(Editor's note: the following article was written by "W. L. Wilbury," part of the Bloggering Wilburys clan of writers. It is part of the "Bloggering WIlburys" series of postings here at Wizbang. Again, if anyone else has any articles by these reclusive authors that they wish to share, please feel free to e-mail them to me at jaytea (at) wizbangblog.com for publication.)
The lying, weaselly Democrats are at it again. They're pushing their lie that President Bush vetoed the S-CHIP (State CHildren's Health Insurance Program) bill last week. What they don't tell you is that the bill wasn't just a renewal of the plan, but a radical expansion of the program.
The bill didn't just keep the program going. It expanded it by 50%, and would have covered "poor" families that make up to three times the poverty level.
Also, the lying, thieving Democrats don't want you to know that about 40% of the kids who would qualify for insurance paid for by you and me already have insurance.
The whole idea here is simple: they want to kill the private insurance industry and make us all dependent on the government for our health and well-being. This is just the first part of the plan.
First, provide health insurance for poor kids. Who can argue against that?
Then, push it for more and more kids. Because why should we trust parents to take care of their kids, even though they have been doing it all along, when we can get Big Brother to take care of it?
Then, once most kids and most poor people are being taken care of by the government, keep pushing up what makes someone "poor" until more and more people are under the control of the government.
This is no big secret. It was the evil idea at the core of Shrillary Clinton's health care program back in the 90's, and Shrillary Care 2.0 looks like more of the same.
You can't believe a single word from the lying, deceitful, power-craving Democraps. When they say they want to "help" you, they're not offering you a hand up -- they're giving you a crutch. And they're going to keep a string on that crutch that they can yank whenever you get too uppity -- or they just feel like it.
It's a trap. Don't fall for it.
And if you do, don't whine when you don't like the leash you're wearing. You put it on yourself.
Comments (39)
Roy Orbison and George Harr... (Below threshold)1. Posted by mantis | October 4, 2007 2:11 PM | Score: -10 (14 votes cast)
Roy Orbison and George Harrison roll in their graves.
1. Posted by mantis | October 4, 2007 2:11 PM |
Score: -10 (14 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 14:11
2. Posted by Spurwing Plover | October 4, 2007 2:33 PM | Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
And with the BUSH veto of that S-CHIP bill the liberals are circling like vultures i mean the dirty lie a day left-wing journalists are already reacting like they always do
2. Posted by Spurwing Plover | October 4, 2007 2:33 PM |
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 14:33
3. Posted by Jim Addison | October 4, 2007 2:36 PM | Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
Jay ~ Since it has become trendy to criticize your grammar and syntax, allow me to point out that "lying, thieving, deceitful, power-hungry Democrats" is redundant.
3. Posted by Jim Addison | October 4, 2007 2:36 PM |
Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 14:36
4. Posted by RobLACal | October 4, 2007 2:56 PM | Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Are ya getting pissed off yet? When are we going to bring the LYING democrat MSM down to the ground? Freedom of speech ? Bullshit!
4. Posted by RobLACal | October 4, 2007 2:56 PM |
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 14:56
5. Posted by BarneyG2000 | October 4, 2007 3:06 PM | Score: -14 (14 votes cast)
Bush asks for another $190-billion in off the book spending in Iraq, but a couple billion more for the children is fiscally irresponsible? Bush raises the nation's debt ceiling for the fifth time in his presidency (nearly doubling the nation's debt since he has been in office) but we can't afford health care for our children?
Bush lost $12-billion in Iraq (gone without a trace) but we can't afford health care for the kids.
I guess "compassionate conservative" is not what it use to be.
5. Posted by BarneyG2000 | October 4, 2007 3:06 PM |
Score: -14 (14 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 15:06
6. Posted by Veeshir | October 4, 2007 3:09 PM | Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
I'm with you Barney, who cares that many of the newly covered children already have health insurance through their parents?
Who cares that it will be at least partially funded by cig taxes, which quite often are predominately smoked by poorer people?
In other words, who cares if this tax on the poor is redistributed to people who don't need it? It's for the Children!
6. Posted by Veeshir | October 4, 2007 3:09 PM |
Score: 11 (11 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 15:09
7. Posted by Scott in CA | October 4, 2007 3:12 PM | Score: 9 (9 votes cast)
A $30 billion increase is not "a couple of billion". Adults over 21 are not "children". This plan would have covered adults up to age 25 by classifying them as "children". No.
People making 80 grand a year do not need government help to buy insurance. Why not go with the Republican plan and let those families KEEP their own money to buy the insurance they want for their kids?
The Dems will never accept that. That would mean the government would not be in control. Can't have that, can we?
7. Posted by Scott in CA | October 4, 2007 3:12 PM |
Score: 9 (9 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 15:12
8. Posted by LoveAmerica Immigrant | October 4, 2007 3:17 PM | Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
What do you expect from the dems? They are a party of liars now. If they are willing to intentionally lie alongside vile (lying) hate groups like MoveOn and Media Matters, you would expect them to lie about this as well. It is probably wise to consider anything the dems say as lies until proven otherwise.
8. Posted by LoveAmerica Immigrant | October 4, 2007 3:17 PM |
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 15:17
9. Posted by Jo | October 4, 2007 3:27 PM | Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Barney nosedives. Liberals like Barney don't even think things through.
Visualize no liberals. What a different world we could enjoy.
9. Posted by Jo | October 4, 2007 3:27 PM |
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 15:27
10. Posted by LT | October 4, 2007 3:31 PM | Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
Damn, that's hilarious. No matter what, I know I can always come to wizbang for some comic relief. Keep fighting the good fight! LOL!
10. Posted by LT | October 4, 2007 3:31 PM |
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 15:31
11. Posted by HughS | October 4, 2007 3:48 PM | Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
RobLA brings up an interesting point.....are you pissed off yet?
Jay's...I mean W L's post...and any story like it would never have been reported twenty years ago, except for in the small circulation conservative opinion journals like National Review, Human Events or the Washington Times.
The lie would have been the opening story on all of the alphabet networks. The usual suspects in the print media would have recirculated it the next day.
11. Posted by HughS | October 4, 2007 3:48 PM |
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 15:48
12. Posted by Jo | October 4, 2007 3:53 PM | Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
HughS, exactly.
Blogs are NOT helping out the liberals. They are exposing them. And so is Fox News. No wonder they hate Fox.
LOVE THE TRUTH.
12. Posted by Jo | October 4, 2007 3:53 PM |
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 15:53
13. Posted by DaveD | October 4, 2007 4:03 PM | Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Barney, you missed the point. We can afford it. It's just that it is being expanded to cover kids who don't need to be covered. And I am sure there has been much more than an unaccountable $12 billion lost to the legacy of decades of Democratic sponsored socialism.
13. Posted by DaveD | October 4, 2007 4:03 PM |
Score: 5 (5 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 16:03
14. Posted by HughS | October 4, 2007 4:12 PM | Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Bush lost $12-billion in Iraq (gone without a trace) but we can't afford health care for the kids.
That would have been Rather's opening line on the CBS Evening News without the New Media today.
It would have been the NYT's opening sentence on the Op/Ed page....maybe (if the news guys hadn't used it first).
14. Posted by HughS | October 4, 2007 4:12 PM |
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 16:12
15. Posted by Falze | October 4, 2007 4:23 PM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
No wonder "the middle class is shrinking" - the liberals/democrats want to reclassify half the ex-middle class as 'poor' so they can give them government programs and they want to reclassify the other half as 'rich' so they can raise their taxes to pay for the new government programs (for the people that make maybe $10k a year less than them).
Voila - to liberals/democrats the middle class is indeed shrinking - in fact, it's gone.
15. Posted by Falze | October 4, 2007 4:23 PM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 16:23
16. Posted by VagaBond | October 4, 2007 4:24 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Personal experience:
I was laid off Nov. 2001 and out of work for 3 months. My wife applied for health insurance thru some government program for our two kids. She and I went without coverage. After landing another job, she called up the lady who got us the insurance for our kids to cancel. She told my wife not to cancel and told her it's good for a year so why don't you just keep it? So we did and used the government's program for vision and dental for the full year.
16. Posted by VagaBond | October 4, 2007 4:24 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 16:24
17. Posted by BarneyG2000 | October 4, 2007 4:58 PM | Score: -6 (6 votes cast)
The program should be expanded to all children and all pregnant women. That alone would prevent more abortions then a whole bench of Thomas's.
It's the christian thing to do and it would be good for business.
17. Posted by BarneyG2000 | October 4, 2007 4:58 PM |
Score: -6 (6 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 16:58
18. Posted by Jack | October 4, 2007 5:02 PM | Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Barney, it's not so much about the money as it is giving middle class people with private insurance welfare, on the backs of one group of people (smokers, who generally tend to be more poor and less educated than others.) Bush was not against the bill (in fact the SCHIP program was created by the Republican controlled Congress in '97) and did want to expand it-- just not to such a degree that those who already have private insurance would suddenly jujmp on the gov't program. Obviously the Dems want to use this as a springboard for universal healthcare. Why did they not try to compromise before now? Bush said in JULY he'd veto the plan. Why did they waste everyone's time and money by submitting it anyway? Why are they not trying to work with the President, as they promised they'd do when they came into power?? Those honest liberals, eh? Anyway, the reason they didn't want to compromise is that they wanted the blaring MSM headlines, such as: "BUSH VETOES HEALTHCARE FOR CHILDREN" and such garbage. A more acurate headline would be "BUSH VETOES WELFARE FOR MIDDLE CLASS FINANCED BY SMOKERS" or something like that. For some reason, liberals don't want you to know Bush wants the program to be continued and expanded.
18. Posted by Jack | October 4, 2007 5:02 PM |
Score: 7 (7 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 17:02
19. Posted by Freddy | October 4, 2007 5:06 PM | Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
No, BarneyG, the program should be for those who NEED it.
19. Posted by Freddy | October 4, 2007 5:06 PM |
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 17:06
20. Posted by Zelsdorf Ragshaft III | October 4, 2007 5:25 PM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Barney, what part of free country do you not understand. If you want to live in a socialist country, move to one. Do not try to foist that BS on those of us who are not willing to foot the bill for others, excepting those who cannot take care of themselves. What you suggest is thievery. If I come to your house and rob you because I need to pay my bills. What is different if the government does it for you? That is why there is a 2nd Amendment.
20. Posted by Zelsdorf Ragshaft III | October 4, 2007 5:25 PM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 17:25
21. Posted by marc | October 4, 2007 5:41 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Baghdad barney:
The program should be expanded to all children and all pregnant women. That alone would prevent more abortions then a whole bench of Thomas's.
Ignorance ignored!
21. Posted by marc | October 4, 2007 5:41 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 17:41
22. Posted by engineer | October 4, 2007 5:56 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
"The program should be expanded to all children and all pregnant women."
All, even those children in families that make say $5,000,000.00/year?
"That alone would prevent more abortions then a whole bench of Thomas's."
It would? So many women are having abortions because they can't afford the future health insurance? Methinks you are purposefully naive.
"It's the christian thing to do and it would be good for business."
No, the Christian thing to do is to take care of your own family and then to help others. It is not the Christian thing to turn that over and let the government do it. Sadly most Christians don't help their neighbor, and have turned it over to the government. But there does come a time when it becomes "casting pearls before swine." You are hindering those people by relieving them of there responsibilities.
22. Posted by engineer | October 4, 2007 5:56 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 17:56
23. Posted by Candy | October 4, 2007 6:05 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
The unnecessary handouts have to stop.
I live in a town where a LARGE PERCENTAGE of the population lives off the system - and have no immediate (or future) plans to change the status quo. It is completely expected that low-income young ladies will get pregnant, drop out of high school, come over to adult ed for FREE classes, FREE books, hit up the local DHS for FREE transportation, FREE housing, FREE insurance, FREE food, then waltz on over to Community Action for FREE heat, FREE WIC, and of course don't forget making the rounds of the local food pantries. I'm told food stamps never covers it all. Did I mention that they also get a pretty decent monthly check as well, so they all have cars and shop at The Mall? 90% of the ones I have known also smoke - they will forego nonsense like diapers and baby wipes to buy cigarettes at $5+ per pack.
Every single one of them has a cell phone.
They all have boyfriends - and they also have a "baby daddy" but don't get me going on that one. The boyfriends don't have to work because they live off the girl who is living off the system.
One young lad - father of several from different moms - called up the mother of his youngest and said "I'll take the kid, but only if you buy me cigarettes. I lost my job because I went in hung over again."
I just discovered that one of my students and her boyfriend, new parents, come from extremely wealthy families. They decided they wanted to MAKE IT ON THEIR OWN - so they left home and took ALL of the benefits listed above so they wouldn't have to listen to their parents anymore.
There are people out there who really need these benefits - people who want to better themselves and become active and important members of society.
I was one of those people for one year - and I've been giving back ever since.
I am now stepping off the soapbox...
23. Posted by Candy | October 4, 2007 6:05 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 18:05
24. Posted by BarneyG2000 | October 4, 2007 6:29 PM | Score: -4 (4 votes cast)
Hey my tax dollars go to a lot crap I wish it shouldn't like supplementing incomes of wealth farmers, pork projects and to Blackwater (40% of each Iraq supplemental goes to contractors).
Tax payer funded education and healthcare benefits everyone.
24. Posted by BarneyG2000 | October 4, 2007 6:29 PM |
Score: -4 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 18:29
25. Posted by RobLACal | October 4, 2007 6:40 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"It is probably wise to consider anything the dems say as lies until proven otherwise."
Democrats have no problem spending other peoples money spreading their lies. It's what they. The truth only needs to be said one time. Democrats must repeat a lie hundreds of times with their never ending 24 hours a day fund raising. Democrats must lie and do lie. That is all they do when their mouths are open and on the TV. 90% of the MSM and Print Media are democrats.
25. Posted by RobLACal | October 4, 2007 6:40 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 18:40
26. Posted by RobLACal | October 4, 2007 6:44 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
"Tax payer funded education and healthcare benefits everyone."
The hell it does. You are proof. You are proof of it's failure and their is no cure for your stupidity except death. So do us the favor.
26. Posted by RobLACal | October 4, 2007 6:44 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 18:44
27. Posted by epador | October 4, 2007 7:10 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Jack and Candy did a much better job than I a week ago or so blogging against he who I will not name. Did he get banned or is he busy saving Baby Seals somewhere by asking the clubbers annoying questions?
27. Posted by epador | October 4, 2007 7:10 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 19:10
28. Posted by Candy | October 4, 2007 7:29 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
For me, it's just making the hot flashes and night sweats work for me, channeling all of the hormonal anger into something positive, like clubbing liberals :)
28. Posted by Candy | October 4, 2007 7:29 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 19:29
29. Posted by stan25
| October 4, 2007 9:04 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The liberals like Barney trash the military and the money that goes to fund it. They think that the money should be spent on boondoggles like this schips program and others like it. I think that programs like schips, headstart and other for the children programs should be abolished immediately, if not sooner and this money should be spent on the military ie raises for the soldiers and upgrades in housing allowances for the military families.
29. Posted by stan25
| October 4, 2007 9:04 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 21:04
30. Posted by LaMedusa | October 4, 2007 9:25 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
We're in big trouble if Hillary gets elected. I think I might have read somewhere that even with her health care system, people can elect to stay with the programs they already have. This is probably true at first. Here is an article on what would also happen with government controlled health care:
"Universal health care" is a lovely phrase with political resonance in some quarters. But what does it mean concretely?
First of all, since people differ in what they want, nothing can be "universal" without being mandatory. In other words, we are talking about forcing people to belong to whatever program the politicians and bureaucrats come up with, regardless of what the people themselves might prefer."
30. Posted by LaMedusa | October 4, 2007 9:25 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 21:25
31. Posted by biggyrat | October 4, 2007 10:35 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I was perusing my copy of the US Constitution today, and while it contained quite a bit about our government providing for the national defence. I could find nothing about providing health care or any other social programs. Perhaps I need to get the living, breathing edition.
31. Posted by biggyrat | October 4, 2007 10:35 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 22:35
32. Posted by nogo war | October 4, 2007 11:28 PM | Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
hmmm "lying scumbags"?
Ted Stevens
ALBERTO G.
of course Jefferson and Murtha for the Dems
that aside...if you all truly believe your increased premiums will cover catastrophic medical situations....fine.
If you believe your HMO and the Pharma's have your family's welfare higher than then quarterly profits fine.
If you believe nothing can happen in the next five years that will leave you without medical coverage fine.
If no one you know has been without medical coverage in the past five years fine.
I truly hope everything regading the above is..ah..well...fine
32. Posted by nogo war | October 4, 2007 11:28 PM |
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 4, 2007 23:28
33. Posted by Spurwing Plover | October 5, 2007 12:11 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I am beging to get tired of all these politicians i mean theres very little difference between ether party
33. Posted by Spurwing Plover | October 5, 2007 12:11 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 5, 2007 00:11
34. Posted by kim | October 5, 2007 2:59 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Not just any breathing one, big; get the one burstin' its britches.
=======
34. Posted by kim | October 5, 2007 2:59 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 5, 2007 02:59
35. Posted by Steve L. | October 5, 2007 8:53 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I wish I had a magical hard drive like that one. It has posts on it on topics from the after it was purchased. ;)
Wow.
35. Posted by Steve L. | October 5, 2007 8:53 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 5, 2007 08:53
36. Posted by tj | October 5, 2007 11:35 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
dont forget all the illegals that it would have covered as well. silly dems, a good vote is hard to buy :)
36. Posted by tj | October 5, 2007 11:35 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 5, 2007 11:35
37. Posted by LT | October 5, 2007 4:23 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hey biggyrat, did you miss the part about promoting the general welfare? It's right up there in the preamble. Are you being disingenuous or are you ignorant? In other words, are you lying or stupid?
Check it out for yourself. Notice the first word in the definition of welfare, health.
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
Oh, and RobLACal? Fuck off, asshole. You'd be offensive if you weren't such a fool.
37. Posted by LT | October 5, 2007 4:23 PM |
Score: 0