Like I Said, They're Dishonest

Bill Scher has a post up after our discussion of S-CHIP and the Frost family on Alan Colmes' radio show. He faults me for claiming liberals are often dishonest in debate ... then goes on to admit a major mis-statement of fact that demon-izes Bush and the Republicans. Some people might call that dishonest, but not a liberal, I guess. Audio here and through post link above.

I did overstate one point. I said Bush is proposing "less money" for SCHIP, which isn't quite right. He is proposing nominally more money, just not enough to maintain the number of kids currently in the program. It's essentially less money, but not literally.

Typical of the liberal entitlement culture, if you don't give them a lot more money, it always ends up being "less than" they started with. But don't you dare call them dishonest, it's just the new liberal Math. And Scher continues his dishonesty and misrepresentation. Let's clear them up.

During our debate, Riehl could not let go that the New York Times characterized Mr. Frost work schedule as "intermittent[]," and presumed he is choosing not to work much because he's coasting with children's health insurance through SCHIP.

I never said the above, I said he appears to have made bad choices before the accident leaving his children at the mercy of taxpayers. Then he allowed his child to be put forward to emotionally black mail America into expanding the program and seems to have no shame about it at all. Why Frost was or wasn't coasting has nothing to do with S-CHIP. That's simply what set the foundation for his "need." Bad choices.

Never mind that his family of six was denied private insurance multiple times because of pre-existing conditions, and that he and his wife are still without health insurance.

As for the above, so far as we know, they've been denied insurance after the accident. What is relevant is what happened before. Frost could have provided better and didn't, staying with a failed or failing business, we can only assume because he enjoyed it more than getting a job that offered his family benefits. I don't see how defending that decision-making is "standing up for the children," unless you also believe the government should always run in and pick up the check for poor planning and bad decision-making.

And anyone knows that to strike out on one's own as an entrepreneur means that steady work is often hard to come by. It's clear that they are doing all they can to raise four kids.

Based on news accounts, Frost struck out on his own a decade ago and failed within the first year. In the years since, he appears to have decided to not take any number of positions he could have that would have provided insurance for his family. Striking out on your own for a decade when it hasn't produced the economic security you require, as you also chose to have four kids, isn't being an entrepreneur. It's called being a failure.

And nowhere will Scher ever point out that many of the people forced to subsidize S-CHIP through taxation still have fewer assets and lower incomes than the Frosts. Who is looking out for them? Certainly not Scher.

Comments

[Worst President Ever]

It's certainly a proud day for conservatives when they can destroy the family of a sick kid that had the audacity to express an opinion. But look, there yet another group to investigate, Chatholic no less. Christians, wanting to help poor kids - who would a thunk it?

http://www.catholics-united.org/schip-ads

And John Cole helps you out with some of the important questions you'll want answered about their ads:

ATTN: Dan Riehl, Michelle Malkin, NRO, you have your marching orders. When the ad airs, it is your job to find out what you can about the woman reading the message. Some possible questions for you citizen journalists:

Is she really a woman?
What is her address and where can I find her house so I can drive by it?
Does she really have three kids?
Are they her kids?
Did she swap one in the hospital?
Is it possible she swapped one at the hospital?
Is she a good mother?
Is she really Catholic?
Does she go to church?
What was her last confession about?
Is she really pro-life?
Has she ever had an abortion?
Have her neighbors ever had an abortion?
Does she use birth control?
Has she ever done anything that could technically make her not Catholic? Not a good mother? Not pro-life?

And most important of all, what do her kitchen counters look like?

Have at it, you sick SOB’s.

[Capitalist Infidel]

The vicious hatred that people like WPE have for the middle class is stunning! I've owned my own business for the past 15 years. I started by buying a small 1,700 sq foot bar. Before the close I bought my own medical insurance for $110 a month. I bought a larger place 4400 square feet. My insurance costs $265 a month now. Granted, I don't have a wife and kids (yet) but I'd be sure to get insurance immediately. Damn, you can buy insurance for as little as $69 a month. A "catostrophic" family plan can cost as little as $179 a month. I wonder if the Frost family could have lived with just 2 vehicles instead of 3 so the family could be insured?

[jj]

As I said on another thread, I want you, WPE, to answer me this question.

"Why should I be forced to give my hard-earned money to someone who is better off finacially than I am?"

Would one of you liberals please answer this question? As far as I'm concerned, it takes a sick totalitarian bastard to take my money away from me and give it to someone a heck of a lot better off than I am. And thus take money away from my children. Aren't my children as good as this Frost guys?

[jj]

As I said on another thread, I want you, WPE, to answer me this question.

"Why should I be forced to give my hard-earned money to someone who is better off finacially than I am?"

Would one of you liberals please answer this question? As far as I'm concerned, it takes a sick totalitarian bastard to take my money away from me and give it to someone a heck of a lot better off than I am. And thus take money away from my children. Aren't my children as good as this Frost guys?

[tjproudamerican]

Dan...what is the cliche about being in a hole and the stoppage of digging?

The Middle Class has a Medical Insurance Crisis! Many people are one accident or tumor away from economic destruction.

We, the middle class, assume the poorest have government benefits that kick in at poverty level. We want to keep what we have when we get sick or a disaster happens. When Bush's spokepeople attack the middle class, they lose.

What is so hard to understand in this debate?

I know pure Friedman (Milton, not the idiot) economics place the market as able to solve all problems, but we already have subsidies upon subsidies: Friedman's market is more of a myth than Marxism. For the record, I think a pure market would work. But the level of subsidies are so ingrained that taking ALL of them away would cause a violent revolution. And I think violence is deplorable and always leads to chaos.

[Lala]

This is what I was taught in Catholic school

I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.

[jj]

Uh, proudamerican, will you please answer the fricking question I asked? Do any of you liberals have the guts to answer my question?

And for the historical record, revolutions are much more likely during a time of rising living standards than in a time of lowering living standards. I really don't know why. So you're wrong again, proudamerican. Revolution in the US is highly unlikely, even if you do force people to spend their own money rather than mine. Just so you know.

[scarshapedstar]

"And for the historical record, revolutions are much more likely during a time of rising living standards than in a time of lowering living standards."

But I thought the Bush economy was awesome?

[AlphaLiberal]

The widening economic gap fostered by Republican policies is creating more struggling families for the right-wing to despise:

"The richest one percent of Americans earned a postwar record of 21.2 percent of all income in 2005, up from 19 percent a year earlier, reflecting a widening income disparity among different classes in the nation, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing new Internal Revenue Service data.

The data showed that the fortunes of the bottom 50 percent of Americans are worsening, with that group earning 12.8 percent of all income in 2005, down from 13.4 percent the year before, the paper said."

Source: IRS
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071012/bs_nm/irs_income_dc

You guys better get hating. You've got a lot more Americans to hate.

[Wahoo Willie Sez:]

"The richest one percent of Americans earned a postwar record of 21.2 percent of all income in 2005"

So how do we fix that?

[tjproudamerican]

jj You should be forced to fund health care for the same reason that we are all forced to fund any government program: it creates a better society. We have subsidies for Natural Disasters, Old Age, Poverty, Roads, Air Travel, Manufacturing, Agriculture, Mail, and National Defense.

My list should actually be longer, since it is almost unbelievable what we subsidize, such as the fact that we pay companies who are not even American-owned for taking the natural resources from Publicly-held lands.

That is the fact.

It is also difficult to argue that since revolutions come from rising living standards, we wouldn't have one here. Our country is affluent and, as we see by American Idol and many television shows, everyone not only wants to be a millionaire but thinks they are owed that status.

[Fred Beloit]

Prudeamerican, you are just proving this point. Let all of us give all our income and assets to the government. If we do that we will be broke and poor and the government will give us what they think we need. Won't that be great?

[Wahoo Willie Sez:]

Oooops, I asked Alpha a direct question. Sorry! He's right george bush is de debil.

Here's something from that right wing hate tank at CNN:
the middle class's financial picture is improving. Take numbers on household income. Usually "middle class" is defined in large part by "middle income." But the median household income - $46,326 - is dragged down by the typically low incomes of those in their early 20s and retirees.

When you look at households headed by someone of working age and most likely to be raising kids (between ages 25 and 59), the median jumps to $61,629, according to ThirdWay, a centrist think tank.

Among two-earner couples in that group, the median is $81,265.

And the percentage of households in that group bringing home at least $100,000 in current dollars has grown from 12 percent in 1979 to 24 percent in 2005.

Even when you just consider families in the statistical middle, median income has grown - after inflation - by more than 20 percent since 1979.

[jj]

"...it creates a better society..."

Says who? You? Mr., it is not a better society when one person is forced to give monies to someone who has more. That's injustice. It'd take a brainless liberal to say that injustice creates a better society. And frankly, I don't think I'm owed millionaire status, nor do I think the majority of decent people think that, either.

[jj]

It's stunning to see how truly ignorant these liberals are. Their utopian ideas of socialism, communism and totalitarianism has failed time after time, yet these ingrates continue to shill for it. It's nothing short of criminal that our education system has taught these jerks nothing worthwhile. They are nothing more than a hive of worthless, blood-sucking leeches. Pathetic.

[Wahoo Willie Sez:]

I just wish, once, they would answer a direct question. The rich have always gotten richer....even in the Soviet Union. So where is the cut off? DO we only allow them to keep 18%, 10% instead of 22%? Where then does the money go? And since they pay about 39% of the taxes. Who will make up the loss? Who determines who the "rich" are? Where is that income threshold? In my opinion there are a hell of alot of people who contribute nothing but to me are rich. Someone who works for six months and makes 15 million for a movie is rich....and has contributed nothing. I mean I would love to see John Edwards 28000+ square foot mansion turned into low income housing. Shoot, at least he could let his brother move out of his double wide into a wing of the thing. Ah, they have no plan, just faceless boogie men.

[Lala]

Speaking of the rich in the Soviet Union -

I worked for an airline during the 1970's. We were the handling agent for Aeroflot Airlines. I'll never forget how amused we all were on seeing the commies fight over the first class seats. And you should have seen all the "stuff" they brought home with them. Of course none of them paid for their excess baggage, it was written off by the Aeroflot agent.

[Lala]

Statistics can always be made to lie.

Earning 12.8 percent of 100,000 dollars isn't very much but earning 12.8 percent of 1 billion is quite a lot, and since we have more billionaires and millionaires then ever before, I'd say things look pretty good.

Where are all these poor people? My daughter is living in an "edgy" neighborhood and every apartment window has an air conditioner sticking out of the window. The kids are all wearing designer clothes and lots of gold jewelry, but this is supposed to be a poor area.

[Wahoo Willie Sez:]

"Where are all these poor people?"
Sorry La but I've got to disagree here. There is a very serious problem of actual poverty in this country. A guy down the road from me used to be a longshoreman making between 26-36 dollars and hour. They get a salary if they dont hit a lick all year, so long as they show up at gang call. Dude has a heart attack, his insurance took care of him but he couldnt return to work. Has no education, is dependent on physical labor which he can't perform and disability ain't much. His son left school to come home and help him. SO here are two, through no fault of thier own that deserve some help but wont get it. So then we have two college educated, healthy people with all of the opportunity in the world who are taking from the truly poor and somehow it's right.
The answer is not to take from the rich and pretend dto give to the pretend poor. My friend would be much more likely to accept retraining and getting gainful employment. But for over 60 years the answer has been bigger handouts with few hands up. I will give Carter credit for his CETA program back in the 70s where employers got 1/2 the salary to hire extra people to be trained. It was abused like hell, but it was an attempt at a true fix. As was Clinton's welfare to work plan.

[Worst President Ever]

"Why should I be forced to give my hard-earned money to someone who is better off finacially than I am?"

Ask George Bush - he's the one you should be accusing. Benefits to the poor and middle class have been cut by Bush while he turns around and hands out tax cuts to the mega-rich. It's the poor and middle class that get laid off while congress hands out billion dollar tax breaks to corporations. Want to move jobs out of the country? Here, let us help.

Conservatives continually bitch that some struggling family might not REALLY be poor enough to get the benefits they've claimed then turn around a give a pass to the rich or corporations when they try to rig the system. Like the proverbial poster family that's going to lose the family farm to inheritance tax -it's a ruse to stir emotions and confuse the public about what's really going on.

[Wahoo Willie Sez:]

"Benefits to the poor and middle class have been cut by Bush"
Care to link us to proof of that statement?

Who are the "mega-rich"?

[Lala]

Wahoo,
Sorry, the longshoreman scam has been going on since the 60's when container ships came into being. What a sweetheart deal that is, I can't believe there are still longshoremen collecting a salary for doing nothing.

I know there are poor people but there are not as many as are claimed.

When Guliani served as Mayor he reduced the welfare rolls from 1.2 million (1 out of 7 New Yorkers) by 470.000. He did it by fingerprinting all the recipients and by instituting a workfare program.

The "left" did not like the fingerprinting at all, they fought it tooth and nail. I think there were a lot of people double-dipping or working and collecting checks.

[Worst President Ever]

Mega Rich: Warren Buffett

Warren Buffett, the third-richest man in the world, has criticised the US tax system for allowing him to pay a lower rate than his secretary and his cleaner.

Mr Buffett, who is worth an estimated $52 billion (£26 billion), said: “The 400 of us [here] pay a lower part of our income in taxes than our receptionists do, or our cleaning ladies, for that matter. If you’re in the luckiest 1 per cent of humanity, you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent.”

Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent”

****************

http://money.cnn.com/2005/12/22/pf/college/congress_loans/index.htm

Congress cut funding for federal student-loan program on Wednesday, raising the cost of attending college for many future students, according to a published report.

Under orders to cut agriculture spending by $3 billion, Republicans in Congress propose reducing food programs for the poor by $574 million and conservation programs by $1 billion, The Associated Press has learned.

***********************

Bush’s 2008 budget cuts crucial aid for America’s middle class:

– “$77 billion in funding cuts for Medicare and Medicaid over the next five years, and $280 billion over the next 10.”

– $223 million in funding cuts (4 percent decrease from this year’s levels) to the Children’s Health Insurance Program.

– “$4.9 billion, or 8 percent, cut in education, training, employment and social services” grants.

– $100 million cut for Head Start, which provides child development services to economically disadvantaged children and families.

– “$2.4 billion cut in community and regional development grants — which often provide funding for low- and middle-income communities — to $16.5 billion from $18.9 billion.

– $400 million — 18 percent — cut in the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, “which provides $2.2 billion to help people pay heating bills this year.”

– $172 million — nearly 25 percent — cut in funding for housing for low-income seniors.

***********************

Washington, D.C. -

In the 2006 budget-cutting "reconciliation" bill President George W. Bush signed this month, the best known student loan programs for middle-class families--Stafford loans for students and so-called PLUS loans for parents--took a big hit.

But the small Perkins Loan Program, which helps lower-income and lower middle-income students, was spared. Now, it turns out, the reprieve may have been temporary. President Bush's fiscal 2007 budget proposal calls for ending the Perkins Loan program altogether.

[jj]

Uh, dufus aka Worst President Ever, have you listened to one single thing I've said? I am the middle class, not the upper class. I know that you are at a grave disadvantage, but this is not hard to grasp. Why should I be forced to give my hard-earned money to SOMEONE WHO IS BETTER OFF FINANCIALLY THAN I AM?

You see, I am a middle-class American. I don't want any money from the government, and if I am allowed to keep the majority of the money I make, then I won't need any help from the government, and neither should any other middle-class citizens.

See how it works. Let the government intervene on behalf of people who NEED assistance, but don't take money away from one middle-class person and give it to another middle or upper class person. Just don't do it, is that so hard for you to comprehend?

And I'm not shilling for lower taxes for the rich. They should pay the same as me. As for all those programs you just listed, they are part of the problem, not the solution.

And as for poor people paying taxes, they pay none, and as a matter of fact, receive large income tax returns when they, in fact, paid no taxes. That is just another welfare program called earned income credits. And I could go on all night with this, but anyone with a brain gets the picture.

[Lala]

Wow, the third richest man in the world pays his secretary $60,000.00. What a sport! I know kids who just graduated from college who started with more than that and they are not professionals.

[Lala]

When Congress wants to expand a program and the President refuses to do so it is called a cut. It's just another lie.

I am at best middle-middle class. Pres. Bush's tax cut is saving me a LOT of money.

[Lala]

The highest tax rate is about 39 percent. If Buffett only paid 17 percent then he must have willfully avoided paying the higher rate by shielding his income.

He can just donate the difference if he feels so concerned about it.

[Lala]

Q Tony, a question that's arisen about the budget is, the President talked about bipartisanship over the weekend when he spoke to House Democrats. Yet in the budget there are fairly large cuts for Medicare and Medicaid, $77 billion over five years, I think $280 billion over the next 10 years. And some say that this could be seen as a slap in the face to Democrats, who are certainly not going to take this sitting down.

MR. SNOW: Well, actually, a number of these -- for instance, the President's proposals on prescription drugs are things that in the past -- not only prescription drugs, but also health care reform -- you go back and look at a number of Democrats have proposed things that are quite similar in the past. This isn't a slap in the face. This is an acknowledgment that you have to find a humane and sensible way of making health care more affordable for everybody.

Also you will note -- and we've been encouraged by statements, because we have continued to reach out to Democrats who understand the nature of the long-term challenge, who have talked about their willingness to explore ideas for trying to make private health insurance available to everybody regardless of medical condition or income.

And that -- if you take a look at the President's health care proposal, it talks about creating a true private market for individuals -- this is what the tax deduction involves. But at the same time, he acknowledges that there are people with preexisting conditions and also those who have low incomes who still are going to have difficulty affording it. So he is now working to try to come up with ways of bridging that gap to make sure that private insurance becomes available to everybody. And that's a goal that both parties share.

So, no, this is not a slap in the face. Furthermore, this is one of these classic Washington definitions of cuts where the expenditure level increases -- as a matter of fact, the expenditure level on Medicare I believe falls from 7.4 percent annual growth to 6.7 percent annual growth. So there's significant annual growth. And in terms of dollars, there are no cuts at all. So this is -- what you're talking about is the classic cuts against a projected baseline.

What the President is trying to do is to give people the best of all worlds, which is more effective access to health care in the form of private insurance for all Americans, and at the same time, try to work it in a way that it's going to be fiscally responsible. And we look forward -- and we have been having conversations with Democrats about this. The President had some over the weekend.

Q Would you say then that these cuts are, in fact, a way of perhaps phasing Medicare or Medicaid, and to move more towards private accounts?

MR. SNOW: No, because you're still looking for innovative ways to make sure that you make private insurance affordable to all, and you can, in fact, use some of those monies for doing it. But again, they are not cuts. If you can come back and demonstrate to me that there is less money available after five years, then I will call them cuts. But they are increases on the order of 6.7 percent per year.

[jj]

Good point, Lala. And Warren Buffet has shown himself to be quite a cheapskate as regards his secretary, considering the financial resources he has. Shame on him for not rewarding his employees for their service, especially his secretary.

[Scrapiron]

I love to see the liberals screaming about those that make a lot of money. Sounds more like envy than real concern for anyone other than themselves. They can't make it with all the left wing liberal education (at least a piece of paper, little real education) so they try to blame everyone but themselves for their failures. In their hurry to show their ignorance the forget that the top 25% of wage earners pay 84.6% of the tax load. The top 50% of wage earners pay 96.7% of the tax load. That means the bottom 50% of those that work in the U.S. only pay 3.3% of the tax load. I'm in the bottom 50% and my taxes are more than reasonable, even while paying the high taxes, fees and whatever else an idiot democrat governor can come up with to load on in my state.

[seekeronos]

Hey, "Worst Commenter Ever":

You might want to give the overpriced college that certified you as "edja-mah-cated" (read: indoctrinated) a ringy-dingy and ask them for your money back, on account of fact is, the Frosty McFamily could have easily taken steps not to be a family on the dole (specifically, being forced into a situation where they are using S-CHIP). Especially when said program is more intended for people who _really_ cannot afford insurance for their kids.

Clearly, a family with nearly a half million dollars in property, three expensive late-model SUVs (who is driving the third vehicle anyway??) a small but failed business, and parents who were pampered through their college years who refuse to do what it takes to take care of their kids without sponging off of the taxpayers, is a family lead by a father with a depressing lack of honour. And what about Grandpa Corwin Frost? Why hasn't he said anything or come to his son and grandchildrens' defense? Or could it that Big Papa Corwin is fed up with his loveable, but marginally employable goofball of a son?

Now, had the Democrat machine trotted out a Katrina victim as their S-CHIP poster boy, I'd see less reason to take issue with it, but as it is, doling out the money to help folks like the Frosty McFamily is ROBBING poor folks like the children of Katrina victims whose parents had not a prayer of affording insurance.

I'd venture to state that the most likely audience that the Catholics United Group is likely looking to help is not so much the children of wealthy patrician families like the Frosts... but kids whose parents are much closer to poverty.

In the end, it is just another case of propagandizing on top of the same old BDS.

Democrats have neither honour nor shame.

[Peach]

I had dinner with democrats, pro public healthcare dems. They ON THEIR OWN had heard the "Frost" example and both were APPALLED. She works in health advocacy for seniors primarily and one of her programs is youth awareness too and this example MADE HER SICK TO HER STOMACH -- did I mention she/they brought it up?

She also indicated that the one group fully funded with massive staff was the Tobacco tax funded. The unit that gets a BIG FAT TAX. She said they get the most attention but the most "GOVT " attention, even though they are funded by the evil doers tax.

Anyhow, I was surprised they had heard of the dem's "frost" example. She heard CNN and had looked around. She wasn't super vexed by them per se, but the Idea that their means constituted help "And this is the 'WORST" they could find? Have they ever stepped outside of their cozy offices lately?" She was appalled that the Dem staffers sought yuppie needy rather than like spending TIME at an inner city clinic and learning what it means to BE A CHILD of a parent of NO MEANS,

Apparently she knew the ins and outs of policy and politics and she was not impressed.

[LOL]

Dan, wingers, you need to shut up about this S-CHIP issue. Not only do you look mean and bitter attacking a hard working middle-class family, but your guys' facts are wrong. There is no argument about S-CHIP. S-CHIP will actually save the American people money in the long run.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/119/5/e1026.pdf

This is no new math. If you guys think the ~50 million Americans without health care (includes 10 million kids) aren't cost you anything, you're foolish. Somewhere along the line their emergency care is being subsidized. And it results in state governments having less funding, increases in the rate of private insurance, longer hospital stays and bottom line, less effective health care across the board.

This btw, is the reason you have chosen to attack the Frosts. It's really a sad kind of petulance when all you can stand for is being against what the liberal culture wants. It's now forced you to side with wealthy plutocrats over middle class americans. You are a disgrace to this country

[Peach]

Your yuppie needy are not winning the hearts and minds LOL.

[Peach]

LOL

is this some sort of tit for tat you feel the need to win or do you even really know the ins and outs? Or are you on paid firedogswamp detail paid or unpaid?

[Peach]

--~50 million Americans without health care (includes 10 million kids)--

OK - U R AN. idiot.

Um...Exactly how do illegals get healthcare? They work in this country, how do they or their children fix a broken arm or other health catastrophes get denied healthcare? Clinics and Emergency rooms?

Thought so - no answer - they do!

--Somewhere along the line their emergency care is being subsidized.--

OH really? Like the illegals I mentions above?

You really have never thought it all out have you LOL -- good handle. LOL LOL and LOL is all you can conjure.

[Worst President Ever]

That Radical Wall Street Journal says:

Unfortunately, that narrative was bolstered this week by some conservative bloggers. After the Schip veto, Democrats chose a 12-year-old boy named Graeme Frost to deliver a two-minute rebuttal. While that was a political stunt, the Washington habit of employing "poster children" is hardly new. But the Internet mob leapt to some dubious conclusions and claimed the Frost kids shouldn't have been on Schip in the first place.

As it turns out, they belonged to just the sort of family that a modest Schip is supposed to help. One lesson from this meltdown is the limit of argument by anecdote. The larger point concerns policy assumptions. Everyone concedes it is hard for some lower-income families like the Frosts to find affordable private health coverage. The debate is over what the government should do about it.

Hard to find health care? Let's go to Michelle Malkin before she decided to become Ann Coulter, Jr.:

"With health insurance choices like that, no wonder so many people opt to go uninsured."

http://michellemalkin.com/2004/08/27/americas-broken-health-insurance-system/

***
Tax rates on investment income are MUCH lower than tax rates on working people. Welcome to the Republican Way. The Rich get taxed at half what working people do.

***
Conservatives attacking the rich - Warren Buffett - for his revenue-sharing (pay) policies. How socialistic.

***
Seek - having property doesn't mean you own it. Ever hear of loans? You want to argue policy, fine. But attacking the messenger, particularly when it's a severely injured 12 year old kid is downright UNAMERICAN.

[Wahoo Willie Sez]

"having property doesn't mean you own it. Ever hear of loans?"

OH FOR PETE'S SAKE WPE, you can do better than such a completely goofy statement like that. Man that's something Liliputians like bobinthebasement or LOL have to say. Dude, if you're tired go to bed. Get some rest and come back, try again. I'm sorry but you have such an F for the day.

[Fred Beloit]

"I did overstate one point. I said Bush is proposing "less money" for SCHIP, which isn't quite right." by Scher.

This is from Dan's original post on this subject and it illustrates left-brain (political left-brain) thinking perfectly. Bush proposed not less money, not the same amount of money, but MORE MONEY. Scher is not just not "quite right", he is 100%, dead wrong. I am not "quite right" in saying that. If Bush proposed the same budget, Scher would have been 100% wrong. But Bush has proposed an increase, making Scher 200% wrong.

[Worst President Ever]

Seek and brethern want to use appearances to judge who's eligible for SCHIP and who's not. I assume anyone who's lived in the real world knows the problems with that. The program designed to deliver health care to struggling families. Families don't have to be destitute to qualify.

**************

George Bush in 2004 says:

`America's children must also have a healthy start in life. In a new term, we will lead an aggressive effort to enroll millions of poor children who are eligible but not signed up for the government's health insurance programs. We will not allow a lack of attention or information to stand between these children and the health care they need,'

I guess he changed his mind.

[tjproudamerican]

jj

I think it would be a mistake to assume that all liberals are people who did not make it in this country. I would love to have you spend a week at my summer home and we can talk about who makes it and why.

I think economic conservatives may have a theoretical point about Government Programs. However, what area of our economic life is not infused with government subsidies? Agriculture? Defense? The stock markets? Did you notice what happened when the Federal Reserve cut the rate a few weeks ago? Hello, 14,000, goodbye Bear Markets.

All advanced countries offer health care, except one.

As I said, I think stripping our economy of government subsidies and interaction would cause a revolution and we will end up like Mexico with the rich the poor and private armies. I prefer the middle class. The Schip is a beginning and we all thrive when the midle class is large and open.

[jj]

"I would love for you to spend a week at my summer home..."

Ok, you talked me into it. But, back to the relevant point, the Frost's are not the kind of people who should be receiving public assistance. They have more assets than the majority of the people in this country have, more than what I have, although my family is hardly destitute by any means.

I just don't think, and don't see how you can think, that people who are poorer should have to give monies to people who are richer. That is just wrong. It is an injustice. The Frosts were irresponsible, and they should have to use their assets before they qualify for public assistance. It is unfair to the truly poor for the middle class to be sucking up benefits that need to be used elsewhere. That is my opinion. I am not for the Frosts or people in their position to lose their homes before they qualify for public assistance, but they should be required to use what assets they have that could be liquidated, excluding their home. If I understand it, that is exactly what people on Medicaid have to do, or am I wrong?

And, in my opinion, taxes and government spending are doing more to destroy the middle class than government subsidies are doing to increase the size of the middle class. The historic growth of the middle class in the US came from people working and being productive, not from redistribution of wealth by the government. That is non-productive, encourages people to be more like the Frosts, and less like productive people who do pay taxes and don't use government programs. See how that works, something I call Economics 101.

And Gin and Tonic is my preference for refreshment when we meet in your summer home.

Regards.

[Worst President Ever]

"the Frost's are not the kind of people who should be receiving public assistance"

How do you know? Do you know them? Have you seen their SCHIP app - approved by the way - or their tax and bank statements?

I have no problem with a debate about the merits of the program or how government should deal with low middle-class wage earners, that would actually be interesting and enlightening. But attacking a family that's played by the rules but had the audacity to publicly support a program you oppose kindof takes the compassionate out of conservative.

[templar knight]

Mr. Worst Commenter Ever, if you had cared to read the rest of my comment rather than cherry-picking that one particular sentence, you wouldn't have said something so silly. Go back and read what I said. I can't explain it to you any better. It is nothing personal against the Frosts, just my opinion as to how a government program should be means-tested, just as it is for Medicaid. Is it just to treat the Frosts better than people who are on Medicaid?

[seekeronos]

Yeah, what Templar said. :)

[Superviso Chambers]

The government exists to take care of our every need womb to grave and thereafter, by ensuring our monuments or little stone markers are well cared for unto the end of time. The trouble is the government isn't doing enough. What are they doing to inspect shoe manufacturers so that we don't get corns or bunions? Ha. Nothing, nothing at all. We need free ice cream on those hot summer days. Gnya. By God they are failing us at every instant. And what do they spend there time on? Pi----g off Turkey to interfere with the war effort. Save us, Save our city, Our city was built on rock and roll. Vote Democraticic.

[Superviso Chambers]

...spending their time... I made a boo boo.

[Worst President Ever]

1. Don't say "back to the relevant point" if you don't really mean it.
2. Setting up the Frosts as the Face of Tax Unfairness is ludicrous. They don't have armies of lobbyists, or legislators in their pockets, to write law. In fact, you have much more in common with them than Big Oil, Bit Pharma, etc., who are the ral abusers of tax policy.
3. Again, the Frosts played by the rules and legally qualified for SCHIP.
4. Please post pictures of your house, family, cars, any businesses owned - past or presetn, as well as income of your parents, grandparents, etc. so we can decide if you really poorer than the Frosts.

[David M]

Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 10/15/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

http://thunderrun.blogspot.com/2007/10/web-reconnaissance-for-10152007.html

[Superviso Chambers]

Say, WCE, you are the greatest commenter. You know why? Because you understand what the government exits for. I hope you run for office. Let me remind you before you are elected that I need a new air conditioner for my trailer. You know it's awful hot down hyeah in Florida in the summer time. Why hell fire, I need so many things and the damn government is fixin' to start trouble with Turkey to make it harder for us to supply our soldiers.

Now I want to know why the government can't buy me a new watch or a good used one. I got to know what the heck time it is so I can get to and return from work. Let's leave Turkey alone for now and get going on supplying me with some of these necessaries.