Skip to comments.
Bush Signs $400 Billion Prescription Drug Program Into Law: Bush Is A BIG GOVERNMENT Republican
December.8,2003
Posted on 12/08/2003 8:47:55 AM PST by Reagan Man
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-179 next last
To: Reagan Man
Where was the "Bush signs Medicare bill -- the LIVE THREAD"? I was looking for it all this morning during his talk.
2
posted on
12/08/2003 8:52:58 AM PST
by
lelio
To: onyx; Howlin; deport; Miss Marple; Wait4Truth
Thought you would be interested to see what one of the most conservative Senators has to say about why he, Senator Inhofe, supported the bill. Would say if my Senator supports the bill, then the naysayers better take another look at the bill before believing everything they read or hear:
Inhofe defends Medicare reform bill vote
by Sean Murphy
CHNI Capitol Bureau
Edmond - U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe took aim at environmental activists and defended his recent vote in favor of a landmark Medicare reform bill during a luncheon visit Wednesday in Edmond.
Speaking to a group of about 25 Edmond city officials and community leaders at a local restaurant, Inhofe, R-Tulsa, said that despite overwhelming opposition to the Medicare reform bill, he supported the measure because of the help it will bring to rural hospitals in Oklahoma.
Specifically, he praised a provision in the bill that would increase the cap on Medical payments to Oklahoma's critical-access hospitals, which serve a large number of low-income Medicare and Medicaid patients, from 5.25 percent to 12 percent in 2004.
"These provisions (in the bill) will probably save 40 hospitals in Oklahoma," Inhofe said.
Inhofe said the measure provides a voluntary prescription drug benefit program for Medicare beneficiaries and will expand drug benefits to the nation's poorest citizens.
"This will allow a lot of very poor people to have access to drugs," Inhofe said. "I felt it was a good vote, and I'm not ashamed of it."
3
posted on
12/08/2003 8:53:14 AM PST
by
PhiKapMom
(AOII Mom -- OU Sooners are #1in the BCS)
To: Reagan Man
I'm not happy with this bill at all, but I'll crawl through broken glass to make sure a Democrat doesn't get elected next year. Some you win, some you lose.
To: Reagan Man
Bush does win on the politics, but its not a political victory for conservatives or for the GOP in the long term. And you can give me a stock tip to make a million dollars tomorrow?
Yeah, Yeah, you will say that the tax cuts will be the first casualty. I don't think so, JMO. I think Bush will go into the 2004 campaign to make the tax cuts permanent and call for a permanent end to the death tax.
But have fun doing your best Chicken Little impression.
5
posted on
12/08/2003 8:53:39 AM PST
by
Dane
To: Reagan Man
I have lost sympathy for these so called 'Conservative' institution who continue to ignore that welfare always follows warfare. Had they made a bigger stink about the debt financed war in Iraq and Afghanistan, perhaps they could have been more effective in preventing the passage of this bill in the first place.
6
posted on
12/08/2003 8:55:08 AM PST
by
JohnGalt
(How few were left who had seen the Republic!---Tacitus)
To: Reagan Man
Bush is just filling another campaign promise. Did you think he was just bullsh*tting to win the 2000 election?
7
posted on
12/08/2003 8:55:29 AM PST
by
SunStar
(Democrats piss me off!)
To: Reagan Man
This goes along with the funding, for the NEA, farm bill bail out.
The pubbies are becoming the junior slave masters in the US.
8
posted on
12/08/2003 8:55:46 AM PST
by
dts32041
(Democrats party of slave holders. More Demo rat presidents owned slaves than any other party.)
To: Reagan Man
Mo money mo money mo money.
9
posted on
12/08/2003 8:56:15 AM PST
by
Dan from Michigan
("if you wanna run cool, you got to run, on heavy heavy fuel" - Dire Straits)
To: Reagan Man
Alternate title:
"Its the Bush reelection campaign, Stupid"
10
posted on
12/08/2003 8:56:40 AM PST
by
BureaucratusMaximus
(if we're not going to act like a constitutional republic...lets be the best empire we can be...)
To: Reagan Man
Tax cuts do not mean reduced tax revenue, and, as a Reagan admirer, you should know that. The Medicare Bill, as faulty as it is, will not mean the end of tax cuts.
Additionally, I believe Bush will go back to this issue, and get more reform, just as he did with the second round of tax cuts.
My father-in-law is a lifelong democrat and he thinks Bush took what he could get and will be back for round two.
To: PhiKapMom
Inhofe, R-Tulsa, said that despite overwhelming opposition to the Medicare reform bill, he supported the measure because of the help it will bring to rural hospitals in Oklahoma.Specifically, he praised a provision in the bill that would increase the cap on Medical payments to Oklahoma's critical-access hospitals, which serve a large number of low-income Medicare and Medicaid patients, from 5.25 percent to 12 percent in 2004.
This just means Inhofe got his pork in up front, rather than waiting to be bribed with it. Bad legislation. Period. But I still generally support the administration.
12
posted on
12/08/2003 9:01:11 AM PST
by
Mr. Bird
To: Reagan Man
Good analysis. You're exactly right on this, of course. The GOP has passed tax cuts that will expire shortly after a potential second term; now they've done the same with a huge new entitlement program. Whether by design or out of necessity, they've created an environment where 8-10 years down the road the government will have some impossible decisions to make. They've delivered in the short-term, but any right-thinking conservative has to know we'll be left holding the bag in just a few years.
If limited government is the correct philosophy, why is it the GOP is so afraid of trying it?
To: PhiKapMom
You have to have a little fodder for the malcontents, luddites, doom and gloomers.... Heck some of them even supported that McClintock boy I believe...
But this bill along with others is loaded with pork, enough to rid the US of A of most all Muslims if'n they were required to eat of it.... Reform is needed but it takes a Congress of which we don't have to complete the process... thus the porkers will 'bring home the bacon' so to speak.
BUSH/CHENEY 2004 in a romp........... especially if the Dean boy is the opposing candidate
14
posted on
12/08/2003 9:05:22 AM PST
by
deport
To: lelio
Too bad we can't find a judicial court that would strike this down as unconstitutional.
15
posted on
12/08/2003 9:05:27 AM PST
by
xrp
To: Mr. Bird
I personally don't count it pork when you have rural hospitals that will close without this bill. I happen to live in Norman so it didn't affect me but a lot of our State is rural and those hospitals were going to close. It would have taken some people two hours or more to reach a hospital which could cost lives.
I agree with my Senator on that portion of the bill.
Thanks for your support!
16
posted on
12/08/2003 9:06:06 AM PST
by
PhiKapMom
(AOII Mom -- OU Sooners are #1in the BCS)
To: PhiKapMom
The purists and the RATS hate the bill...so what else is new? I am proud of President Bush for keeping the promise he made when he was campaigning for the presidency. Promise made, promise kept. Everyone knew in 2000 that he would fight for this and he did.
To: Reagan Man
Now watch how fast Teddy K and Nancy Pelosy line up some 'suffering Senior Citizens' to wail and moan about how terrible this legislation REALLY is.
18
posted on
12/08/2003 9:09:31 AM PST
by
Khurkris
(Ranger On...The Big Ranger in the Sky is there for You)
To: Reagan Man
What the President signed into law today, was not what he ran on in 2000. President Bush has proven, he is a BIG GOVERNMENT Republican.BIG GOVERNMENT Republican is synonymous to the new LIBERAL Republican! There is NO difference. When you*re getting porked it doesn*t matter whether a Liberal Democrat is doing it or a Liberal Republican is. The bottom line is still the same, and taxpayers are going to pay.
19
posted on
12/08/2003 9:10:53 AM PST
by
NRA2BFree
(If I told you Hillary Clinton is a bwitch, would you know what two words I used to make bwitch?)
To: NittanyLion; Jim Robinson; Admin Moderator
It would appear that the powers that be don't want this subject to appear in breaking news. I thought that Free Republic was
"working to roll back decades of governmental largesse". If this new Medicare PDP isn't government largesse, I don't know what is.
>>>If limited government is the correct philosophy, why is it the GOP is so afraid of trying it?
I don't know. Conservatism will never triumph over liberalism, if the GOP doesn't stand up and fight these additions to the ever growing size and scope of the federal bureaucracy.
20
posted on
12/08/2003 9:11:10 AM PST
by
Reagan Man
(The few, the proud, the conservatives.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-179 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson