Bush on Healthcare: Go away kid, you bother me.

So yesterday Bush announces that the Dumbocrats’ plan for expanding the child medical insurance act (which would cover about 4M more uninsured children – up from 6M to 10M) is tantamount to Hillarycare & government controlled medicine.

Well let’s see now. The first plan was passed by you and your boys pal. Seeing how it’s going to expire in a week, it’s a good idea to get it back in force. And since it’s a plan that’s good for UNINSURED CHILDREN then perhaps it has good cross-aisle appeal.

Oh wait – sorry, I forgot. We need to be spending our money on Iraq’s healthcare and rebuilding and people and jobs and infrastructure and such. That’ll make us all safer. So I guess what you’re saying is it’s OK to give money to people as a handout, so long as its not us.

Hey – white trash Republican voters: the money you want to hang on to is still leaving your pocket – don’t think that voting for Repubs stopped that. Bush just decided to give it Haliburton and Iraq rather than people in our own country. Does that give you pause, or am I just interrupting your Laverne & Shirley reruns?


  1. Lupus says:

    How about we don’t spend my money on anything?

    Does it really matter what the government is spending the money on? That is MY money. They heald a GUN to my head and stole the money from me.

    So Bush spends it on blowing up brown people, and the democrats want to waste it in mismanagement. Who cares?

    The real crime here is the theft of the money in the first place. End taxation and you end the governments power to do anything.

  2. perkiset says:

    Although I agree that the money is the source of the corruption that pervades American politics today, I disagree that the answer is to just eliminate their income.

    The problem is that we live in a society dude – a society that demands a certain amount of concession and cooperation. Remove the notion of the government and you will reduce the country into anarchy. This is fine for the back woods of Montana, but it is horrible for a country like ours and the world in general. We are too interconnected with the world and with ourselves to remove the controlling body that effectively creates an evironment for financial growth.

    I agree that they are taking my money, but the truth is, a certain amount of that is absolutely required for us to exist IMO.

  3. Lupus says:

    Ah beautiful Anarchy. What you describe is chaos, not anarchy. It is not the government that stops societ from being chaos, it is normal people like you and I.

    100 years ago the government had a fraction of the power and control it has today. We were not in a state of chaos then.

    Fact is, you do not need a nanny state to stop chaos. People want stability, they want safety. None of these things need to be provided for at the point of a gun. The market will provide whatever people want, if they want safety and security they will get it.

  4. perkiset says:

    Anarchy is political chaos.

    Unfortunately, I disagree that we do not need a political nanny – nice term, incidentally – you and I do not, certainly. But the vast majority of people out there do. They are sheeple, not thinkers. They do what they are told and little else.

    Ergo, the loudest voice gets their money, time and energy. A slow moving, hard to budge Congress is a great way to get cooler heads to prevail. Which is a good thing, believe it or not.

  5. Lupus says:

    How is it right that I have a gun held to my head to nanny people who “can’t” themselves. Honestly I believe that the system encourages, and breeds this dependence. If you drop the system the sheeple that it has created will be forced to become more independent. By supporting them you are encouraging the sheeple behavior.

  6. perkiset says:

    The elimination of the social safety nets will create an environment where you will need to watch for your safety every moment of the day.

    The thing that you do not address here is how the predatory capitalistic practices of many corporations here in the U.S. actually creates a type of person that is dependant. Although in theory (and personal practice in my family) I agree with you, that is simply not a realistic proposal for our country at this time.

  7. Lupus says:

    Here again you are a supporter of violence and I am a supporter of freedom and choice.

    The current system is NOT capatalism. It is corperatism. The corperations get away with that crap becuase they are protected and work in cahoots with the government which uses GUNS to MAKE you do what they want. Big corporations spend BILLIONS of dollars to bribe the fedgov into making laws that make it harder for other companies to compete with them. They raise the cost of doing business to keep smaller players out.

    This is not capatalism, this is corpratism.

    Futhermore, I do not think it is right to solve problems using guns. You may love the violence that is govenment, and you may see violence as the only solution.

    If safety nets are something you desire, then please CHOOSE to give money to organizations that provide safety nets. Americans are some of the most generous people in the world. I think you would find that of people got to CHOOSE to help others, they would. I don’t see why you have to point a gun in their face and make them help.