and his eyes puffed shut and his mouth ballooned up as well; he also broke out in hives. So we went to the ER. The bill was nearly $5,000. Yeah, our insurance covered it, but imagine if we hadn't had it or hadn't had such good coverage...

Hell, my hospital birth cost 14,000....I can only imagine what a NICU stay would be...

[/quote]

Stories like these make me ill when I think about the current talking point circulating amongst conservatives when bringing up socialized healthcare.

"There are a large group of people out there who just don't need health insurance namely the 18-25 yo's because they're young and healthy. Why should they pay healthcare?"

When I started hearing this make the Sunday talk show circuit route I almost choked on my coffee. That's the best they can come up with now? Some people don't need it? When I was 21yo and no longer covered by my dad's insurance I was terrified of getting sick. Thankfully I did not but if I had I would have been royally screwed and can see why some people can go bankrupt in that state.

No one does not need healthcare. That argument unfortunately will be digested by the zombie horde from the right like my father who constantly trots out that boogieman of "Do you want to wait months for neccessary medical care?"

[Darth Wong]

That's the thing about Republitard arguments about socialized health-care. You can tell they're all arguments of convenience rather than the actual reasoning which led to their position, because they keep changing and bear no relation to each other. When someone has a fixed position and a shitstorm of unrelated, often bizarre arguments that he uses to justify it, you know that he never did actually arrive at his position through any reasoning at all.

[[R_H]]

snip

Technically, a tax increase on cigarettes would be a "tax raise on stupid Americans", but I guess that would be too honest for a politician to say.

I don't understand why a tax increase on fucking cigarettes is a bad idea. It may discourage smokers from continuing to burn their money on smokes. It's not like the bill would have forced the tobacco companies to pay those 35 billion dollars. Lastly, doesn't the GOP like screwing over anybody that isn't rich anyways, since when have they given a flying fuck about the work class?