Hope all you want but they didn't. It was they that ADDED it.



You mean they would have to give up their nintendo, Ipod, and other luxuries to afford this?? Oh the insanity of getting a person's priorities right.

If a person has that much value on having insurance then it would be a priority would it not? Would you subsidize me getting a house while I buy booze? No, you wouldn't. You'd tell me to clean up my act and save THAT money to pay for a place of residence. So why are you giving these people who make enough.

As I said I make less than 40K and my wife currently does not work. She doesn't have insurance Col. NO INSURANCE. But do you see me whinning that I am poor waiting for a bloody handout? No you do not. Why because I know that right now we cannot afford it just yet. We have other things that we must pay off/for first. We have chosen to not have insurance on her because we adjusted our priorities. That is the bottom line. You want to keep people lazy by giving them a pass on their poor choices but are the first to scream at Bush for his irresponsibilities? You want Bush to be responsible how about making the American Public responsible?

I could maintain my standard of living AND afford insurance for my couple of kids and my wife on a $50k salary. So, that 70-80K claim is ridiculous. And yeah, it would cost about $8k.

You give to 10 charities, you give to the church, yet you refuse to help out your own son.

And you call REPUBLICANS cold hearted!

Help me out here Jythier.

So you would pay $8K for insurance on your family (insurance of your choice)or let the gov't take over your insurance someone would still be paying $8K for your money plus extra from the bloated infrastructure of gov't administrators with them as your only option for insurance that will have less coverage (and depicted upon legislation what is covered)?

Which would you choose?

actually he allowed a lady to waste expensive oil on his feet rather than give it to the poor.

Reply By: Adventure-Dude Posted: Friday, October 19, 2007
I Hope the democrats clearly exclude illegal aliens.


Hope all you want but they didn't. It was they that ADDED it.


They can do that with their next bill.


Reply By: Jythier Posted: Friday, October 19, 2007
“I could maintain my standard of living AND afford insurance for my couple of kids and my wife on a $50k salary. So, that 70-80K claim is ridiculous. And yeah, it would cost about $8k.”


If you are saying a person with a family income of $50,000 can spend $8,000 for just health insurance you are NUTS. There are Millions of families that can not and are not covering their children and that are why this bill is needed. We can pay farm subsidies to families with incomes up to $2.5 Million but can NOT help a family making 50K with health insurance for their children? That also is JUST NUTS as is anyone that would make such a ridiculous argument!

Reply By: danielost Posted: Friday, October 19, 2007
Allowing the poor to suffer and have nothing is just what Christ was talking about.




Actually he allowed a lady to waste expensive oil on his feet rather than give it to the poor.

That oil was used on the feet of GOD and was not wasted!!!!!!!! That has nothing to do with the teaching in the Lazarus passage and you know it! You just do not to admit what Bush and all the people in Congress did to deny the children health coverage is like the rich man ignoring the needs of Lazarus. There is also a passage that says” it would be better to place a mill store around you neck and be tossed in the sea then to harm the children”.

what is a ridiculous argument. anything that doesn't agree with you. how dictatorship[democrat] of you

Now you're quoting GROSSLY out of context, COL. I won't even begin to address your theological errors, which are APPALLING!

Christ did not go into the temple and steal the priests' money. He advocated INDIVIDUAL responsibility, NOT THEFT.

If your church teaches that Christ advocated theft to care for the poor and needy, it's a cult, plain and simple, COL.

"If you are saying a person with a family income of $50,000 can spend $8,000 for just health insurance you are NUTS. There are Millions of families that can not and are not covering their children and that are why this bill is needed."

Nonono. I'm saying I'm living on 40k now, but if my expenses included health insurance then I would need 50k in order to live. Actually, 49k. But, I must just be a nut. Because it's not like I know how much I make. It's not like I live in an expensive New England state. No, cost of living must just be much higher everywhere else.

These people who don't have health insurance but make 50k are choosing not to. They chose another way to spend their money. I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem with giving them health insurance because they are not capable of choosing for themselves.

Double the poverty line is closer to 40k. I think that's closer to what is actually needed.

Naw, my company's insurance sucks. Blue Cross of California. As I said, I'm in New England. Real cool. And it would be the 8k per year. No co-pay though. And I'm covered free.

A G-D that wants not and/or needs not.



Here here!

This thread is hysterically funny.

No intelligent, conscious person can possibly miss the hypocritical bullshit posturing going on, by the Democrats and by Gene.

And to think, God had stinky feet.

Jythier you mean they have the money but just don't make it a priority????? GASP!

Jesus got perfume poured on his feet, and then he had to go and wash his disciples feet, 'cuz they were too stinky for him...

or they figure the $8k is better invested in a health care savings account, where it draws interest????? DOUBLE GASP!

The FOOLS! (completely sarcastic here)

G-D had athletes foot? I guess they didn't have fast actin Tinactin back then???

Reply By: Adventure-Dude Posted: Friday, October 19, 2007
Now what the hell does GOD want with oily feet?


The oil was used on the feet of Christ who is GOD!

Reply By: Adventure-Dude Posted: Friday, October 19, 2007
“These people who don't have health insurance but make 50k are choosing not to.


Jythier you mean they have the money but just don't make it a priority????? GASP!”


No - what it means is when you pay for housing, utilities, transportation including gas, taxes, food and clothing you do not have $8,000 left to pay for health insurance.

I just explained to you, I pay for all those things with my current salary. If I was making more, I would have $8k to pay for health insurance.

Reply By: little-whip Posted: Friday, October 19, 2007
Ahh, He's got Anthem HealthKeepers Plus, which I believe is also a blue cross/blue shield company. His copays are kinda high, $25 for a regular visit, $50 for a specialist, and a high deductable on prescriptions, ($1000.)

You are incorrect. I know the costs both from my last job and by what my daughter must pay for health insurance. The monthly cost of blue Cross for a single person is just under $400 per month. Family coverage is about $700 per month.

Christ did not go into the temple and steal the priests' money. He advocated INDIVIDUAL responsibility, NOT THEFT.


Taxing is not theft. In fact Christ held up the coin with Caesar’s image on it and said render unto Caesar what is CEASERS. YOU CAN BS ALL YOU WANT, THE WEALTHY WHO OPPOSSE HELPING THE POOR ARE NO DIFFERENT THEN THE RICH MAN IGNORING LAZERATH.


Reply By: Gideon MacLeish Posted: Friday, October 19, 2007
We support about 10 charities in addition to our church.


You give to 10 charities, you give to the church, yet you refuse to help out your own son.

Where did you get the idea we did not help our son? We have and continue to help all our children.

now you see what his major problem is.


he thinks everyones circumstances are the same as his.

Col, there aren't very many here that are WEALTHY. And yet we still oppose. Baffling isn't it!