English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

How about vetoing the war.

2007-10-03 03:53:31 · 16 answers · asked by You may be right 7 in Politics & Government Politics

16 answers

he is not looking out for the well being of the country, he is looking out for the well being of big business.

2007-10-03 04:13:57 · answer #1 · answered by Jerry H 5 · 0 2

Bush vetos the health care plan, not because it's too expensive, it's to EXPANSIVE. Why should a child be defined as 25 years old and younger?

Quit playing politics with our soldiers!

2007-10-05 00:57:26 · answer #2 · answered by niteridder 2 · 0 0

Yes, the war in Iraq is expensive but it's completely different ranges of importance and finance. We're committed to Iraq, so it makes sense to put your best effort forward. At the same time, a lot of money WAS approved for children's care (more so than was vetoed). The president vetoed some ridiculous over-reaching provisions. Honestly, I think the Democrats constructed that bill flawed on purpose, knowing it would be vetoed, because they knew you'd use it as a talking point to say Bush doesn't care about children.

2007-10-03 04:02:57 · answer #3 · answered by Pfo 7 · 3 4

I 2d all that suthrnlyts pronounced. basically including that no longer basically is it attempting to get investment from an ever reducing tax gross sales source. This "elevated" toddler wellbeing care kit additionally lined offering investment for the loads of thousands of anchor toddlers and illegals right here now. So despite if or no longer it "would desire to" have come from an identical monies getting used for Iraq, that still does not make it impressive. Bush has been incorrect on many themes yet a minimum of he replaced into clever adequate to renowned this. Why do no longer a number of you human beings supply up taking issues at face fee and easily look at what those so reported as "sense reliable" rules somewhat propose?

2016-10-10 05:38:27 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

People living below the poverty level getting that minum wage icrease taken awy from them again.

Congressional Research Service pointed out, an increased cigarette tax means the “burden falls heavily on lower income people.” Statistics reported by the American Heart Association showed that smoking is “highest among persons living below the poverty level.” Forty-six million adults in the country are smokers.

And New Yorker make out like bandits!!!!

So, New York could increase its income eligibility cap to $82,600 for a family of four for at least two years

2007-10-03 04:10:45 · answer #5 · answered by Michael F 3 · 0 1

Bush veto the heath care plan because it covered every child's whose family made under $80,000 a year, and a child is anyone under 25. Bush wanted to make sure all the poor children were covered, not middle class children. If you listened to what Bush was saying about the bill you would know this.

2007-10-03 03:57:30 · answer #6 · answered by gerafalop 7 · 3 4

Thank you gerafalop, libsticker, and Pfo for a voice of reason among the dumbasses who also posted.

One thing you can be sure of, if this war isn't funded and fought over there; kids with bombs strapped to them won't need a health care plan.

2007-10-03 04:12:21 · answer #7 · answered by Barney 6 · 1 2

Actually he agrees with this but not how they want to fund it.

Now if they wanted to tax each drink a dollar extra, because it is the leading cause of health issues in America, then he might sign it.

besides, alcohol is more execpted in this country and alot more money would help to fund it.. And who knows, with more tax attached to it, that might make a few more people quit drinking it.. It does cause alot more crimes in america to..

Not to mention it is the leading cause of break ups in marrages, job loss, allergies, leaving children uninsured in this country, and sick..

If they want to do that, I think that would be great!!

Hey PFO, you got that right, here is a thought for you, Hillery had mentioned this, she has always tried to get the power of money through the legal people living here by offering things for their illegal families.. Remember Mr. Shu? yeah you can bet alot of that money went to the Dems because they promise changes in policies that help them make money for the election.. Hillery just had a big week in donations.. Right after she made this proposal in the news outlets. She knew this was going through the floor. Yeah sneaky Hellery got more money.. How does that feel suckas..?? And guess what? Our children still dont have health insurance..

2007-10-03 04:04:41 · answer #8 · answered by tiny b 3 · 3 2

Bush doesn't care. He's had almost 2 terms to help families without health care but he'd rather spend the $$ in Iraq.
Go to costofwar.com to see what we're spending in Iraq and how it could be used in our country. It will only take a few minutes but it's very enlightening.

2007-10-03 04:05:23 · answer #9 · answered by katydid 7 · 2 4

Here's to the PEA BRAIN libs.....do YOU want the war raging in the streets of America? The Gov't ALREADY runs a health care plan for children without...it is called "MEDICARE". I'm S-U-R-E you;ve heard of it! Go back to something you know about... like... Phony Warriors in the Democratic ranks!

2007-10-03 04:04:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

No actually the war in Iraq is cheap, it will be over and we will have markets there to bring money back into our economy, whereas the health care plan is spending for an eternity,,, it will never bring money back into our economy, it will be just more taxes that never go away.

2007-10-03 03:57:31 · answer #11 · answered by libsticker 7 · 4 5

fedest.com, questions and answers