President George W. Bush. . .

[JustinM]

OPED by Bill Press

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=57874

I thought I'd be the first conservative to coin the phrase, in response to Presiden't Bush's decision to veto the new SCHIP Bill. Now the liberals can't take credit for it. . .

Kind've like one of our brothers did a while back and called General Pretraus, "General Betrayus."as a joke. Just like this post. I just want to see how long it takes before this new title becomes main stream.

[Marnie]

The problem with this atrocious bill is that its funding expires in 2011. Now, what politician in their right mind is going to say, "We need to stop funding this money pit?" then? It's an appropiator's dream: another program that will never stop growing. GWB was right to veto this thing. Every GOP congressman who voted for this bill should be ashamed of themselves; talk about using children to buy votes. Absolutely shameful.

[Guest LadyC]

you're calling soros a brother? a brother in what way? he's certainly not MY brother, genetically or spiritually.

and you're saying that soros running an ad calling petrayus betray-us was only meant as a joke? really? i'm scratching my head over that one.

but then, i'm scratching my head at how you think it's funny to call bush a baby-killer because he wants to protect AMERICANS from hillarycare.

[JustinM]

Hey LadyC,

You know I would never seriously call President Bush a babykiller. I was being sarcastic and I was ridiculing Bill Press's liberal stance on this issue.

Also, a couple of weeks before the infamous NYTimes ad, we were having a discussion here about General Petraus's upcoming testimony and one of our members here, jokingly called General Petraus, "General Betrayus." We thought it was funny, because we wouldn't be surprised if that label was given to him by some liberal somewhere, then of course, the NYTimes did print that long after we jokingly referred to General Petraus in that manner.

Now, that I've stirred up some controversy, I'd like to state my real opinion on this article.

Liberals have become very predictable lately, especially when it comes to demonizing the President. In this OPED, Bill Press is trying to say that President Bush does not care about the health of children. That just simply is not true. The President very much cares for not only the health, but the education and well-being of them as well. Lowering taxes, so low income, low skilled workers can have a job, is a very compassionate thing to do. Now that over 95% of the nation is employed, that means, 95% of our children have parents with jobs.

It's apalling that liberals will say or do anything they can to feed their hatred towards our President, but it has also become quite predictable.

[kat8585]

I'm sure Justin's remarks were tongue in cheek. I mean, consider the source. Bill Press????

Marnie is right, too. Once you pass a giveaway, there is no way you are ever going to get rid of it. Liberals know this. And of course, giveaways never stop growing, either.

Liberals always use children to get votes for some hellish bill they don't tell the details about til it's too late. They've been doing it since I've known anything about politics. It always works. You'd think the American people wuold have wised up by now.

[JustinM]

I'm sure Justin's remarks were tongue in cheek. I mean, consider the source. Bill Press????

Marnie is right, too. Once you pass a giveaway, there is no way you are ever going to get rid of it. Liberals know this. And of course, giveaways never stop growing, either.

Liberals always use children to get votes for some hellish bill they don't tell the details about til it's too late. They've been doing it since I've known anything about politics. It always works. You'd think the American people wuold have wised up by now.

Yeah, which is why, my first argument for staying in Iraq now, is to stay there for the children.

[JustinM]

So Bill Press claims to know so much about our President, because of his 3 Vetoes. So, Bill Press is implying that President Bush is a war-mongering ( vetoed troop withdrawals), heartless, (vetoed stem cell research) babykiller (threating to veto the expansion of SCHIP).

Then Bill Press goes on to say "we crossed that bridge a long time ago. Medicare today successfully serves over 45 million seniors."

So, essentially he's saying, we're already partly socialist, might as well complete the remaining 9 yards.

Then he says something really rediculous: "How sad that Bush is willing to test kids for math, yet refuses to test them for hepatitis."

Everyone child gets vaccinated for type A hepatitis before they're allowed to enter public schools. So, that comment doesn't make since, kids are already vaccinated against it. The only way they can obtain the more serious forms of Hepatitis is through unprotected sex, sharing infected needles, or through contaminated blood transfusions.

Oh, but I love this one: "Perhaps, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested, Bush's problem is simply that he's reading his Bible upside down. When Jesus said "Suffer the little children to come unto me," he didn't mean "Make the little children suffer.""

[Guest LadyC]

ahhh, ok, sorry justin! i'm having one of those bad days where my comprehension of anything is... shall we say a little lacking?

[forrestkc]

The problem with this atrocious bill is that its funding expires in 2011. Now, what politician in their right mind is going to say, "We need to stop funding this money pit?" then? It's an appropiator's dream: another program that will never stop growing. GWB was right to veto this thing. Every GOP congressman who voted for this bill should be ashamed of themselves; talk about using children to buy votes. Absolutely shameful.

The reason why it has an expiration date is that it is a block grant. Block grants always have expiration dates for fundings. This is a good thing because that means that at least every so often the block grant can be evaluated. For example, SCHIP was originally passed in 1997. It expires this year, thus it is being renewed.

What is shameful is opposing health coverage for children of the working poor or near poor simply out ideological reasons. This is a 35 billion dollar a year Block Grant. Yes, that sounds like a lot of money, but when you consider that the administration is asking for 180 billion for next year to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (mostly Iraq), its a drop in the bucket. This is what I just don't get with conservatives. There is always money to blow people up with, never a dime to help anyone with. The war in Iraq is estimated to cost 1 trillion dollars by the time its all said and done. I mean come on, we can blow 1 trillion dollars on social experiment in Iraq, but we cant invest 35 billion dollars a year in the health care of our children? If we can spend a trillion dollars on an elective war, but we can't spend 35 billion dollars to ensure that our own kids in this country have health care, then we are not a Christian nation.

[Eliyahuw]

What is shameful is opposing health coverage for children of the working poor or near poor simply out ideological reasons.

Why is it our responsibility to pay for their insurance? Isn't that their parents responsibility??