$190 Billion For WAR; NO Help For Children's Health

Bush said he objected to the SCHIP Bill because it would provide help to families that make up to $80,000 per year. At the same time the Bush Farm Policy provides subsidies to farmers that make up to $2.5 Million dollars per year. When the Democrats tried to lower the limit to $500,000 per year, Bush threatened to VETO that Bill. How is it he thinks $80,000 per year is TOO much to help children have health insurance but it is OK to pay tax dollars to farmers making as much as $2.5 Million per year which is more then 30 times more?

How much have you donated to kids' health charities? If nothing, then shut your lazy, good for nothing, waste of a mouth. If you aren't helping kids, then don't sit there on your fat butt and whine that the government isn't doing it for you.

the poor are now anyone who makes 80,000 a year or less.

the rich are now anyone who makes 91000 a year or more.

so that means if your not in the rich category then you are poor.

and since gene makes less than 80,000 a year that must be why he wants someone else to pay for him.

“Reply By: ParaTed2k Posted: Saturday, September 29, 2007
How much have you donated to kids' health charities? If nothing, then shut your lazy, good for nothing, waste of a mouth. If you aren't helping kids, then don't sit there on your fat butt and whine that the government isn't doing it for you.” My point is that the government is “doing it for wealthy farmers but not for POOR people”

DROP DEAD YOU PATHETIC A*S!

We support 10 charities, our church and support a child via the Christian Children’s Fund! People like you are a waste!

Reply By: danielost Posted: Saturday, September 29, 2007
The poor are now anyone who makes 80,000 a year or less.

The rich are now anyone who makes 91000 a year or more.

So that means if you’re not in the rich category then you are poor.

And since gene makes less than 80,000 a year that must be why he wants someone else to pay for him. SORRY—My Income is in six figures!


I would not say a family making UP TO $80,000 is rich but I KNOW a Farmer making $2.5 Million is RICH! WHY does Bush support handing out tax dollars to farmers making millions per year and then object to a family making up to $80,000?

if you look at this closely you will find that this was started by a democrat. i don't know if bush can stop something like this. since he doesn't make the budget out the congress does.

Then why do you insist the government do what it is OUR job to do? It is UNCONSITUTIONAL for the government to do what you demand here.

Reply By: danielost Posted: Saturday, September 29, 2007
“WHY does Bush support handing out tax dollars to farmers making millions per year


if you look at this closely you will find that this was started by a democrat. i don't know if bush can stop something like this. since he doesn't make the budget out the congress does.”


It is Bush that is preventing that policy from changing. WHY? No matter who started it, the democrats want to stop handing out our tax dollars to people that do not need or deserve the help as the policy was designed to do.



Reply By: ParaTed2k Posted: Saturday, September 29, 2007
“We support 10 charities, our church and support a child via the Christian Children’s Fund! People like you are a waste!


Then why do you insist the government do what it is OUR job to do? It is UNCONSITUTIONAL for the government to do what you demand here.”

There is no such Supreme Court ruling!


Because all the private help does not come close to meeting the need for help. Simple as that.

Here is more consequences from the Iraq war:

US Official Notes China's Military Gains
Saturday, September 29, 2007 6:45 AM EDT
The Associated Press
By ERIC TALMADGE Associated Press Writer

KADENA AIR BASE, Japan (AP) — While the U.S. has been tied up in Iraq, China is modernizing its military and its air defenses are now nearly impenetrable to all but the newest of American fighters, the senior U.S. military official in Japan said.

Lt. Gen. Bruce Wright, commander of the roughly 50,000 U.S. forces in Japan, Washington's biggest ally in Asia, said in an interview with The Associated Press this week that the Iraq war is reducing the availability of U.S. troops and equipment to meet other contingencies.
I bet that general gets a call from the White House!

Why you haven't been banned long ago is beyond me.

Maybe it's because nobody, but nobody, takes you seriously?

Sorry to burst your ignorant bubble you idiot, btu the Supreme Court is NOT the U.S. Constitution. There is plenty of help, and would be more if communistic fools like you didn't demand our government do OUR job for us.

Reply By: Gideon MacLeish Posted: Saturday, September 29, 2007
DROP DEAD YOU PATHETIC A*S!


Why you haven't been banned long ago is beyond me.

Maybe it's because nobody, but nobody, takes you seriously?


HAVE YOU LOOKED AT WHAT IS SAID TO ME? Half the regulars would be banned!

Reply By: ParaTed2k Posted: Saturday, September 29, 2007
"Sorry to burst your ignorant bubble you idiot, btu the Supreme Court is NOT the U.S. Constitution. There is plenty of help, and would be more if communistic fools like you didn't demand our government do OUR job for us."


What ever laws you claim are unconstitutional are nothing of the sort UNTIL a case is brought to the courts and the Supreme Court says the law is unconstitutional.

You have given as much as you've gotten Gene. Quit trying to play the victim here, it doesn't suit you. Sure, I've said things to you that should have gotten me banned, but you shot right back.

I'd voluntarily banish myself forever if it meant you would be banned too!

Reply By: ParaTed2k Posted: Saturday, September 29, 2007
You have given as much as you've gotten Gene. Quit trying to play the victim here, it doesn't suit you. Sure, I've said things to you that should have gotten me banned, but you shot right back.

I am not trying to play anything. I Just said it like it is!!!!!

You've never just said it like it is Gene... only what your stoned, "hate Bush" reddened eyes see.


I will agree with you on one thing though, Prs. Bush doesn't have a leg to stand on when he says, "it costs too much".

When I started to write my two books about Bush, I did not have the negative feeling about him that I had after I researched his background and the results of his policies. I can not believe that ANYONE who truly looked at the experience GWB brought to the Presidency and an honest look at what has taken place in both the foreign and domestic agenda, that one could conclude that Bush has been good for the vast majority of Americans. The facts just do not support that he has made ANYTHING better and many issues have gotten much worse since January 2001.

That's the thing Gene, we treat you just like you treat Prs. Bush. Even those of us who still support Prs. Bush don't claim to support everything about him. I support him in the war in Iraq, but I also admit he has botched parts of it.

You go just as far in trashing Bush as we go in trashing you. I mean, look at the lengths you're willing to go to trash him. You don't care if it has nothing to do with Bush's job, you'll use it as an example of his incompetence.

Look at Katrina. You know he has little to do with disaster response. You know he has NOTHING to do with state and local Disaster protocols. Yet, you were right there with the liars in the incompetent press. Claiming it was a fiasco because of Bush.

Well, when you lie, I'll be there to call you on it.

If you had any real decency or credibility, you would acknowledge what wasn't his fault or his responsibilty... or at least leave those things out.

Instead you reveal yourself for the baffoon you are.

Believe it or not, if there was an opportunity, I wouldn't mind meeting you in person. I figure you are more than what you present here at JU, and it would be cool to see the other sides of you.

In regards to the topic at hand, $ 190 billion for war and yet threatenging to veto a health bill for children, I have to agree with Col Gene. And no, it's not because of my 'emotional' lefty thinking that apparently has left me brain damaged. It's a valid question- why is it OK for the government to spend almost half a trillion dollars on a war of choice overseas (total amount since war began), yet when a basic service for children, who are the future of a nation regardless of whether they're your children directly or not, is not ok? Can someone please enlighten me as to why the benevolent White house cut taxes, then heaped on the spending for a war overseas? If they were really serious about the future of the country, they would have kept taxes the same or raised them to cover the costs of the war. Instead, that cost is now on the biggest visa bill ever racked up, and someday the foreign creditors that allowed the U.S to continue it's war are going to want to collect. Is it more important to spend money on killing foreigners rather than take care of your own citizens? And no, I don't buy into the argument that this is a war of necessity and we're fighting them "over there, so we don't have to fight them here"

Artyism, it's a myth from the inception, this money isn't being proposed to help kids that have no other means of help, there is aid for them, this is just an increase in the money going to a program (bureacracy). Only a small portion of the budgeted money would have actually made it to any kid.

SCHIP isn't underfunded, it is overbloated.

sorry this is wrong to. this is an underhanded way to bring in universal health care.

That too

“You go just as far in trashing Bush as we go in trashing you. I mean, look at the lengths you're willing to go to trash him. You don't care if it has nothing to do with Bush's job, you'll use it as an example of his incompetence.”


I provide the actual results of Bush and his policies. The Iraq war for example is a series of mistakes that build on each other. The most serious error was to attack Iraq and the failure of Bush to understand what his father knew-- We would get bogged down in a civil war and would destabilize Iraq if we invaded. Then Bush did not follow the military experts as to the resources needed to prevent the violence we see today. First we did not control the internal factions and we also failed to prevent foreign terrorists from setting up operations. Finally, Bush disbanded the internal structure needed to run the country-- the Army, Police and Civil workers. To sugar coat the extent of the failures of Bush in Iraq is what people do who say Bush made mistakes in how he conducted the war. No Bush made the series of mistakes starting with the monumental error to invade Iraq, This was a strategic mistake which shows Bush has no understanding of the danger that faces us in the Moslem World. That is not trashing Bush. That is recognizing the extent of the failure of this man in Iraq and the destabilizing effect on entire region. What he did will impact us for decades and the only unknown is just HOW much of a price will we pay for his ignorance.

most of what you provide is actually democrat policy. you just put bushes name to it. and half the stuff that is bushs doings you spin to fit your agenda.

Then we will continue to treat you with the same mindless venom that you vomit on Bush.. because you deserve no better.