Saturday, October 06, 2007

SCHIP of Fools

Call it strike four. Or running aground upon a shoal named Bush. Either way, by President Bush vetoing SCHIP, he did a good thing.

Democrats wanted to expand children's health coverage so people making $60,000 a year would be covered. Which is strange for a group which loudly proclaims they are for the poor, always fighting for the underdog. Unless one remembers Democrats like to pander and bribe people to support their aims. In this case, a semi-sneaky socialisation of national health care in the name of the children which would give them in Congress and the bureaucrats more control over everyone's life. Larry Craig, Jack Murtha, Nancy Pelosi, Stevens, Robert Byrd, Harry Reid and others sticking their noses into my life and dictating what I should do with my body; forget about it - its that choice thing don't ya know, oh wait that only applies when NOW and such are about to give them contributions.

If this grasping hand for control was not bad enough, lets look at how they intend to fund this expansion. Oh right, raise taxes; colour me surprised by this - not. So far the only tax Democrats have not liked is Rep. Obey's harebrained scheme of imposing a war tax. And the Democrats think they got the perfect tax to cover the SCHIP expansion, raise the tax imposed upon the sale of every pack of cigarettes - their thinking is how can anyone oppose a sin tax since smoking is such a smelly mess? Again the only time you hear Democrats actually use such a judgemental word like sin is in support of their agenda. But the Democrats are hoping people are foolish enough to believe this claptrap of a sin tax paying for this expansion or it proves that Democrats have never took an economics course outside of Marxism. When one reads Democrats want to raise the tax to $1, the expense to the smokers who suck down over a pack a day will rise to such a point that the smokers will either impoverish themselves to support their habit, quit the habit, or find a smuggler bringing non-tax cigarettes across the border from Canada or Mexico - who knows cigarette smuggling might replace cocaine smuggling if this keeps up. In all three instances, the tax income will shrink and cause this SCHIP expansion to lose funding which means Congress will have to rob money from some other project to keep this boondoggle running or raise taxes; with Democrats bet on a raise in taxes. Which will increase the downward spiral as more money vanishes from the economy and into non-productive government work programs until Democrats will have spent this country into abject poverty.

What President Bush did with this veto was to take one step into stopping this foolishness of the Democrats. Hopefully he will keep vetoing these mad spending binges of Congressional Democrats. And how pathetic the Democrats have become when their only argument for this power grab, while raping the taxpayers, is for the sake of the children. If they were truly concerned for the sake of future generations, they would not be saddling these generations with mountains of debts; Congressional Democrats only care for themselves and their plush offices.


Anonymous said...

Sigh! If Bush would have controlled the spending spree of the republicans as well, they would still be in control of Congress today. But his veto this time was a good thing.

Mike's America said...

I think Bush mistakenly thought that if he compromised on spending with Democrats and even his own Republicans in Congress he'd have an easier time getting what he needed to fight the war.

Of course that was a laugh.

Is it true that the Dems SCHIP expansion would cover "children" old enough to vote?

I've always said Democrats acted like children.

Anna said...

I hear you Sharku, if he had been a bit more fiscally conservative it might have helped things in 06. Though Foley and his immoral escapades being a tin drum the Dems beat like crazy along with Abramhoff stuck in voters' minds.

Mike, you would think this Bush would have learend that lesson from his Dad; only deal with Congress from power and then make doubly sure the legislation is what you wanted and not what Congress has creatively written to suit themselves. Read my lips George, never trust Congress to not stab you in the back.

Does SCHIP support 'children' old enough to vote, we might have to use the Clinton to English dictionary to find out what is means - again. It just strikes me as crazy that an income of $60,000 qualifies someone for this version of SCHIP.. if the parents can not afford insurance for their children on that salary then there is something very wrong with those parents.

Dionne said...

I'm planning on doing a comprehensive post on this so I will add this to the links.

Anna said...

Dee, thanks. Still got some to say about this.

The Frosts, as it turns out, are covered by the existing Maryland SCHIP program so President Bush's veto has no impact on Graeme or Gemma. But Sen. Harry Reid brought Graeme into the spotlight and portrayed the child as a victim of the veto. At this point I think Reid is more of a Fagin than the parents. But in classical Marxism, the Frosts are the class enemies because of their richness in personal property; but who is pushing them as a banner? The Socialists are, all in the name of seizing control of the means of production while trying to avoid a bloody revolution.