Why is Bush opposed to spend 10 days worth of Iraq money on kids health-care?

Answer 1

Because, that bill lobbied as children's healthcare is actually a bribe to households that can afford health insurance for their children, and also included illegal aliens and undocumented workers. Bush vetoed the additional money that was to be spent on those families and non-citizens. He kept the 20 billion dollars for the children who still need it and whose family's pay taxes.

Answer 2

Is it the fact that because President Bush supports Welfare Reform be reauthorized that strengthens marriage and requires welfare recipients to spend 40 hours a week- either working at a job or in a program designed to help them achieve independence?
There are programs for childrens health care already in place. However, families are obligated to care for their own. As a single mom I took care of my chidren and went to college while working and supporting them on my own, to make sure they had their needs met. Why should I pay for your kids too?

Answer 3

Because he hates poor people!
Seriously, the elites try to work against what they term "the danger of over production"
If the standard of living for everyong rises then they view this as a disaster and have to contrive wars to consume human production. That's one of war's true goals. they want to squander money on weapons so people remain impoverished!
They don't care about sick children or public health risks.
They do care about keeping the despised common people in or near poverty.
This bunch is the worst bunch we've ever had leading us!
I hope they can't show their faces in public after leaving office!

Answer 4

with the 3 BILLION a WEEK that's being pissed away in Iraq in 14 weeks the entire 10 year health care plan for America's impoverished children could be paid for.

but health care for poor kids doesn't help engorge the bank accounts and stock portfolios of war profiteers.

Answer 5

Because Kids health care does not generate any soutsourcing orders for Halliburton, nor does it make Carlyle group happy. Why should he bother?

Answer 6

He is right in opposing the waste of money and expansion of obligations by taking on more health care responsibility. Many of those who have health care would drop it to pick up the free programs. The socialist agenda in this country rewards people for pushing responsibility on others. Those with real need are already covered and the liberal sneaky way of trying to increase Uncle's involvement is typical of those who want their loser friends to make the fed payroll.

Answer 7

The purpose of government is to uphold laws and protect it's citizens both at home and from foreign powers, not to give hand outs and use tax payer money to take care of and cater to certain people.

Health care is NOT a right. As soon as you liberals get that through your heads, the better. Nowhere in the constitution does it say that the government is suppose to provide health care for people at the expense of others.

Answer 8

Parents are responsible for their kids, not the government. Why is it the liberals seem to think the government needs to raise their kids, provide them a home, provide their food, provide their healthcare, pay for their medication, etc,etc.. How about some personal responsibility...

Answer 9

Because if he withdraws funds from Iraq for ten days, it might well end in the deaths of many troops.

Many ppl don't seem to care about that possibility, but I do and thankfully this president does too.

But why the question? I am always being told that libs support our troops but this question certainly seems in opposition to that.

Answer 10

Because defending the country is more important than handing out money. It's the responsibility of the parents, not the federal government, to provide health-care for their kids. Besides, health-care isn't going to do much when the Islamofacists are slitting your throat.