Posted by: ST on August 21, 2007 at 11:12 am
The top item at Memeorandum is a story that made the front page of the NYT today. The headline reads:
White House Acts to Limit Health Plan for Children
If you go to the NYT link, though, they’ve revised the headline to read as follows:
Rules May Limit Health Program Aiding Children
The headline from the Washington Post:
New Bush Policies Limit Reach of Child Insurance Plan
From the liberal McClatchy newspaper, we read that Bush is responsible for the lead paint we’ve been seeing in various items imported from China:
Efforts to crack down on lead paint thwarted by China, Bush Administration
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration and China have both undermined efforts to tighten rules designed to ensure that lead paint isn’t used in toys, bibs, jewelry and other children’s products.
Both have fought efforts to better police imported toys from China.
I’m sure there’s a lot more to the story than meets the eye on that one, but for now we’ll just stick to the unfolding drama about Bush not liking kids enough to let more of them have access to health insurance, which is being played out at several far left blogs, per the Memeorandum link. This argument has been dissected and debunked before, but McQ over at QandO does it again here. An excerpt:
Of course it is being characterized as an attempt to deny poor children “free” health care. It’s not. It specifically denies the attempt, by some states, to raise the bar for acceptance to 400% over the poverty rate which means the inclusion of some households making $80,000 a year and “children” up to the age of 25.
Read it all, and you’ll understand why the mischaracterizations of Bush’s argument against expanding this benefit are blatant misrepresentations designed to demagogue and ridicule, rather than to inform and discuss the issue.
Joe Gandelman, I blogger whom I respect, has unfortunately fallen for the mainstream spin on this story hook, line, and sinker. Come on, Joe. Bush might be many things to people who don’t like him, but he is not someone who hates children and wants to ‘deny’ them healthcare. This is just like the old “Reagan wants to starve school kids” lie the left and the media perpetuated back in the early 80s. It wasn’t true, of course, but the media ran with it, just as they are doing now with Bush’s ‘denial of healthcare’ for ‘millions’ of children.
Never underestimate the media’s patented ability to shill for the Democratic party when it comes to issues revolving around the poor, weak, sick, needy, kids, ‘minorities,’ and the elderly. This issue is a classic example of that.
Is there nothing the Boy King could do to get you to criticize him? Cancel Christmas? Dismember a baby in the East Room? Suck stem cells through a straw, check them up, and spit them out? Anything?
I guess that new “Internet for preschoolers” program is just now kicking into effect. Guess your teachers haven’t yet taught you the art of ‘directly addressing the point,’ hmm?
Geez, were you in a coma or something during the recent immigration discussions?
They stay in a coma, Sev. ‘Fraud, er, ‘freude obviously has forgotten the Harriet Miers drama, and the UAE port deal disagreements as well, among other things.
As they say, ignorance is bliss for some.
- Hmmm…. I’m getting “duplicate comment, but I don’t see it posted, and its been awhile….ST HELP!….lol
1.
I’ve seen plenty of critism regarding Bush on the right- from how he handled Iraq, to his misplaced immigration policy, to the port deal.
Of course, unless one declares Bush “The Great Satan” then the left does not acknowledge it. it is just as bad the the right delcaring the left “UnAmerican traitors”.
Please feel free to toss out the usual “Commie” and “Fascists” statements, one and all.
Sev, you beat me to it on the immigation point.
But I doubt this troll will ever see your response. Their usual modus operandi is to come in, fling their poo, and run away.
But the list is sort of interesting. Sounds like ‘freude is suggesting that the President start acting like a leftist. Cancelling Christmas is something the ACLU has been after for years, and dismembering babies (more commonly referred to as partial birth abortion) is virtually a sacrament on the left.
It’s not that Bush hates children…no one really believes that (it’s just fun to say)… it’s that Bush loves corporate profit more than the health of other peoples Children.
Silly left wing media can’t tell the difference!
I love your last paragraph, Sister. Although I’d rewrite it as:
Never underestimate the media’s patented ability to shill for the Republican party when it comes to issues revolving around the terrorism, Iraq, Bin Laden, Energy Policy, Domestic Spying, reasons for going to war, and no-bid contracts/cronyism.
This is a joke, right?
“…and no-bid contracts/cronyism.”
- You see, thats why the loons on the Left can’t get any real traction in the “Bush demonization campaign”, even though there are a number of legitimate beefs that the electorate as a whole have with the Administration.
- The Left pimple heads get their laundry lists of talking points, and like good little Kossacks, they go forth to spread the word, too lazy to bother to fact check their claims. To wit:
- This idea that Iraq ia being serviced by a mass of “no-bid” Contractors is pure bunk. But like a lot of the moonbat claims, it starts with a grain of truth, and then proceeds to be distorted for propaganda purposes, and to fit the “Narrative”. Heres the truth of things.
- Some contracts are so involved, and massive in scope, only a very few companies have the resources to bid on them, and in some cases only a single company will even agree to take the jobs.
- See the difference between the truth and “no-bid”?
- The topper is that “no-bid” contracts are agaisnt DOD policy, that is, illegal by Congressional ban. So the claim is simply stupid. There are a very narrow range of reasons for “directed contracts”, which is the proper term, and they include minorities, woman owned businesses, ect, all the sorts of people that the phoney Ill-Liberals claim they are trying to protect. But that doesn’t stop the bird-brain Progessives. If it bashes Bush, its got to be true.
- The good ole cronyism meme is cut from the same clouth. ect ect ect. More BDS syndrome.
- BBH –
BBH,
I’m glad you tackled the no bid subject, as that was the only point of Matt’s post where I would of agreed with Matt. Your post has put unsure on this issue.
I’ve read in the past where our government has paid excessive amounts for small items, (I forget where, and it was at least 10 years ago maybe, but I remember reading $250 for a hammer)and can only assume that somewhere, someone, in the government is getting a kickback from the hammer company in the form of a campaign contribution, etc.
okay, so bush isn’t actively attacking children. so tell us what he is doing to help them.
- GM – All of that is true also, and has not a single thing to do with Bush wagging a peronal canpaign of idiotic contract bidding, or sinister implications of personal gain.
- Yes there are many and varied cases of 350 dollar hammers, 760 dollar ashtrays, 20 dollar a roll toilet paper, ect., but thats because the Government, in general, is such a massive CF at times. Again. that isn’t fodder for the Left-loons Narrative, because “the Government”, unfortunately for the numbskull Leftist claims, has just as many Dems gumming up the works as Reps.
- I spent 45 years in Aerospace in every aspect of GOA and DOD and so forth contract work/bidding/rules, ect ect. and believe me, neither side has anything to be proud of, or has the market cornered on bad purchasing practices.
- If the average American knew all the stories they’d be appalled. The Left Loons, and their self serving lies, would fade into oblivion. Its just poor government economics period. But they use that as a basis for theit nonsensical Bush bashing fairy tales.
- I have some serious problems with Bush. But that’s the working word. Serious. You can’t take people serious that run around screeching that Cheney and Bush blew up the WTC, or that Elvis is going to lead an army of little green men in hotpink heliocoptors to come and save us all from the evil Satan Bush. They sre not serious. they are children mentally.
- BBH –
ibfamous and the moderate (leftist) voice,
When did you guys stop beating your wives?
Your question ibfamous is rhetorical in nature and doesn’t even warrant a response. If you feel so LAZY that you can’t find the 100′s of things and Billions of dollars of help that Congress wrote and Bush signed to “help” children then I can only call YOU lazy and NEGLIGENT.
Negligence makes ignorance and ignorance is hurtful to America and a gem for terrorist propaganda. Good work ibfamous!!! Stop being lazy…
I should’ve said, “Joe Gandelman, when did you stop beating your wife?”
Respect is lost for me ST. I’m sorry. It’s the whole 1995 4.5% increase for school lunches yet the Democrats had masses of school children writing Congress and moderate (leftists) believing (because the dominant drive-by legacy media was saying it) that the school lunch program was being cut.
These leftists should have free speech but should have consequences in the ballot box for lying repeatedly ON EVERY TOPIC. No matter what the topic the drive-by legacy press will completely distort and make things 180 degrees from reality.
FUNDING for health programs for children under Bush HAS INCREASED you wife beaters…
- *chuckle*…Bak….friend….please….you’ll burst a blood vessel…..I know I know….the magnitude of mendacity, and willingness to speak unfounded nonsense by the left boggles the mind.
- But as I’ve said on many occassions…. “Truth, like oil in water, always rises to the surface.” which is just a fancy way of saying the propaganda campaigns run out of gas sooner or later. Just to hard to keep all those phoney balls in the air.
- I remember back in 2004 when the Left was screeming about how Bush had cut ALL programs for the poor and disadvantaged, including schools. Then when the GAO issued the final figures, it turned out that Bush had spent a record 392 Billion dollars on ALL governemnet programs, nearly 125 Billion more than Clinton in his best year, that every single program had an INCREASE, and suddenly all the fairy tales on that subject, including all the nonsense articals the NYT was floating to help the Left narrative, came to a screeching halt.
- So I have faith in the majority of americans to see through all the Ill-Liberal agendas.
- BBH –
I would not only say the right is willing to go after Bush, I would say that both the far right and the far left employ many of the same tactics in going after their enemies. Paranoia, conspiracy theories, cherry picking data, fear mongering, bigotry…and the list goes on.
But in this case I can say after years of working in health care, children are not denied health care in this country. In fact not so long ago, the far right was complaining that Bush was in error for not denying health care to immigrant children.
The man can not win for losing.
To get back to more rational discussion on my part….
To me, it is BETTER for low income children that the program is NOT diluted by people who do not have the need to be subsidized with government health benefits.
To have that diluting effect would be a disservice to low income families. Bush is helping low income families therefore in my humble opinion Joe and ibfamous…
Bravo!
$82,600 is in the top 20% of income earners. Are any of the people in America responsible anymore? You people aren’t saving any money by having the government pay for it. Government run programs generally pay out 25% of the dollar in benefits. The other 75% is administrative costs. This is true in almost EVERY government run program. Take your pick. Welfare, AFDC, WIC, and 50 other programs that you weren’t aware is there for you….
Every one of these programs has had increased spending every year for over 6 decades despite the CLAIMS of cuts by the drive-by legacy media.
Baklava, you’re right on one thing – people are not responsible.
That’s why we spend so much on Social Security – because some people are not responsible enough to save for themselves.
That’s why we spend so much on the war on drugs – because some people are not responsible enough to not fry their brains.
That’s why we spend so much on police – because some people are not responsible enough to obey the law.
But you’re against spending $5 billion (about 1 month in Iraq) to help children who have no way to help themselves? Ridiculous.
Governments are created by the people in order to provide for collective needs. And if assuring the health and well being of our children isn’t a collective need, please tell me what is.
And I’m sorry, did someone say the no-bid theory was debunked?
LINK
Matt:
It is not just about being responsible. The Social Security system was put in place so that people who were too old to work would not starve. And to be honest, not everyone makes enough money to save enough to live on for years. It is not realistic. Besides, if all those middle class people out there had to pay for their parents old age and meds etc they would not be buying houses or sending kids to college etc.
Social Security has helped a lot of people.
As for no bids contracts, the kinds of contracts Halliburton got have always been around. In fact Clinton gave them the same kind of contract in the 90′s for work in Kosovo.
And Matt, children are not going without health care. It just does not happen, unless their care givers are completely unresponsible.
Bull.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”
Governements are created to protect the rights of the governed.
Ted:
Well there are people who would argue that pursuit of happiness is not possible if people are starving.
And that life is not possible without health care.
I am not saying I feel that way, but there are people who see it like that.
In fact in the beginning of the country abortion was not a crime and neither was the use of opiates.
MattM said “But you’re against spending $5 billion (about 1 month in Iraq) to help children who have no way to help themselves? Ridiculous.”
First – Don’t state what I’m against when you aren’t stating it correctly. That would be LYING.
Second – I’m for helping poor people. $82,600 is NOT poor people no matter how you would like to sell it. I make slightly less here in CA and am responsible and pay for my daughters’ health insurance.
Third – children by definition have no way to help themselves… the unfortunate fact for you is that the parents of children at or above 300% above the poverty line have access to benefits and you are acting like 400% is poor people. That would be a LIE.
Matt wrote, “Governments are created by the people in order to provide for collective needs. And if assuring the health and well being of our children isn’t a collective need, please tell me what is.”
That is a different argument. We should have this debate instead of liberals like yourself LYING about what conservatives want or not. When government administers programs only 25 cents to the dollar get to the recipient. If this is how government should be used then have THAT debate. Let’s setup pilot states to see how well it works. Let’s do CA and include my kids (not). I can cancel the insurance policies I have purchased and what? save money!! or have less health care for my daughters – not have the doctor I’ve been using since my daughters’ birth.
Let’s debate it all without the LIES. oh yeah. Thanks for calling me and my daughters POOR by the way. I’ve been waiting for this day!! hallelujah we’re poor at last !! LIAR….
I would say that Bush has helped childen by trying to improve the education system. I would also say the faith based initiatives have helped children and the poor as well.
- Matt, that link might seen to you to be a simply bone chrushing indictment of the evil BushCo conspiracy, but its pitifully lacking in any such support.
- Those types of poor money management stories, (and believe me at a 45 million dollar level this particular oopsie moment is peanuts), are exactly the sort of thing I was reffering to, although in this case there is a case to be made if the GAO had to act immediately, and the companies willing to bid were dragging their feet. But lets set that aside for now.
- Lets pretend I don’t know anything about government programs and purchasing. Just how exactly does that sort of screwup, something that happens every day, AND HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE WWII,….. ahem, has anything to do with Bush personally, or is in any way under his direct control. Just exactly when in the past 60 years did the White house become involved in day to day GAO operations. (I’ll ignore for the moment the “inconvieniant truth”, in the words of AlGore, the embarrassing fact that Congress, not the PONTUS or his evil band of thieves, is the Oversite managers of the GAO).
- Take your time, I’ll wait.
- BBH –
So wait BBH,
Your earlier argument was that:
1) Some no-bids were ok because the project was too massive in scope for many people to bid. (Not the case with my link.)
2) Then you argued that there aren’t really any no-bid contracts because they’re against DOD policy due to a Congressional ban.
Now you’re claiming that, oops, they do occasionally happen but they’re not Bush’s fault.
And why is it Bush’s fault? Because despite repeated spending debacles in Iraq, he continues to allow the practice both there and after Katrina.
Bush ran on being a Conservative. But he’s only conservative when it doesn’t make his friends and allies money.
Social Security doesn’t make anyone he knows money – so let’s try and reform it! But prescription drugs make his supporters lots of money – so let’s write a terrible senior drug bill that gives huge profits to the pharmaceutical companies!
We can’t make proftis for our defense buddies with a small-scale hunt-and-destroy Bin Laden mission – so let’s invade Iraq with no plans to leave!
It’s so sickeningly transparent it’s ridiculous.
BBH:
Ooops – sorry, Bang. I was without an I’net connection most of the afternoon
Did your comment ever post?
MattM:
ROTFLMAO. You really believe that, don’t you?
Baklava,
Please show me where I personally called you poor. If you can’t find that quote, you’re a LIAR.
Second, show me anywhere in that post where I even use the word “Poor.” If you can’t, you’re a LIAR.
So if you want to debate without the LIES, maybe you should look in the mirror first.
Matt wrote, “It’s so sickeningly transparent it’s ridiculous.”
Yes. Your lying is… You don’t present facts but lousy opinions that have no basis in fact..
You project and don’t even do it well.
So please show me where Liberals are paying journalists to shill for their political viewpoints. Because I can certainly show you where the Conservatives have.
Please show me all the “Liberal” media’s intense debate before going to war with Iraq over non-existent WMDs. Because for every MSM story you show me, I can show you 10 that just parroted the administrations talking points without any critical investigation as to the trurh.
Show me all the “Liberal” outrage over our Vice President secretly (and against the law) meeting with energy companies to form our energy policy. It’s simply not there.
BBH-
I know you’re disagreeing with Matt right now, but I think U.S.
Well there are people who would argue that pursuit of happiness is not possible if people are starving.
They would be wrong.
Governments are instilled to protect the rights of men (a generic term) per our beliefs. The pursuit of happiness is a unalienable right, however it is not incumbent upon the government to provide the means to purse said happiness (in this case- food). It is incumbent upon the government not to interfere with said right.
As an example, if this were so food would be a right, and one that the government would be beholden to provide.
Oh gee Baklava, you showed me. What a wonderful counter argument – calling me a liar without any substance to back it up.
You must love Bush because you act just like him. Repeat something over and over without any substantiation and hope people end up believing it’s true.
oops…i hadn’t finished my comment. disregard above and let me rewrite.
we are so off topic regarding ST’s original post. I don’t like no bid contracts. If a decision has to be made quickly, I can understand the need for them. I don’t think George W. Bush had anything to do with who gets what.
- Matt….Try to focus here. While I understand your urgency in enumerating all the sinister behind the scenes workings you fervently believe are going on between unseen multitudes of Bush and his evil Friends, as they greedily pillage the countries coffers, I’ll play your sandbox games if you’ll just try really hard to answer my one single question to you.
- Or is it that you’d rather deflect with conspiracy theories because you simply do not know, much less understand, just exactly how our government actually works?
- BBH –
I’ve posted link after link, example after example, of blatant instances of liberal media bias, admissions of liberal media bias from the horses’ mouths -it’s all in the archives, and if you’re too lazy or too willfully blind to see it, you simply don’t want to.
How about I ‘show you’ the door? Buhbye.
whew…that was getting confusing. I’ll see you guys at the next topic.
LOL.. that was rather funny.
It’s almost as if ol’ Matt just ignored ST’s post before entering the comments section. Actually I’d bet that’s exactly what happened.
- Oh damn ST…..Now I’ll never get to see him type “I don’t know….”.
- And a progressive will do that when pigs start to tap dance.
- You have to admire, in a twisted sort of way, the sheer Hubris of young energetic turks that wade willy nilly into the fray, willing to debate people that have spent their lives actually working 12 hour days for decades on the front lines of the system. But then again they have the most powerful debating tool known to man on their side.
- The industructable, absolutely unquestionable, all omniverant, all seeing, Progressive weapon of “Truthiness”. Amazing.
- What I do notice though, as they debate anyone that knows what they are talking about, their arguments start to unravel, and become more and more shrill, and finally they break out in wild flailing homonims, or even more infantile, declare victory, and leave. *snort*
- Putting all their eggs in the “Bush bad” basket, (Someone, anyone, should really whisoer in their ear that hes not running again), coupled with the terribly risky corner they’ve painted themselves into on Iraq, the Progressive movement is in dire danger of becoming the first political Piniata of the 21st centuary.
- BBH –
They don’t have to.
Journalist are liberal on a 9:1 ratio over being conservative.
This is a straw man argument. There were little to no debate because it was a given that Iraq had them- one supported by several reliable sources. This included multiple intelligence agencies and independant resources.
Since this is your accusation, I would like you to provide proof of this from a reliable source please.
If this wasn’t reported in the media, how else would you know? Are you a plant within the DoE?
Good grief. No-one is arguing that help – be it in the form of food, clothing, medical care, or a hearty handshake – should be withheld from people who need it.
The question at hand is this: is the coercive power of Big Nanny Government the best way to accomplish this? Experience of the last 50 years or so has led many people to conclude: no, it is not.
Why not? It’s the nature of the beast. Government programs are run by government employees, who have a vested interest in perpetuating the problem, not in solving it.
That’s the problem with liberals. They’re so busy thinking about what they want to do, that they never stop to think if they should.
In re. the media, it’s pretty predictable:
THERE CAN BE NO GOOD NEWS UNTIL BUSH LEAVES OFFICE
THERE CAN BE NO GOOD NEWS UNTIL BUSH LEAVES OFFICE
THERE CAN BE NO GOOD NEWS UNTIL BUSH LEAVES OFFICE
THERE CAN BE NO GOOD NEWS UNTIL BUSH LEAVES OFFICE
THERE CAN BE NO GOOD NEWS UNTIL BUSH LEAVES OFFICE
THERE CAN BE NO GOOD NEWS UNTIL BUSH LEAVES OFFICE
THERE CAN BE NO GOOD NEWS UNTIL BUSH LEAVES OFFICE
Braaaains… blarrgh… ghblbath… braaaaaaaains….
Yes, the ever present doomsaying of progressivism. There’s only one pinata taking a beating from the majority of the public, Big Bang. And it isn’t the Left.
The ‘Bush bad’ basket, as you so handily describe, is an easy win. Witness the mad scramble of Republicans trying like hell to put distance between themselves and Bush’s ‘catastrophic success’ of failures. The Democrats, in all their comical handwringing, don’t even have to campaign on anything resembling oppositional politics. Just give conservatives enough rope and they’ll do the job themselves.
Ride the wave.
I didn’t read in any of those articles that “Bush hates Kids”. It wasn’t even implied. What was clearly shown was that Bush puts kids behind lowering taxes and making nice with china and large corporations in his list of priorities. But we all already knew that. About Bush and the entire Republican party. And I sincerly hope that the Dems are smart enough to rub voters noses in that plain fact for the next 15 months.
MattM wrote ,”calling me a liar without any substance to back it up.”
no… because you know what I’m for or against better than I do!!! You are all about TRUTH right!!
Next time Matt… stick to what is true. The government IS spending more on Health benefits for kids this year and every year Bush has been in office.
Are you for that or against it???