Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

“Are you for or against children?”

Oh, Baloney! Are you for or against purely partisan grandstanding that will increase CHIP funding 10 times current levels?

The quotes from Republicans in this article are lame - most likely chosen to be lame.

The focus ought to be "Will the Democrats (once again) stubbornly force through a Bill that the President has said he will veto?"

The other focus should be: "We asked for it by allowing them to win the '06 elections, what are we going to do about the '08 elections?"

1 posted on 08/01/2007 9:59:44 AM PDT by hocndoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: neverdem; Mr. Silverback; balch3; Eric Blair 2084

THIS is the “Nanny State.”


2 posted on 08/01/2007 10:01:45 AM PDT by hocndoc (http://ccgoporg.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hocndoc

This is a transparent push for incrementally imposed socialized medicine for “children” up to 24 years of age, whose families’ earnings are up to four times the poverty level. At the expense of what and whom?

This may be an issue for AARP.


3 posted on 08/01/2007 10:07:12 AM PDT by tennteacher (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hocndoc

This is a transparent push for incrementally imposed socialized medicine for “children” up to 24 years of age, whose families’ earnings are up to four times the poverty level. At the expense of what and whom?

This may be an issue for AARP.


4 posted on 08/01/2007 10:07:21 AM PDT by tennteacher (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hocndoc
But in the short term, members of both parties say, the broader outline of that struggle is likely to be reduced to a simple stupid, demagogic and irrelevant question: “Are you for or against children?”

Fixed it.

5 posted on 08/01/2007 10:12:02 AM PDT by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: hocndoc
“Are you for or against children?”

If you are for children and support this increase in spending and taxes, then you better damn well start smoking! Because thats how its paid for.

Do non-smokers hate children?

8 posted on 08/01/2007 10:50:49 AM PDT by Phantom Lord (Fall on to your knees for the Phantom Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All
Benefits for illegal aliens. Maybe nytimese hides that but other sources openly admit it.

Rush recently stated that "children" could be as old as 25. I'll accept his word and besides, current taxpayer-funded health service already cover ILLEGAL aliens.

Now, the Selective Service says that all males living here must register once they reach the age 18. No social security number is required and immigration status will not be revealed by the registration form. Undocumented foreigners must register or face the same penalties as citizens, they could lose benefits of government programs and as non-citizens they could lose the opportunity for citizenship.

Fat chance that part will be enforced vis-a-vis ILLEGAL aliens; it's "mean-spirited" to honor our heritage as a Nation of Laws. Hey, nobody said anything about enforcing those laws.

9 posted on 08/01/2007 11:29:35 AM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson