Bush vetoes expansion of kids' health insurance program

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

Gary and charles, so if i was dieing and no hospital would help me bc i had no insurance, youd kick me while down and say "shouldve done better in your life and youd be comfy in that hosp bed sipping kool-aid" ???

charles, yes my panties are wading

kick you while you are down? absolutely not. i'd pat you on the head and say "sucks to be you"

C'mon Chuck. You wouldn't.

shhh, i'm wadding panties

LMAO your the best i know youd help me

Gary this was not a "guilt trip" it was a hypathetical question and you still didnt answer it, but the truth is youd walk over me as you sighed in disqust as you walked away. i hope im wrong but the fact that you didnt answer my q makes me feel like that.

hey even charles would give me help, a pat on the head is better than nothing

just because he's not answered that does not mean he'd do that.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

I think it's hilarious that if some of you think thatsome of you think that because someone doesn't have the right level of healthcare it's because they haven't "earned" it, and therefore the idea that they want better coverage is because they have an "entitlement" mentality, whilst they themselves are "hardworking" and therefore immune to finding themselves up chits creek for lack of coverage.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Gary and charles, so if i was dieing and no hospital would help me bc i had no insurance, youd kick me while down and say "shouldve done better in your life and youd be comfy in that hosp bed sipping kool-aid" ???

charles, yes my panties are wading

kick you while you are down? absolutely not. i'd pat you on the head and say "sucks to be you"

C'mon Chuck. You wouldn't.

shhh, i'm wadding panties

LMAO your the best i know youd help me

Gary this was not a "guilt trip" it was a hypathetical question and you still didnt answer it, but the truth is youd walk over me as you sighed in disqust as you walked away. i hope im wrong but the fact that you didnt answer my q makes me feel like that.

hey even charles would give me help, a pat on the head is better than nothing

just because he's not answered that does not mean he'd do that.

Agreed. Gary is a good guy. He's got his belief system that may not be the same as that of many here but I get the impression that he's got a big heart. He'd reach out where there's a need. I'm pretty sure of that.

[Sinergy 3]

Gary and charles, so if i was dieing and no hospital would help me bc i had no insurance, youd kick me while down and say "shouldve done better in your life and youd be comfy in that hosp bed sipping kool-aid" ???

charles, yes my panties are wading

kick you while you are down? absolutely not. i'd pat you on the head and say "sucks to be you"

C'mon Chuck. You wouldn't.

shhh, i'm wadding panties

LMAO your the best i know youd help me

Gary this was not a "guilt trip" it was a hypathetical question and you still didnt answer it, but the truth is youd walk over me as you sighed in disqust as you walked away. i hope im wrong but the fact that you didnt answer my q makes me feel like that.

hey even charles would give me help, a pat on the head is better than nothing

just because he's not answered that does not mean he'd do that.

Agreed. Gary is a good guy. He's got his belief system that may not be the same as that of many here but I get the impression that he's got a big heart. He'd reach out where there's a need. I'm pretty sure of that.

i know that too...shhh im trying to get it out of him tho

[britty 1]

People will continue to ... leave one lined answers they think are "smart".

Speaking of which. Some people, believe it or not, can't even contribute a whole line anymore...

You mean like that?

[Sinergy 3]

People will continue to ... leave one lined answers they think are "smart".

Speaking of which. Some people, believe it or not, can't even contribute a whole line anymore...

You mean like that?

get off devs back, im so sick of her being labled a "bi**h" just bc she dont take anyones ####### on here.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

I'm not sure she's any b*tcher than some of the boys here, no....

[Sinergy 3]

I'm not sure she's any b*tcher than some of the boys here, no....

Oh i so agree.

[GaryC 7]

Gary and charles, so if i was dieing and no hospital would help me bc i had no insurance, youd kick me while down and say "shouldve done better in your life and youd be comfy in that hosp bed sipping kool-aid" ???

charles, yes my panties are wading

kick you while you are down? absolutely not. i'd pat you on the head and say "sucks to be you"

C'mon Chuck. You wouldn't.

shhh, i'm wadding panties

LMAO your the best i know youd help me

Gary this was not a "guilt trip" it was a hypathetical question and you still didnt answer it, but the truth is youd walk over me as you sighed in disqust as you walked away. i hope im wrong but the fact that you didnt answer my q makes me feel like that.

hey even charles would give me help, a pat on the head is better than nothing

Ok, I thought I did answer you with my comment and then I got busy at work. I just got home. So, if you want a straightforward answer here it comes. I would never watch someone that needs help just lay there and die. I have helped friends and strangers alike in the past and you would be no exception. I am not a heartless monster as has been suggested. But I do believe in self determination none the less. I hold with the idea of giving a hand up rather than a hand out. But if it came down to it I would help you or anyone else if it were a matter of life or death.

That being said I still do not believe in a UHC system run by the federal government. I will never believe in it. It can and should be done on a more local level like the state.

[Sinergy 3]

Gary and charles, so if i was dieing and no hospital would help me bc i had no insurance, youd kick me while down and say "shouldve done better in your life and youd be comfy in that hosp bed sipping kool-aid" ???

charles, yes my panties are wading

kick you while you are down? absolutely not. i'd pat you on the head and say "sucks to be you"

C'mon Chuck. You wouldn't.

shhh, i'm wadding panties

LMAO your the best i know youd help me

Gary this was not a "guilt trip" it was a hypathetical question and you still didnt answer it, but the truth is youd walk over me as you sighed in disqust as you walked away. i hope im wrong but the fact that you didnt answer my q makes me feel like that.

hey even charles would give me help, a pat on the head is better than nothing

Ok, I thought I did answer you with my comment and then I got busy at work. I just got home. So, if you want a straightforward answer here it comes. I would never watch someone that needs help just lay there and die. I have helped friends and strangers alike in the past and you would be no exception. I am not a heartless monster as has been suggested. But I do believe in self determination none the less. I hold with the idea of giving a hand up rather than a hand out. But if it came down to it I would help you or anyone else if it were a matter of life or death.

That being said I still do not believe in a UHC system run by the federal government. I will never believe in it. It can and should be done on a more local level like the state.

ok thanks for clearing up your not a heartless monster, thats all i was trying to prove.

yes when it comes to this health care thing we strongly disagree. i guess maybe bc ive hard all my life and have never had it where i could relax bc finacially im not there yet. and when i do get there, my opinion will still not change.

but i wanted everyone to see you can be human, i had to, some of the things you said in this thread looked otherwise.

[Widge 0]

A little clarification please, I accept you abhorrence of the federal govt "running' health care but exactly what do you mean by that . if I am not mistaken the UK System (only UHC system I am familiar with sorry) is in many ways just the funding agent , they collect the taxes that pay the expenses of the system. But each area of the country has its own health authorities that have to manage that budget (some more successfully than others) and are accountable both upwardly and to the consumer. But because it is a uk govt agency then it is accountable something I fail to see here in the US (pork pork pork!). There is no "for profit" no myriad of different HMO's/HSO's and other accounting /billing agencies everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet.

"Millions of citizens had been unable to afford the privatized system and were disenfranchised from access to health care before the NHS. Now, every single person has access to quality health care that is financed through progressive taxation, that is, from each according to his ability to pay, to each according to his needs as a patient. To this day, the Labour Party still considers the creation of the publicly-funded National Health Service its proudest achievement."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Health_Service

Such a system provides health care to all (and you dont realise how good till you don't have it anymore ..... hence many of the complaints) from birth to death and yes if yu can afford it then you can take additional coverage which in non-life threatening instances may queue jump and get you a private A+ room and decent food but no more (hence the low percentage of people having such coverage) but no the Prime Minister isn't your doctor with his cabinet administering the anesthetic so stop fearing federal intervention take the lower costs to your family and if you must buy additional care but as a compassionate man allow your neighbour the same privileges you can afford and he'llpay his tax $$ just the same.

[GaryC 7]

A little clarification please, I accept you abhorrence of the federal govt "running' health care but exactly what do you mean by that . if I am not mistaken the UK System (only UHC system I am familiar with sorry) is in many ways just the funding agent , they collect the taxes that pay the expenses of the system. But each area of the country has its own health authorities that have to manage that budget (some more successfully than others) and are accountable both upwardly and to the consumer. But because it is a uk govt agency then it is accountable something I fail to see here in the US (pork pork pork!). There is no "for profit" no myriad of different HMO's/HSO's and other accounting /billing agencies everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet.

"Millions of citizens had been unable to afford the privatized system and were disenfranchised from access to health care before the NHS. Now, every single person has access to quality health care that is financed through progressive taxation, that is, from each according to his ability to pay, to each according to his needs as a patient. To this day, the Labour Party still considers the creation of the publicly-funded National Health Service its proudest achievement."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Health_Service

Such a system provides health care to all (and you dont realise how good till you don't have it anymore ..... hence many of the complaints) from birth to death and yes if yu can afford it then you can take additional coverage which in non-life threatening instances may queue jump and get you a private A+ room and decent food but no more (hence the low percentage of people having such coverage) but no the Prime Minister isn't your doctor with his cabinet administering the anesthetic so stop fearing federal intervention take the lower costs to your family and if you must buy additional care but as a compassionate man allow your neighbour the same privileges you can afford and he'llpay his tax $$ just the same.

As someone that has lived here all his life I can tell you that if our government got it's hands on it you would not get a system like you do in the UK. It would be a power trip for most, a chance to give political favors to others. With one administration it would go in one direction and with another it would go a different way. But there would be one constant. Waste and corruption would be the norm no matter who was in the white house or controlling congress. If you doubt what I say just look at the history and budgets of SS or Medicare. The budgets spiral upwards and at the same time it becomes more and more in debt. The only thing our government seems to want to do to fix it is to throw more money at it. Any time some brave politician tries to cut out the waste he gets accused of wanting to cut the project. Even if they want to slow the growth of a project the still get accused of wanting to cut the funding. It is plain silly. I see people wanting systems that are in place in other countries and think I am some sort of a azzhole when I don't want it. They just don't understand that it just isn't possible here. That is why I want a state level system. It's smaller and can be tailored to each states unique needs. The USA is just too big to make it work across the board.

[Sinergy 3]

nighty nighty

[Widge 0]

As someone that has lived here all his life I can tell you that if our government got it's hands on it you would not get a system like you do in the UK. It would be a power trip for most, a chance to give political favors to others. With one administration it would go in one direction and with another it would go a different way. But there would be one constant. Waste and corruption would be the norm no matter who was in the white house or controlling congress. If you doubt what I say just look at the history and budgets of SS or Medicare. The budgets spiral upwards and at the same time it becomes more and more in debt. The only thing our government seems to want to do to fix it is to throw more money at it. Any time some brave politician tries to cut out the waste he gets accused of wanting to cut the project. Even if they want to slow the growth of a project the still get accused of wanting to cut the funding. It is plain silly. I see people wanting systems that are in place in other countries and think I am some sort of a azzhole when I don't want it. They just don't understand that it just isn't possible here. That is why I want a state level system. It's smaller and can be tailored to each states unique needs. The USA is just too big to make it work across the board.

So finally we reach the crux of the problem and I have to agree that the levels of corruption, backhanders cronyism is utterly beyond any level of my comprehension here.

I have no idea what the answer is, unless the populace rebel instead of accepting it all as a way of life, I have acrually commented to my husband that it runs too deep to be fixed far to many vested interests in all walks of life with way to many $$$ to grease the way to allow any level of serious reform ......... quite ironic for a system that was set up with, and prides itself on, its series of checks and balances.

BUT you cannot allow the poorer working man to suffer at the hands of a health care system that is a model of said corruption, lobbying and greasing. To my way of thinking it is the duty of every right minded citizen to stand up and fight for a fair system for all not to say well I'm OK too bad your not - that is just a cop out and makes the individual no less self serving than the most corrupt politician.

[GaryC 7]

As someone that has lived here all his life I can tell you that if our government got it's hands on it you would not get a system like you do in the UK. It would be a power trip for most, a chance to give political favors to others. With one administration it would go in one direction and with another it would go a different way. But there would be one constant. Waste and corruption would be the norm no matter who was in the white house or controlling congress. If you doubt what I say just look at the history and budgets of SS or Medicare. The budgets spiral upwards and at the same time it becomes more and more in debt. The only thing our government seems to want to do to fix it is to throw more money at it. Any time some brave politician tries to cut out the waste he gets accused of wanting to cut the project. Even if they want to slow the growth of a project the still get accused of wanting to cut the funding. It is plain silly. I see people wanting systems that are in place in other countries and think I am some sort of a azzhole when I don't want it. They just don't understand that it just isn't possible here. That is why I want a state level system. It's smaller and can be tailored to each states unique needs. The USA is just too big to make it work across the board.

So finally we reach the crux of the problem and I have to agree that the levels of corruption, backhanders cronyism is utterly beyond any level of my comprehension here.

I have no idea what the answer is, unless the populace rebel instead of accepting it all as a way of life, I have acrually commented to my husband that it runs too deep to be fixed far to many vested interests in all walks of life with way to many $$$ to grease the way to allow any level of serious reform ......... quite ironic for a system that was set up with, and prides itself on, its series of checks and balances.

BUT you cannot allow the poorer working man to suffer at the hands of a health care system that is a model of said corruption, lobbying and greasing. To my way of thinking it is the duty of every right minded citizen to stand up and fight for a fair system for all not to say well I'm OK too bad your not - that is just a cop out and makes the individual no less self serving than the most corrupt politician.

That is why I am in favor of a state run system. If a problem starts it is easier to fix. Once the federal government gets it's hands on something it becomes so entrenched changing it becomes almost impossible.