2) SS is a joke. FDR was great for foreign policy, but not so much for domestic policy. If I ruled the world, I’d change SSI to “Social Welfare Program” because that’s what it’s become. None of my kids expect to receive benefits from SSI. They plan on depending on their 401K’s for retirement. SSI is just a slush fund for greedy politicians and people who really do need assistance. Let’s stop kidding ourselves and come up with bi-partisan ideas to increase citizens’ retirement income by using the private sector while at the same time reforming “SSI” social services so that those in need know about these programs and don’t fall through the cracks. For example, many poor pregnant women don’t even know about Title 19…

3) I worked my ass off to provide my kids with a private school college prep education while at the same time subsidizing government schools that have turned into marxist indoctrination camps with my property taxes. I have no problem paying for my neighbor’s kids education as long as their mom is able to CHOOSE which school they attend. Government schools have done more to harm the U.S. in the last 40 years than any other institution.

3) I doubt any of you marxists were even an itch in your daddy’s pants when Reagan came into office so let me give you a heads-up: Jimmy Carter trashed the U.S. economy and appeased the terrorists who we are now fighting during his presidency. Reagan came into office and shook things up. There’s no way in hell I’d be sitting right now in the house I bought in 1983 if it weren’t for Reagan. Many Americans feel the same way so get used to it.

As a Reagan Democrat, I’ve become thoroughly disgusted with the Democrat/Marxist Party over the last 3 decades.

Comment by Joe Armstrong — October 2, 2007 @ 12:13 pm

A Reagan Democrat? You really believe that the republican Party is working to benefit the interests of the middle class? Have you been paying attention to the shriveling up of the middle classes since 1980? Try as you might, I don’t think it is factually possible to believe that Reaganomics have done anything but destroy our nation’s once strong working class. And Bushinomics are solely about pillaging from the middle and even slightly upper class to feed the endless greed of the ultra rich. Every single study done by anyone except the Heritage Foundation clearly expresses this fact.

Now, I’m not saying the Democrats have a vested interest in our greater good either. I’m just of the belief that they don’t get titillated at the thought of our demise into a Kleptocracy as much.

Comment by Joe Armstrong — October 2, 2007 @ 12:13 pm

Doesn’t drive us nuts. Libs are more amused than anything else at the idea you think your bad grammar is somehow insulting to us.

“I’m a middle class guy and I can afford healthcare.”
– That’s great. Do you pay for it all by yourself, or does your employer provide at least part of it? If you are self-employed, do you take it as a business deduction? How many in your family are you insuring? For many middle class families, paying $1,000 a month to insure a family of four is a hardship, and they can’t do it without sacrificing other luxuries, such as rent and food.

“Sorry, I’m not going to pay for my healthcare and my middle class neighbor’s kids healthcare.”
– If you are truly “middle class”, as you say, your kids would be covered just as your neighbor’s kids would be. Don’t have any kids? Boy, you must REALLY be burned up about your taxes paying for your neighbor’s kids’ education, then.

It’s also funny how libs/marxists think the government will provide cheaper healthcare. My company’s #1 customer is the federal government and you’d be shocked to see how much taxpayer money is wasted. The only thing government agencies care about is spending all the money that is allocated to them so they can get as much or more money in the future. They couldn’t care less about spending taxpayers’ money wisely.

2) Bush would not veto the bill if the dems didn’t try to change its scope. SCHIP is a great example of a safety net program that helps those who are less fortunate. Sorry, I’m not going to pay for my healthcare and my middle class neighbor’s kids healthcare. It’s never going to happen.

So your only objection to providing health care to children of the working poor is what level of government pays for it?

I may need a machete to navigate my way through your rant, but here goes.

“Americans will never pay for the health care of middle class kids and middle class adults under 25.”
– Two points here. One, the middle class can no longer afford health care unless somebody (the government or their employer) pays for at least part of it. Two, adults under 25 only qualify if they are college-attending dependents of their parents.

“Do you guys want the federal government to wipe your butt too?”
– Why is it that the wingnut response to everything the government tries to do for its citizens is to complain that the people will expect the government to take care of every single little thing they need, such as butt-wiping? You probably also object to government-provided education, taxpayer funded police and fire departments, and publicly funded roads and highways.

“I’m no fan of Bush, but he will make up for his traiterous shamnesty bill if he vetos this piece of garbage.”
– If you’re going to use terms like “traiterous shamnesty bill”, you might at least explain how these terms apply. Correct spelling would be a bonus.

“The Dems tried to get the get universal healthcare’s nose under the tent by trying to modify the scope of SCHIP and common sense Americans smelled a rat.”
– Um…”common sense Americans” actually WANT universal healthcare. A majority of our people now think Bush isn’t doing a good job on handling health care, they want universal healthcare even if it means raising their taxes (the tradeoff for higher taxes means no more obscene insurance premiums), and they want everybody covered so the insured no longer have to pay for the uninsured. Check this out: http://www.pollingreport.com/health3.htm

“If the Dems don’t pull this garbage out of the bill and get funding approved for SCHIP ASAP, millions of impoverished kids will have a lapse in healthcare coverage.”
– This makes no sense. What are you talking about here? Explain.

“So who is really hurting the kids? That’s right, the marxist scum that has become the democrat party.”
– The “it’s the Democrats’ fault the president is vetoing the bill” argument doesn’t wash. You think that by lowering the age and income level limits that Bush will sign the bill? Bush doesn’t want ANY SCHIP funding, as it takes money away from his benefactor private health insurance companies. And two things about your last sentence: 1) if you’re going to call the Democrats “marxist scum”, you need to give an explanation with more evidence than wanting to help children get health insurance, and 2) it’s the Democratic Party. Just basic grammar, which you need to brush up on in addition to your spelling.

Is social security “socialism” too? Are you against that?

>Democracy and freedom are best served when issues like this remain at >the state level where the people can actually have an influence.

I’ll address your other persona here. Nice conclusory argument you have here. Care to tell us exactly what sort of things you think the founding fathers were referring to when they said that congress should “provide for the general welfare”?

Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations.
Do you agree with this word of God Daryll?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination – (Lev. 11:10,) it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this?

Also, theres something in the bible about how those who disprect thier parents should be put to death. Do you agree Daryll?

What is the takeon this? Is it concern that the middle class is beoming the lower class, or that middle class is trying to get welfare that should be for lower class? Inquiring minds want to know.

No worries, we all do it from time to time. And Daryll can be sooo much fun to feed, though.

This has been a pretty common cry from the right — we’re paying for people who make $40,000 — or $60,000 — or $80,000 — or whatever. This is a meaningless argument, since different ceilings apply different places, based on what the cost of living is. For example, in New York City, $80,000 still puts you less than average. But in Omaha, that puts you in a very comfortable lifestyle.

As far as paying for children of illegal aliens — if the children were born here, they are U.S. citizens. If you believe they shouldn’t be citizens, that’s a separate argument — one that needs to be changed through a constitutional amendment, not vetoing SCHIP. Until that change is made, children who are citizens get the benefits of being citizens no matter who their parents are.

That’s a lie. That original provision was struck from the final bill.

I’m the mocha messiah that melts in your mouth, not in your toilet stall.

what if theres no daddy around mikey?

we make the kid suffer for the mom’s lapse in judgement for getting knocked up by a bumb?

how would you feel about not having to pay for childrens healthcare, as long as every american woman got one free abortion on the taxpayers tab?

what? did I hear you say something about iraqi parents responsibilities?
oh no, I guess not.. I guess we’re giving them free healthcare over there so we dont have to give them free healthcare over here, huh mikey?

so you agree that if a pregnant woman thinks she can’t provide adequate prenatal + postnatal care for her children, she should just abort them right?

which is worse in your mind? abortions you dont have to pay for, or healthcare for other peoples children you DO have to pay for?