S-CHIP Watch: Newsweek goes nutroots, Pelosi blames “hate radio,” Mikulski barks at Rush; Update: Bush addresses S-CHIP, Dems trot out…singer Paul Simon; Update: MoveOn cashes in its S-CHIP; Update: House Democrats warm up; Update: Republicans to introduce S-CHIP alternative
Update 10:45pm Eastern. Rob Bluey reports:
As Democrats stage the ultimate political stunt Thursday with an override vote of President Bush’s SCHIP veto, Republicans are actually planning to do something about saving the children’s health care program.
Sens. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) and George Voinovich (R-Ohio) will join Reps. Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo.), Tom Price (R-Ga.), Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) and Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) to introduce an alternative to the Democrats’ $35-billion expansion. The lawmakers plan an afternoon news conference in the Capitol around the time of the veto vote.
Their alternative, based on a proposal crafted by the Heritage Foundation, consists of three elements:
1) A full reauthorization of SCHIP. The program would continue to cover children in families with incomes at or below 200% of the federal poverty level;
2) A child health care tax credit. Rather than putting more people on a government-run program, the legislation advances tax credits to families with incomes between 200% and 300% of the poverty level; and
3) A health care “federalism” initiative. This piece would complement both the reauthorization and the tax changes in expanding health care coverage, and would encourage even more dramatic health care experimentation at the state level with different approaches to coverage expansion.
Update 9:21pm Eastern. House Democrats are warming up for the veto override vote tomorrow. There are three Dems on the floor right now forming an echo chamber. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz boils down the “debate:”
“It’s who’s for kids versus who stands with the President.”
File under “Death of the Grown-up,” Part 99,999.
Interestingly, one of the Democrats on the floor says blatantly that their fight is indeed about getting government-subsidized health insurance for the middle-class. He said it several times.
After degenerating into a Democrat jokefest about their baseball teams, GOP Rep. Steve King–adult–takes the floor. “What they’re not saying is that the question is: ‘Are we going to lay down the cornerstone for socialized medicine or not?’”
Update 8:20pm Eastern. Here’s my chat with John Gibson this evening about S-CHIP and some choice words from Allahpundit to top it off.
Update 1:15pm Eastern. Well, well. Read this: MoveOn Threatens Republicans With New SCHIP Ads.
And now read this fund-raising letter from the MoveOn thugs cashing in on S-CHIP (via S.M.)…
From: Noah T. Winer, MoveOn.org Political Action mailto:moveon-help@list.moveon.org
Sent: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:46:30 -0400
Subject: Meet BethanyWe’re down to the wire on kids’ health care—a few votes away from victory. USAction is highlighting one of the best reasons to override Bush’s veto—Bethany, a 2-year-old girl who might not be here today without SCHIP. Click below to see the ad—it’s powerful—and donate $25 to get a 30-second version on the air.
Contribute NowDear MoveOn member,
We’re just a few votes short of overriding President Bush’s veto and allowing millions of kids to see a doctor when they’re sick. The vote is tomorrow.1 It’s time to pull out all the stops.
We need to remind Republicans there will be dramatic consequences if they stand with Bush on this one. The consequences aren’t just political: this means real health problems for millions of real kids.
One of those kids is Bethany, a 2-year-old girl born with a heart defect who’s only healthy today because of the SCHIP children’s health program. Our friends at USAction put together an ad with her story, and we want to raise money to tell that story in the districts of representatives who vote wrong.
Our goal is to raise at least $200,000 today to run the ad. Can you chip in $25? Our ad will be a slightly shorter version of the video you can see by clicking here—you should check it out:
The more we raise today, the more members of Congress will think twice about our ad campaign before they vote.
Bethany Wilkerson was born with several holes in her heart. Her family lives in St. Petersburg, Florida, on an annual income of $34,000—not poor, but unable to afford private health insurance. Even if they could, Bethany’s “pre-existing condition” makes it impossible to qualify. Only because of SCHIP is Bethany healthy today.
With children’s lives hanging in the balance, this is a politically risky vote for Republicans, and they’re watching public reaction closely to decide what to do. We’re announcing our ad to the local press in the districts of our top targets. No member of Congress will be able to vote against our kids without knowing they will be held accountable by voters.
But this isn’t just about scaring Congress into voting the right way. Some people will vote wrong, and it’s critically important to let their constituents know they abandoned our kids.
At last night’s vigils, we lit candles for the millions of children who are one vote away from having health insurance. Here are a few of your highlights:
Chanting, connecting with others, and responding to MANY supportive honks from passing drivers.—Margaret N., East Lansing, MI
Having children deliver hand written message to the congressman’s office.—Jim G., Chico, CA
We started the action in the wind and rain with candles blowing out immediately. Mid-way through a magnificent rainbow appeared and grew brighter. At the end the sun was shining. —Judy T., Lopez Island, WAPresident Bush vetoed SCHIP because it’s such a successful public program—and the right-wing’s ideology is about running the government into the ground to keep it from serving the common good. But children’s health care has so much popular support that Bush’s supporters are paying a heavy political price for defending this failed ideology.
Together—with phone calls, rallies, vigils, letters, and TV ads—we can make the political price too high for opponents of children’s health care to stomach.
Can you contribute $25 to pressure House members to override Bush’s veto of children’s health care? Click here:
Thank you for all you do.
–Noah, Adam G., Jennifer, Carrie, and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team
Wednesday, October 17th, 2007Source:
1. “Poll Reflects Republican Divisions on SCHIP,” NPR, October 17, 2007http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3060&id=11416-7005627-DY4c2t&t=4
PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.
Update 11:25am Eastern. Bush briefly addressed S-CHIP at his morning press conference, noting that he supports covering 500,000 children who are eligible for the current program and questioning the creeping entitlement in states where more adults than children are now covered by S-CHIP. Bush complains that “we weren’t dialed in” on the legislative process. Reporters whining about lack of bipartisanship. “Isn’t it your responsibility to work with Congress to make sure you don’t get to the veto point?” And I’m so sure the White House press corps would hammer a Democrat president with the same indignant question.
Last Bush comment on S-CHIP: “I don’t like plans that encourage people to move from private plans to the public. And that’s what that bill would do.”
Meanwhile, the Dems traded in tots for singer Paul Simon, who called President Bush’s veto, what else, “a heartless act:”
***
Several readers e-mailed to inform me that I’ve earned a down arrow from the “Conventional Wisdom” charters at Newsweek.
Or is it KOSweek now?
***
Meanwhile, doing her own best Kossified Kabuki act, Nancy Pelosi lashed out at “hate radio” in advance of Thursday’s S-CHIP veto override vote. Amanda Carpenter reports:
This reporter asked Pelosi “Is it appropriate for opponents of SCHIP expansion to openly question the circumstances that led some children to become spokespeople for that expansion?”
Pelosi replied that she “would not censor” critics and “I can’t control what they have to say,” but much of it was “beneath the integrity of the debate.”
She classified many of the “attacks that impugn children” as coming from “hate radio.”
Are our questions and arguments “beneath the integrity of the debate?” Impossible. The “integrity of the debate” hit rock-bottom last night with Olbermann goading the Frost family to post photos of their children in their hospital beds after their horrible accident in order to score cheap political points.
Democrat Sen. Barbara Mikulski played Pelosi’s mini-me and piled on Rush Limbaugh. He’s laughing out loud:
I’m not mad. This is parallel universe time like it’s never been. The other side does not want to get it right. This is a great illustration, folks, of what they use the media monopoly for. They have their narratives; they have their templates. The truth is the most inconvenient thing to them. Fiction is what they need to survive, and in order to sell and peddle fiction, you need a monopoly and they don’t have their monopoly anymore, but they’re still peddling their fiction and they don’t understand how it is destroying them and discrediting them — and, for that, ladies and gentlemen, I celebrate, and I say, “I’m happy,” because it’s succeeding.
Indeed. But don’t take it for granted. Call your congressman and make your voice heard.
Capitol switchboard - 202-224-3121.
House Republican Leader John Boehner:
(202) 225-6205 phone
(202) 225-0704 fax
***
More:
- My column today - Slick S-CHIP sanctimony
- Catholic United’s deceitful S-CHIP ads
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- More on S-CHIP : The American Pundit
- The aftermath of the SCHIP debate… « Cowardly political musings…
- Health Care BS
- JABbering Stooge :: The side of the S-CHIP debate Stalkin’ Malkin doesn’t want you to know about :: October :: 2007
- Bill's Bites
- Don Surber » Blog Archive » Democrats beat up Graeme Frost
- Republicans Introduce SCHIP Alternative : The American Pundit
- Links Today « I Think ^(Link) Therefore I Err
- House to Vote on Overriding SCHIP Veto « Morning Coffee
- October, 2007 Archive « Right Minded Online
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You’re mean and selfish because you don’t want them to take your hard-earned money forcibly.
The dems use the 12-year old as a discussion ending tactic. As soon as you take issue with any of the content or even the use of a child as a spokesman, the reply/rebuke is “Why do you not like children?” or “We are doing it for the children; how can you not support us?” You can’t even get to the issues of SCHIP. If it were an adult delivering the message you could have further discussions; with a child as the messenger you can’t.
watershed:
Dripping condescension? I didn’t realize that simply asking questions in a very pointed manner constituted condescension. But frankly, I’ve become used to your diversionary tactics.
Condescension would be more like:
Perhaps you’d like for me to draw you a picture since you obviously can’t read.
or
Go away and let the adults talk.
Get the chip off your shoulder.
And, not surprisingly, you still did not answer the question.
What level of sacrifice is appropriate for the Frost family?
It’s a simple question really. Requires a simple answer.
Either “An appropriate level of sacrifice is . . .”
or
“They should not be required to make a sacrifice”.
The ball is in your court. No evasion. No long diatribes about what good and noble people these are.
Please just simply answer the question.
/condescension (real or imagined) off.
“In the same way a Christian and a non-Christian may both wish to do good to their fellow men. The one believes that men are going live forever, that they were created by God and so built that they can find their true happiness only by being united to God, that they have gone badly off the rails, and that obedient faith in Christ is the only way back. The other believes that men are an accidental result of the blind working of matter, that they started as mere animals and have more or less steadily improved, that they are going to live for seventy years, that their happiness is fully attainable by good social services and political organizations, and that everything else (e.g.,vivisection, birth control, the judicial system, education) is to be judged to be ‘good’ or ‘bad’ simply insofar as it helps or hinders that kind of ‘happiness.’
Now there are quite a lot of things which these two men could agree in doing for their fellow citizens. Both would approve of efficient sewers and hospitals and a healthy diet. But sooner or later the difference in their beliefs would produce differences in their practical proposals. Both, for example, might be very keen about education; but the kinds of education they wanted people to have would obviously be very different. Again, the Materialist would simply ask about a proposed action, ‘Will it increase the happiness of the majority?.’ the Christian might have to say, ‘Even if it does increase the happiness of the majority, we can’t do it. It is unjust.
The Christian and the Materialist hold different beliefs about the universe. They can’t both be right. The one who is wrong will act in a way which simply doesn’t fit the real universe. Consequently, with the best will in the world, he will be helping his fellow creatures to their destruction…”
#98 29Victor:
And therein we have the definition of a troll…
They’re not here to debate the issue, but to re-direct the thread!
I will say it over and over until people finally start to get it. We cannot fight an emotional arguement with a logical counter. While we maybe right, you cannot counter little kids with sobering statistics. If we are to win, the Reps, not just the bloggers, have to get down and dirty. The other side has quoted Jesus in support of SCHIP. They say that we owe to the children and they trot out a poor kid to deliver their address on a Saturday. WE cannot defeat that sort of propaganda with statements like, “I am worried about creeping entitlements” The word is corruption. Furthermore, this plan covers Illegal immigrants. The Reps need to hit as many hot button emotional spots as the Dems and then our logic and reason will shine through.
For an example of the outlandish Jesus references go to this link
I think we are taking the wrong approach here. If the Frosts were asked to make some sacrifices to help the environment, as opposed to their own flesh and blood, we might get some liberal support.
BTW, I believe watershed is a teacher in his own music acadamy, not a public school.
#98, Great points 29 Victor.
One other though - Watershed said,”…something as necessary as healthcare.” Apparently they didn’t it was necessary enough to make health insurance part of their basic budget.
They do it all of the time! Cindy Sheehan, (can’t criticize what she says because she lost a son in Iraq), The Jersey Girls, (who put themselves into the political arena - yet you can’t criticize what they say because they lost husbands in 9/11), the list goes on. It’s the best they’ve got because they’re idiots. They know they can’t sell most hard-working Americans on the idea that government run health care is great, so they use a big PR campaign using victims that if you criticize you’re just a big, meanie, hate-monger.
jsr #107. Thank you - I stand correected then. My comment was out of line.
@everybody:
watershed told us yesterday on the last thread in this topic:
Just so ya know.
…and watershed tells posters what they think without any evidence.
…and then argues against that.
They also throw in red meat like this:
(which was in response to this)
…and then goes back and forth with that for a while. And they are trying the same thing on this thread with statements like:
watershed comes looking for a fight, doesn’t find one, makes one up and then asks why we can’t all get along.
Sounds like a good definition for “troll.”
We’re begin baited. Ignore it.
#97 Just A Grunt
My nomination… Thomas Sowell
ooops! #108 “…didn’t think it was…”
“Faux News Alert”
Not to be left in the dark Alice Cooper decides to joint in on the fun Paul Simon and David Crosby are having.
film at 11:00
Will you base your decisions off what the Democratic Party thinks of you?
I wonder if Michelle can file a lawsuit against Newsweek for Libel and slander?
Just curious.
What’s heartless is that Paul Simon and his Marxist friends don’t use their own money to start some kind of charity to bail out middle-class people who are fiscally irresponsible. Instead he wants middle-class people who are fiscally responsible to pick up the tab while he makes another hackneed crap album in his home studio.
If there no truth behind MM’s words, The Nutty Left wouldn’t be in such an uproar!!!
MM swung for the fence and put another out of the park.
When our first child was born my wife and I decided that she was going to stay home and take care of him and then subsequently our daughter 2 years later. She voluntarily took herself out of the work force to raise the kids. She was going back to work after the second one graduated high school.We thought this was important.
Now to insure that she could do that even if I died before the second one graduated high school we went to our insurance agent and bought a life insurance policy on me that was large enough to allow her to not have to work and be enough to get the kids through college.
That was a choice we made. That was the lifestyle we chose. We lived within our means so that we could afford to do this. We insured that she could maintain the same basic lifestyle even if I was out of the picture. The operative word if “we” insured it, not the government, not my parents, not her parents, not the tooth fairy.
Now suppose we had not bought that policy and I had died, basically watershed is saying that it is the government’s (read everyone else’s) responsibility to make sure my wife and kids were taken care of. In other words if my wife and I had made an irresponsible decision the responsible people of the world would have been punished for it.
No one has a right to a certain lifestyle. If you have it and want to maintain it then it is up to you to make the needed decisions to maintain it.
If we had not my wife would have had to change her lifestyle and gone back to work to provide for her and the children.
Well said. I’ve had an obnoxious co-worker make fun of the fact that I (used to) drive a used Toyota Camry. He drives an Audi. He also had declared bankruptcy because of his credit card debt, (so he wasn’t even man enough to pay his own debts) and then couldn’t re-finance his house because of it. He blamed Bush - I kid you not. Typical libtard, (also hits on me whenever he gets too drunk, is married and has 2 kids, so he’s got the libtarded values down.)
#119 - foxforce91:
What you said!!!
I’ve now written my 3 representatives on the Hill; what have you done?
Democracy is not a spectator sport.
You will not get a prize for your eloquent Blog-blabber.
Pick up the phone or sent a web email contact form.
Now, you, get to work
Question for Watershed;
Here are my circumstances, I was a bartender and wine manager at a very expensive steakhouse for a number of years following a layoff at a large telecom company where I worked in sales. I worked 4 days a week at the restaurant and made around 1200/week CASH. I had 3 days off to play golf (very often comped by my country-club member regulars), take trips, and relax with my friends.
When my wife and I started our family, I went back to work as a network engineer complete with 5-day workweek, cubicle, and HEALTH BENEFITS. I detest my job, but it’s more important to protect my family than to make myself happy. Should the government make it possible for me to choose a less demanding work life, or a job that takes up less of my personal time, or should I be required to be responsible for my family? If I remained a bartender, and my uninsured child needed expensive medical care, I would think that makes me an irresponsible jack ass. What do you think?
jah #121 - you fool. The dems/libs are volunteering me to pay your bill. I’m not too happy about it though
Please accept my honest and sincerest apologies….
I had mistakenly had the mental image of a watercloset instead of a ‘watershed’.
#121 & 122: Hear ! Hear!
Liberal Principle: Eschew any form of personal responsibility. You made your decision because of some other person’s position or decision, thus you can’t be blamed when your decision fails to meet your expectations, which by the way, should never fail, because as a liberal you’re entitled to success and incapable of failure and making poor or wrong decisions; therefore, any failure that you experience is because you were misled or lie to. Remember…you are a victim.
“Down Arrow” from Newsweek
“Firecracker” from NyTimes
“Good Shot” Michelle, I’m proud of you for wining all those awards.
When the target is lower than whale poop, it still needs to be pointed out to some people.
by the way - NewsWeek’s “SPONSORED LINKS” had —
Since they also believe Gore, “The Creator of the Internet as we know it”, and our “World Savior”.
If it takes a “Firecracker”, to light up their world
– and make them (dim o wits) take notice. Go Michelle!!!!
#125…I’m pretty sure I know the liberal response to that question. I’ll see how many agree. Here it goes.
How come Bush is so mean to Helen Thomas at White House press briefings?
Don’t accuse me of not answering your question.
conservativesRus let me get you my address and the amount it costs each month and I will gladly let you take over, hey might be fun to be the grasshopper for a while instead of the ant. *big smile*
Paul Simon!!!
I do not want to be called ‘Al’ anymore.
jah - you’ll notice I didn’t say I was volunteering. I was actually thinking that congressional payroll might be a good place to start covering the costs they so happily trot out under “it’s for the children”. Might have to include the staffers too to get it all covered.
Maybe we could put in such an idea and then call them all mean when they don’t go for it.
Move on is getting ready to release a new video add using Bethany
LINK
#125 Lib answer:
You are clearly one of the pampered rich (golf, travel, travel…) and should be taxed into oblivion. And why are are you reproducing when that will obviously worsen global warming?
Did Paul Simon sing “Stil Crazy After All These Years”? So appropriate for a Democratic gathering.
watershed: I apologize to you for my comments about you teaching. I admit I was out of line there.
Although we are diametrically opposed on political view and world view..I will admit to awe of those who can actually make real music from a hunk of wood, some strings, and/or some metal.
For staters I want to say that you have a pretty extravagant view of what constitutes “modestly stable”. But here’s the probelem, Watershed: the money used to ensure this family’s “right to remain modestly stable” does not materialize out of thin air. It’s taken out of the paychecks of everyone who works for a living. Which means that in a very real sense their “right” to live the way they do comes at the expense of my right to live that way. And I’m not the one who made the exceedingly foolish decision to not carry insurance.
Which reminds me, earlier you said this:
Risk: (noun) 1. exposure to the chance of injury or loss; a hazard or dangerous chance
If he has nothing to lose by his choice because (per your apparent preference) the government will protect him from any loss then it’s not taking a risk.
You’re right, he did take a risk. And had his risk paid off I would not have turned up at his doorstep asking for a cut of the profits. Now that it didn’t pay off I should not have to shoulder the consequences.
All of which is moot anyway because as I understand it these people are already eligible. What’s being proposed is an expansion of the plan to cover people who are even more well off.
Several times it was pointed out on this site that they could have bought medical insurance for about $450, roughly a car payment for a nice car(they own three nice autos). They chose not to. Now watershed wants us to pay the bills. So watershed (probably my last question to you since you seem incapable of answering any), why should any of us get health insurance for our children? You can pay if they have bills. I am following the American Dream too - who are you to stand in my way by making me buy - say - car insurance?
And you always dodge this - shouldn’t they at least sell one of the three autos? two drivers, three autos? Is that too much to ask? Should their parents help pay? Second job (or a full-time job for one of them at least)? No - the government (you and I) should pay for everything for everyone?
Anyway, I’m switching to Do Not Feed the Troll mode…
Oooh, can I try?
Lib answer to #125:
Bush Lied! People Died! My right to have a dissenting voice is being stifled by the Bush administration! And I’ll go on as many radio and tv shows as I can to make sure that people know I’m being silenced!
# 139 LOL!
…”and I’m being oppressed too…yeah, oppressed I tell you!”
In my youth I was a bouncer. I got paid cash nightly to hang around in a nightclub, listen to music, flirt with hot women and beat up drunken troublemakers. It was the best job I ever had, and I’d love to still be doing it. That’d be following my dream.
Instead I work a 9-5 office job where I have to hide my tattoos and where I haven’t had occasion to punch anyone in over 8 years. Boring, boring, boring. But I work for a major corporation and the health benefits are phenominal, and so I make the choice to endure the boredom, do my job and provide for my family.
It’s called being an adult. I know that’s a foreign concept to the average Liberal, but I really wish they’d look into it.
Nancy is becoming an embarrassment(sp?)to her party and to herself. It’s almost to late to salvage her reputation but it could be done if she’d just come up with something sensible and carefully thought through that all sides could comfortably agree on. I wonder sometimes if the advice she’s getting from her cohorts is deliberately designed to sabotage her. How else could she keep coming up with one fiasco after the other?
Oooh, can I try too?
Lib answer to #125:
“Its the government’s job to provide these much needed necessities such as health insurance because it is in our constitution that we have the right to life (except for unborn fetuses), liberty (including an illegial’s right to vote, and a terrorists right any and all things provided under our constitution) and the pursuit of happiness. Therefore, I also think that it is a huge travisty that the Government doesn’t provide all Americans (and what the hell…. illegals too) with their very own home and brand new SUV. I support the troops….. I hate George Bush!”
Brilliant point. Why don’t I try to start my own business? What do I have to lose? And what did Hillary Cankles Clinton herself say back in the 90’s about small businesses that couldn’t afford to insure all of their employees?
Wasn’t it something like, “It’s not my problem if they didn’t have enough capital to start their business.” Well itt’s not my problem if some guy didn’t provide for the eventuality of his not being able to pay for his child’s health care.
No it’s like this,
It’s all Dick Cheney’s fault. We know Cheney is the devil, the devil takes over people’s soul so Cheney took over my soul and as Flip Wilson used to say “Honey the Devil made me do it!” so that’s why it’s Dick Cheney’s fault!
Hey this is fun *smile*
Whatever happend to the United Way, Red Cross, state and local charities? The Dems are parading injured/sick children in the media to suit their agenda which is the re-distribution of wealth and vote buying. They couldn’t care less about these kids. They only care about holding onto and grabbing more power from us sheep.
There are numerous charities along with state and local governments that help the poor. And yes, I help the poor as well with charity contributions.
Where, in the constitution, does it say that the government can take money from citizens and give it to other citizens or that anyone has a right to health care? If they take more money from me to pay for health care for others, then I can no longer contribute to charities and I will tell those charities why.
I don’t have any problem with legitimately poor people getting help from the government, but they should have to apply for it. Why force them to give up employer insurance in order to force them into a government program that will cost the taxpayers.
Democrats are trying to buy votes with taxpayer dollars…plain and simple.
Watershed:
Well ain’t that the shocker!?
In other news today: the sun rose in the East.
Yes, down with health care for children! Health care for adults only!
They can’t NOT know what they are writing when they write this stuff. This is gross misrepresentation on a ridiculous level. ANYone who read that (”opponents of children’s health care”) who has ANY critical thinking skills whatsoever should have been able to smell a rat immediately.
Well unfortunately my CFD run is finished and I have to go back and do some real engineering work now so I will say good bye. Probably won’t be back on for the rest of the day. Enjoy yourselves and play nice.
Damn! They’re on to us!
Guess that leaves out watershed, huh?
Kevin,
You’re projecting…bro! You’re expecting them to think rationally and responsibly.
They indeed are writing the stuff, and they intend to misrepresent. Their idea of being responsible is to take their critical thinking skills and rationalize their misrepresentation because they believe that most are stupid, and they must do what’s best for the “people/common good”…and a what’s a wee little lie when it’s for the “common good?”
Editorial from today’s Green Bay Press Gazette:
Gee - a media outlet that understands
After reading this, I think it’s safe to assume that watershed believes no level of sacrifice should be required.
“Live beneath your means” is a good quote and definitely applies.
You got paid too?!
Here’s the guest commentary from WI Representative Steve Kagen:
Someone should tell the Congressman that the “poorest children among us” are already covered through Medicaid.
The next tier is already covered by S-Chip.
Above that comes personal responsibility. ( He may need a dictionary to understand that term, he is, after all, a Democrat )
Funny how the Dems always want to moral and compassionate with money other than their own.
I think I now understand. I’ve decided that I’ll sacrifice too. I’ll take the afternoon off and go sailing. Everybody else can do all my work and feel good about themselves for all their kind generosity. When my boss fires me, they you all can pay all of my expenses (which of course will only be modest) I need a new house, car and of course a new boat too. About 4500 sq ft should be adequate for myself and my wife. Why should my lifestyle be curtailed just because I was sacrificing already taking the afternoon off to go sailing.
Augustine - of course they do - as with all conservatives, you are by definition immoral and mean
conservativesRUS, I think you’re about right on the merits of the SCHIP debate as it relates to the Frosts. However, you come off as arrogant, condescending and smug in your exchanges with anyone who has a different view of things. Bush league stuff (no pun intended). My impression is that watershed holds his views sincerely and in good faith. Would you speak to him in the same way if you were having this debate face to face? Guessing not.
A Newsweek “Down Arrow” is the highest civilian patriotic honor that can be bestowed by the MSM on a columnist.
Congratulations, Michelle!
Its value is further accentuated by the fact that in the same list, Hillary and Al are going the opposite direction.
It’s all good.
Mike Volpe #106. While I agree with you that corruption should be a big selling point on not expanding a program, I think long gone are the days of “ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for country” We live in an age where I think most? (at least many) couldn’t care less if it were to be corrupt as long as “they got theirs”. What we have to point out to people is all of the shortcomings - including the corruption. Focusing only on corruption probably won’t get it done.
Interesting that there is no mention of moveon to be found in that ad.
Even in the update they are once again using somebody who was already covered. Shouldn’t they be trying to find somebody who fell those the gaps? I guess those kind of people are a little harder to find. Bethany is alive because the current system worked. In the Army we had a saying, “If ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”
Speaking of things that are broke when are these whining Dems going to let us do something with Social Security? Oh yeah when Hillary proposes it.
If any entity deserves a “thumbs down” and a smack upside the head, it’s Newsweek and the despicable leftwing politicians who trotted out a disabled kid to use as a pawn for their health care rip-off.
There seems to be an issue here raised by those for expansion as to what level of sacrifice would be expected of the Frost family by those who oppose the expansion of SCHIP.
First, under the current program, they sacrifice nothing.
But more to the point here, the issue is indeed one of personal responbility. The question should really be what would you scarifice in your life to make your child’s life better by obtaining health insurance versus what the government can do for your child.
Having lax checks and balances within the system rewards those who shun personal responsibility and live life with a reckless disregard of the risks. That type of program only serves to reward irresponsibility and encourage misplaced dependence on a “free” entitlement that someone else pays for. With that kind of program in place, there is no need for people to become responsible citizens since others are paying for their mistakes and lifestyle choices. Shouldn’t the reward go to those who actually work hard and sacrifice for their children?
I don’t think anyone has brought this up before, so I’ll be the meanie of the hour.
I think one of the most disturbing things about this issue is that the Democratic leadership trotted out the Frost family before the Nation as the epitome of the hard working family that “needs” government sponsored health insurance.
Maybe to the Democratic leadership, the Frosts’ are their vision of such a family. To the rest of the country, however, they are a poor example. And both hard working Democrats and Republicans alike out to be insulted by the implication.
Neither Frost has a full time job. Yet they have three (3) fairly new gas guzzling vehicles. Their children have an advanteage over other children whose parents make the same as the Frosts in having a benefactor that covers the $80,000 a year combined tuition expense. But let me remind you, that is private and not government assistance.
The frosts have a piece of commercial property that is no longer used for Mr. Frost’s business. That property continues to accrue maintenance expenses and property taxes.
My heart goes out to their children, but let’s not let the plight of the children cloud the issue with the parents here. Mr. Frost has a woodworking talent that could net him a more than fair income. With that skill in demand, why not work full time?
First and foremost, the Frost family needs a credit counselor more than a government handout. I have seen more than a few situations where first time minority home buyers are forced to go through counseling to stress the importance of financial responsibility. They go though very detailed workshops on needs versus wants and family budgeting. So if we put minority homeowners through these kind of hurdles, why are the Frosts’ given a pass?
Hard working? Something tells me they have no clue what that means. And like I mentioned earlier, I would be surprised if this is going over well with a lot of democrats.
#169 Jim M.
*Hence my “ant and grasshopper” analogy in #83
Close - but still an entitlement-based theory, no? Better would be to reduce taxes, thereby “rewarding” each individual’s work/decisions (choices) without encumbering others.
Just my 2¢ worth!
Tony,
The reward for those who work hard should be reflected in their paychecks through lower taxes.
Jim
I remember people used to tell my Dad how “lucky” he was with his career and family. My Dad’s reply: “You know something, the harder I work, the luckier I get”.
Thats one of the biggest bunch of exposing their own b.s. & lies I can imagine, but it wont harm them a bit.
.
That IS the way of the lefties, scare and b.s. as many people as possible into voting however THEY deem “right”, even if it is WRONG.
.
Bush did well today, even brought up $83,000 isn’t the CORRECT income to deem as POOR, it’s a set-up for big gov’t health care.
.
Ann IS RIGHT! …if they only had a brain…
Wasn’t it a Democrat who once set the standard for his party with the challenge, “Ask not what your Country can do for you; ask what you can do for your Country”.
They really have come a long way, haven’t they?
GREAT POINT.
Some of the watershed types even have MORE kids just to receive an additional check from the gov’t. “thats what its there for , right”? /s
watershed
NO! some of us made CALCULATED risks and did NOT pursue shoddy plans or unfulfilled dreams endlessly, or blindly, at great risk of becoming a burden to others…i.e. taxpayers/the rest of US.
Bad business plan? Then get out before you cant afford to keep your own job.
Many businesses close, 80% close within the first three years because they cant afford to go on RESPONSIBLY!
.
NO ???You’re kidding, please.
OK, I’m going to buy a 3000 sq ft house, in Aspen, and then you watershed, can pay my other bills… really soon too cause it will cost me about 4 million bucks and I want three cars and four kids in private schools. BUT I have a plan for a business, so I’m good to go….right?
.
WATERSHED - SCHIP is for KEEPING YOUR SUV’S AND YOUR CARS???????
Makes NO difference???? lets see, a car without payments vs. a HUGE lease, or three…BIG difference, watershed.
.
oh my, please no. Watershed is a TEACHER?
THAT explains a bunch.
You’re not that guy that went to CU Boulder and ‘taught’ the kids about doin dope all day and having unprotected gay sex and experiment sexually with anyone…are you?
Heartless, Michelle?? LOL…wow. So, if you don’t give people whatever they want, you are heartless?
Selfishness at it’s finest. Many far left libs want socialism, only trouble is most of them wouldn’t give up what they have for it, so it would never work. Why? Because they are too selfish! Or maybe they are under the illusion that only republicans pay taxes?
I wish the right would find Iraqi children who were suppressed by Saddam and use them in campaign commercials and see how the media reacts.
#163 Dakine:
Well, if that is not the pot calling the kettle black!? (not that i am in agreement with what you said about cRus).
Glad to see our “self appointed” moderator/arbitrator and almighty one of all wisdom decided to drop by and point fingers. Jeesh.
And this is the difference between a Conservative and a liberal. Conservatives are willing to make sacrifices.
A liberal want other people to make sacrifices for them as well as want:
Big Government
Indoctrinate Children
Tax and Spend
Illegal Aliens
Multiculturalism
Spread Misinformation
Keep Americans Ignorant
Communism
Thanks feebie…that means alot coming from you.
Wow. Some pile on! Too many to take on one by one. This will be a long response for all of you.
This site needs a little soundproofing though, the echo chamber effect is like that of the Grand Canyon otherwise. (That’s a “nobody ever takes an opposing viewpoint nearly ever here on MM,” analogy.)
After reading all your posts, I would first like to comment on the number of people who have mocked me outright and my profession as a (music) teacher, rather than respond to my posts. You only bolster people’s opinions that perhaps personal attacks outweigh reasoned debate here. As literally one of the ONLY liberals I can find here, I expected maybe a curiosity factor would help me receive slightly more decorum. I was wrong. You’re cowardly, because you know more about me than I about you, and there you mock from your anonymous hiding place. (Flame away.)
For those of you who argue that the Frosts should NOT have had access to schip (and you are legion here)-
I think the Frosts are a family, like most American families, in search of the American dream. I think they have took every step to attain this goal and do what every family hopes to do- have kids that go to a good school, own a home, and work hard and take some entreprenurial strides. I think then something happened and the dream became more difficult to acheive. (They say, in an interview, that among other burdens, their business couldn’t handle the costs of medical insurance, and they had to end the business. I believe them. Maybe you don’t.) So they try to get themselves back on their feet, when tragedy strikes, and their kids wind up in the hospital in a coma after a terrible car accident. They are without insurance, and make little income. Schip helped them out. Thank goodness. They came out and described their situation in oredr to demonstate the effectivness of schip. Rightly so. I think more families, in similar situations (hard working class familes who cannot feasibly afford insurance) should be covered by schip.
I also think that one boon of schip is that it prevented the Frosts from having to add to their already traumatic situation by freeing them from heartbreaking decisions (doubly so, given the accident) such as “Should I sell my house?” or “What assets should I begin to get rid of?”. That concept is is for some reason scoffed at here. Some here think these decisions are “easy” or “expectable”. I say they are horrendous and life-altering decisions. I would like to live in a country that helps out those in situations like the Frosts, and give them an opportunity NOT to sell their house. I think America, in my heart of hearts (uh, oh, I said “heart”) is a caring nation, and doesn’t throw it’s citizens under the bus (or force them to ride the bus, ha ha)when the financial burden becomes too great.
If any other Americans, including all of you on this board, were in a similar situation, I would feel the same way and want them to have the same help. Swear to god. Even you, GovtDrone. (jk.)
I think MM and other freeper-like sites started off this debate in truly bad form in a number of ways: in taking hearsay and anonymous emails as fact and accusing the Frosts of LYING, and in driving past their house and describing what was seen, as if that did anything but ADD to the rank speculation about their financial situation. All those assumptions about the Frosts were of course proven false. (That is what people mean by “smear”, by the way.) And I must say I didn’t notice anyone apologizing for the ignorant assumptions and incorrect accusations. I think the Frosts got into a situation that could happen to many other hard working families, and it doesn’t mean they are lazy or selfish or uncaring or bad parents, which many of you have said time and again about these people.
Ug. I will stop there, even though there’s obviously more. (Expansion of schip, etc.) But I am hungry!
watershed,
My full ame is James Steven Roberts. I am a mechanical engineer in Atlanta, Georgia. I am married with one child. I believe I have already given you example of my volunteer activites.
Now that that is out of the way how about dropping your anonimity. The least you could do is give us some examples of how you have shown your compassion to your fellow man. Once again, support for government programs do not count.
We are awaiting with baited breath.
Wow!The Dems have Paul Simon….that’s almost as impressive as having David Crosby.After all,if a mental giant like P.S.says it ,it must be true.Right? Right?….Hello,is there anybody out there?
I know better but:watershed,the decisions you refer to in your comment i.e.”What assets should I begin to get rid of?”are in fact the easiest decisions for a parent to make.My children’s welfare,or my house,is not a “heartbreaking decision”for a parent.Any good parent would give away all worldly goods for the benefit of his or her children,without a second thought. Besises,assets can always be re-gained–your children’s health can’t.
#182
You win. I guess since I refuse to tell you exactly where I live, everything I said must be false and un-American.
Excellent arguing technique you have there. My point was about those who were mocking me, just to be clear.
Why do you have it so in for me, guy? All your posts to me are quel agro.
This is not about the Frost family at all. It is about how to properly manage a gigantic federal financial program and how to manage our emotions. I’ve often wondered if all of this Frost business is just a contrived red-herring thrown out to deflect the debate away from the real issue: federal spending is out of control and the powers that be (Pelosi, Hillary, Reid, et al) do not want to restrain their pandering for votes.
Check out the trackback to JABbering Stooge. He claims there are provisions for wounded soldiers also in the S-CHIP bill. In case it’s true, I asked him a question that I wish everybody could ask the Dems. This could cave in on their notion of supporting wounded troops if it gets out.
#185
Interesting, I think this site has devoted many columns to the Frost family specifically, when in fact they were simply an example of the success of a larger issue (schip). I think MM and the freepers made it personal, and it is they who deflected from the real issue (healthcare assistance for families who need it).
#181 watershed:
My “mocking” consisted of striking out “teach” and substituting “propagandize” [#83]
Reason being - your trolling comments prior to that. Just an assumption on my part (and yes, we had a saying about that practice in the military too). Seemed to me you were not a private teacher (apparently you run your own school?) but a public one.
If that’s the case, I’m afraid I cannot understand your basic premise; that the S-CHIP is supposed to cover losses without some consideration of means.
Besides that - when you ignore the central topic and try to hijack the thread… it’s trolling. As in “Troll-like behavior.” The more the troll is fed, the further off-topic the thread goes… fer’ instance:
OH - and I’ll bet you still don’t get it… it’s not about the Frost’s or their manipulation by the Democrat’s… it’s about taking my money and giving it to somebody else without my approval. Charity is not the work of government. The bigger this program gets, the more out-of-hand it will become… until you wind-up with socialized health-care (as indicated elsewhere in this thread, go figger) and that’s not the same as good health-care.
Have a nice nite.
#185 Larry
Yep - but it’s not just the current “powers that be” it’s all the rascals. This is what I mean by rapidly expanding social programs that redistribute the individual’s property to others… that’s what charity is for.
Our Republican Congress was no better.
Watershed,
Your bleeding heart ruined my rug. I’m sending you the cleaning bill.
#186 Watershed
Glad to see your post.
Guess I was right: You still don’t get it [#185].
The Frost family had purposely decided not to get insurance. They had adequate means to do so. They also made choices (self-employment, multiple properties) which have repercussions associated (risk). They did so KNOWING they may suffer some catastrophic event.
Hell - I don’t have earthquake or flood insurance… but I made those choices.
I never took WIC or a PELL Grant when I could’ve… because those are for folks that need them. While not “rolling in the dough” I was (and still am, thank G-d) sufficiently able to support myself and my family.
YMMV
I recall some years ago working with a corporate charity where every year we would collect donations from individual employees. We had a committee that would go out and purchase gifts for needy chidren and all would gather round to wrap them. We would get a list from a local charity of families that needed help. We’d choose the ones we thought the most needy. Then came the big night of delivering the Christmas presents to the children. The last time we did this we recognized one of the phone numbers given to us as one that was a cell phone and one landline. Driving up to the house a fairly new Cadillac was in the drive, the house was better than any of us lived in, and the welcome was less than cordial. It was basically, “drop off what you have and leave us the h-ll alone.”
If any want to check out the stats on who will qualify for this entitlement look up what the average wage is in all the states and compare that to what this bill will cover. I’m guessing that what is projected to cover the costs of the bill is only a drop in the bucket.
We all have “heart” for those truly in need. However, two or three cars parked in your driveway where only a minimum down payment has been made, and ditto for the house, is reckless when you have small children to support - and earnings from your job can never cover the minimum payments. This is akin to the bail out of sub-prime loans. It’s not my fault or yours on this site. It lies squarely on the shoulders of the individuals who made the decisions to bury themselves in debt and too many mouths to feed.
Selling one of their three cars?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Why are people still feeding the troll? Several of us have pointed out (above) that it’s pointless. Starve him. You’re giving him exactly what he wants. Without attention he will go away.
Now I see he’s whining about “the number of people” mocking the fact that he runs a music school? I looked up and down these nearly 200 comments and found maybe one or two comments that even mentioned that fact.
The next thing you know he’s going to be claming that Michelle knocked him down and broke his teeth.
BTW, none of this matters anyway. Red Eye has been moved to 3am Eastern. Life as we know it is over.
Paul Simon blows. He’s a has-been, drug-burned out, pile of libby-dem crap.
I’m still waiting for some responses:
1) What if any sacrifice should be made when bad things happen (or maybe even before bad things happen)? I know my anwer - and
2) Please point me to a successful socialized country. When I said liberals were unable to learn from history, I gave as an example the lack of successful socialized countries. There are many possible ways to rebut the statement (show me a successful example, show me other examples of learning from history…etc) however calling me mean or arrogant is not one of them.
I believe both of these question are integral components of the debate about SCHIP (and/or it’s expansion).
oops - point 1) I know my answer - and I know my answer isn’t the same as everybody else here although those who are conservative tend to be grouped toward one area. I would like to know what is the liberal answer.
Here, here 24Klady!
Following this debate sickens me.
Didn’t the republican congress first bring this program into existence? Why is the argument whether to expand it instead of eliminating it? Why are we always reduced to this argument of more and more and bigger and bigger programs?
Get the government out of it altogether.
If everyone received a tax deduction for their insurance costs and/or medical costs no matter the income level the debate would change dramatically.
Ditto with rent deductions vs. mortgage interest deductions. Why are renters penalized? Maybe that would help lower income people that everyone seems (NOT)to care so much about.
DO YA THINK that might be a reason so many people are in the sub prime situation because they wanted a deduction too???
Heck, I give up. There is no way to move this behemoth in my lifetime.
If only a fair tax solution could be seriously addressed. Seriousness is not what our government is about.
ejean….agree with a modification. Forget tax deductions (because that implies the taxes are ok in the first place). How about just lower taxes in the first place.
Without thinking about actual numbers - something along the lines of a flat tax - but not only limited to income, ie. has to be some “asset” component. Like x% of income, y% of total assets.
(The asset component is directed toward those with ?historic? (not sure what word there) wealth - relatively low current income but huge assets)